The fight against Newspeak

Comprehending laws and contracts is impossible, unless we first learn the meaning of the words and phrases they contain.

Moderator: notmartha

User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by Firestarter » Fri Oct 28, 2016 2:01 pm

The Tenach (Old Testament) names God as the one and only true God (one, not three), see for example.
Deuteronomy 6:4 —
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
Hear, O Israel: The LORD thy God is one LORD.

2 Samuel 7:22 —
Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God; for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

Isaiah 46:9 —
For I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me.
1 Corinthians 8:6 - But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

There was some resistance against adopting the Trinity into Christianity. Three versions were debated, until the present one was voted into existence by the powers that rule over the church.

Before Jesus there were several religions that followed a Trinity as the highest: https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/b ... ion-of-the
In Egypt “The Hymn to Amun” decreed that “No god came into being before him” and that “All gods are three: Amun, Re and Ptah”.
In Germanic nations the 3 Gods were Wodan, Thor and Fricco.
In India Hinduism was already founded more than 3,000 years ago. The 3 Gods – Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva - form a Trinity (I once asked a Hindu, who told me that they can be compared to the three in one God of Christanity). See the picture of the 3 Gods, even the halo around their heads was copied by Christianity
Image

The Holy Ghost (Holy Spirit) isn’t in the Tenach but first appears in the New Testament. The most interesting appearance of the Holy Ghost, is where Mary is “found” with his child.
Matthew 1:18 -
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Jesus Christ named the Trinity - Father, Word, Holy Ghost; Father, Son, Holy Ghost; Spirit, water, blood - as three parts of the same God…
1 John 5:7-8 -
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

Matthew 28:19 -
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
The fact that Jesus Christ was teaching about a Trinity indicates that he preferred other religions over the Tenach.

Here are some numerological arguments to illustrate that the Trinity, triangle is really Satanic.
The Babylonians believed in a Trinity, and used the sexagesimal (60) number system from which comes 60 minutes in an hour, 60 seconds in a minute, 360 (60×6) degrees in a circle and 60 degrees in each angle of an equilateral triangle and so on. 360 divided by 10 = 36; 6 * 6 = 36; 2 * 3 = 6.
An even triangle has 3 corners of 60 degrees, 60, 60, 60 representing 666.
The numbers from 1 to 36 total 666 like this: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18 + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 + 26 + 27 + 28 + 29 + 30 + 31 + 32 + 33 + 34 + 35 + 36 = 666

In witchcraft also a Trinity symbol is used, see for example these wiccan chalices.
Image

The same (satanic) symbol is even on some editions of the New King James Bible and the New International Version of the Bible.
Image
Last edited by Firestarter on Sat Jan 13, 2018 6:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by notmartha » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:43 am

Firestarter wrote:The Tenach (Old Testament) names God as the one and only true God (one, not three), see for example.Deuteronomy 6:4 — Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:Hear, O Israel: The LORD thy God is one LORD.2 Samuel 7:22 — Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God; for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.Isaiah 46:9 — For I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me.1 Corinthians 8:6 - But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.There was some resistance against adopting the Trinity into Christianity. Three versions were debated, until the present one was voted into existence by the powers that rule over the church.
You give 1 Corinthians 8:6 as an example from the Old Testament. That is incorrect. It is an example of the one true God from the New Testament.

The trinity doctrine is one of the most divisive doctrines throughout Christendom. You will not find the words "trinity" or "triune" in the Bible. Yes, there are various mentions of three personalities/characteristics to describe God. That does not make Him a triune God. The "halo" depicted in artwork is symbolic of sun worship, which permeates the Catholic (NOT Christian) religion. The early Christians were warned over and over again to beware of the fakes, who absolutely wanted to morph their pagan Baal religions into the Christian body of believers.

Matthew 7:15 (KJV)
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Matthew 24:24 (KJV)
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

2 Corinthians 11:13-15 (KJV)
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Here is one of Ben Williams' newsletters about the fake Christ and sun worship: http://benwilliamslibrary.com/pdfs/st13-7&8.pdf

I totally agree that the Catholic Church has evolved from pagan religion. The symbolism is everywhere. This site and this site have some good pictures of the similarities in pagan/Catholic symbolism. I just wish you would stop equating Catholic with Christian. Anything of pagan origins is anti-Christ, no matter what liars call it.
Firestarter wrote:The Holy Ghost (Holy Spirit) isn’t in the Tenach but first appears in the New Testament. The most interesting appearance of the Holy Ghost, is where Mary is “found” with his child.
The Holy Spirit is a characteristic of God and has been with Him from the beginning. In the Old Testament it is most often translated from the Hebrew word ruach as "Spirit of the Lord". You'll find examples in 2Sam. 23:2, 1Kings 18:12; 22:24, 2Kings 2:16, 2Chron. 18:23, Neh. 9:20, 30, Job 26:13; 33:4, Isa. 40:13; 48:16; 59:19, 21; 61:1; 63:10, 1-4, Ezek. 3:12, 14 (1st); 8:3; 11:1, 24; 37:1; 43:5, Mic. 2:7; 3:8, Zech. 4:6; 6:8; 7:12, Mal. 2:15. Example:

2 Samuel 23:1-3 (KJV)
Now these be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said, The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.

Please note that the fact that David mentions three characteristics of God (invisible force/Spirit, creator/God/Elohim, mighty/Rock) does not make Him a triune God.
Firestarter wrote:Jesus Christ named the Trinity - Father, Word, Holy Ghost; Father, Son, Holy Ghost; Spirit, water, blood - as three parts of the same God…1 John 5:7-8 - For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.Matthew 28:19 - Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:The fact that Jesus Christ was teaching about a Trinity indicates that he preferred other religions over the Tenach.
Again, the word "trinity" is not found in the Bible. Jesus named various characteristics of God, sometimes in groups of threes. Jesus was NOT teaching about a Trinity. He was communicating to the apostles at a level they would understand, being surrounded by all the false gods/religions, and it is ludicrous (and completely circular logic) to suggest he preferred other religions. If I say that you are Dutch, poor, and oppressed, does that make you a triune man/woman, or me prefer a pagan religion? Of course not! They are just some characteristics of you as I perceive them. If I knew you better, I could maybe add kind-hearted, generous, and/or caring to the list. Your characteristics aren't limited to the three I mentioned just because I mentioned them in a group of three. God's characteristics can't be enumerated, and can surely not be limited to three.
Firestarter wrote:Here are some numerological arguments to illustrate that the Trinity, triangle is really Satanic.
A triangle is not Satanic. The way some people perceive a triangle is Satanic. There is a difference.
Firestarter wrote:The same (satanic) symbol is even on some editions of the New King James Bible and the New International Version of the Bible.
Yep. Beware of false teachers. I warned about the NIV in my first post on this thread.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by Firestarter » Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:10 pm

notmartha wrote:A triangle is not Satanic. The way some people perceive a triangle is Satanic. There is a difference.
You are absolutely right that the fact that Satanists use the triangle for a symbol, doesn’t make that Satanists “own” the triangle. I should have been more careful in how I wrote this down. I would not dream of calling a goat or a 10-year-old born on 6/6/’06 Satanic…
Even a pentagram isn’t a Satanic symbol per definition. There have been found pentagrams from 3000 BC in Egypt (you might consider this evidence that it is indeed a symbol of evil). The five-pointed-star has been used for many years in Christianity.
notmartha wrote: I totally agree that the Catholic Church has evolved from pagan religion. The symbolism is everywhere. This site and this site have some good pictures of the similarities in pagan/Catholic symbolism. I just wish you would stop equating Catholic with Christian. Anything of pagan origins is anti-Christ, no matter what liars call it.
This is the first time in this thread that you explicitly name Catholics as “pagans”. From what I have seen there is no real difference between Catholic and Protestant Christians. You could blame me for nothing seeing the (obvious) differences between them. I have often heard Catholics and Protestants saying about each other that they’re not “real” Christians. I am simply not able to distinguish very well between these flavours of Christianity.
One of the tricks the elite use is to divide us (and conquer). While the poor get caught up in fighting each other, the elite exploit the poor slaves. Spreading hate between poor Christians, Muslims, Hindus and whatever other religions, is in fact a major factor in keeping us enslaved. This kind of thinking is against the teachings of Jesus. Jesus was trying to make the poor more bonded to fight against the evil of hypocrites and slave drivers. From what I understand Jesus himself wasn’t even interested in symbolism.

You do have a valid point that the Catholic churches are much more decorated with “golden calves”. For me one of the most evil symbols is the cross, because this is in celebration of the killing of an innocent man (Jesus); especially because Christians always say that we should be thankful that Jesus died for our sins (and I have seen these on and in many Christian churches including Protestant).
I don’t agree that the halos around the head of saints is a strong argument against Catholics, for the simple reason that not all Catholic churches have saints with halos, while not all Protestant churches are without. Furthermore I believe that there could be a good Christian that goes to a church with all kinds of wrong symbolism.
The following photos show Protestant churches with halos and Masonic symbolism. I’ve found some wonderful pictures from a Protestant church in Montgomery, USA, the first shows saints with halos and the second of a pentagram in a red shield (Rothschild = Red-shield): http://cannundrum.blogspot.nl/2014/04/s ... omery.html
Image
Image

I wanted to say something positive about the lack of “golden calves” in Islam (if I understand correctly there are not even images of Allah), but the strange thing is that a lot of Muslim countries have a flag with Pentagram and a crescent moon. I believe that this says more about the forces that rule over the governments than about Muslims. The first picture shows the red flag of Turkey with crescent moon and pentagram and the second the horned beast Baphomet with the same symbols.
Image
Image
notmartha wrote: The "halo" depicted in artwork is symbolic of sun worship, which permeates the Catholic (NOT Christian) religion. The early Christians were warned over and over again to beware of the fakes, who absolutely wanted to morph their pagan Baal religions into the Christian body of believers.
I can imagine that you would say that a halo around the head (of saints) is a symbol for worshipping the sun. If halos come from Hinduism it cannot be worshipping of the sun. The ideal of Hinduism (as in other “Eastern” religions) is enlightenment. Maybe childish, but understandable: enlightenment is pictured by a circle of light around the head. There are some pictures, statues of Shiva (one of the trinity of gods in Hinduism) dancing with a halo of fire around his body (instead of light around the head).
According to the following site the halo first appeared in Greco-Roman art (so not Hinduism): http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Halo
The first picture shows a halo around the head of Apollo in a Roman mosaic in Tunisia from the second century AD, than a Buddhist halo first or second century AD.
Image
Image

The following picture shows a Protestant church in Germany, not only with halos, but with a shrine for worshipping the sun.
Image
notmartha wrote:
Firestarter wrote:Jesus Christ named the Trinity - Father, Word, Holy Ghost; Father, Son, Holy Ghost; Spirit, water, blood - as three parts of the same God…1 John 5:7-8 - For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.Matthew 28:19 - Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:The fact that Jesus Christ was teaching about a Trinity indicates that he preferred other religions over the Tenach.

Again, the word "trinity" is not found in the Bible. Jesus named various characteristics of God, sometimes in groups of threes. Jesus was NOT teaching about a Trinity. He was communicating to the apostles at a level they would understand, being surrounded by all the false gods/religions, and it is ludicrous (and completely circular logic) to suggest he preferred other religions.
I really don’t see how you can disagree that in these quotes Jesus was teaching about a Trinity. I often use logic to try to explain to Christains that something is wrong with the Bible and the church they got to.
notmartha wrote: Before Jesus? Really?

John 1:1-14 (KJV)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I don’t know how serious you are with this. If I take Jesus as being the Word with these extracts literally... Then Jesus preceded Mary, Josef and Moses. This kind of circular reasoning is too much for me to understand. Jesus of course made some explicit references against the Tenach, for example in his “turn the other cheek” or “breaking the Sabbath” quotes.
There are some similarities between the teachings of Buddha and Jesus. If I remember correctly in the New Testament there are some paragraphs dedicated to how Jesus was as a child, then from age 16/17 till 30 years old nothing about how Jesus lived. What did he do in these years? Did he work as a carpenter, like Josef? Did he remain in “Israel” or did he go abroad (maybe India) to study other religions?
The teachings of Jesus are closer to Buddhism than the slavery of Judaism. First I will present some historic information about the Buddha.

The later Buddha was born as Prince Siddhartha Gautama. When he reached the age of 16, his father reputedly arranged his marriage to a cousin of the same age and he lived a life of comfort. At the age of 29 Siddhartha took a trip to meet his subjects. Siddhartha saw an old man, a diseased man, a decaying corpse, and an ascetic. He couldn’t go on with his wealthy lifestyle knowing that people were suffering. He couldn’t find a teacher that could answer all his questions and settled on a lifestyle where he had to overcome every need, this included fasting for days and meditation. He preferred being a homeless man (like Jesus) and he begged for food.
According to legend Siddhartha became the (or “a”) Buddha when meditating under the Bodhi tree for days. After he became Buddha he taught his disciples the middle way. The description of how Buddha was attacked by “Mara” before reaching enlightenment is like the following quote from: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Mara
Mara attempts to tempt Buddha, both with promises of glory and pleasure, and then begins to warn of consequences for breaking away from the prince's religious and secular duties. Buddha easily rejects these, knowing they are meaningless. Mara uses force against Buddha, appearing as a hideous demon and sending an army of likewise revolting and terrible creatures, bent on the bodily destruction of Buddha. They launch a volley of arrows at Buddha, but as these projectiles approach they are transformed into flowers and fall harmlessly to the ground. Buddha invokes the earth goddess to wash away the demons in a flood—the earth goddess obliges. The daughters of Mara try to coerce and seduce Buddha, but he recognizes them as they are, and is not swayed from his goal. Finally Mara mocks Buddha, and tells him his work is for nothing, as there is no one there to recognize his achievement. Buddha responds that the earth will be his witness, and after touching the ground the earth trembles in agreement. Thus Mara admits defeat for the moment; however, he is determined to carry on harassing the Buddha and his followers

You must agree that this is very similar as the description of how Jesus was tempted when he fasted in the desert for 40 days (Buddha fasted regularly and for long periods, but not for 40 days). Matthew 4:1-11 (KJV):
Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.
There are a also a lot of differences between Jesus and Buddha (Jesus was certainly not teaching anybody to become a Buddhist). Buddhists in later times have made similar changes to the story of the Buddha, as was done to Jesus.
Buddhism is an atheist religion, so there is nothing to worship (this is certainly not placing yourself at the height of God, as there is no God). According to Buddhist views anybody with enough talent and determination can achieve “Buddha nature”.
Last edited by Firestarter on Sun Apr 15, 2018 1:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by notmartha » Sat Nov 26, 2016 2:17 pm

I will reply below to some of the issues you addressed, but first I'm including two links to PDF documents you may find enlightening.

The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop describes in detail the evolution of the various religions, including Hindoo [sic] and Catholisicm, from ancient Mystery Babylon. This was first published in 1853, and is not a quick or easy read, but is well worth your time, imo.

Who is Mithra? is a shorter discussion on the symbolism borrowed from the sun-worshipping ancients by the Catholic church.

Ok, my replies...
Firestarter wrote:The five-pointed-star has been used for many years in Christianity.
It is sometimes used by deceived Christians but most often used by Babylonian Jews.
Firestarter wrote:This is the first time in this thread that you explicitly name Catholics as “pagans”.
I didn't. I said
notmartha wrote: I totally agree that the Catholic Church has evolved from pagan religion.
I don't believe that all Catholics are pagans. I was specifically writing of the origins and symbolism of the organized Roman Catholic Church.
Firestarter wrote:One of the tricks the elite use is to divide us (and conquer).
Absolutely. You titled this topic “The Fight Against Newspeak”. Newspeak is just Oldspeak, lies fed to willfully ignorant people. It matters not what “brand” (i.e. religion, denomination, sect, party, etc.) the liar wears, the new lies are the same as the old lies. Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes 1:9-10:

"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us."

My fight is against lies, and the people who perpetuate them. This is what being a Christian is about. Showing love by loving Truth.
Firestarter wrote:From what I understand Jesus himself wasn’t even interested in symbolism.
That is correct.
Firestarter wrote:I don’t agree that the halos around the head of saints is a strong argument against Catholics, for the simple reason that not all Catholic churches have saints with halos, while not all Protestant churches are without. Furthermore I believe that there could be a good Christian that goes to a church with all kinds of wrong symbolism.
This is covered in the docs I linked in the beginning. And thank you for qualifying that there are good Christians, albeit deceived.
Firestarter wrote:The following photos show Protestant churches with halos and Masonic symbolism.
Yep. You know Episcopal is Catholic in sheep's clothing, right? They even describe themselves as "Protestant, yet Catholic." I'm sure the stained glass was funded by a deceiver, and church goers were willing to be deceived.
Firestarter wrote:I can imagine that you would say that a halo around the head (of saints) is a symbol for worshipping the sun. If halos come from Hinduism it cannot be worshipping of the sun. The ideal of Hinduism (as in other “Eastern” religions) is enlightenment. Maybe childish, but understandable: enlightenment is pictured by a circle of light around the head. There are some pictures, statues of Shiva (one of the trinity of gods in Hinduism) dancing with a halo of fire around his body (instead of light around the head).
Sun = Light = Enlightenment
The Two Babylons will explain to you why you are wrong.
Firestarter wrote:I really don’t see how you can disagree that in these quotes Jesus was teaching about a Trinity. I often use logic to try to explain to Christains that something is wrong with the Bible and the church they got to.
Well, first off the verses you quoted were not all attributed to Jesus. They were not all His teachings.

The one verse you correctly attributed to Jesus was:

Matthew 28:18-19 (KJV)
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

This is not teaching a "trinity" per se, but rather naming (authorizing) three distinct authorities in the act of baptism. I refuse to call any doctrine that limits my Sovereign, Omnipotent, Omnipresent God to three ens truth, and don't believe for a second that Jesus was teaching this doctrine.

Here are some of His teachings:

Mark 12:29-30 (KJV)
And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

this was repeated from Deuteronomy 6:4-5 (KJV):
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

John 10:30 (KJV)
I and my Father are one.

John 17:11 (KJV)
And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

The word "one" meant unified, as in a common purpose. In none of these verses did he teach a "trinity" or that oneness was limited to three entities.

Paul taught more about the "oneness" of the body of believers:

1 Corinthians 12:12-20 (KJV)
For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but one body.

Firestarter wrote:notmartha wrote: Before Jesus? Really?John 1:1-14 (KJV) 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. I don’t know how serious you are with this.
I am serious, but I won't expand on it here.
Firestarter wrote:There are some similarities between the teachings of Buddha and Jesus.
I don't know enough about Buddha to hold even a halfway intelligent discussion about him. Yes, there are some similarities, according to what you wrote.

I'd really like your feedback on the 2 docs I linked to, when you have the time. :)
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by Firestarter » Sun Dec 25, 2016 4:51 pm

notmartha wrote:Absolutely. You titled this topic “The Fight Against Newspeak”. Newspeak is just Oldspeak, lies fed to willfully ignorant people. It matters not what “brand” (i.e. religion, denomination, sect, party, etc.) the liar wears, the new lies are the same as the old lies. Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes 1:9-10:

"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us."
I think this is very well expressed.

notmartha wrote:Who is Mithra? is a shorter discussion on the symbolism borrowed from the sun-worshipping ancients by the Catholic church.
That link doesn’t work.
notmartha wrote:The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop describes in detail the evolution of the various religions, including Hindoo [sic] and Catholisicm, from ancient Mystery Babylon. This was first published in 1853, and is not a quick or easy read, but is well worth your time, imo.
This looks like it’s written by some hate spreading politician, who’s selling Christianity to keep us in chains.
Maybe this is what Jesus meant when he was speaking against the “scribes” - Matthew 23:1-5.
Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments

Erasmus was a Dutch Christian, “The praise of folly” by Desiderius Erasmus (1511) is one of the best philosophy books ever written (much better than your last 2 links): http://www.gutenberg.org/files/9371/9371-h/9371-h.htm
The best book I’ve read about Jesus is “Jesus the son of man” (1928) by Kahlil Gibran: http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0301451h.html
notmartha wrote:
Firestarter wrote:I can imagine that you would say that a halo around the head (of saints) is a symbol for worshipping the sun. If halos come from Hinduism it cannot be worshipping of the sun. The ideal of Hinduism (as in other “Eastern” religions) is enlightenment. Maybe childish, but understandable: enlightenment is pictured by a circle of light around the head. There are some pictures, statues of Shiva (one of the trinity of gods in Hinduism) dancing with a halo of fire around his body (instead of light around the head).
Sun = Light = Enlightenment
The Two Babylons will explain to you why you are wrong.
The word “enlightened” describes an inner mental state as an ideal to be achieved. I prefer the word “awakened”. “Eastern” religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, and the teachings of Osho hold this as an ideal - they do not worship the sun.

Here is evidence that worshipping “Lucifer” is indeed worshipping the light: http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-decepti ... lbert_Pike
Most New agers believe in light. There is also some symbolism in New age that´s Satanic. Most New agers aren´t Satanists however: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Age

notmartha wrote:The sacrificing of people was a heathen practice, and sometimes, like in the case of the Egyptians or the idolatrous Israelites (see 2 Kings 17:17 and Ezekiel 20:24-26), God will turn them over to their own evils.

When God slew the firstborn of Egypt (keeping in mind that the Egyptians already customarily sacrificed their infants to the gods) he spared the firstborn Israelites.
For me all the more interesting is the influence of the Egyptian worship for Osiris. Osiris represents the “sun” (Isis was his wife – the moon). Osiris was – not evil, but - the prototype of a “good” halfgod.
While it’s not clear if Jesus Christ was aware of the religions in India, like Hinduism and Buddhism, it’s evident that Jesus knew about Egyptian religion. Jesus has said some things that are in violation with the Tenach (Old Testament), while his teaching were not against the Osiris/Isis cult and he even said some things in accordance with the Osiris cult.
Jesus talked about a Trinity that should be seen as one, this coincides with the Egyptian worshipping of Amun, Ra and Ptah.
In Egyptian scriptures were the 12 sons of Ra (one of these was the saviour Osiris). There is also some mixing up Osiris with his father Ra, while the son of Osiris – Horus – also became Osiris. Osiris was resurrected after he was murdered by his evil brother Set (Satan): http://www.truthbeknown.com/osiris.htm

The halo for Osiris was not portrayed behind his head, but painted directly above his head.
Image


Jesus told us to eat his flesh and drink his blood - John 6:52-58:
The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

This is certainly not in accordance with the Tenach, but the sacred Eucharist (or Holy Communion) – bread mixed with blood - was part of the religion for Osiris. The believers in Osiris also drank sacramental wine which represented the blood of God: http://www.paganizingfaithofyeshua.free ... orisis.htm

Even the Christian cross (in celebration of the murder of Jesus) looks like this symbol for Osiris - the Ankh.
Image


While I see a lot of warnings by Christians against worshipping the sun; I hear a lot of “wishing on a star” and (especially) in this time of the year see a lot of stars. Sometimes these are 5-pointed stars with 1 point downwards making it a satanic pentagram.
Image
Last edited by Firestarter on Sun Apr 15, 2018 1:11 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Mithra, Baphomet

Post by Firestarter » Fri Jan 12, 2018 5:08 pm

I’ve searched and found more information on Mithraism.

The veneration of this god began around 3000 BCE in Persia. It was after 2800 BCE when Mithra was first transformed to the Supreme Being. He was known throughout Europe and Asia by the names Mithra, Mitra, Meitros, Mihr, Mehr, and Meher.
When the Persian Empire expanded, the worship of Mithras spread eastward through northern India into the western provinces of China. In Chinese statues, Mithras is still represented as a military General, and considered to be the friend of man in this life and his protector against evil in the next. In India, Mithras was recognized as “God of Heavenly Light” and an ally of Indra, King of Heaven.

For more than 300 years the rulers of the Roman Empire worshipped Mithras as a god.
Purification through a ritualistic baptism was required of the faithful, who also took part in a ceremony in which they drank wine and ate bread to symbolise the body and blood of the god. Sundays were held sacred, and the birth of the god was celebrated annually on 25 December.
Many nobles took names associated with Mithras. The title “Mithras” was used in the dynasties of Pontus, Parthia, Cappadocia, Armenia and Commagene by emperors with the name Mithradates.

Emperor Nero adopted the radiating crown as the symbol of his sovereignty to show that he was an incarnation of Mithras.
When Emperor Commodus (Emperor 180-192 AD) was initiated into the Mithraic religion, there began an era of strong support of Mithraism that included emperors such as Aurelian, Diocletian, and Julian the Apostate, who called Mithras "the guide of the souls".
Mithras later was referred to by Roman worshippers as “Sol invictus” (invincible sun). The sun itself was considered to be "the eye of Mithras". The title Sol invictus was later transferred to Mithras.
The Roman erected several Mithraeums, where Mithras was worshipped. Emperor Diocletian, who ruled 284-305 AD, gave Mithras the title "The Protector of the Empire".

The neophyte could proceed through 7 levels of initiation. The 7 grades of Mithraism, were: Corax (Raven), Nymphus (Male Bride), Miles (Soldier), Leo (Lion), Peres (Persian), Heliodromus (Sun-Runner), and Pater (Father); the grades were protected by respectively Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, the Moon, the Sun, and Saturn.
The initiate first drank wine from the cymbal to recognise it as the source of ritual ecstasy, and then ate a small morsel of bread placed on a drum, to signify his acceptance of Mithras as the source of his food.

Worshippers of Mithras prayed:
Abide with me in my soul. Leave me not [so] that I may be initiated and that the Holy Spirit may breathe within me.
Mithras was almost exclusively worshipped by men. Instead the wives and daughters of the Mithraists worshipped Magna Mater, Ma-Bellona, Anahita, Cybele, and/or Artemis.
The Priestesses of Cybele were known as “Mother” (instead of “Father” for Mithra priests).

The official story is that Emperor Constantine (Emperor 306-337 AD) converted from Mithraism to Christianity on the eve of a battle in 312 AD. Constantine made Christianity the state religion. All subsequent emperors were openly hostile towards Mithraism: http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Religions ... ianity.htm
(archived here: http://archive.is/YnS6B)


After Emperor Constantine supposedly converted to Christianity in 312 AD, he maintained the title “Pontifex Maximus” - the high priest of paganism.
The first Roman Emperor to omit “Pontifex Maximus” from his title was Gratian (Emperor 375-383 AD).

Some of Constantine’s coins have been found. At least until 323 AD, they were inscribed with: “SOL INVICTO COMITI” (TO MY COMPANION THE INVINCIBLE SUN) and showed Sol.
Image

The following third century mosaic of the Vatican grottoes under St. Peter's Basilica, allegedly represents Christ as the sun-god Helios/Sol Invictus riding in his chariot.
Image


It becomes even more bizarre when we learn that according to the notorious British Satanist Aleister Crowley, who adopted the name Baphomet for himself:
Baphomet was Father Mithras, the cubical stone which was the corner of the Temple.
Baphomet can be found in documents dating as early as the 11th century. Knights Templar of the Middle-Ages and Freemasons of the 19th century were reportedly in a pact with Baphomet. Today the symbol is associated with anything relating to occultism, witchcraft, Satanism and esoterica.

The French Satanist Eliphas Levi made the most famous drawing of Baphomet in 1861: a winged humanoid goat with a pair of breasts and a torch on its head between its horns.
Baphomet’s phallus is actually Hermes’ Caduceus.
Each of Baphomet’s hands points towards opposing moons, which Levi calls the Chesed and the Geburah. In the Kabbalistic Tree of Life, the Sefirot, Chesed is associated with “kindness given to others” while Geburah refers to the “restraint of one’s urge to bestow goodness upon others when the recipient of that good is judged to be unworthy and liable to misuse it”.
Image

Levi explained:
The goat on the frontispiece carries the sign of the pentagram on the forehead, with one point at the top, a symbol of light, his two hands forming the sign of Hermeticism, the one pointing up to the white moon of Chesed, the other pointing down to the black one of Geburah. This sign expresses the perfect harmony of mercy with justice. His one arm is female, the other male like the ones of the androgyn of Khunrath, the attributes of which we had to unite with those of our goat because he is one and the same symbol.
The flame of intelligence shining between his horns is the magic light of the universal balance, the image of the soul elevated above matter, as the flame, whilst being tied to matter, shines above it. The ugly beast’s head expresses the horror of the sinner, whose materially acting, solely responsible part has to bear the punishment exclusively; because the soul is insensitive according to its nature and can only suffer when it materializes.
The rod standing instead of genitals symbolizes eternal life, the body covered with scales the water, the semi-circle above it the atmosphere, the feathers following above the volatile. Humanity is represented by the two breasts and the androgyn arms of this sphinx of the occult sciences.
Several mythological figures have similarities to the Baphomet as drawn by Levi. Pan, for example, was a prominent deity in Greece; often depicted with horns on its head and the lower body of a goat.
Image

According to Eliphas Levi, the name Baphomet was derived from Kabbalistic coding:
The name of the Templar Baphomet, which should be spelt kabbalistically backwards, is composed of three abbreviations: Tem. ohp. AB., Templi omnium hominum pacts abbas, “the father of the temple of peace of all men.
According to Hugh Schonfield, Baphomet stands for the Greek word “Sophia”, which means ”knowledge” and is also synonymous with “goddess”: https://vigilantcitizen.com/hidden-know ... sbaphomet/
(archived here: http://archive.is/pxB17)
Last edited by Firestarter on Wed Dec 19, 2018 5:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by notmartha » Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:51 am

Firestarter wrote:
Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:36 pm
notmartha wrote:I get what you are saying, all religion is for control, but neither of us were eyewitnesses to the writing of the books. I have no reason to believe that all the books of the OT were written by Jewish elite. If you have proof they were, please provide. Maybe you mean translated, and I would not disagree. Here is a list of purported authors. Moses, Samuel, Joshua, to name a few, were not Jews. You won't even find the word "Jew" in the KJV until the Book of Esther, and then it means a descendant of Judah.
I think “Jew” is the tribe that occupied Israel some 2500 ago, that spoke and wrote in Hebrew and because someone is a Jew is decided by the Jewishness of the mother, also all their forefathers must be Jews. This leads to the conclusion that Noah and his family were Jews and so - according to the Tenach – all humans must be Jews. I haven’t been found a clear definition on Jew in the Tenach, so you have every right to disagree with me on this one. I have even seen Christian websites that claim that Jesus was no Jew.
I wasn't sure if I should post this here or in your Dragon Society thread. It is good to see you are now figuring out the differing "Jews". It is tricky to differentiate between Israelites, Jews, and Jews who aren't Jews, such as the Ashkenazis you've mentioned in other posts. I'll expand a bit here, to increase understanding.

Noah>Shem>Arphaxed>Shelah>[H]Eber>Peleg>Reu>Serug>Nahor>Tarah>Abraham>Issac>Jacob-Israel

Noah>Japheth>Gomer>Ashkenaz

The Shemitic/Semitic people are descendants of Shem, not Japheth.

The Hebrew people are descendants of [H]eber and include the sons of Jacob-Israel (Israelites). The sons of Ashkenaz (Ashkenazis) are not Hebrew nor are they Israelites, the holy, chosen, peculiar people of God (Deut. 14:2).

The word Jew first appeared in the Old Testament to name only descendants of Jacob-Israel’s son Judah.

The word Jew then morphed to include other Israelites that moved into the Kingdom of Judah.

In the New Testament, the word Jew was to include any inhabitants of Judea that “Judaized” or lived like Jews. This included many races other than the Israelites.

So how did the Ashkenazis, who were not Hebrew, and were not Israelites and/or descendants of Judah, and were not inhabitants of Judea, come to be called Jews? The Synagogue of Satan by Andrew Carrington Hitchcock describes it this way:
“In 740 A.D. in a land locked between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, known as Khazaria, a land which today is predominantly occupied by Georgia, but also reaches into Russia, Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, and Romania, the modern Jewish race is born. A modern Jewish race that incidentally is not Jewish.

How can this be, you ask? Well at that time, the Khazarian people felt a vulnerable people as they had Muslims one side of them and Christians the other side of them, and thus constantly feared attack from either side. Furthermore, the Khazarian people were of neither faith and instead practiced idol worship, which made them ripe for invasion by a people who wished to convert them to an established faith.

The Khazarian King, King Bulan, decided in order to protect themselves against attack, the Khazarian people must convert to one of these faiths, but which one? If they converted to the Muslim faith they would risk attack by the Christians and if they converted to the Christian faith they would risk attack by the Muslims.

He had an idea. There was another race that he was aware were able to deal with both the Muslims and the Christians either side of him, predominantly in matters of trade. A race which also dealt with Khazarians in the same manner. That race was the Jews. King Bulan decided if he instructed his people to convert to Judaism he could keep both the Muslims and the Christians happy, as they were both already willing to trade with the Jews, so this is what he did.

King Bulan was right. He would live to see his country unconquered, his people convert to Judaism enthusiastically and adopt the principles of the most holy Jewish book, the Talmud. There are many things the king would not live to see, however.

He would not live to see his Asiatic race of converts to Judaism, one day represent 90% of all the Jews on the planet, and call themselves Ashkenazi Jews, when in fact they were not Jews, but simply an Asiatic race of people who converted to the Jewish religion, whilst still continuing to speak the Khazarian language of Yiddish, totally different to the language of Hebrew.

He would not live to see his people turn to the descendants of a man, far more powerful than him, who would be born just over 1,000 years later in Germany, a man named Bauer, who would spawn the Rothschild dynasty.

He would not live to see this dynasty usurp the wealth of the world through deception and intrigue, which they would finance through the vast riches they accumulate as they usurp the wealth of the world by gaining control of the world’s money supply.

He would not live to see his people demand a homeland for themselves in Palestine as their birthright, and ensure every Prime Minister there from its inception in 1948 is an Ashkenazi Jew, even though the true homeland of the Ashkenazi Jews, Khazaria, is his kingdom, some 800 miles away.

And he would not live to see his people fulfill bible prophecy, as the, “Synagogue of Satan.”
These are the prophesies written of:

Revelation 2:9 (KJV)
9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Revelation 3:9 (KJV)
9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

So to sum it up, many of the “Jews” in the world, including those in the state now called “Israel,” are not Semitic, are not Israelite, and are not the chosen people of God. They are imposters, and actually haters of God and Christianity.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by Firestarter » Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:31 pm

notmartha wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:51 am
I wasn't sure if I should post this here or in your Dragon Society thread.
I agree that your post could’ve fitted in both of “my” threads. In this context (Newspeak) “Jew” certainly fits.
I plan to do a longer post in “my” thread on the dragon bloodlines, which will probably include some of this post.

One of my problems with “Jew” is that it’s used both for the Jewish “race” as for the followers of the Jewish religion (Judaism).
According to the Rabbis, Ivanka Trump-Kushner (daughter of President Donald) is a full Jew: https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-02-07/ ... t-does-now


notmartha wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:51 am
The word Jew first appeared in the Old Testament to name only descendants of Jacob-Israel’s son Judah.

The word Jew then morphed to include other Israelites that moved into the Kingdom of Judah.

In the New Testament, the word Jew was to include any inhabitants of Judea that “Judaized” or lived like Jews. This included many races other than the Israelites.
I had not found a definition for “Jew” in the Bible…
You write that the definition of “Jew” in the Tenach (Old Testament) is even different from the “Newspeak” New Testament.


notmartha wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:51 am
Noah>Shem>Arphaxed>Shelah>[H]Eber>Peleg>Reu>Serug>Nahor>Tarah>Abraham>Issac>Jacob-Israel

Noah>Japheth>Gomer>Ashkenaz

The Shemitic/Semitic people are descendants of Shem, not Japheth.

The Hebrew people are descendants of [H]eber and include the sons of Jacob-Israel (Israelites). The sons of Ashkenaz (Ashkenazis) are not Hebrew nor are they Israelites, the holy, chosen, peculiar people of God (Deut. 14:2).
Like you’ve written, in the Tenach: Ashkenaz is the son of Gomer (Genesis 10:1-3).
I don’t believe that the Ashkenazi Jews descend from Ashkenaz though. It is of course possible that part of the Scythians were/are of the Jewish descend (from the New Testament), but as far as I can tell they descend from Turkey.
Scythians appear in the Bible several times: 2 Maccabees 4:47, Colossians 3:11 and...
3 Maccabees 7:5
These friends also drove them along in chains, treating them harshly as slaves, or rather, as traitors. Without any investigation or trial they attempted to destroy them, displaying a cruelty more savage than the barbarians from Scythia.

notmartha wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:51 am
So how did the Ashkenazis, who were not Hebrew, and were not Israelites and/or descendants of Judah, and were not inhabitants of Judea, come to be called Jews? The Synagogue of Satan by Andrew Carrington Hitchcock describes it this way:
The difference between “Ashkenazi Jew” and “real” Jew is of course disputed…
I probably first learned about this from Andrew Carrington Hitchcock.
The most named source for this is Arthur Koestler (an Ashkenazi Jew himself) "The Thirteenth Tribe" (1976): http://solargeneral.org/wp-content/uplo ... estler.pdf

Koestler and his wife were suicided in 1983: http://aangirfan.blogspot.nl/2010/02/my ... stler.html

Please note that Carrington Hitchcock is not a reliable source for information, as his book is a mixture of fact and fiction, see “my” thread on the 3 World Wars Albert Pike letter of 1871 (that is "based" on information from his interesting book): https://www.lawfulpath.com/forum/viewto ... =30&t=1183
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by notmartha » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:58 am

Firestarter wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:31 pm
I had not found a definition for “Jew” in the Bible…
You write that the definition of “Jew” in the Tenach (Old Testament) is even different from the “Newspeak” New Testament.
The following show the Hebrew and Greek words translated into English, with definitions as per Strong's Concordance, 1890. When reading these words in context, I agree with his definitions.

The word "Jew(s)" as found in Old Testament:

Hebrew Strong's Number: 3054
Hebrew Word: ‏יָהַד‎
Transliteration: yāhad
Phonetic Pronunciation:yaw-had'
Root: denominative from a form corresponding to <H3061>
Part of Speech: v

English Words used in KJV:
became Jews 1
[Total Count: 1]

denominative from a form corresponding to <H3061> (Yehuwd); to Judaize, i.e. become Jewish :- become Jews.

Hebrew Strong's Number: 3061
Hebrew Word: ‏יְהוּד‎
Transliteration: yehûd
Phonetic Pronunciation:yeh-hood'
Root: contracted from a form corresponding to <H3063>
Part of Speech: n pr loc

English Words used in KJV:
Judah 5
Judea 1
Jewry 1
[Total Count: 7]

(Chaldee); contracted from a form corresponding to <H3063> (Yehuwdah); properly Judah, hence Jud'a :- Jewry, Judah, Judea.

Hebrew Strong's Number: 3062
Hebrew Word: ‏יְהוּדָי‎
Transliteration: yehûdāy
Phonetic Pronunciation:yeh-hoo-daw-ee'
Root: patrial from <H3061>
Part of Speech: n pr pl

English Words used in KJV:
Jews 10
[Total Count: 10]

(Chaldee); patrial from <H3061> (Yehuwd); a Jehudaète (or Judaite), i.e. Jew :- Jew.

Hebrew Strong's Number: 3063
Hebrew Word: ‏יְהוּדָה‎
Transliteration: yehûdâ
Phonetic Pronunciation:yeh-hoo-daw'
Root: from <H3034>, Greek <G2448> and <G2455>
Part of Speech: n pr m

English Words used in KJV:
Judah 808
Bethlehemjudah + <H1035> 10
[Total Count: 818]

from <H3034> (yadah); celebrated; Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five Israelites; also of the tribe descended from the first, and of its territory :- Judah.

Hebrew Strong's Number: 3064
Hebrew Word: ‏יְהוּדִי‎
Transliteration: yehûdî
Phonetic Pronunciation:yeh-hoo-dee'
Root: patronymically from <H3063>
Part of Speech: n m

English Words used in KJV:
Jew 74
Jew + <H376> 1
Judah 1
[Total Count: 76]

patronymic from <H3063> (Yehuwdah); a Jehudite (i.e. Judaite or Jew), or descendant of Jehudah (i.e. Judah) :- Jew.

The word "Jew(s)" as found in the New Testament:

Greek Strong's Number: 2450
Greek Word: Ἰουδαΐζω
Transliteration: Ioudaizō
Phonetic Pronunciation:ee-oo-dah-id'-zo
Root: from <G2453>
Part of Speech: v

English Words used in KJV:
to live as do the Jews 1
[Total Count: 1]

from <G2453> (Ioudaios); to become a Jud'an, i.e. “Judaize” :- live as the Jews.

Greek Strong's Number: 2451
Greek Word: Ἰουδαϊκός
Transliteration: Ioudaikos
Phonetic Pronunciation:ee-oo-dah-ee-kos'
Root: from <G2453>
Part of Speech: adj

English Words used in KJV:
Jewish 1
[Total Count: 1]

from <G2453> (Ioudaios); Judaïc, i.e. resembling a Jud'an :- Jewish.

Greek Strong's Number: 2452
Greek Word: Ἰουδαϊκῶς
Transliteration: Ioudaikōs
Phonetic Pronunciation:ee-oo-dah-ee-koce'
Root: from <G2451>
Part of Speech: adv

English Words used in KJV:
as do the Jews 1
[Total Count: 1]

adverb from <G2451> (Ioudaikos); Judaïcally or in a manner resembling a Jud'an :- as do the Jews.

Greek Strong's Number: 2453
Greek Word: Ἰουδαῖος
Transliteration: Ioudaios
Phonetic Pronunciation:ee-oo-dah'-yos
Root: from <G2448> (in the sense of <G2455> as a country)
Part of Speech: adj

English Words used in KJV:
Jew 193
of Judea 1
Jewess 2
[Total Count: 196]

from <G2448> (Iouda) (in the sense of <G2455> (Ioudas) as a country); Jud'an, i.e. belonging to Jehudah :- Jew (-ess), of Jud'a.

Greek Strong's Number: 2454
Greek Word: Ἰουδαϊσμός
Transliteration: Ioudaismos
Phonetic Pronunciation:ee-oo-dah-is-mos'
Root: from <G2450>
Part of Speech: n m

English Words used in KJV:
Jews' religion 2
[Total Count: 2]

from <G2450> (Ioudaizo); “Judaïsm”, i.e. the Jewish faith and usages :- Jews' religion.

Ben Williams sorts out the confusion:
JEWS, JUDEANS & JUDAHITES

Part of the confusion in the churches is the deceptive translation of the Scriptures along with false history.
For instance, the churches equate Judaism (Pharisaiism) with the teachings of the Old Testament. Nothing could
be further from the truth. Furthermore, the KJV translators replaced both "Judahite” and "Judean” universally with the English word “Jew” They just called them all “Jews.” This is a flagrant deception.

"Judahite” actually refers to a member of the tribe of Judah. It is a racial term ... like “Semitic.” The term “Judahite" appears in the Old Testament text.

In contrast, the term “Judean” meant a resident of the province of Judea. It was not a racial term but rather a national/cultural term ..... like “American.” The term “Judean” appears in the New Testament text. Under Rome's rule the land of Canaan was renamed Judea, and anyone who resided there or subscribed to its culture was called a “Judean.”

But the KJV translators just lumped them together and called them all “Jews” in both Old and New Testaments.
The so-called “Jews” of the New Testament were mostly non-lsraelite Judeans. They were (and still are) a mixture of Edomites, Canaanites, Persians, a smattering of Israelites and whoever else happened to reside in Judea or subscribe to Judean culture. Then about 740 AD the whole nation of Khazaria in eastern Europe joined the throng, converted to Judaism and began calling themselves "Ashkenazi Jews. Thus "Jews” are truly a mixed multitude.
Firestarter wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:31 pm
Like you’ve written, in the Tenach: Ashkenaz is the son of Gomer (Genesis 10:1-3).
I don’t believe that the Ashkenazi Jews descend from Ashkenaz though. It is of course possible that part of the Scythians were/are of the Jewish descend (from the New Testament), but as far as I can tell they descend from Turkey.
Here is a map showing land occupied by Japheth's descendants in pink - including the Ashkenazi and Scythians.

Image

Here is map similar to one in Hitchcock's book, for comparison:

Image

Firestarter wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:31 pm
Please note that Carrington Hitchcock is not a reliable source for information, as his book is a mixture of fact and fiction, see “my” thread on the 3 World Wars Albert Pike letter of 1871 (that is "based" on information from his interesting book): https://www.lawfulpath.com/forum/viewto ... =30&t=1183
Note taken. I always try to check multiple sources, comparing info. After reading many sources other than Hitchcock's book and talking to a Jew who's not a Jew who's wife died of Ashkenazi disease, I still come to the conclusion that the Ashkenazi "Jews" are not descendants of Jacob-Israel, but imposters.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: The fight against Newspeak

Post by Firestarter » Thu Mar 29, 2018 3:02 pm

I wanted to add something on “Jews”, while you probably already know this I guess that most people are ignorant on this topic (at least I was...) – the 12 Tribes of Israel (there are actually 13!).

notmartha wrote:
Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:58 am
Note taken. I always try to check multiple sources, comparing info. After reading many sources other than Hitchcock's book and talking to a Jew who's not a Jew who's wife died of Ashkenazi disease, I still come to the conclusion that the Ashkenazi "Jews" are not descendants of Jacob-Israel, but imposters.
It takes a lot of time to verify if the stories I hear are true or fiction.
Because stories are often simply copied by others (whether they are true or fake) while some of the biggest scandals are hidden from history, just looking at “different” sources doesn’t always solve this problem.
When I find one “reliable” source that is enough. I consider the Arthur Koestler book a reliable source to show that the Ashkenazi “Jews” are in fact a Turkish Tribe.

Firestarter wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:31 pm
The most named source for this is Arthur Koestler (an Ashkenazi Jew himself) "The Thirteenth Tribe" (1976): http://solargeneral.org/wp-content/uplo ... estler.pdf
In Appendix III of Koestler’s book are references to 2 early sources (around 1100 and 1140 AD) on a letter by Hasdai , written between 954 and 961, and Joseph’s reply that the Khazars are Turks.

Around the year 1100 Rabbi Jehudah ben Barzillai of Barcelona wrote the “Book of the Festivals” — Sefer ha-Ittim — which contains a long reference, including direct quotations, to Joseph’s Reply to Hasdai. The passage in question in Barzillai’s work starts:
We have seen among some other manuscripts the copy of a letter which King Joseph, son of Aaron, the Khazar priest wrote to R. Hasdai bar Isaac.* We do not know if the letter is genuine or not, and if it is a fact that the Khazars, who are Turks, became proselytes.
What’s unfortunately missing from the Koestler book are descriptions of the elite (Dragon, Grail) bloodline of the Khazars and the connection to Greater Scythia.

notmartha wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:51 am
The word Jew first appeared in the Old Testament to name only descendants of Jacob-Israel’s son Judah.
That’s certainly not what I thought when I read the Bible...
You’re probably right but I still doubt that not all of the 12 (13) Tribes of Israel (besides Judah) are both Israelites and Jews according to the Tenach (Old Testament).

1 – Reuben was the firstborn son of Jacob and Leah (his cousin: the daughter of the brother of his mother) - patriarch of the tribe of Reuben.
2 - Simeon was the second son of Jacob and Leah - patriarch of the tribe of Simeon.
3 - Levi was the third son of Jacob and Leah - patriarch of the tribe of Levi.
4 - Judah was the fourth son of Jacob and Leah - patriarch of the tribe of Judah.

5 - Dan was the fifth son of Jacob - patriarch of the tribe of Dan. The mother was Bilhah, Rachel’s maidservant (Rachel was the younger sister of Leah).
6 - Naptali was the sixth son of Jacob - patriarch of the tribe of Naptali. The mother was Bilhah.

7 - Gad was the seventh son of Jacob - patriarch of the tribe of Gad. The mother was Zilpah, Leah’s maidservant.
8 - Asher was the seventh son of Jacob - patriarch of the tribe of Asher. The mother was Zilpah, Leah’s maidservant.

9 - Issachar was the ninth son of Jacob - patriarch of the tribe of Issachar. The mother was Leah.
10 - Zebulun was the tenth son of Jacob - patriarch of the tribe of Zebulun. The mother was Leah.

11 - Joseph was the eleventh son of Jacob. The mother was Rachel.
12 - Benjamin was the twelfth son of Jacob - patriarch of the tribe of Benjamin. The mother was Rachel.

The first strange thing is that Joseph had no tribe named after him.
Instead his 2 sons with Asenath (who was given to him by the Pharaoh) - Manasseh and younger brother Ephraim – were adopted by Jacob, so they could share in Jacob's inheritance equally with Jacob's own sons.
Manasseh and Ephraim are the patriarchs of the 2 tribes named after them.
So there are really 13 tribes of Israel (the Ashkenazi “Jews” aren’t one of them): http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the ... -of-israel

The second strange thing is that the tribe of Levi became the heads of Judaism – Levites.
The “Jews” were ordered to pay the Levites handsomely for their brainwashing practices. As a result they didn’t have their own land, but settled in all the lands of Israel (of the other tribes).

The following shows which land the 12 tribes occupied (13 – the tribe of Levi).
By common consensus the tribe of Judah is the most important that delivered the Kings.
Image
Post Reply