“I’m afraid” and I need your help.

[guardian Snow]

“I’m afraid” and I need your help. You can’t let this just roll by as
another topic you ignore, if you agree, say so and ask friends to
join. United we stand, divided we fall. What would your heavenly
Father say about the media you watch?

Mat 6:23 “But if your eye is evil, all your body shall be darkened.
If, then, the light that is within you is darkness, how great is that
darkness!

What would he say if he saw the shooter games kids play, that your
money buys?

“I am a sniper and always hit the mark, a paid assassin working after
dark…
Don't you know that killing is my business... and business is good
You better believe it.”
Megadeth

How many deadly shooting rampages does it take before all of us WAKE
UP and realize that we are paying for the bullets? Not directly but by
buying into the medium that creates, promotes and glorifies FEAR,
Music that glorifies death and video games that teach people to
rampage our money goes to create more of the things we don’t want.

2010, Occultist believe this is the, “Dawn of the New World Order”.

2012, is the end of the Mayan calendar on December 21, 2012 with a
celestial pagan sign of the “grand cross alignment” to occur on this
date. A recently heavily advertised movie, “2012” is based on
supposed “prophecies” of major catastrophes occurring on this date.

From “The Stand” to “The Day after Tomorrow” the world has filled
itself with tales of destruction, death and end of the world scenarios
that catapult ordinary people to being respected leaders that in some
way saves a remnant of humanity. Death of billions, destruction of
civilization, serial killers.. entertainment how do these things get
stringed together and include participation of believers of the
scriptures?

Pro 8:36 “But he who sins against me injures himself; All who hate me
LOVE DEATH!”

A tragic situation has arisen where the vast majority of people do
not recognize their own divinity and by extension, their own greatness
that they already possess. Isn’t it “entertaining” to see a movie that
makes the death of a billion people a sideline story as we focus on
the selfish self preservation of the “hero” with the logic of “Who
cares as long as I survive” as the theme.

From Harp weapons and biological weapons to mind control, a lot of
people are dreaming up ways to kill off humanity or enslave them.
Killers are cropping up on a daily bases looking to take as many
people with them as possible and societies answer by making more
horrific mind viruses promoting FEAR from the daily newsroom to your
living room.

Jas 3:9 With it we bless our Elohim and Father, and with it we curse
men, who have been made in the likeness of Elohim.

People call destroying the very image of our creator (other people)
entertainment, every time they pay for a horror movie! Have you ever
thought about just how evil and Satanic that is?

Paraskavedekatriaphobia - Fear of Friday the 13th.
From the serial killer series, “Friday the 13th” to “Halloween”
occultist sell us stories of destruction with days and dates to
instill fear.

Chronophobia - Fear of time.
From “The Omen” being released on 6/6/06, fear of dates and times
projecting hysteria inundate western culture or have we forgotten
“Y2K” was first promoted in the movie, “Strange Days” and followed up
by made for TV movies and then we have, “The day after Tomorrow”
released during the Reagan administration promoting Nuclear
holocaust.

These fears being projected in the media become part of the world
psyche and the worse part about it is that heading the lines into
theaters around the world are those very people that are suppose to
love and choose life, believers of the scriptures.

Ecclesiophobia - Fear of church.
It seems hard to imagine that this is an actual phobia but it is…
maybe by extension it arises from fear of being judged, I don’t know
and it’s sad because church is the one place people should never be
afraid.

Ecophobia - Fear of home.
Some homeless people actually suffer from this phobia because of
tragic loss in their lives and they feel, if they don’t have a home,
they can’t lose one and by extension this also extends to
relationships… You can’t have your heart broken if you don’t love
anybody.

Agoraphobia - Fear of the outdoors, crowds or uncontrolled social
conditions.
Some people have become so afraid of the world outside that they fear
even leaving their own home because they are unable to control events
around them. What about the little lady down the street? Instead of
filling her television with messages that tell her it’s safe, we
sensationalize murder and the evening news confirms it. What kind of
future are you buying for your children watching “Saw 5” or “Hostel
3”?

Deu 30:19 “I have called the heavens and the earth as witnesses today
against you: I have set before you life and death, the blessing and
the curse. Therefore you shall choose life, so that you live, both you
and your seed.

Have you ever not walked down a dark alley at night time? You
shouldn’t think you are immune to irrational fear. Ever gone out of
your way to avoid certain areas of the city?

The underlying theme in all these phobias is FEAR and we continue to
pay for it. What you might see as “harmless entertainment”, might be
the very thing that pushes somebody else over the edge. From
Arachnophobia [Fear of spiders] to Xenophobia [Fear of foreigners]
shows seek to push every boundary of the imagination that permanently
scars a part of human consciousness. The mind becomes a burial ground
of our own self fulfilling prophecies by the mediums we pay for and we
call its art.

“Since mankind's dawn a handful of oppressors have accepted the
responsibility over our lives, responsibility that we should have
accepted ourselves. By doing so, they took our power. By doing
nothing, we gave it away.”
V for Vendetta

The ironic thing is that if YOU wanted to make the world a better
place, you wouldn’t have to do a thing. The only thing we would have
to do is NOT go to the church of Satan and pay for movies that promote
death and destruction. If horror movies and “apocalyptic” genres
don’t make money and if YOU and I stop contributing towards it, they
will disappear. If they didn’t make a profit, they would stop making
it.

Stop buying violent games, satanic music and paying for your own
destruction.

Gal 5:13 For you, brothers, have been called to freedom, only do not
use freedom as an occasion for the flesh, but through love serve one
another.
Gal 5:14 For the entire Torah is completed in one word, in this, “You
shall love your neighbour as yourself.”

Prince once said something like this, “Very few of mankind's creations
are designed to make you feel good, unless you get pleasure from
seeing the human body desecrated by guns, explosions, fights, and any
other of these things these so- called "artists" create. In the name
of freedom, many have used art as a means to destroy the human mind.
As an excuse to continue we hear

"Art reflects society".

How many times has this lie been repeated: "these creations are not
real", they say this and yet any one of you can call to mind images
and complete scenes of utter horror in graphic detail. They will
carry these so-called "unreal" creations around with them for the rest
of their lives. These images are now a part of their being. In the
name of RECREATION these people in fact are re-creating themselves in
their own images.”

SOCIETY THEN REFLECTS ART. “

The medium we choose is then internalized and either darkens or
lightens the beholder of the eye and incorporates itself into our
spirit. We must exert our will at the gateway to the soul (the eye)
and not empower that which would destroys us, the darkness of our own
“art”.

“'Men have forgotten this truth,' said the fox. 'But you must not
forget it. You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed.'
And now here is my secret, a very simple secret; it is only with the
heart that one can see rightly, what is essential is invisible to the
eye.“
Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)

“When you think about others before yourself and offer the love you
feel for all of life- First in your thoughts and then in your
actions- That’s how you make a connection to inspiration.”
Dr. Wayne Dyer


Respond directly:
http://groups.google.com/group/messianicYehoshua
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/messianic_Yehoshua/

http://www.isr-messianic.org/ <- download the scriptures free
or
http://messianicyehoshua.googlegroups.com/web/RNKJV.zip <--free
download of the Restored Names King James Version

Life is a gift, and it offers us the privilege, opportunity, and
responsibility to give something back by becoming more.
Tony Robbins

[guardian Snow]

On Nov 9, 2:38 pm, guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:

> I want your commitment NOT to attend horror movies or purchase violent
> video game or allow your children to rot their brains with shooter
> games and explicit music.

Will anybody join me in saying NO to VIOLENCE in the media?

In the past, people have argued that it should be the television and
media executives that reduce violence in programs and movies and this
makes no sense at all. Rather than wait for the fox watching the hen
house, we should be individually responsible for what we watch and
buy… In other words, “If you don’t like the show, change the
channel”.

The campaign against violence must speak to the individual and
illustrate the harmful effects of violence in the media in the modern
world. It’s non-sense to call for regulating industries when people
still desire violent content and are willing to pay for it and
encourage it by passively watching free to air.

The only truly responsible action is INDIVIDUAL COMMITMENT to not
purchase violent content in any media form and that is what I am
asking for from all people, regardless of faith because when
confronted with the evidence against media violence, it becomes
apparent that we are destroying ourselves with art.

A brief case against media violence:

"Media violence not only increases aggression among viewers, it breeds
a callousness toward violence directed at others."

In 1994, Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders said "By portraying violence
as the normal means of conflict resolution, the media gives youth the
message that violence is socially acceptable and the best way to solve
problems. After 10 years of research, we know that a correlation
exists between violence on television and aggressive behavior in
children."

Research results in two different studies strengthen Elders'
statement.

One study shows that "two years after television was introduced to the
remote city of Notel, Canada, physical aggression in children in the
area increased 160 percent".

Once televison arrived in South Africa, the homicide rates among
whites, which had been in the decline, increased 130 percent in twelve
years. (Goodwin, 49) There may have been other factors which
contributed to the increase in violence, but, these studies show that
television does have an impact on youth behavior.

Dr. Dimitri Christakis of Seattle Children's Hospital Research in a
December 8, 2008 interview, says, “Watching violent cartoons increases
real life aggression. Decades of research have proven that children
imitate what they see on screen – this includes both undesirable and
desirable behaviors”

Research shows a strong link between media violence and the way
children behave. Exposure to screen violence increases real world
aggression. Also, children frequently exposed to violence on
television are indifferent towards real life violent experiences.
Children become immune to the pain and suffering of others. Children
don't have much experience in the real world; that is why it is hard
for them to distinguish between fantasy and reality. Consequently,
they imitate what they see.

As a member of The Children's Broadcast Institute, Toronto child
psychiatrist Dr. Arlette Lefebrve was actively crusading against the
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (a show which was eventually taken off
the air; but not necessarily due to violent content). She found
following examples of the impact the show had on younger viewers: "A
six-year-old boy wearing a turtle costume stabbed a friend in the arm
for not returning a borrowed toy; A three-year-old boy picked up the
family cat and swung it around his head like a Turtle hero wielding a
weapon. When his mother tried to intervene, the boy said "It's just
like Michelangelo".

When an ad is shown on TV, no one expects that it will sell the
product to everybody. If the ad influences only 1% of viewers, it is
considered to be a great success (Medved, 1995). Suppose violent media
make only 1% of the population more aggressive. Should society be
concerned about a percentage so small? The answer is a resounding
"Yes!" Suppose 10 million people watch a violent TV program. If only
1% of the viewers will become more aggressive afterward, then the
violent TV program will make 100,000 people more aggressive! Because
so many people are exposed to violent media, the effect on society can
be immense even if only a small percentage of viewers are affected by
them. It takes only one or two affected students to wreak murderous
havoc in a school.

Much of this material is available on several web sites:
http://www.bluecorncomics.com/grossman.htm

From an interview with Jamie Rouse after he killed a teacher and a
student at his school in Lynnville, Tenn. In the LA Times, 4/22/00:

"In the 10th grade, that's when I started wearing all black. I wasn't
aware of the Gothic look when I was doing it. Part of it was the anti-
God attitude. But it [also] reflected how I felt. Dark. I listened to
evil music and dark music, and that was part of it too.

"The 10th grade was when I went from heavy metal to death metal." From
Alice in Chains, Megadeth and Pantera to Obituary, Deicide and Napalm
Death. "I think I bought a Marilyn Manson tape after that. It's evil
heavy metal, I guess you'd call it. Straight-out hating God. The one
song that I listened to over and over was 'Diary of a Madman' by the
Gravediggaz. It was about these people going off and killing these
other people."

The day before he shot two people, Rouse argued with a girl. As he
recalls it:

"I went back to my truck, [and] I was listening to Morbid Angel, the
particular song called 'Hatework,' [and] of course, after I listened
to my music again, it was back to anger again.

"I just went home. I took my portable Discman in the house and
listened to it and went to bed. I mainly listened to one song:
Gravediggaz' 'Diary of a Madman.'

"I'd get extremely angry, and in a split second I'd feel like crying,
and then I would go back to being extremely angry. I was listening to
the music until I went to sleep."

The next day Rouse went on a shooting rampage at his school. He says
he felt nothing that day and doesn't know why he did it.

[guardian Snow]

On Nov 10, 9:54 am, Qadosh Stephanos <qadosh.stepha...@yahoo.ca>

wrote:

> >> I want your commitment NOT to attend horror movies or purchase violent
> >> video game or allow your children to rot their brains with shooter
> >> games and explicit music.
>
> >Will anybody join me in saying NO to VIOLENCE in the media?
>

> Does it include your religious oral VIOLENCE in the newsgroups?
> Suggestion:Turn your TV OFF. Nobody is forcing you to watch TV.
> Will anybody join me in saying NO to SNOWS VIOLENCE in the NGs?
>
> John chapter 17.

“Let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me.” We use to
sing that song at the start of every church service. To quote a more
recent artist:

“I’m looking at the man in the mirror, I’m asking him to change his
ways.”

Violence occurs when it is seen as a solution to the problem of the
individual conducting the violence. Violence seems acceptable as a
solution to those that see the only solution is to hurt somebody else
so that a view point can prevail.

“Violence and arms can never resolve the problems of men. “
Pope John Paul II

My last discussion, I asked, “If Jesus was Dead, who raised him?” The
best answer I got back was, “The Holy Trinity”. The problem with this
answer, in my opinion is that Yehoshua that you know as Jesus is that
trinity and so the conclusion of the answer by my Christian friend is
that, Dead Jesus raised himself according to Trinity practicing
Christians.

They say, “Jesus is God that should be worshiped” and I disagree. The
strongest evidence of this deity is by Thomas in the book of John.

Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Master and my
Mighty One.

A very recent statement to me said,

“The Lord Jesus Christ IS NOT A MERE MAN. NO CHRISTIAN would worship
a man, at least not for very long, when someone would set him straight
on it.”
Bob

I couldn’t agree with you more Bob but then, I’m not a Christian, “I’m
a Messianic” and what this means is that I worship only YAHWEH, the
deity of the “Old Testament” and Moses makes it clear that this deity
is not a man or the son of man.

Num 23:19 El is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man,
that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath
he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

Now, I recognize that from a perspective this might be taken in
another sense as I am sure my Trinity Christians brother do and… I
respect this point of view.

The fact that we can disagree is healthy. The fact that we can agree
to disagree is a solution that ends the never ending debate, the
baseless attacks or the idea that somehow if one person doesn’t force
all the other people to accept your statements as complete truth, you
have failed.

The idea that trinity Christians disagree with Yehoshua being simply a
prophet that has authority and power given to him by a higher power,
YAHWEH, is absolutely evident but…

I do not see the need to force Bob or any of them to subscribe to my
point of view and I see no need to forcefully go around calling
anybody that doesn’t agree with me “an idiot” or any of the other
negative names they seem to toss around on a daily bases.

Psa 44:20 If we have forgotten the Name of our Elohim, Or stretched
out our hands to a foreign mighty one, 21 Would Elohim not search this
out? For He knows the secrets of the heart.

Everything is purposed and created by Elohim to test us and so, for
trinity Christians to have the belief that they have does not mean
they are “going to hell” or facing damnation and for me to say
anything of that accord means that I am attempting to be my brothers
judge.

Jas 3:9 With it we bless our Elohim and Father, and with it we curse

men, who have been made in the likeness of Elohim. 10 Out of the same
mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brothers, this should not be
so.

While it may trouble other people that I feel no need to correct what
I believe to be a grievous error on his part, I also know that he will
learn his lessons in the time that he is ready.

Isa 55:7 Let the wrong forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his
thoughts. Let him return to Yahweh, who has compassion on him, and to
our Elohim, for He pardons much. 8 “For My thoughts are not your
thoughts, neither are your ways My ways,” declares Yahweh. 9 “For as
the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your
ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.

Now, many people are adamant that at some points in scriptures, they
imply that violence is needed with our children and I’ve had a long
hard look at this topic. One of the scriptures used to promote
spanking children is:

Pro 23:13 Do not withhold discipline from a child; If you beat
[punish] him with a rod, he does not die.
Pro 23:14 Beat him with a rod And deliver his being from the grave.

The English word beat is also translated “punish” [Lev 26:24] and the
word “rod” is a symbol of leadership, like a king’s scepter. Because
the TRANSLATORS believed in beating children, they conveyed this idea
but the reality of this passage is that it can be taken as simply
given strong council.

H5221
נכה
nâkâh
naw-kaw'
A primitive root; to strike (lightly or severely, literally or
figuratively): - beat, cast forth, clap, give [wounds], X go forward,
X indeed, kill, make [slaughter], murderer, punish, slaughter, slay (-
er, -ing), smite (-r, -ing), strike, be stricken, (give) stripes, X
surely, wound.

I find it interesting that this word can be translated anywhere from
kill to wound or punish, which may not include physical violence at
all. Translators pretend to know based on context but reality is the
translating Hebrew is a much more complex undertaking then simple word
for word translations… this is probably why Jews opposed the books
being translated in the first place.

Pro 13:24 He who spares his rod [leadership] hates his son, But he who
loves him, seeks him with discipline.
Pro 19:18 Discipline your son because there is expectation, And do not
set your being on his destruction.
(Included to be comprehensive)

“Disciple” is also translated “instruct”. Seems like common sense but
when I examine the Hebrew text, I find no other support for the idea
of beating or spanking kids.

Pro 22:15 Folly is bound up in the heart of a child; The rod
[leadership] of discipline drives it far from him.


Instead of translating the word as “rod”, it might just as well mean
“the leadership of discipline”. That would agree with, “monkey see,
monkey do”… possibly these scriptures like so many others is simply
telling you to set a good example for your children.

Setting the example is something that I strongly agree with because
every modern example I’ve seen of people using these scriptures are
those people who are effectively TYRANTS setting a bad example and
telling others, do as I say, not as I do and the fruit of this bad
teaching is rebellion in almost every instance.

I’m not saying there isn’t any place for corporal punishment but
violence is a poor solution, especially to children that simply don’t
understand.

I know my own Father use to spank me on a regular bases and I honestly
think it never really made a big difference in my life. We follow the
examples our parents set for us for good or bad unless we recognize
poor behavior and know to change it. The idea that violence is ever a
solution to problems must be pushed back to the back burner and every
other solution put first.

If we are to, “let the wrong forsake his way” then I don’t see why
that wouldn’t apply to my family and my child first. By allowing my
kids to make mistakes in life, as I did, they can learn from them and
what is important is that I provide LEADERSHIP and a EXAMPLE for them,
not a beating.

To put this argument another way, why would scriptures teach us to
“love our enemies”, “turn the other cheek”, “do onto others as you
would have them do to you” but beat your kids?

If we are to “love our neighbors” as ourselves, I’d say the same
applies to our children and I’m not looking to have them beat me, I’ll
set a good example and remove violence from their lives first.

In conclusion it really isn’t a wonder why so many people live in the
conflict view that we must crush our enemies when the poor translation
of scriptures leads us to believe that violence is a solution that
serves the purpose of YAHWEH. A closer examination of what is written
in Hebrew truly is lost on modern society.

Mat 7:12 “Therefore, whatever you wish men to do to you, do also to
them, for this is the Torah and the Prophets.

The bottom line is that I don’t want my heavenly Father coming down to
beat me so why would I teach other people to beat their children when
it should be the last option after all other tools of rearing children
are exhausted.

Num 6:24 “Yahweh bless you and guard you;
Num 6:25 Yahweh make His face shine upon you, and show favour to you;
Num 6:26 Yahweh lift up His face upon you, and give you peace.” ’

Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)

Every child senses, with all the horse sense that's in him, that any
parent is angry inside when children misbehave and they dread more the
anger that is rarely or never expressed openly, wondering how awful it
might be.
Benjamin Spock

Exo 20:7 “You do not bring the Name of 'Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh [translated
Yahweh] your Elohim to naught, for Yahweh does not leave the one
unpunished who brings His Name to naught.

The child supplies the power but the parents have to do the steering.
Benjamin Spock

Respond directly:
http://groups.google.com/group/messianicYehoshua
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/messianic_Yehoshua/

http://www.isr-messianic.org/ <- download scriptures free
http://messianicyehoshua.googlegroups.com/web/RNKJV.zip
Restored Names King James for E-sword

http://messianicyehoshua.googlegroups.com/web/Jubilees.pdf
Book of Jubilees

I believe that being successful means having a balance of success
stories across the many areas of your life. You can't truly be
considered successful in your business life if your home life is in
shambles.
Zig Ziglar

[guardian Snow]

On Nov 11, 3:14 am, default <defa...@defaulter.net> wrote:

> All manner of politicians justify their personal agendas for wealth
> and power, by saying or implying that "God Almighty" wants it.
> Murder, war, torture, violence, genocide, are just some of the
> favorites.

The only thing Planned Parenthood prevents is pregnancy. Pregnancy is
not an illness abortion is a violent murder of the unborn child.
Planned Parenthood is in business to make money.

"We'd have a goal every month for abortion clients and for family
planning clients"
Abby Johnson, former affiliate director for Planned Parenthood.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115476

A former affiliate director for Planned Parenthood, the nation's
largest abortion provider, says she decided she could no longer be
part of the industry after she watched an ultrasound of a baby being
aborted and realized it was fighting for its life.

Abby Johnson, who resigned as director of a Texas Planned Parenthood
branch, now is the target of a restraining order sought by the
organization.

Ron Paul said, “All initiation of force is a violation of someone
else's rights, whether initiated by an individual or the state, for
the benefit of an individual or group of individuals, even if it's
supposed to be for the benefit of another individual or group of
individuals.” The same applies to Abortion as it was asked, “Should
it be the litmus test”? A better question is “Should the murder of
innocent unborn children be the litmus test?”

Deu 19:10 That innocent blood be not shed in thy land, which YHVH thy
Elohim giveth thee for an inheritance, and so blood be upon thee.

Somebody complained that I took this passage out of context but the
fact is, it needs no context just like:

Exo 20:13 “You do not murder.”

Does this passage sound like it’s saying it’s alright to murder
sometimes? Why do people want to make excuses and bargain the demons?
Abortions not only kill the unborn child, they are killing the women
that have them! Maybe they don’t die on the operating table but I
tell you, IT KILLS their SOUL! Murder has become all to commonly
excepted in society and nobody has the guts to say STOP, IT’S a
COMMANDMENT that you don’t murder!

Gen 4:10 And He said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s
blood cries out to Me from the ground.

In the time that it took you to read this far into my post, ABORTIONS
will kill 120,000 Babies today alone around the world. This year
alone, so far the abortion clock is about to hit 40,000,000 unborn
children dead... have a look for yourself.

http://www.poodwaddle.com/clocks16.htm

That’s double the entire population of Wyoming in ONE WEEK, murdered
senselessly. More innocent children die before you have your
afternoon lunch then all the Americans that have died in 8 years of
war in Iraq. So if you think war in Iraq is killing people, look at
your own home town because thousand more die in the United States by
abortion then do war.

Psa 9:12 For He remembers the seekers of bloodshed, He does not forget
the cry of the afflicted.

By the time you have your lunch at noon, more Americans will have died
by abortion in ONE MORNING then all the people that died during 9/11!
FACT!

Since 1972, 43 million Americans never got a say in how they died
because they were aborted. They were never given a choice to live.

Pro 6:15 Therefore shall his calamity come suddenly; suddenly shall he
be broken without remedy.
Pro 6:16 These six things doth YHVH hate: yea, seven are an
abomination unto him:
Pro 6:17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed INNOCENT
BLOOD,

Do you think for even a second that your heavenly Father has seen the
innocent blood crying out from the land? Do you really think the
murder of innocents shouldn’t be a litmus test? We spend millions of
dollars everyday under the banner of “protecting Americans” and then
by the end of that same day, we murdered thousands by our vote.

I have no desire to negotiate with murderous people who sit around
making excuses to kill unborn children and then turn around and claim
to be “Christian”. More unborn babies died then all the Jewish
Holocaust plus all of World War 2 and Vietnam combined, killed in our
own local towns by abortion.

Stop making excuses to support candidates that support abortion, it’s
costing us millions of dollars more to murder the unborn and the toll
on the American conscience....

Yes, the opposition to murder should be a litmus test in a moral
society.

Is the repulsion and revulsion that is evoked by these travesties due
simply to the loss of life? Or is humanity’s outrage due to the fact
that lives were snuffed out unjustly and unfairly—that those lives
were “innocent” of any wrongdoing that their persecutors alleged as
justification to terminate their lives? If the former is true, why is
no great issue made of the death toll that takes place in the United
States every day? That figure stands at 6,674 (Sutton, 2003)—more than
two and a half times as many people as those who died on 9-11. That’s
how many people die every day in America—not to mention the thousands
who die every day around the world. Why do we feel no great heartache
for these multitudes—akin to that which we felt on the occasion of
9-11?

Isa 59:2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your
Elohim, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not
hear. 3 For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with
iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered
perverseness.

Is it because you don’t hear the cries of the unborn still? YOU
WILL. Someday when your knee bends before your heavenly Father, he’s
going to ask you.. why didn’t you stop it? You had a say in a free
country and you voted for people that promoted murder of my unborn
children...

The mind has difficulty even comprehending 43,000,000 murdered
American babies—let alone envisioning the lost potential for good for
the entire human race. Make no mistake, the “hands that shed innocent
blood” (Proverbs 6:17) will one day face the consequences of their
actions (Ecclesiastes 12:14)

Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)

A test of a people is how it behaves toward the old. It is easy to
love children. Even tyrants and dictators make a point of being fond
of children. But the affection and care for the old, the incurable,
the helpless are the true gold mines of a culture.
Abraham Joshua Heschel

http://groups.google.com/group/messianicYehoshua <-- please join
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/messianic_Yehoshua/
http://www.e-sword.net/  Free bible software

http://www.isr-messianic.org/ <- download the scriptures free

http://messianicyehoshua.googlegroups.com/web/RNKJV.zip

[guardian Snow]

“I am not only a pacifist but a militant pacifist. I am willing to
fight for peace. Nothing will end war unless the people themselves
refuse to go to war.”
Albert Einstein

“War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.”

The popular song from the sixties claimed war was good for nothing
during Vietnam and here we are 40 plus years farther down the road in
two more wars.

Alfred Adler said, “It is easier to fight for one's principles than to
live up to them.” A very good person who I consider a teacher for me
responded to my quote from the Pope about violence:

“Violence and arms can never resolve the problems of men. “
Pope John Paul II

> Ask the 12 million killed in Nazi death camps if violence solved
> anything for them.

But they were the victims of violence?!?

Sun Tzu in the Art of War said, “To fight and conquer in all our
battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in
breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.”

>Ask the Jews whether the Arabs would have given up the
> attack without the violence they used in defense.

Do you honestly think the Arabic nations have given up? From what I
understand, several nations are still in a declared state of war with
Israel. Sun Tzu then said, “Know your enemy and know yourself and you
can fight a hundred battles without disaster.”

> The Torah contains many instances of capital punishment, and other violent
> punishments for breaking the Law.

True but the same Torah makes compassion the law.

Deu 4:31 “For YAHWEH your Elohim is a compassionate Ěl,
He does not forsake you, nor destroy you,
nor forget the covenant of your fathers which He swore to them.

>Y'hvah is not against violence or
> killing, per se, he is against murder.

The earth was first destroyed because it was filled with violence.

Gen 6:13 and Elohim said to Noaḥ, “The end of all flesh has come
before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them. And
see, I am going to destroy them from the earth.

I hope my brothers will give serious consideration to the fact that
the ONLY reason given for the destruction of the earth by flood was
VIOLENCE. Charles Stanley said, “A Christian has no right being in
a fight unless it's a spiritual fight.” And he was right.

>The reason that there is death a
> penalty in the Torah is because violence DOES solve things.

I will disagree with you brother and point to the teachings of
Yehoshua who said:
Mat 26:52 Then Yehoshua said to him, “Return your sword to its place,
for all who take the sword shall die by the sword.

A dead man
> harms no one. A live reprobate will continue to harm people. A dead man
> can not proselytize for a false God.

And who are we to determine this false deity that we should be our
brother’s judge? Is it not that we should judge rightly for
ourselves?

Psa 94:2 Raise Yourself up, O Judge of the earth; Render punishment to
the proud.

> The Torah, though, only allowed killing on the testimony of two or three
> witnesses, not on hearsay or for vengeance.

A trial by jury is not violence then is it but rather justice and this
justice was not carried out by a man but by Elohim. It is not until
you can see that the Torah speaks of harsh punishments as a deterrent
to transgression not as an ends, lest we ourselves are destroyed by
the same judgment we place on our brother’s head.

YAHWEH does not destroy us and until we learn to trust in him alone to
be our strength, our protector and our vengeance and our JUSTICE, we
have none.

Luk 22:36 And He said to them, “But now, let him who has a purse take
it, likewise also a bag. And let him who has no sword sell his garment
and buy one.”

That the threat of violence should be the deterrent becomes painfully
obvious because we go out as sheep among the wolves but ultimately my
battles are not fought with arms and weapons or do you not believe the
promise of him who sent you into this world?


Isa 54:17 “No weapon formed against you shall prosper, and every
tongue which rises against you in judgment you shall prove wrong. This
is the inheritance of the servants of YAHWEH, and their righteousness
from Me,” declares YAHWEH.

Mohandas Gandhi said, “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
then they fight you, then you win.”

You my friend are that servant and nothing will take you out of his
hands and in this, is my hope that you find your strength in the
darkest of days to put your faith in YAHWEH and allow those who do
wrong dig their own ditch while you try to keep them on the path of
righteousness.

Isa 55:7 Let the wrong forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his
thoughts. Let him return to Yahweh, who has compassion on him, and to
our Elohim, for He pardons much. 8 “For My thoughts are not your
thoughts, neither are your ways My ways,” declares Yahweh. 9 “For as
the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your
ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.

You are called to a high station my friend to an Elohim we do not know
ourselves, yet he knows us.

Isa 45:3 ‘And I shall give you the treasures of darkness and hoarded
wealth of secret places, so that you know that I, YAHWEH, who are
calling you by your name, am the Elohim of Israel.
Isa 45:4 ‘For the sake of Jacoḇ My servant, and of Israel My chosen,
I also call you by your name, I give you a title, though you have not
known Me.
Isa 45:5 ‘I am YAHWEH, and there is none else – there is no Elohim
besides Me. I gird you, though you have not known Me,
Isa 45:6 so that they know from the rising of the sun to its setting
that there is none but Me. I am YAHWEH, and there is none else,

We have ONE JUDGE and ONE CREATOR who will judge all, don’t try to
think it’s you. Be Humble.

“Love is a better teacher than duty.”
Albert Einstein

Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)

Respond directly:
http://groups.google.com/group/messianicYehoshua
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/messianic_Yehoshua/

The heart of another is a dark forest, always, no matter how close it
has been to one's own.
Willa Cather

An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation,
nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi

http://www.isr-messianic.org/ <- download the scriptures free

http://messianicyehoshua.googlegroups.com/web/RNKJV.zip <--free
download of the Restored Names King James Version

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other
time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that
we seek.
Barack Obama

[guardian Snow]

On Nov 20, 2:55 pm, singin4free <jffry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 19, 7:07 pm, guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:

It should be noted that what I say here are things extremely hard to
put into practice in our own life because we must disregard what we
know as “common sense” for the teachings of Messiah.

> > “I am not only a pacifist but a militant pacifist. I am willing to
> > fight for peace. Nothing will end war unless the people themselves
> > refuse to go to war.”
> > Albert Einstein

> I hesitate to enter this conversation, mainly because my views on the
> subject are not as clear to me as they should be. I abhor violence and
> war. But I also understand it is evil to allow injustice when it is
> possible to stop it.

First off, I’m glad to see that you do have the courage to enter your
opinion in this discussion. Violence is a serious issue and I’m
grateful to discuss the topic of somebody of your caliber of faith,
even if we disagree on topics.

I suppose it becomes necessary to define the type of violent behavior,
defensive and aggressive. Defensive violence such the apprehension of
criminals by law enforcement should always be respected in my opinion
but the professional police officer with proper tools at his/her
disposal should hardly ever need to employ deadly force.

>If someone is attacking the innocent, is it wrong
> to use violence against violence unselfishly?

The law says that equal force for the detaining and apprehension of
criminals is required.

> The stereotypical
> situation is a man defending his wife and children. Should he allow
> them to be harmed?

You assume that violence is the only solution to defending your family
because of your conditioning but this is why Americans believe in the
right to bear arms with the idea that intruders can be held at the
threat of gun point without the need for actual violence.

Mat 26:52 Then יהושע [Yehoshua] said to him, “Return your sword to its

place, for all who take the sword shall die by the sword.

>If he uses violence he may also be laying down his
> life for his family. Is that evil or is it the highest form of love?

Mat 10:37 “He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of
Me, and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.

No, according to scriptures, the highest form of love is love of
Elohim Yahweh which is always put first before the love of neighbor as
the second greatest command. It’s assumed you love your own:

Mat 5:46 “For if you love those loving you, what reward have you? Are
the tax collectors not doing the same too?

The issues that you are raising are according to our secular beliefs,
not are religious beliefs which is why I believe you have such a hard
time with the issue.

> As Jesus said, greater love has no man than to lay down his life for
> his friends.

Lay down his life in the example of the Messiah didn’t include him
attacking anybody in self defense and you are attempting to reason
from your own perspective. Can you imagine Yehoshua the soldier
attacking anybody even for his own mother? His entire ministry was
non violence:

Mat 5:39 but I say to you, do not resist the wicked. But whoever slaps
you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

Can you imagine the Messiah attacking any person for any reason?

> The American national anthem says in a verse seldom sung:
>
> "So conquer we must, when our cause it is just, and this be our motto,
> in God is our trust". - from a verse of the Star Spangled Banner.
>
> Interestingly, the self-declared "militant pacificist" quoted above
> was also the author of a letter to FDR concerning development of the
> first atom bomb. Einstein the pacifist knew that if the Allies did not
> have the bomb first, tyranny would then conquer freedom.
>
> The Bible tells us there is a time for every purpose under heaven.
> That includes times of peace and times of war. I hate war.

It does not say every purpose is righteous or that these times are a
call for your action. You are adding your own definition to the
times. Just because there is a time for war does not mean I should
participate, only that these things happen in their seasons.

> Any sane
> person should. But common sense declares that complete refusal to act
> with force is not the way to love those who cannot defend themselves.

In reading what you said, “common sense” stood out to me and the
knowledge of Yehoshua is not common because you are called to a higher
standard as priest and sovereigns of Elohim.

1Pe 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being built up, a spiritual
house, a set-apart priesthood, to offer up spiritual slaughter
offerings acceptable to Elohim through יהושע [Yehoshua] Messiah.

The question one such as yourself should be asking is “What would
Jesus do?” and you basically just called the Messiah INSANE! In
asking that question, do you think you would find the Messiah watching
violent movies and television? Do you think Yehoshua would be at the
next opening of Friday the 13th part 2 in 3-D or Saw or Nightmare on
Elm Street 2010? When Peter sought to defend the innocent Messiah,
did he not tell him to put away the sword and he did not resist evil
even though he had authority to call down all the messengers of the
heavens, including what you know as the “angel of death” to fight for
him and still he willingly gave the example to suffer like a lamb led
to slaughter….

> It is unjust to turn ones back on violence to the innocent. So I
> believe there must be causes worth fighting for.

Ever seen sheep fight back when a lamb’s neck is being sliced open
right before them?

1Pe 2:21 For to this you were called, because Messiah also suffered
for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps,

Is it your accusation that Elohim does not protect the innocent? I
found no example of the Messiah fighting with anybody. The closest
found in scriptures is:

Joh 2:15 And having made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the
Set-apart Place, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the
moneychangers’ coins and overturned the tables.

I would point out that it doesn’t say he whipped the people and this
could just as easily have been that he snapped it at them to drive
them out and he used non-lethal force to do it.

> Very tough topic. Those are some of my thoughts.

You’ve got that right brother! I am so grateful that you had the
courage to inject those thoughts with honesty. Think long and hard
about that because unfortunately there are no applications of the New
Testament that directly speak to crime and war and the closest I can
determine to serve is:

Mat 10:16 “See, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves.
Therefore be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.

In determining how our behavior should be we should consider the
behavior of sheep!

Flee, not fight
Sheep are a prey animal. When they are faced with danger, their
natural instinct is to flee not fight. Their strategy is to use
avoidance and rapid flight to avoid being eaten.

Safety in numbers
After fleeing, sheep will reform their group and look at the predator.
They use their natural herding instinct to band together for safety. A
sheep that is by itself is vulnerable to attack.

Never a straight line
Sheep tracks are never straight. The winding of trails allows sheep to
observe their backside first with one eye, then the other. Sheep can
spot dogs or other perceived forms of danger from 1,200 to 1,500 yards
away.

Keen senses
Sheep have excellent senses. Their wide angle of vision allows them to
see predators. They can direct their ears to the direction of sound.
They are very sensitive to what different predators smell like.

Pain
Sheep have an amazing tolerance for pain. They do not show pain,
because if they do, they will be more vulnerable to predators that
look for those who are weak or injured.

http://www.sheep101.info/bahavior.html

"What we plant in the soil of contemplation, we shall reap in the
harvest of action."
Meister Eckhart

Num 6:24 “Yahweh bless you and guard you;
Num 6:25 Yahweh make His face shine upon you, and show favour to you;
Num 6:26 Yahweh lift up His face upon you, and give you peace.” ’

Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)

“Begin to see yourself as a soul with a body rather than a body with a
soul.”
Wayne Dyer

Exo 20:7 “You do not bring the Name of 'Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh [translated
Yahweh] your Elohim to naught, for Yahweh does not leave the one
unpunished who brings His Name to naught.

[guardian Snow]

Aldous Huxley, Essays: Words and Behavior

Words form the thread on which we string our experiences. Without them
we should live spasmodically and intermittently. Hatred itself is not
so strong that animals will not forget it, if distracted, even in the
presence of the enemy. Watch a pair of cats, crouching on the brink of
a fight. Balefully the eyes glare; from far down in the throat of each
come bursts of a strange, strangled noise of defiance; as though
animated by a life of their own, the tails twitch and tremble. With
aimed intensity of loathing! Another moment and surely there must be
an explosion. But no; all of a sudden one of the two creatures turns
away, hoists a hind leg in a more than fascist salute and, with the
same fixed and focused attention as it had given a moment before to
its enemy, begins to make a lingual toilet. Animal love is as much at
the mercy of distractions as animal hatred.

The dumb creation lives a life made up of discreet and mutually
irrelevant episodes. Such as it is, the consistency of human
characters is due to the words upon which all human experiences are
strung. We are purposeful because we can describe our feelings in
rememberable words, can justify and rationalize our desires in terms
of some kind of argument. Faced by an enemy we do not allow an itch to
distract us from our emotions; the mere word “enemy” is enough to keep
us reminded of our hatred, to convince us that we do well to be
angry.

Similarly the word “love” bridges for us those chasms of momentary
indifference and boredom which gape from time to time between even the
most ardent lovers. Feeling and desire provide us with our motive
power; words give continuity to what we do and to a considerable
extent determine our direction. Inappropriate and badly chosen words
vitiate thought and lead to wrong or foolish conduct.

Most ignorances are vincible, and in the greater number of cases
stupidity is what the Buddha pronounced it to be, a sin. For,
consciously, or subconsciously, it is with deliberation that we do not
know or fail to understand — because incomprehension allows us, with a
good conscience, to evade unpleasant obligations and responsibilities,
because ignorance is the best excuse for going on doing what one
likes, but ought not, to do. Our egotisms are incessantly fighting to
preserve themselves, not only from external enemies, but also from the
assaults of the other and better self with which they are so
uncomfortably associated.

Ignorance is egotism’s most effective defense against that Dr. Jekyll
in us who desires perfection; stupidity, its subtlest stratagem. If,
as so often happens, we choose to give continuity to our experience by
means of words which falsify the facts, this is because the
falsification is somehow to our advantage as egotists.

Consider, for example, the case of war. War is enormously
discreditable to those who order it to be waged and even to those who
merely tolerate its existence. Furthermore, to developed sensibilities
the facts of war are revolting and horrifying. To falsify these facts,
and by so doing to make war seem less evil than it really is, and our
own responsibility in tolerating war less heavy, is doubly to our
advantage. By suppressing and distorting the truth, we protect our
sensibilities and preserve our selfesteem.

Now, language is, among other things, a device which men use for
suppressing and distorting the truth. Finding the reality of war too
unpleasant to contemplate, we create a verbal alternative to that
reality, parallel with it, but in quality quite different from it.
That which we contemplate thenceforward is not that to which we react
emotionally and upon which we pass our moral judgments, is not war as
it is in fact, but the fiction of war as it exists in our pleasantly
falsifying verbiage. Our stupidity in using inappropriate language
turns out, on analysis, to be the most refined cunning. The most
shocking fact about war is that its victims and its instruments are
individual human beings, and that these individual human beings are
condemned by the monstrous conventions of politics to murder or be
murdered in quarrels not their own, to inflict upon the innocent and,
innocent themselves of any crime against their enemies, to suffer
cruelties of every kind.

The language of strategy and politics is designed, so far as it is
possible, to conceal this fact, to make it appear as though wars were
not fought by individuals drilled to murder one another in cold blood
and without provocation, but either by impersonal and therefore wholly
non-moral and impassible forces, or else by personified abstractions.
Here are a few examples of the first kind of falsification. In place
of “cavalrymen” or “foot-soldiers” military writers like to speak of
“sabres” and “rules.” Here is a sentence from a description of the
Battle of Marengo: “According to Victor’s report, the French retreat
was orderly; it is certain, at any rate, that the regiments held
together, for the six thousand Austrian sabres found no opportunity to
charge home.”

The battle is between sabres in line and muskets in Echelon — a mere
clash of ironmongery.

On other occasions there is no question of anything so vulgarly
material as ironmongery. The battles are between Platonic ideas,
between the abstractions of physics and mathematics. Forces interact;
weights are flung into scales; masses are set in motion. Or else it is
all a matter of geometry. Lines swing and sweep; are protracted or
curved; pivot on a fixed point. Alternatively the combatants are
personal, in the sense that they are personifications. There is “the
enemy,” in the singular, making “his” plans, striking “his” blows. The
attribution of personal characteristics to collectivities, to
geographical expressions, to institutions, is a source, as we shall
see, of endless confusions in political thought, of innumerable
political mistakes and crimes.

Personification in politics is an error which we make because it is to
our advantage as egotists to be able to feel violently proud of our
country and of ourselves as belonging to it, and to believe that all
the misfortunes due to our own mistakes are really the work of the
Foreigner. It is easier to feel violently toward a person than toward
an abstraction; hence our habit of making political personifications.

In some cases military personifications are merely special instances
of political personifications. A particular collectivity, the army or
the warring nation, is given the name and, along with the name, the
attributes of a single person, in order that we may be able to love or
hate it more intensely than we could do if we thought of it as what it
really is: a number of diverse individuals.

In other cases personification is used for the purpose of concealing
the fundamental absurdity and monstrosity of war. What is absurd and
monstrous about war is that men who have no personal quarrel should be
trained to murder one another in cold blood. By personifying opposing
armies or countries, we are able to think of war as a conflict between
individuals. The same result is obtained by writing of war as though
it were carried on exclusively by the generals in command and not by
the private soldiers in their armies. (“Rennenkampf had pressed back
von Schubert.”) The implication in both cases is that war is
indistinguishable from a bout of fisticuffs in a bar room. Whereas in
reality it is profoundly different. A scrap between two individuals is
forgivable; mass murder, deliberately organized, is a monstrous
iniquity.

We still choose to use war as an instrument of policy; and to
comprehend the full wickedness and absurdity of war would therefore be
inconvenient. For, once we understood, we should have to make some
effort to get rid of the abominable thing. Accordingly, when we talk
about war, we use a language which conceals or embellishes its
reality. Ignoring the facts, so far as we possibly can, we imply that
battles are not fought by soldiers, but by things, principles,
allegories, personified collectivities, or (at the most human) by
opposing commanders, pitched against one another in single combat.

For the same reason, when we have to describe the processes and the
results of war, we employ a rich variety of euphemisms. Even the most
violently patriotic and militaristic are reluctant to call a spade by
its own name. To conceal their intentions even from themselves, they
make use of picturesque metaphors. We find them, for example,
clamoring for war planes numerous and powerful enough to go and
“destroy the hornets in their nests” — in other words, to go and throw
thermite, high explosives and vesicants upon the inhabitants of
neighboring countries before they have time to come and do the same to
us. And how reassuring is the language of historians and strategists!
They write admiringly of those military geniuses who know “when to
strike at the enemy’s line” (a single combatant deranges the
geometrical constructions of a personification); when to “turn his
flank”; when to “execute an enveloping movement.” As though they were
engineers discussing the strength of materials and the distribution of
stresses, they talk of abstract entities called “man power” and “fire
power.” They sum up the long-drawn sufferings and atrocities of trench
warfare in the phrase, “a war of attrition”; the massacre and mangling
of human beings is assimilated to the grinding of a lens.

A dangerously abstract word, which figures in all discussions about
war, is “force.” Those who believe in organizing collective security
by means of military pacts against a possible aggressor are
particularly fond of this word. “You cannot,” they say, “have
international justice unless you are prepared to impose it by force.”
“Peace-loving countries must unite to use force against aggressive
dictatorships.” “Democratic institutions must be protected, if need
be, by force.” And so on.

Now, the word “force,” when used in reference to human relations, has
no single, definite meaning. There is the “force” used by parents
when, without resort to any kind of physical violence, they compel
their children to act or refrain from acting in some particular way.
There is the “force” used by attendants in an asylum when they try to
prevent a maniac from hurting himself or others. There is the “force”
used by the police when they control a crowd, and that other “force”
which they used in a baton charge. And finally there is the “force”
used in war. This, of course, varies with the technological devices at
the disposal of the belligerents, with the policies they are pursuing,
and with the particular circumstances of the war in question. But in
general it may be said that, in war, “force” connotes violence and
fraud used to the limit of the combatants’ capacity. Variations in
quantity, if sufficiently great, produce variations in quality. The
“force” that is war, particularly modern war, is very different from
the “force” that is police action, and the use of the same abstract
word to describe the two dissimilar processes is profoundly
misleading. (Still more misleading, of course, is the explicit
assimilation of a war, waged by allied League-of-Nations powers
against an aggressor, to police action against a criminal. The first
is the use of violence and fraud without limit against innocent and
guilty alike; the second is the use of strictly limited violence and a
minimum of fraud exclusively against the guilty.)

Reality is a succession of concrete and particular situations. When we
think about such situations we should use the particular and concrete
words which apply to them. If we use abstract words which apply
equally well (and equally badly) to other, quite dissimilar
situations, it is certain that we shall think incorrectly. Let us take
the sentences quoted above and translate the abstract word “force”
into language that will render (however inadequately) the concrete and
particular realities of contemporary warfare. “You cannot have
international justice, unless you are prepared to impose it by force.”
Translated, this becomes: “You cannot have international justice
unless you are prepared, with a view to imposing a just settlement, to
drop thermite, high explosives and vesicants upon the inhabitants of
foreign cities and to have thermite, high explosives and vesicants
dropped in return upon the inhabitants of your cities.” At the end of
this proceeding, justice is to be imposed by the victorious party —
that is, if there is a victorious party. It should be remarked that
justice was to have been imposed by the victorious party at the end of
the last war. But, unfortunately, after four years of fighting, the
temper of the victors was such that they were quite incapable of
making a just settlement.

The Allies are reaping in Nazi Germany what they sowed at Versailles.
The victors of the next war will have undergone intensive bombardments
with thermite, high explosives and vesicants. Will their temper be
better than that of the Allies in 1918? Will they be in a fitter state
to make a just settlement? The answer, quite obviously, is: No. It is
psychologically all but impossible that justice should be secured by
the methods of contemporary warfare. The next two sentences may be
taken together. “Peace-loving countries must unite to use force
against aggressive dictatorships. Democratic institutions must be
protected, if need be, by force.” Let us translate. “Peace-loving
countries must unite to throw thermite, high explosives and vesicants
on the inhabitants of countries ruled by aggressive dictators. They
must do this, and of course abide the consequences, in order to
preserve peace and democratic institutions.” Two questions immediately
propound themselves. First, is it likely that peace can be secured by
a process calculated to reduce the orderly life of our complicated
societies to chaos? And, second, is it likely that democratic
institutions will flourish in a state of chaos? Again, the answers are
pretty clearly in the negative.

By using the abstract word “force,” instead of terms which at least
attempt to describe the realities of war as it is today, the preachers
of collective security through military collaboration disguise from
themselves and from others, not only the contemporary facts, but also
the probable consequences of their favorite policy. The attempt to
secure justice, peace and democracy by “force” seems reasonable enough
until we realize, first, that this noncommittal word stands, in the
circumstances of our age, for activities which can hardly fail to
result in social chaos; and second, that the consequences of social
chaos are injustice, chronic warfare and tyranny.

The moment we think in concrete and particular terms of the concrete
and particular process called “modern war,” we see that a policy which
worked (or at least didn’t result in complete disaster) in the past
has no prospect whatever of working in the immediate future. The
attempt to secure justice, peace and democracy by means of a “force,”
which means, at this particular moment of history, thermite, high
explosives and vesicants, is about as reasonable as the attempt to put
out a fire with a colorless liquid that happens to be, not water, but
petrol.

What applies to the “force” that is war applies in large measure to
the “force” that is revolution. It seems inherently very unlikely that
social justice and social peace can be secured by thermite, high
explosives and vesicants. At first, it may be, the parties in a civil
war would hesitate to use such instruments on their fellow-countrymen.
But there can be little doubt that, if the conflict were prolonged (as
it probably would be between the evenly balanced Right and Left of a
highly industrialized society), the combatants would end by losing
their scruples. The alternatives confronting us seem to be plain
enough. Either we invent and conscientiously employ a new technique
for making revolutions and settling international disputes; or else we
cling to the old technique and, using “force” (that is to say,
thermite, high explosives and vesicants), destroy ourselves. Those
who, for whatever motive, disguise the nature of the second
alternative under inappropriate language, render the world a grave
disservice. They lead us into one of the temptations we find it
hardest to resist — the temptation to run away from reality, to
pretend that facts are not what they are. Like Shelley (but without
Shelley’s acute awareness of what he was doing) we are perpetually
weaving, “A shroud of talk to hide us from the sun Of this familiar
life.”

We protect our minds by an elaborate system of abstractions,
ambiguities, metaphors and similes from the reality we do not wish to
know too clearly; we lie to ourselves, in order that we may still have
the excuse of ignorance, the alibi of stupidity and incomprehension,
possessing which we can continue with a good conscience to commit and
tolerate the most monstrous crimes:

The poor wretch who has learned his only prayers From curses, who
knows scarcely words enough To ask a blessing from his Heavenly
Father, Becomes a fluent phraseman, absolute And technical in
victories and defeats, And all our dainty terms for fratricide; Terms
which we trundle smoothly o’er our tongues Like mere abstractions,
empty sounds to which We join no meaning and attach no form! As if the
soldier died without a wound: As if the fibers of this godlike frame
Were gored without a pang: as if the wretch Who fell in battle, doing
bloody deeds, Passed off to Heaven translated and not killed; As
though he had no wife to pine for him, No God to judge him.

The language we use about war is inappropriate, and its
inappropriateness is designed to conceal a reality so odious that we
do not wish to know it. The language we use about politics is also
inappropriate; but here our mistake has a different purpose. Our
principal aim in this case is to arouse and, having aroused, to
rationalize and justify such intrinsically agreeable sentiments as
pride and hatred, self-esteem and contempt for others. To achieve this
end we speak about the facts of politics in words which more or less
completely misrepresent them. The concrete realities of politics are
individual human beings, living together in national groups.

Politicians — and to some extent we are all politicians — substitute
abstractions for these concrete realities, and having done this,
proceed to invest each abstraction with an appearance of concreteness
by personifying it. For example, the concrete reality of which
“Britain” is the abstraction consists of some forty-odd millions of
diverse individuals living on an island off the west coast of Europe.
The personification of this abstraction appears, in classical fancy-
dress and holding a very large toasting fork, on the backside of our
copper coinage; appears in verbal form, every time we talk about
international politics. “Britain,” the abstraction from forty millions
of Britons, is endowed with thoughts, sensibilities and emotions, even
with a sex — for, in spite of John Bull, the country is always a
female. Now, it is of course possible that “Britain” is more than a
mere name — is an entity that possesses some kind of reality distinct
from that of the individuals constituting the group to which the name
is applied. But this entity, if it exists, is certainly not a young
lady with a toasting fork; nor is it possible to believe (though some
eminent philosophers have preached the doctrine) that it should
possess anything in the nature of a personal will.

One must agree with T. H. Green that “there can be nothing in a
nation, however exalted its mission, or in a society however perfectly
organized, which is not in the persons composing the nation or the
society. . . We cannot suppose a national spirit and will to exist
except as the spirit and will of individuals.” But the moment we start
resolutely thinking about our world in terms of individual persons we
find ourselves at the same time thinking in terms of universality.
“The great rational religions,” writes Professor Whitehead, “are the
outcome of the emergence of a religious consciousness that is
universal, as distinguished from tribal, or even social. Because it is
universal, it introduces the note of solitariness.” (And he might have
added that, because it is solitary, it introduces the note of
universality.) “The reason of this connection between universality and
solitude is that universality is a disconnection from immediate
surroundings.”

And conversely the disconnection from immediate surroundings,
particularly such social surrounding as the tribe or nation, the
insistence on the person as the fundamental reality, leads to the
conception of an all-embracing unity. A nation, then, may be more than
a mere abstraction, may possess some kind of real existence apart from
its constituent members. But there is no reason to suppose that it is
a person; indeed, there is every reason to suppose that it isn’t.
Those who speak as though it were a person (and some go further than
this and speak as though it were a personal god) do so, because it is
to their interest as egotists to make precisely this mistake.

In the case of the ruling class these interests are in part material.
The personification of the nation as a sacred being, different from
and superior to its constituent members, is merely (I quote the words
of a great French jurist, Léon Duguit) “a way of imposing authority by
making people believe it is an authority de jure and not merely de
facto.” By habitually talking of the nation as though it were a person
with thoughts, feelings and a will of its own, the rulers of a country
legitimate their own powers. Personification leads easily to
deification; and where the nation is deified, its government ceases to
be a mere convenience, like drains or a telephone system, and,
partaking in the sacredness of the entity it represents, claims to
give orders by divine right and demands the unquestioning obedience
due to a god.

Rulers seldom find it hard to recognize their friends. Hegel, the man
who elaborated an inappropriate figure of speech into a complete
philosophy of politics, was a favorite of the Prussian government. “Es
ist,” he had written, “es ist der Gang Gottes in der Welt, das der
Staat ist.” The decoration bestowed on him by Frederick William III
was richly deserved. Unlike their rulers, the ruled have no material
interest in using inappropriate language about states and nations. For
them, the reward of being mistaken is psychological. The personified
and deified nation becomes, in the minds of the individuals composing
it, a kind of enlargement of themselves. The superhuman qualities
which belong to the young lady with the toasting fork, the young lady
with plaits and a brass soutien-gorge, the young lady in a Phrygian
bonnet, are claimed by individual Englishmen, Germans and Frenchmen as
being, at least in part, their own. Dulce et decorum est pro patria
mori. But there would be no need to die, no need of war, if it had not
been even sweeter to boast and swagger for one’s country, to hate,
despise, swindle and bully for it. Loyalty to the personified nation,
or to the personified class or party, justifies the loyal in indulging
all those passions which good manners and the moral code do not allow
them to display in their relations with their neighbors.

The personified entity is a being, not only great and noble, but also
insanely proud, vain and touchy; fiercely rapacious; a braggart; bound
by no considerations of right and wrong. (Hegel condemned as
hopelessly shallow all those who dared to apply ethical standards to
the activities of nations. To condone and applaud every iniquity
committed in the name of the State was to him a sign of philosophical
profundity.) Identifying themselves with this god, individuals find
relief from the constraints of ordinary social decency, feel
themselves justified in giving rein, within duly prescribed limits, to
their criminal proclivities. As a loyal nationalist or party-man, one
can enjoy the luxury of behaving badly with a good conscience. The
evil passions are further justified by another linguistic error — the
error of speaking about certain categories of persons as though they
were mere embodied abstractions.

Foreigners and those who disagree with us are not thought of as men
and women like ourselves and our fellow-countrymen; they are thought
of as representatives and, so to say, symbols of a class. In so far as
they have any personality at all, it is the personality we mistakenly
attribute to their class — a personality that is, by definition,
intrinsically evil. We know that the harming or killing of men and
women is wrong, and we are reluctant consciously to do what we know to
be wrong. But when particular men and women are thought of merely as
representatives of a class, which has previously been defined as evil
and personified in the shape of a devil, then the reluctance to hurt
or murder disappears.

Brown, Jones and Robinson are no longer thought of as Brown, Jones and
Robinson, but as heretics, gentiles, Yids, niggers, barbarians, Huns,
communists, capitalists, fascists, liberals — whichever the case may
be. When they have been called such names and assimilated to the
accursed class to which the names apply, Brown, Jones and Robinson
cease to be conceived as what they really are — human persons — and
become for the users of this fatally inappropriate language mere
vermin or, worse, demons whom it is right and proper to destroy as
thoroughly and as painfully as possible. Wherever persons are present,
questions of morality arise.

Rulers of nations and leaders of parties find morality embarrassing.
That is why they take such pains to depersonalize their opponents. All
propaganda directed against an opposing group has but one aim: to
substitute diabolical abstractions for concrete persons. The
propagandist’s purpose is to make one set of people forget that
certain other sets of people are human. By robbing them of their
personality, he puts them outside the pale of moral obligation. Mere
symbols can have no rights — particularly when that of which they are
symbolical is, by definition, evil.

Politics can become moral only on one condition: that its problems
shall be spoken of and thought about exclusively in terms of concrete
reality; that is to say, of persons. To depersonify human beings and
to personify abstractions are complementary errors which lead, by an
inexorable logic, to war between nations and to idolatrous worship of
the State, with consequent governmental oppression.

All current political thought is a mixture, in varying proportions,
between thought in terms of concrete realities and thought in terms of
depersonified symbols and personified abstractions. In the democratic
countries the problems of internal politics are thought about mainly
in terms of concrete reality; those of external politics, mainly in
terms of abstractions and symbols. In dictatorial countries the
proportion of concrete to abstract and symbolic thought is lower than
in democratic countries.

Dictators talk little of persons, much of personified abstractions,
such as the Nation, the State, the Party, and much of depersonified
symbols, such as Yids, Bolshies, Capitalists. The stupidity of
politicians who talk about a world of persons as though it were not a
world of persons is due in the main to self-interest.

In a fictitious world of symbols and personified abstractions, rulers
find that they can rule more effectively, and the ruled, that they can
gratify instincts which the conventions of good manners and the
imperatives of morality demand that they should repress. To think
correctly is the condition of behaving well. It is also in itself a
moral act; those who would think correctly must resist considerable
temptations.
(From The Olive Tree)

http://danassays.wordpress.com/collected-essays-by-aldous-huxley/aldous-huxley-essays-words-and-behavior/

[Snow]

“I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I
am opposed to is a rash war.”
Barack Obama

Why are we at war in Afghanistan and Iraq? Can anybody really tell me?
Eight years ago, we entered these countries under the excuse of
retaliatory for the 9/11 attacks but that was 2001 and this is almost
9 years later. Saddam Hussein is dead and gone; there are no weapons
of mass destruction and President Obama promised to end the war and
yet, here we are a year after he’s been elected and more troops are
being deployed.

“The surge troops have been deployed to Afghanistan by the end of
Summer 2010, the total number of US troops there will be around
98,000, the highest level yet. When President Obama took office, that
number was 32,000.”

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/12/wh-no-additional-troops-to-afghanistan-beyond-surge.html

Instead of ending war, he has double the number of armed soldiers and
will soon triple the number from Bush administration levels and we
have nobody asking, “WHY”?

“All war is based on deception.”
Sun Tzu

From the second Obama won the Presidency, the international media
stopped the daily body counts and broadcasting the war protesters and
stopped asking, “Why are we at war?” They no longer cared because the
propaganda against the Bush administration had put their Manchurian
candidate in office.

To be fair, I never understood from day one, why we went to war in the
first place and to be honest, I don’t care.

Knowing that just the “Defense” budget would feed, clothe, transport,
educate and house one sixth the entire world population makes me
scratch my head at the vast amounts of debt America is buried under to
support these travesties, no… crimes against humanity. I think if
we created trade opportunity instead of bombs, the world might think a
little better of us but the tragic reality of the real world is that
people like to lie to themselves and label human beings as statistics
so that they don’t have to think about the reality that their tax
dollars aren’t really helping the poor unless you consider killing
them a viable option.

We send troops instead of educational book to teach them a better way
of life. The last time I checked the only viable crop in Afghanistan
was opium, so maybe we should be looking at pharmaceutical companies
seeking to control drug production but are poppies really worth
killing for? In Iraq, any layman knows it’s about the oil but I
remember Obama spending a lot of his hype on new technology to remove
this dependency… We’ve had the technology to never use oil ever again
for a dozen years, affordable, reliable and cheap alternatives have
already obsoleted yesterdays economy and still we bail out car makers
and continue corrupt business schemes with a bankrupted economy… What
happened Obama to, “Yes, we can” that you’ve tied up all your
credibility in socialized health care instead of any real reforms???

Americans are reduced to social gossipers talking about how many woman
a golfer slept with instead taking any real steps to change the world…
why? Or if the insane “Octo” mom is going to have still more babies
even though she can’t take care of the bastards she already has being
supported by corporate sponsors. Because nobody is FOCUSED on
solutions to the problems when they are too busy being worried about
if they are going to have access to prescription drugs they don’t even
need.

Religious people don’t seem to give a damn about anything but there
precious dogma and we don’t see any of them stepping up and talking
about real world issues either.

The media continues to push out its defecation of never ending
violence and pointless soap operas and all people seem to care about
is nothing but themselves and if there poor low self esteem is being
insulted as if that matters.

Everything that we need is within reach and all we have to do is wake
up and realize that we can pull our troops out of foreign countries
and let them be… we can decentralize the electric grid and make self
sustaining homes that produce electricity using various methods… we
can take the government OUT of health care and the doctors will be
forced to provide affordable solutions of actually curing sickness
instead just pills that mask symptoms and make pharmaceutical
companies rich. Government isn’t the cure to health care, they are
the people that poison the well in the first place! The welfare
system makes our own government compete against its own working
population and the only people with health care are those on the
government payroll (including the military) and this should be
reversed.

If we can say we are fighting for anything, it’s to support the
corporate controlled media that also owns the military industrial
machine and we are fighting to support corruption, greed and seeking
world domination instead of world peace and that’s nothing worth
fighting for.

I shouldn’t be surprised that on the 20 boards I posted, “The campaign
against violence”, a single person of faith spoke up and he
supported violence.

Num 6:24 “Yahweh bless you and guard you;
Num 6:25 Yahweh make His face shine upon you, and show favour to you;
Num 6:26 Yahweh lift up His face upon you, and give you peace.” ’

Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
George Orwell

Respond directly:
http://groups.google.com/group/messianicYehoshua
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/messianic_Yehoshua/

Many a man's strength is in opposition, and when he faileth, he grows
out of use.
Francis Bacon

[Yochannan]

It might be true, that all war is based upon deception (it certainly
includes deception), but in my understanding, war is also the result
of poor and inept leadership. It is caused by greed; a pretext for
invading another sovereign state; an excuse to develop private,
corporate, an/or personal wealth. War is also commonly used to effect
changes in customs, cultures and the religions of countries deemed
inferior to what the superior power dictates as most desirable to
their own self interests, the latter has become quit evident in the
war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The war in Iraq and Afghanistan has also become "Christianity's"
struggle against "Islam" since it has become a popular but mistaken
belief, that Islam is an inferior belief to that of Christianity. The
truth is, these religions are exclusive, that is, Christianity accepts
no other religious concepts as valid, and Islam does likewise. Where
Islam is a "pure" monotheistic religious belief system, Christianity
has developed into a "compromised" monotheistic religious belief
system. Christianity promotes the concept of a one true God that is
expressed into the three distinct persons. This concept that is not
reconcilable to someone having the pure monotheistic concept of the
God that names Himself YHWH in the Hebrew Scriptures. The extreme
elements on both these religious systems would love to wipeout a
billion or more of those adhering to the other system from the face of
the earth. Not a day goes by that I do not hear a Christian voicing
contempt against the belief of a Muslim. I suppose the opposite is
also true, but I have not had the opportunity to confirm this.

Fanaticism is found in all major religions, not just in Islam.
Christianity (and its need to "convert" the globe) is one of those
religions that have extremists on the far right. Christianity is
directly responsible for the death of millions of people throughout
the last 2000 years. This I believe it is one of the reasons the
extreme wing of Islam is at war with the Government of the United
States. It seems that some people just do not "appreciate" the moral
standards that have come about through "Christianity" and I can't
blame them. Further more, the United States has become a "Democracy"
and who wants to live in a Democracy? I don't. According to our
Constitution, (the by-laws for our Federal Corporate Government), we
are a "Representative Republic," NOT a Democracy. No Country in the
history of the world has ever, nor could ever survive as a true
"Democracy."

The real root of the terrorism problem is, that we, the Western
Nations of the World have not been able to control the Jews, who have
used our good will, and our money to steel, and rob their neighbors
with US supplied arms, and US built war machines. The Christian
ignorance of who these so-called Jews the "chosen people" really are,
have led to a convoluted support for a people group that are united
only by their religious belief of Jewism, and by their hate for anyone
else (including the Christian). Jewism has nothing to do with the
Ancient religious belief of our Hebrew forefathers, nor does
Christianity for that matter. The prophet Yahshua was never a
Christian, and never used the New Testament Greek Bible. Yahshua was a
pure monotheist, a believer in the God of the Hebrew Scriptures named
YHWH. Yahshua was therefore a Yahwist, one who believes (like the
Muslim) in ONE true "God." Ultimately then, it is the policy of the
United States Government, supported by the convoluted Christian
mentality in this country (to protect the so-called "chosen people")
that has helped keep us in war in the middle East. It is this extended
policy to convert (and force by power of arms) the religious systems
and the moral standards of those with whom we disagree, into what we
may determine to be fit. It is the United States Government and it's
miss-directed foreign policy (our support for the wicked Jewish State
called Israel) that fosters the real cause of Terrorism World Wide,

What we see happening today did not begin on 9-11, it is the result of
US Government actions that date back at least 60 years and to the
Creation of State of Israel. Atrocities against ones fellow man, or
against ones neighbor is never justified. Yet it is not the
responsibility of the United States Government to change the form of
other Governments, or the religion of the people that hold to
particular beliefs, simply by a force of arms. Would we as a people
want to be forced to worship the Buddha? After all, we are now the
real property of Communist Red China since our wonderful Communist
trading partner has become the master holder of indebtedness. As they
say, the debtor is always the slave of the lender.

The payback against the United States in the 9-11 twin tower NYC
destruction, was in fact a retaliation against the United States
Government for permitting the Jews (State of Israel) to act against
Lebanon in 1982 by destroying the "Twin Towers" located in Lebanon.
This 9-11 act instigated by Bin Laden was simply a long over-due
retaliation against the United States for picking a side, supporting
the Jewish State against the Palestinian people. "A friend of my enemy
is my enemy." Largely due to its attempt to manipulate the customs,
culture, standards of other sovereign nations, the United States is
seen as the world bully, and therefore has become the basic root cause
of world terrorism. The United States instigates one side against
another by direct influence and military support for the one, many
times resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people that
are innocent of any wrongdoing on both sides a the resulting
conflict.

In videotape broadcast by the Al-Jazeera network on Oct. 29, 2004, Bin
Laden said he got the idea for destroying the Twin Towers in NYC as a
young man watching the devastation wrought on Lebanon during the
United States-backed invasion. "When I saw those destroyed towers in
Lebanon," bin Laden said, "it sparked in my mind that the oppressors
should be punished in the same way and that we should destroy towers
in America - so they can taste what we tasted and so they stop killing
our women and children." The rest is now history, but could have been
prevented by the correct United States Policy.

This was a good example of delayed Arab re-payment for an injustice
brought about by America's support for the Jew. Oppression fosters
terrorism, retribution and resistance against the oppressor. This is a
given result that the arms of war will never overcome or correct. This
being the case, changes from the status quo must be made in American
foreign policy. The changes must contribute toward eliminating the
basic need for any future conflict, or acts of terrorism against
people regardless of their color, custom, culture or religion, or how
they may differ from us.

A Palestinian State MUST be created, and it cannot contain "isolated
islands of land with dense populations" subject to the complete
control of Jews. Because it is in fact isolated land, a land island,
the Gaza Strip must become part of the State of Israel. In return
Israel must give much of its stolen northern territory and the West
Bank to make room for the new Palestinian State. The Palestinian State
must become a viable State. The resulting smaller Jewish State will
have equal opportunity for success and independence, but no more that
the Palestinian State. The Jews must be disarmed from their weapons of
mass destruction, and an embargo on the Jews must be placed to avoid
continued hostilities against their neighbors. As American, British,
and French people, we must see that this becomes a reality.

The change of leadership in the Government of America (Obama
Presidency) is the perfect opportunity to FORCE THESE CHANGES on both
the Jews, and the Palestinians. If the situation between these two
peoples is not corrected terrorism and hatred will NOT be corrected,
and those that support the Jew will continue to be subject to acts of
hatred. It is that important. The conflict between the Jew, and the
Arab is the direct cause for terrorism against any State that
continues to support the Jew and their agenda for world control. It is
high time for Americans to recognize that Jews are not the friends of
the American People. Jews are not friends of any people on the Globe.
The American F-14 fighter jets, the Apache helicopters, their rockets,
and smart bombs, are the only friends Jews have with the American
people. Take away the billions of annual dollars of U.S. support, the
weapons of mass destruction that they have acquired from us, and their
friendship to America will disappear overnight.

Jews unfortunately, have been very successful in manipulating control
over the American people through their vast influence in the Christian
community and in United States Government. They control of all major
American News Networks, and Television, and control the American
Banking industry, the Federal Reserve Banks and other major world
currencies. The Jews in fact, invented "printed" fiat currency that is
now used as money, and Jews own the Private Federal Reserve Banking
system of the United States.

Contrary to the understanding of Christians, Jews are imposters to the
Scriptural Israelites. They are not related in any way to the Ancient
Israelites by their religion or otherwise. It is high time that this
truth is recognized. The only claim the Jew has to any land in
Palestine is from the original League of Nations (UN) mandate 60-years
ago. This was put together by European nations that wanted to rid the
Jew from Europe by dumping them on the people of Palestine at the
request of British Zionist Jews.

As long as arms and financial support from the United States continues
to flow to the Jew, the Jews will continue to oppress and kill their
neighbors. The Western European nations and we as Americans will
continue to be subject to hatred violence and possible retribution by
those that are oppressed due to our Government policies.

Yochannan

[Snow]

I am a little bit put back by some of the opinions expressed in your
post. You seem to put a lot into the lap of "Jews" and all I can say
is that hatred of any group of people is wrong. People should be
judged as individuals. While I'm not rushing to defend the
Independant nation of Israel, many of the actions you called for would
take an act of aggression against it. Maybe I'm still clinging to
some remnants of my Christian up bringing but I don't see that as an
answer either. My thoughts on the matter are, "How about we let other
people solve their own problems and I'll work on solving my own. How
about we stop labeling individuals as groups and realize they are
people just like you and me."

On Dec 6, 8:36 am, Yochannan <aoycasc...@assemblyoftrueisrael.com>
wrote:

> to flow to the Jew, the Jews will continue to ...
>
> read more »

[Yochannan]

I am very aware, that some of the things I have posted will appear at
first to be controversial, however, I believe that to those educated
in the subject of Jews and their religion, the things I have stated
are completely true, and can be verified by the historical action of
the Jews. First, Jews are not related to the Historical Israelites of
the Bible. Jewism is a religion period. However, this religion is very
convoluted, more than Christinity and even more than Islam. Jewism is
very exclusive. If you are not a Jew, then you are nothing but
garbage.

Here is a condensed 1000 year History ..of the Jews (NOTE: Jewism is
only about 1000 years old)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a lot of confusion on who is, or what is a Jew. Who are
Ashkenazi Jews, or Sephardic Jews? What is Judaism, Yehudaism, Jew-dah-
ism, or Jewism? Our document Words and Terms in the Scriptures
explains the difference between many of these confusing terms. The
following brief History of the Jews, establishes the basic events
which have occurred throughout their 1000 year History. Contrary to
popular belief, Jews did not exist during Bible time, but are people
adhering to a Religious sect dating about the year 1000 AD. The
following excerpts were compiled by the "Jerusalem Post", a news group
located in Israel. We have assumed their information to be dependable,
however, we have not verified all the events, or the dates they
establish. The information is accurately reproduced to the best of our
knowledge.

Contrary to popular belief, most Jews are not descendants of the
tribes of Scriptural Yisrael (Israel), and they are not for the most,
descendants of "Yahudah", one of the 12 tribes of "Yisrael". Over 95
percent of the Jews of today are a mongrel Amalgamated people, from
many diverse nationalities, and from many ethnic race origins, who
have in common their religion of "Jew-dah-ism".

Jew (a Definition from Jewish sources)

Jew - an individual who is a member of the Jewish People. See also:
The word Jew

The Question of "Who is a Jew?" has arisen with particular urgency
today, especially in the modern State of Israel. This is because of
intense pressure from the Movements of Reform and Conservative Jewry,
who feel that they have been excluded or, more precisely, that
Conversions performed by their Rabbis have not been recognized by
Israeli authorities. Another major factor is the immigration of
hundreds of thousands of individuals from the former Soviet Union,
many of whom claim that they are Jews and who were in fact persecuted
in their homeland because of that identification, but who may not,
according to the Halachic definition (a definition according to Jewish
Law) given below, be Jewish.

According to strict Halachah, the answer to the question is clear. A
Jew is someone who either … is a child of a Jewish mother or is a
Convert to Judaism who, after a period of serious and verified study
of the Principles of the Faith and the Laws of Judaism, has done the
following:

Accepted upon Himself or Herself the "Yolk of the Kingdom of Heaven
and the Yolk of G-d's Commandments" Immersed Him or Herself in a
Ritual Pool of Water known as a "Mikveh," symbolizing Rebirth If a
male, has undergone the Process of "Brit Milah," Circumcision.

Conclusion:

Thus Jew-dah-ism, (Jewism) is the religion of those who call
themselves Jews, and Jews are those who follow the religion of Jew-dah-
ism. Jews are not Christians, most are anti-Christian. There is no
such thing as a Messianic Jew. Although loosely based on Old Testament
interpretations through halachic creativity, most of Jew-dah-ism was
formed and fabricated by many individuals throughout "The 1000 year
History of the Jews". The formation of religious cultic Jew-dah-ism
becomes quite clear when you follow the following compilation by the
"Jerusalem Post."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A summary of the 1000 Year History of the Ashkenazi Jews

1000 - Rabbenu Gershon of Mainz, Germany, publishes ban on bigamy.
This marks the beginning of the Ashkenazi Jews*, and Franco-German
halachic* creativity.

*Ashkenazi - European Jews
*halachic - interpretations of Old Testament laws

1025 - Samuel Hanagid becomes vizier of Granada. He is the first of
the poets of the Golden Age of Spain, symbolic of both the political
power and literary creativity of the Jews in Spain at the time.

1070 - Rashi founds academy in Troyes, composes commentaries on the
Bible. His commentaries on the Babylonian Talmud are compiled after
his death.

1096 - First Crusade - Mobs kill thousands of Jews in Mainz, Speyer,
Worms, and Cologne. Many Jews die for Kiddush Hashem (sanctification
of God's name), trying to defend themselves, or by taking their own
lives.

1100-1300 - Germans, including German Jews, migrate to Poland. It is
seen as "the Land of opportunity."

1120 - Jews from Moslem countries begin to settle in Byzantium*.
*Byzantium - Asia Minor, the Near East

1144 - Norwich, England, is the site of the first blood libel*.
*blood Libel - the idea that Jews killed Gentiles to use their blood
in ceremonies

1166 - Moses Maimonides, one of the great Jewish philosophers and
halachists of the millennium, settles in Cairo. He will compose a
codification of the Talmud, the Mishne Torah, and articulate his
philosophy in The guide to the Perplexed.

1182 - Jews are expelled from France.

1200 - (circa) - Permanent Jewish communities are established in
Poland.

1211 - A group of 300 rabbis from France and England settle in
Palestine (Eretz Yisrael), beginning what might be interpreted as
Zionist aliya.

1286 - Rabbi Moses de Leon, a mystic living in Guadajar, Spain,
finishes writing the Zohar, a kabbalistic, mystical and symbolic
commentary on the Torah.

1290 - Jews are expelled from England.

1348 - Black Death reaches Europe and Jews are accused of poisoning
Christian wells.

1391 - Anti-Jewish riots break out throughout Spain.

1473 - First two Hebrew presses are established in Italy. The first
complete edition of the Soncino Bible is printed in Soncino, Italy, in
1488.

1492 - Jews are expelled from Spain. Many flee to Portugal, North
Africa, and Turkey.

1496 - Jews are expelled from Portugal.

1516 - The first ghetto is established in Italy. Eretz Yisreal becomes
part of the Ottoman Empire, increasing the movement of Jews from Spain
and Portugal to the "Holy Land". Safed is an important center.

1524 - David Reuveni, a false Messiah who claims to be a messenger of
the King of the Lost Tribes, arouses messianic hopes and seeks
military alliance with the pope to conquer to "Holy Land".

1525 - Solomon Molcho, another false Messiah, also seeks to fight
against the Turks and regain Palestine.

1555 - Rabbi Joseph Caro completes his codification of Jewish Law, the
Shulhan Aruch.

1648 - The Chmielnicki Massacres cause large-scale migration of Jews
to Germany and western Europe, but Jewish life flourishes in Poland
and Lithuania.

1654 - Jews arrive in America.

1656 - Baruch Spinoza is excommunicated in Holland for his pantheistic
view of God and for denying the divinity of the Bible.

1665 - Shabbetai Zevi (a False Messiah) messianic fervor sweeps across
Europe.

1666 - Shabbetai Zevi converts to Islam.

1667 - Persecution of Jews begins in Yemen.

1700 - The aliya of Yehuda Hahassid to Eretz Yisrael is viewed as one
of the religious precursors of Zionism.

1740 - Israel Ba'al Shem Tov, founder of Hassidism*, moves to
Medzibezh, Podolia.
*Hassidism - extremely orthodox Jews.

1775 - Vilna rabbis, including the Vilna Gaon, put Hassidism under
rabbinic ban.

1791 - The First Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees the
equality of all peoples, regardless of religion. The French General
Assembly grants emancipation to all Jews.

1804 - The first modern yeshiva* is founded in Volozhin.
*yeshiva - school to study Jew-dah-ism.

1807 - The Sanhedrin, convened by Napoleon, declares Jew-dah-ism a
religion rather than a nation.

1826 - Bezalel Stern establishes a modern Jewish school in Odessa
which marks the beginning of Haskala* study of science and language.
*Haskala - the study of non-Jewish subjects

1839 - The entire Jew community of Meshed, Persia, is forced to
convert to Islam.

1840 - Jews of Damascus are accused of blood libel. Jews from all over
the world lobby for them. This marks the beginning of the secular
international Jewish political activity.

1848 - Jews are granted equality in German states during the
revolution of 1848. Although later rescinded, this marks the beginning
of Jewish liberalism.

1852 - First Hebrew novel is published by Abraham Mapu.

1869 - Bismarck grants Jews German citizenship.

1871 - Samson Raphael Hirsch secedes from the Frankfurt Jewish
community. This marks the split between Orthodox and Reform in
Germany.

1881 - Pogroms* in Russia start, leading to the First Aliya.
*Pogrom - Government-sponsored persecution.

1881 - 1914 - There is a mass migration of European and Russian Jews
to the US.

1896 - Theodor Herzl writes The Jewish State,which expounds his
Zionist vision.

1896 - Cairo Geniza is rediscovered; the documents shed new light on
the Jewish world in the medieval period.

1897 - The first Zionist Congress is held in Basel. The Bund, a pro-
Yiddish Jewish socialist party, is established.

1903 - A pogrom in Kishinev, Bessarabia, sets off a chain of pogroms.

1904 - The Second Aliya, consisting of Russian Socialist Zionists,
begins partly as a consequence of Kishinev pogroms.

1917 - The British government issues the Balfour Declaration, viewing
with favor establishment of a national home for Jewish people.

1918 - Minorities' treaties grant Jews rights in the countries of
Europe.

1921 - Arab riots kill 45 Jews in Jaffa. British suspend immigration
of Jews to Palestine.

1922 - Jordan is created.

1929 - The Arabs of Hebron riot against the Jewish community.

1933 - Adolf Hitler gains power in Germany.

1936-1939 - Arabs riot all over Palestine.

1938 - Kristallnacht marks no future for Jews in Germany.

1939 - World War II breaks out. 1942 - The Final Solution is formally
approved.

1945 - Concentration camps are liberated.

1947 - The United Nations recommends the partition of Palestine into
an Arab state and a Jewish state.

1948 - The State of Israel is established. Yemenite Jewry is airlifted
to Israel.

1953 - Stalin's doctor goes on trial in Russia.

1954 - The founding of the Conference of Major Jewish Organizations
indicates a galvanization of the Jewish lobby in the US.

1956 - Suez War - Israel joins the French and British in an operation
against Egypt to prevent fedayeen terrorism.

1961 - Adolf Eichmann, architect of the Final Solution, goes on trial
in Israel.

1966 - S.Y. Agnon receives the Nobel Prize in Literature.

1967 - Six Day War is fought on Syrian, Egyptian, and Jordanian
fronts. Victory reunites Jerusalem and gives Israel control over
Palestinian territories in the West Bank.

Early 1970's - The War of Attrition leads to sporadic fighting on
Syrian-Lebanese and Egyptian borders. There is also extensive
terrorism, including hijacking and the massacre of children at
Ma'alot.

1973 - Yom Kippur War - Syria and Egypt launch surprise attacks in the
Golan Heights and Sinai, shocking Israel which had been complacent
after the 1967 victory. The IDF* retaliates, but at great human cost.
*IDF - Israeli Defense Forces

1977 - Menachem Begin and his right-wing Likud party wrest power from
the left-wing Labor Party.

1978 - Egyptian president Anwar Sadat comes to Jerusalem to begin the
talks with Menachem Begin that will lead to a peace treaty and
Israel's withdrawal from Sinai.

1982 - Israel launches Operation Peace for Galilee, the Lebanon war,
to protect its northern border. Israel goes as far as encircling
Beirut.

1989 - Perestroika is launched, marking the beginning of massive
Soviet aliya.

1990 - The Gulf War breaks out and Israel is hit by missiles from
Iraq.

1993 - The Oslo Accords are signed by Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat.

1995 - Right-wing extremist Yigal Amir assassinates prime minister
Yitzhak Rabin.


The above dates were compiled by the Jerusalem Post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those of you who have the guts to learn beyond what you have been
told by your Sunday School teachers, and your ignorant pastors, here
is
a challenge to you: Find the book "The Jewish Religion; It's Influence
Today" written by Elizabeth Dilling in 1983, The Noontide Press. This
book was formerly Titled "The Plot Agaisnt Christianity" If you can
find this book, and you are a Christian, then you will begin to
understand why the Jew is an
adherent to a wicked belief system, and NOT your friend. The paperback
ISBN 0-939482-07-X. This book is very difficult to get, but the
documentation is eye opening, and cannot be disputed.

Yochannan

[Yochannan]

Is it wrong to condemn a particular group, when their actions merit
condemnation? No, it is not. Without the condemnation of wicked
actions, those that continue in them cannot be corrected, or punished,
and will continue in their wicked ways. Is it wrong to promote the
truth if it means to step, or even stomp on a few toes?? No, it is
not. Is it wrong to slander "without merit" yes it is.

It it wrong to call a "group" hypocrites? No.
It it wrong to call a "group" blind fools? No.
It it wrong to call a "group" blind guides? No.
It it wrong to call a "group" Serpents, brood of adders? No.
It it wrong to call a "group" you are sons of those who did murder the
prophets blind fools? No.

Mat 23:13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because
you shut up the reign of the heavens before men, for you do not go in,
nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.
Mat 23:14 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you
eat up widows’ houses, and for a show make long prayers. Because of
this you shall receive greater judgment.
Mat 23:15 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you
go about the land and the sea to win one convert, and when he is won,
you make him a son of Gehenna twofold more than yourselves.
Mat 23:16 “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘Whoever swears by the
Dwelling Place, it does not matter, but whoever swears by the gold of
the Dwelling Place, is bound by oath.’
Mat 23:17 “Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold or the
Dwelling Place that sets the gold apart?
Mat 23:18 “And, ‘Whoever swears by the altar, it does not matter, but
whoever swears by the gift that is on it, is bound by oath.’
Mat 23:19 “Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gift or the
altar that sets the gift apart?
Mat 23:20 “He, then, who swears by the altar, swears by it and by all
that is upon it.
Mat 23:21 “And he who swears by the Dwelling Place, swears by it and
by Him who is dwelling in it.
Mat 23:22 “And he who swears by the heaven, swears by the throne of
Elohim and by Him who is sitting upon it.
Mat 23:23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you
tithe the mint and the anise and the cumin,1 and have neglected the
weightier matters of the Torah: the right-ruling and the compassion
and the belief. These need to have been done, without neglecting the
others. Footnote:1The wording in Lk. 11:42 is somewhat different.
Mat 23:24 “Blind guides – straining out a gnat and swallowing a
camel!
Mat 23:25 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you
clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are filled with
plunder and unrighteousness.
Mat 23:26 “Blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and dish,
so that the outside of them becomes clean too.
Mat 23:27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you
are like whitewashed tombs which outwardly indeed look well, but
inside are filled with dead men’s bones and all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28 “So you too outwardly indeed appear righteous to men, but
inside you are filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness.1 Footnote:1See
5:20.
Mat 23:29 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you
build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the monuments of the
righteous,
Mat 23:30 and say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we
would not have taken part with them in the blood of the prophets.’
Mat 23:31 “Thus you bear witness against yourselves that you are sons
of those who did murder the prophets –
Mat 23:32 and you fill up the measure of your fathers!
Mat 23:33 “Serpents, brood of adders! How would you escape the
judgment of Gehenna?
Mat 23:34 “Because of this, see, I send you prophets, and wise men,
and scholars of Scripture.1 Some of them you shall kill and impale,
and some of them you shall flog in your congregations and persecute
from city to city, Footnote:1See 13:52.
Mat 23:35 so that on you should come all the righteous blood shed on
the earth, from the blood of righteous Hebel to the blood of Zekaryah,
son of Berekyah, whom you murdered between the Dwelling Place and the
altar.
Mat 23:36 “Truly, I say to you, all this shall come upon this
generation.

The above are the sayings of the Prophet Yahshua, (as recorded by the
Greek book called Matthew). I could go on for another page, but I
think that the point has been made. Being nice to those individuals or
those groups that practice "wickedness" may be politically correct,
but it is NOT Scriptural.

Yochannan

[CHARLES HUFMAN]

Yochannan.

 

I have been perusing your comments on war and "Jews". I have understood

for a long time that Jews, primarily, hasidic Jews are anti-christian.

 

most sincerely  Charles

--
You received this message from "The Narrow Gate" group.
To contact the Moderator of this group email NarrowG...@gmail.com

To POST a message, visit us at http://groups.google.com/group/TheNarrowGate
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email TheNarrowGat...@googlegroups.com

[CHARLES HUFMAN]

I find myself still left with the question after reading the Nevi'im about this

one thing in particular: it seems that YHWH has a promise that HE made

to HIMSELF that HE would restore Israel/Jerusalem in the end of days.

how does this fit in your conclusion about "jews" in particular or in

generaL if you will??

 

most sincerely  Charles

----- Original Message -----

From: Yochannan

To: The Narrow Gate

[Yochannan]

Charles,

The only restoration of the temple, and the city of Jerusalem, having
any historical importance was under Nehemiah as foretold by the
prophet Ezekiel. Any subsequent use of the term "New Jerusalem" in the
book called Revelation, (an NT book having several writers, and which
is an obvious composition and amalgamation of several apocalyptic
writings, popular at the time), is strictly metaphorically and should
always be understood as such.

Daniel's prophesy of 70 weeks, was completely fulfilled with the
destruction of Jerusalem, and Herod's third temple under Rome in 70
AD. This was the "End of the World" a metaphor which is talking about
the final destruction of the Kingdom of Yahud, along with the National
identity the Ancient unified nation of Israel that will never again
exist. Israel is however is still a Nation in the diaspora, and is now
numbered in the hundreds of millions. As a dispersed people, True
Israel will never again be able to fit in the old homestead area of
Palestine but will forever be dispersed "among" the nations. Israel is
not made up of the 14 million Jews worldwide. True Israel is a
composite "Family" (a household) of YHWH, whose foundation was laid by
Yahshua. It was Yahshua who came to seek that which was lost. Matt.
18:11, Jer. 50:6. and to announce the Kingdom (Council) of heaven
(YHWH) to first century Israel. Even at the time Israel was already
dispersed among the (non-Israelite) nations.

So, back to the basic question of the restoration of Israel: I believe
that True Israel has been in the process of being restored since the
First Century. It is however a "spiritual" restoration, not a physical
restoration. When a believer truly recognizes who he is, what is
required of him to become a member of the "household of YHWH," who the
Creator Father is, what his Creator Father is asking of him, then he
is in the process of being restored (re-born) if you like the term. It
occurs when the believer knows who Yahshua was, that Yahshua was his
brother, and it consummates when the believer is willing to do the
will of the Father as taught by Yahshua. Matt. 7:21, 12:50.

The will of the Father, and to become a member of the household
(family of YHWH, and to inherit eternal life, is to keep the
Commandments and to observe the weekly Sabbath. This was also the
entire Covenant YHWH had with Israel. This covenant extends to those
who are True Israelites and to those non-Israelites that are willing
to become the servants of YHWH. Matt. 19:16-17, Isaiah 56.

You probably know by now, that I do not accept the NT Greek as "the
inspired" word of YHWH. It does have some historical value in the
Three Synoptic Gospels, which record (by unknown authors) some of the
sayings of Yahshua. I use the same "Bible" that Yahshua used as my
final authority, the Hebrew Scriptures. Over many years I have found
that there is nothing lacking in the Hebrew Scriptures, when correctly
understood and translated. In it we find the key to eternal life, who
we are, and how we should strive to live.

The NT Greek has developed into a new religious belief called
"Christianity." This religion has incorporated many primitive pagan
customs and cultures, and has shifted toward worshiping the messenger
(Yahshua) as "God" rather than relying upon the Message that was
taught by Yahshua.

Yochannan

[Snow]

On Dec 8, 6:09 pm, "CHARLES HUFMAN" <rockanrail2...@msn.com> wrote:
> I find myself still left with the question after reading the Nevi'im about this
> one thing in particular: it seems that YHWH has a promise that HE made
> to HIMSELF that HE would restore Israel/Jerusalem in the end of days.
> how does this fit in your conclusion about "jews" in particular or in
> generaL if you will??
>
> most sincerely  Charles

The problem with all of this blaming of external forces such as "the
Jews" is that it still doesn't answer the question, Why are WE at war
with Iraq and Afghanistan? Instead of looking at our own value
system, we again lay blame on anybody else.

[CHARLES HUFMAN]

Yochannan:

 

As you know, in my comments I did not refer to the NT, as I discerned

that you would have rejected its premesis about the end of days. this is

why I suggested the Nevi'im. I did not even suggest Daniel which is part

of the Kethuvim. I would suggest that you peruse the last 10 chaps of

Isaiah which talk about the restoration of Jersualem and Israel.........

in the end of days. other than the above, I find I agree with your conclusion

about YHWH and Yeshua. Yeshua's goal was to tell the message about His

FATHER and His FATHER's salvation. this has been watered down through

time as Yeshua's salvation. Yeshua did state that no man can come to the

FATHER unless it is through Him (Yeshua). thank you for sharing your

thoughts as I find we have much more in common that what I earlier

percieved.

 

most sincerely  Charles

----- Original Message -----

From: Yochannan

To: The Narrow Gate

[CHARLES HUFMAN]

because Yeshua said there would be wars and rumors of wars but the end

is not yet. these wars are just a crazy reaction to a couple of towers falling

because a nation was to nieve to realize the threat of a religion that believes

its mission is to clean the world up of infidels so that the 7th Imam can return

to usher in a period of peace.

 

most sincerely  Charles

----- Original Message -----

From: Snow

To: The Narrow Gate

[Snow]

On Dec 8, 11:32 pm, "CHARLES HUFMAN" <rockanrail2...@msn.com> wrote:
> because Yeshua said there would be wars and rumors of wars but the end
> is not yet. these wars are just a crazy reaction to a couple of towers falling
> because a nation was to nieve to realize the threat of a religion that believes
> its mission is to clean the world up of infidels so that the 7th Imam can return
> to usher in a period of peace.
>
> most sincerely  Charles

I do not see Islam as a threat to me or my belief system, in fact,
Christians attack me far more then any Muslim ever has... As with all
things, I'm sure we can find many passages in the Koran that speak of
peace, love and compassion. The last time I looked into it, although
I am admittedly ignorant of it, the Koran keeps the books of Moses and
consider Yehoshua a prophet of the most high. It seems it is the
interpreters that are the problem... We can find passages in the
prophets to support almost any point of view if we take them out of
context...

Presidents Bush and Obama have made it clear that these wars have
nothing to do with Islam.

I do not know any person that supports these wars or sending more
troops to these countries we know so little about.

>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Snow<mailto:snowpheo...@eck.net.au>
>   To: The Narrow Gate<mailto:thenar...@googlegroups.com>
>   Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 11:19 PM
>   Subject: [Narrow Gate 4861] Re: Campaign against violence - Why war and why terrorism exists
>

>   On Dec 8, 6:09 pm, "CHARLES HUFMAN" <rockanrail2...@msn.com<mailto:rockanrail2...@msn.com>> wrote:
>   > I find myself still left with the question after reading the Nevi'im about this
>   > one thing in particular: it seems that YHWH has a promise that HE made
>   > to HIMSELF that HE would restore Israel/Jerusalem in the end of days.
>   > how does this fit in your conclusion about "jews" in particular or in
>   > generaL if you will??
>
>   > most sincerely Charles
>
>   The problem with all of this blaming of external forces such as "the
>   Jews" is that it still doesn't answer the question, Why are WE at war
>   with Iraq and Afghanistan?  Instead of looking at our own value
>   system, we again lay blame on anybody else.
>
>   --
>   You received this message from "The Narrow Gate" group.

>   To contact the Moderator of this group email NarrowGateGr...@gmail.com<mailto:NarrowGateGr...@gmail.com>
>
>   To POST a message, visit us athttp://groups.google.com/group/TheNarrowGate<http://groups.google.com/group/TheNarrowGate>
>   To UNSUBSCRIBE, email TheNarrowGat...@googlegroups.com<mailto:TheNarrowGat...@googlegroups.com>

[Yochannan]

On Dec 8, 11:32 pm, "CHARLES HUFMAN" <rockanrail2...@msn.com> wrote:
> because Yeshua said there would be wars and rumors of wars but the end
> is not yet. these wars are just a crazy reaction to a couple of towers falling
> because a nation was to nieve to realize the threat of a religion that believes
> its mission is to clean the world up of infidels so that the 7th Imam can return
> to usher in a period of peace.
>
> most sincerely  Charles

Charles,

What you are implying, can just as easily be said about Christianity.
The good ole Christian is out to convert the "world" in order that the
message of the "good New" (the human sacrifice of Jesus for sin) can
save those that want to believe it. It is Christian's belief that
"Jesus" can't return until the message of the "Good News" has been
preached to the whole world, and that Jesus can usher in a period of
peace. This is why Christian's are pressured as a religious group to
"change" the customs cultures, and the religious beliefs of any
person, group, or the national identity of nations whose belief on the
whole is contrary to that of Christianity, by aggressive world-wide
evangelism.

Furthermore, over the years this desire to change cultures has
destroyed or damaged many people, who have been forced to believe in a
religious system that, is completely foreign to their own history, and
that has nothing to do with their own eternal destiny. Only Israel has
the covenant with YHWH, therefore only Israelites are obligated to
adhere to its terms. Everyone else will be judged for their own
actions good or bad, based upon the natural laws that YHWH has given
to all.

Christians are waiting for Jesus to return and fix everything by his
earthly rule……even though Jesus himself said that his rule would never
be on earth. (according to the book called John). John 18:36.

The misunderstanding with the "go out to all the nations concept" is -
that it has already happened during the time Yahshua was on earth. The
word "THE nations" is talking about the "Tribes of Israel" NOT to some
Negro tribe located in Africa. read Matt. 24:14, Mar. 13:10. Notice
the use of the definite article "the." Also, according to the self
appointed Apostle Paul/Saul, (the "saint" of many Christians) said
that the Good News has already been preached (past tense):

Col 1:23 "if indeed you continue in the belief, founded and steadfast,
and are not moved away from the expectation of the Good News which you
heard, which was proclaimed to every creature under the heaven, of
which I, Sha’ul, became a servant,"

Notice the use of the words in past tense "which was." Paul, the
originator of the Christian belief said that the "Good News," – "has
already been preached to every creature under heaven." That being the
case, if Jesus was waiting for everyone to hear the "Good News" before
he can come again to rule on earth and bring peace, he is about 2000
years late.

In order for the world to have peace on the "religious" front, there
will have to be some tolerance, among the major religious of the
globe. Those that differ will need to except the fact that all the
people on the globe will not become Muslims, and all will not become
Christians. YHWH will judge each as He determines to be just, not by
the doctrinal standards a religious group is using to judge others .

Yochannan

[Snow]

On Dec 10, 9:45 am, Yochannan <aoycasc...@assemblyoftrueisrael.com>
wrote:

> In order for the world to have peace on the "religious" front, there
> will have to be some tolerance, among the major religious of the
> globe. Those that differ will need to except the fact that all the
> people on the globe will not become Muslims, and all will not become
> Christians. YHWH will judge each as He determines to be just, not by
> the doctrinal standards a religious group is using to judge others .
>
> Yochannan

AMEN. First off, I wanted to say that you have made some very
wonderful points but I would like to add:

Isa 55:7 Let the wrong forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his
thoughts. Let him return to Yahweh, who has compassion on him, and to
our Elohim, for He pardons much. 8 “For My thoughts are not your
thoughts, neither are your ways My ways,” declares Yahweh. 9 “For as
the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your
ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.

Rev 22:11 “He who does wrong, let him do more wrong; he who is filthy,
let him be more filthy; he who is righteous, let him be more
righteous; he who is set-apart, let him be more set-apart.

Actually, if we use doctrinal standards, we do not judge others.

Mat 15:13 But He answering, said, “Every plant which My heavenly
Father has not planted shall be uprooted.
Mat 15:14 “Leave them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And
if the blind leads the blind, both shall fall into a ditch.”

It’s not something only the Messiah taught, it’s Old Testament.

Hos 4:17 “Ephrayim is joined to idols, let him alone.

I have no doubt that this is a hard teaching to follow for us.. that
we let them be what they are but in doing so, we submit to the
teachings of our scriptures and show by our works, the faith that
motivate our actions.

Hos 4:4 “However, let no one strive or reprove another, for your
people are like those striving with a priest. 5 “And you shall
stumble in the day, and the prophet shall also stumble with you in the
night. And I shall make your mother perish. 6 “My people have
perished for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I
reject you from being priest for Me. Since you have forgotten the
Torah of your Elohim, I also forget your children.

Yahweh desires that we know and understand but this does not happen
when we waste our time passing OUR judgment on our other people. The
scriptures are very clear in that we are not to strive with other
people. Now this is not to say that we can’t have a spirited debate
which by the very meaning is righteous, only that it is not our place
to seek to subvert other peoples understandings.

Eze 18:23 “Have I any pleasure in the death of the wrong?” declares
the Master Yahweh. “Is it not that he should turn from his ways, and
live?

I strongly recommend people read Ezekiel especially chapters, 3, 18
and 33 which are all relevant to the topic.

Deu 17:12 “And the man who acts arrogantly, so as not to listen to the
priest who stands to serve there before Yahweh your Elohim, or to the
judge, that man shall die. So you shall purge the evil from IsraEL.

We have ONE JUDGE and ONE CREATOR who will judge all, don’t try to

think it’s you, and you all know it's not me either!

Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)