- Christogenea Internet Radio
On the Gospel of John, Part 20: For Fear of the Jews
How timely it was, that as I wrote this presentation, I learned that Christogenea was mentioned in an ADL report on hate, their favorite word. The anti-Christs are indeed the personification of hate, but Yahweh the God of Israel hates them, and they will have their day soon enough.
In Part 19 of this commentary on the Gospel of John, which we had subtitled No Friend of the Devil, we made a lengthy presentation from Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians hoping to explain where Paul had described not only the true essence of Christian communion, but also the danger of accepting those who are not worthy of communion into Christian fellowships. The ministry of Yahshua Christ is an example for us of that very danger, although within the Provenance of God, it worked to His advantage. Yahshua had given His Bread of Life discourse in an assembly hall in Capernaum, and even His students had a hard time understanding its meaning. So He responded and said “The words which I have spoken to you are Spirit and are life. 64 But some from among you are they who do not believe.” John then inserted a parenthetical remark into his account where he wrote: “For Yahshua knew from the beginning who they who do not believe are, and who it is who shall betray Him.” Next he recorded the conclusion given by Christ Himself where He said: “For this reason I said to you that no one is able to come to Me unless it should be given to him from the Father.”
As we had also discussed in John chapter 2, Yahshua Christ, being God incarnate, knew the inherent nature of men when – or even before – He encountered them, so the apostle wrote at the conclusion of an encounter between Christ and the officials at the temple in Jerusalem that “24… Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men, 25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.” Christ would not subject Himself to the authorities in the temple because He knew that they were inherently evil. Now here, at the end of John’s description of the events which followed the Bread of Life discourse, we see that many of the people who had followed Christ had at this point departed, ostensibly because they could not understand or believe Him, while Peter explained why he and others would not depart. By saying “they who do not believe” John was also referring to people who did not possess an inherent capacity for belief, as we shall see Christ Himself describe in John chapter 10. So Christ had asked His disciples: “Have I not chosen you twelve? Yet one from among you is a false accuser [or a devil]!” There John informed us that He was speaking in reference to Judas Iscariot, and it is evident that the devil remained for other and nefarious reasons, but not because he believed.
Commenting on this passage, we offered a lengthy explanation describing why it was that Judas Iscariot was a devil. This we shall discuss once again in John chapter 8, where we hope to further expound upon the fact that while the Greek word for devil, as it is translated in the King James Version, only actually describes a false accuser, there are certain presumed people here on this earth whose inherent nature is to act in that manner. Later, in John chapter 8, Christ had accused His adversaries for behaving in that same manner, for reason that they were children of the original “accuser of our brethren”, as the devil and his angels are described in the Revelation. Judas was a devil because he was, evidently, an Edomite, or Idumaean, and the Edomites were in part descended from those Canaanites who were themselves mingled with the Kenites, Rephaim and other races in early times. When, in Hebrews chapter 12, Paul of Tarsus described why Esau was rejected, he wrote that he was a fornicator and a profane person. Ostensibly, the only reason for which Esau could be called a fornicator was the fact that he had taken wives of the Canaanites. In that same chapter of Hebrews Paul had contrasted bastards and sons, and it certainly seems to be inherent in the nature of a bastard to contend against the Word of God.
Yahshua Christ being that Word made flesh, at least many of the people of Judaea had contended against Him. So in our Commentary on those final verses of John chapter 6 we discussed some of the historical background of Judaea in the centuries leading up to the incarnation of the Christ, which we hope to further elaborate upon when we present John chapter 8. At His appearance, Judaea was a multi-ethnic province of the Roman Empire, as Strabo of Cappadocia had said that the Idumaeans were “mixed up” with the Judaeans, and that they “joined the Judaeans, and shared in the same customs with them” (Strabo, Geography, Book 16, chapter 2 [16.2.34]). When we discuss John chapters 8 and 10, it will hopefully become evident that this circumstance has serious implications which explain all of the divisions over Christianity in the first century, the subsequent persecutions of Christians, and also accounts for the nature of the Jews and Jewry to this very day.
Now with this background, we may begin to see the reasons behind what was described which follows, as we commence with chapter 7 of the Gospel of John:
VII 1 And [P66, א, and D want “and”] after these things Yahshua walked about in Galilaia. For He did not desire [W has “have license”] to walk in Judaea, because the Judaeans sought to kill Him.
Christ had driven the money-changers from the temple, as it was described in John chapter 2. Then the Pharisees had heard of the success that He had in accumulating followers from among the people as His disciples were baptizing, as it is recorded in John chapter 4. Then they began to persecute Him, as it is recorded in John chapter 5, after he had healed the lame man at the pool of Bethesda. In the dialog which resulted, He had told them in several ways that He was indeed the expected Messiah, and that the works which He did were sufficient proof of His assertion. But here in John chapter 7 we have the first occasion where we are informed by the apostle that the Judaeans actually sought to kill Him.
Where the Judaeans wanted to kill Christ, Christ Himself would not have been surprised. This is evident where, describing events from the last year of His ministry, we read in Matthew chapter 17: “22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: 23 And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.” At that point Matthew describes the group as coming to Capernaum, in Galilee, and not long before the final journey to Judaea. Yet in Matthew chapter 21, after Christ spoke in a parable of the “stone which the builders rejected”, we read: “45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. 46 But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet.” Later in John’s gospel, in chapters 8 and 10, we shall learn that these people who wanted to kill Him were not His people in the first place, although they claimed to be Judaeans.
Furthermore, if Christ were to be the Lamb of God, as John the Baptist had declared Him to be, then He was to be crucified on a Passover, and if His ministry was to last for three-and-a-half years, it would have to occur on a particular Passover. So at times the officials of the temple wanted to seize Him, and there were reasons why they could not because the circumstances prevented them. But at other times Christ had purposely avoided them so as not to provoke them to take action in an untimely manner. While it was not yet time, the time was certainly approaching, as John says:
2 Now it was near the Tabernacles feast of the Judaeans.
The Greek word for tabernacles here is σκηνοπηγία [Strong’s # 4634], which is literally “the setting up of tents”, and it is frequently used in this same context in the Septuagint. Here the concise nature of John’s gospel is also fully evident, as we have at the beginning of chapter 6 the statement that “4 Now it was near the Passover, the feast of the Judaeans.” Yet the only events which John had recorded since that statement in chapter 6, are the feeding of the multitude in the wilderness, and the Bread of Life discourse in Capernaum, both of which actually transpired over only a few days. So, excepting those few days, from the Passover to the feast of Tabernacles there is a period of six months, from which John recorded nothing. Later, in John chapter 10, we shall see a reference to the feast of dedication in winter, and then another reference to the final Passover of the ministry of Christ which is first mentioned in chapter 11, the Passover upon which He is crucified. So we may imagine that the events recorded here and through John chapter 10 took place from October through December of the final year of His ministry.
As we have already discussed earlier in this commentary, a three-and-a-half year duration for the ministry of Christ, as it is evident from several Scriptures, would necessarily include four Passover feasts, since He evidently began His ministry in the fall, around the time of His thirtieth birthday. But only three Passover feasts are explicitly mentioned in the Gospel of John. So if the Passover mentioned in John chapter 6 is indeed the last one before the Passover upon which He was crucified, three years of His ministry have already transpired, and from this point only about six months remain.
Now Christ is challenged by His Own brethren:
3 Therefore His brothers said to Him: “You must cross over from here and go into Judaea [D errantly has “Galilaia”] in order that Your students also shall see Your [א and D want “your”, where “the” would be supplied by the definite article; the text follows P66, P75 and B, and also W, 070 and the MT which vary slightly in word order] works which You do. 4 For no one does anything in secret yet seeks it [E has “seeks for himself”; the NA27 and NA28 have “himself seeks”; the text P66, B and W, and D which varies slightly] to be before the public. If you do these things, make Yourself known to the Society!”
The phrase which we translate as “in public” is ἐν παρρησίᾳ, the Greek word παρρησία [Strong’s # 3954] being, according to Liddel & Scott, “outspokenness, frankness, freedom of speech, claimed by the Athenians as their privilege.” It was not necessarily a privilege in first century Judaea. Rather than “in public” the phrase may have been rendered simply as “openly”, as it is in the King James Version. Interestingly, the Geneva Bible exaggerates the meaning where it renders this sentence “For there is no man that doeth any thing secretely, and hee himselfe seeketh to be famous.”
Now John inserts another parenthetical remark:
5 (For not even His brothers believed in Him.)
The Codex Bezae (D) adds the words “at that time” to the end of this verse, for reasons that may become manifest as we continue to discuss it. First, there are more important aspects of this significant statement which must be discussed.
The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, as well as many of the Protestant denominations of today, have traditionally interpreted that word brother, in a Christian context, to mean a fellow believer. But that is not how the term was used in Scripture. The churches have traditionally followed the sects of the Neoplatonists and the Gnostics in their corruption of this term and several others. To the writers of the New Testament, a brother was a man of one’s own family or one’s extended family, and nothing else.
At the end of John chapter 6, just a few short verses ago, Simon Peter had expressed a full belief in Christ on behalf of himself and at least some of the other disciples, and Yahshua had acknowledged it, albeit indirectly. By taking credit for having chosen them, Christ revealed an expectation that they would indeed believe Him, so in that manner He acknowledged Peter’s profession of belief. When Christ asked His disciples whether they would also forsake Him, Peter replied “68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. 69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.”
But here John described the disbelief of the brothers of Christ, which must have stood apart from the belief of John himself or of Simon Peter or of the other of His disciples. So John, Peter and the other disciples are not the brothers of Christ. Likewise, in 1 Corinthians chapter 9, Paul of Tarsus also distinguished the “brethren of the Lord” apart from Peter, whom he calls Cephas in that passage, which is the Hebrew equivalent of Peter, and also apart from himself and Barnabas and “other apostles”. In Matthew chapter 13, we see four men are specifically named as the brethren of Christ, who were accompanied by Mary His mother, where it says “55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?” In Mark chapter 15 that same Mary is named as “the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome”, where “James the less” is the younger apostle James as opposed to the James who was the brother of John and son of Zebedee, and we also see that Christ had at least one sister. Yet Christ during the time of His ministry is never called the “brother” of the other disciples, and the other disciples are never referred to as the “brethren” of Christ.
So the word brother in Scripture when used in an immediate sense refers to a man’s close kin, his brothers by the same mother, and that is the literal meaning of the Greek word ἀδελφός, which was used to indicate a brother or sister by one or both of the same parents. In the greater, transcendental sense, it is used of the people of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel collectively, since they are all related, being members of the same family, and in that regard Chirst is “firstborn among many brethren”, according to Paul of Tarsus.
Unlike the synoptic gospels, John did not provide a list of the twelve apostles. In the synoptic gospels, James, and Judas, or Jude, the brother of James, are mentioned among the twelve disciples in Luke chapter 6. The same Judas, or Jude, is mentioned again in John chapter 14. But it is certainly evident that here, while they are not specified by name, at least two of the brethren of Christ did not believe Him. So while it is possible that James or Jude were still somewhat skeptical of Christ, it is more plausible that Joses and Simon are being referred to here, as they are also His brothers. James and Jude are mentioned again among the disciples in Acts chapter 1, so they remained with Christ until the end, and they are also the authors of the epistles bearing those names.
The Roman Catholic Church denies the fact that Christ had brethren in this manner, in order to accommodate two great heresies. The first is that brother can mean something different than the way in which it was used by the writers of Scripture. The Church insists that a brother is merely a fellow believer, and therefore anyone who claims to believe can be a brother, which is a lie and a great deception. The deception is used to admit wolves among the sheep. The second, and more significant heresy, is the false doctrine that Mary the mother of Christ was an eternal virgin. The Scriptures plainly indicate that Mary, the theotokos, the god-birther or god-bearer, as they are accustomed to idolizing her, had at least five additional children later in her life. Those five are the apostles James the son of Alphaeus, Jude his brother, and Joses, Simon and Salome.
Explaining this to Catholics or to the followers of Eastern Orthodoxy today, one is very likely to be called a protestant, and that is actually quite amusing. To Identity Christians, it is the Catholics and the Orthodox who are protestants, since they protest the plain word of Scripture in favor of the traditions of men. Many of the traditions of the so-called churches stand in plain contradiction to Scripture, and then the fools who follow those church traditions claim that men cannot understand Scripture, which is also a lie. Both Yahshua Christ and Paul of Tarsus fully expected men everywhere to be able to read and understand the Scripture. Now Christ responds to his brothers:
6 Then [א, D and W want “then”] Yahshua says to them: “My time is not yet here, but your time is always at hand.
As we have already explained, there was an appointed time at which Christ was to die, and it had to be a Passover. Here was the Feast of Tabernacles, and His brethren were provoking Him to push the matter of His presence in Judaea, which would provoke in turn the Judaeans. In Matthew chapter 26, at the Passover six months later, we read where He had commanded His disciples to prepare the Passover meal so they may celebrate, and describing a certain man at whose house they would hold the celebration, we read “18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.” Where He said “My time is at hand”, He indicates to us that He knew all along when it was that He was going to make His great sacrifice. Now where He continues to speak to His skeptical brothers, He also explains how their time is “always at hand”:
7 The Society is not able to hate you, but it hates Me, because I testify concerning it, that its works are evil!
The brothers of Christ were evidently engaged with the world, going along with it and getting along in it rather than withstanding it and opposing its sins. So long as men agree with the world, it is their time because the world will not hate them. Rather, the followers and true believers in Yahweh should also have emulated Abraham, who “looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God”, as Paul of Tarsus explained it in Hebrews chapter 11. That is what Christians should also do today, and that city, as it is described in Revelation chapters 21 and 22, is the twelve tribes of the children of Israel, so once again we come full circle to the Christian need for brotherly love.
Later on, in John chapter 15, Christ told those of His disciples who would follow Him that “17 These things I command you, that ye love one another. 18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” Then in the first epistle of John, in chapter 3, we read “13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you. 14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.” So it should be evident from Scripture, as it is evident also in history, that the princes of this world hate us when we love our own brethren, and love and seek to follow after Christ by keeping His commandments. Only the events of Genesis chapter 3, and the ensuing enmity which was first displayed in the slaying of Abel by Cain in Genesis chapter 4, explain the source and cause of this phenomenon.
Now Yahshua continues to address His brothers:
8 You go up to the feast. Not yet do I go up to this feast, because My time is not yet fulfilled.” 9 Then [א, D and 070 want “then”; the text follows P66, P75, B, T, W and the MT] having said these things He Himself remained [P75, B, T and the MT have “having said these things to them He remained”; the text follows P66, א, D, W and 070] in Galilaia.
The tradition, which is evident in the Gospel from as early as Luke chapter 2, was for families and extended families to travel together to Jerusalem from their countryside towns and villages for the appointed feasts, which they were required to attend three times each year in the law, which are the feasts of unleavened bread, which begins with the Passover, and then first fruits, which is called Pentecost, and finally the feast of tabernacles.
Some readers see a discrepancy here in verse 8 with what is to follow, however there is no discrepancy. Unfortunately, however, the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece, in both the 27th and 28th editions, follows the Codices Sinaiticus (א) and Bezae (D) which have the verse to read in part “I do not go up to this feast”, where our text follows the 3rd century papyri P66 and P75, and the Codices Vaticanus (B), Borgianus (T), Washingtonensis (W), 070 and the Majority Text. The Nestle-Aland reading clearly conflicts with the subsequent account, and forces the proposition that the apostle records Christ as having contradicted Himself, or, at least, as having lied to His brethren.
The purpose of Christ was only “not yet do I go”, and not that He would not go at all. The Greek word οὔπω [Strong’s # 3768] primarily means not yet, although sometimes it was used as an emphatic form of the negative particle, for not at all. Here it cannot be interpreted as not at all, thereby once again forcing Christ to contradict Himself, but some translations also do that very thing. It can only honestly be interpreted by its primary meaning, not yet, and Christ certainly did not contradict Himself. By the law, Christ was compelled to attend the feast, and He did, but He did not have to suffer the provocation of His brothers and make a spectacle of Himself before His time. So we read:
10 But as His brothers went up to the feast, then He also [070 wants “also”] went up [D and the MT move the words “to the feast” here; the text follows P66, P75, א, B, T, W, and 070], not openly but as if [א and D want “as if”; the text follows P66, P75, B, T, W, 070 and the MT] in secret.
His brothers had demanded that He go up openly, making signs among the Judaeans, evidently so that they could witness the subsequent spectacle. Because He professed that it was not yet His time, they must have been disappointed, even if they may only have been mocking him. Evidently, the Judaeans themselves were laying in wait for Him, hoping for Him to come openly as John attests:
11 Then the Judaeans sought Him at the feast and said “Where is He?” 12 And there was much [P66 and D want “much”] murmuring concerning Him among the crowds [P66, א and D have “crowd”]. Some indeed said that He is good, but [P66, א, D and the MT want “but”; the text follows P75, B, T and W] others said “No! Rather He would deceive the people!” 13 Of course no one had spoke publicly concerning Him [in fragmented text P75 appears to have “on behalf of Him” rather than “concerning Him”] due to fear of the Judaeans.
So the people in general were discouraged from speaking what they believed was true “for fear of the Jews”, as the King James Version reads the passage. This situation would have stifled the dialog concerning Christ, and would have kept many in Judaea blind as to the truth of the matter, so that they might investigate that truth for themselves. The Jews use that same tactic to suppress dialog on many historical, political and social issues today.
Today Christians are once again found in this same predicament. The Scriptures command Christians to separate from sinners, to put away fornicators and idolaters, and not even to greet those who do not bear the doctrine of Christ. Yet today Christians have lost their freedom of association, and they are forced to placate, and even to comfort, both Sodomites and Antichrists. Henry Ford, in his book The International Jew, proved through citations of many court cases from the late 18th and early 19th centuries that the Jew was behind this secularization of society, especially in Volume 2, in the chapter “Jewish Rights” Clash With American Rights.
Christians are also forced to tolerate Jews themselves, in spite of the fact that toleration of Jews is something which both the Gospel and Revelation of Christ as well as certain of the epistles of the apostles warn Christians not to do. In the second epistle of John, for example, Christians are warned that “9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. 10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” To “bid God speed” in archaic English is merely to greet someone. So Christians should not even greet Jews, lest they be held responsible for their evil works. When you allow the devil into your home, you yourself are responsible for the evils that he will commit, and being a devil he certainly will commit evil. With that alone, it is clear that Christianity is not practiced by the vast majority of people who consider themselves to be Christians.
For centuries, Jews have claimed the authority to explain what Christianity is, and the Churches have often recognized that claim, if only upon the presumed “conversion” of the Jew. Historically, Jews have used that presumption of authority to corrupt and subvert Christian society, in spite of the fact that according to Christ and the apostles, Jews are the last people on earth to have any understanding of anything which is truly Christian. It is laughable, and at the same time deplorable, that a Jew would be able to say “Oh, that is not Christian” without being mocked and scorned.
Now Jews have come to the point where they even demand special rights and privileges that Christians in Christian societies never even thought to give themselves. Now Christ can be publicly criticized, lied about and condemned, but Jews are demanding that they themselves are elevated above criticism and condemnation.
For example, There is currently a bill in the Florida state legislature which has just recently passed both houses unanimously, and which is about to become law. The governor has even promised to sign this bill in Palestine, so with that we may see who is really in control of Florida. Although this bill only affects the operation of the Florida public schools, it is another step in the incremental stranglehold which Jews have sought to impose upon all public discourse. All public discourse will be moderated on account of fear of the Jews. The Bill prohibits things which are not even likely to happen in Florida public schools, however it is also generally patterned after a model which Jews have sought to use in order to regulate all forms of public life and public discourse in both America and in Europe.
So among its provisions, it does the following:
Prohibits calling for, aiding, or justifying violence against Jews.
These things are already illegal under general public laws. For instance, practically everywhere in the America and the West, calls for violence against anyone are labeled as terroristic threats or incitements to riot, and are punishable by law. So no particular class or group of people need special laws to protect them from actions that are already unlawful. But this provision restricts free speech and opinion to the point where Jews become a special and protected class of their own who are not only free from violence, but free from any other criticism at all. Next, it prohibits:
Alleging myths about a world Jewish conspiracy or that Jews control the media, economy, government, or other institutions.
So the historian who sees a definite and demonstrable pattern in the actions of Jews, for instance in the verifiable fact that most of the Soviet proletariat happened to be Jewish, or that Jews are indeed greatly over-represented in positions of control over the media, or even that Jews demanded that Christ be executed by the Romans, is precluded from discussing any such facts.
A summary survey of the people who hold positions of authority in the corporate media clearly indicates that Jews have absolute control over 95% of American and European media and publishing, and now it is illegal to note that in Florida schools, which includes the state’s largest universities. A summary survey of the membership of the United States Congress, the federal bureaucracies or the court systems, including the Supreme Court, reveals that Jews are highly over-represented compared to their general proportion of the overall population.
Throughout the West, Jews are without doubt over-represented in every aspect of political and social life which can influence the policy and direction of nations. They did not gain this advantage because of any special ability. The rest of the population is not benefited by this advantage, but has only suffered more. Jews only have this advantage because they themselves collude with one another and promote one another purposely, so that they can dominate any nation which they infiltrate, and they act that way naturally. At the same time, they chastise and accuse Christians who act in that manner, crying injustice at what they themselves do naturally. Paul of Tarsus warned the Christians at Rome that they should prefer one another, and for fear of the Jews, Christians now fail to prefer their own.
Sometime around 125 BC John Hyrcanus began circumcising Edomites into Judaism, making them fellow-citizens of the Judaeans. By 36 BC Herod the Edomite had bribed the Romans, became king of Judaea, and began appointing his own people into all of the offices of power. This was the same process by which Jews subverted America in the early 20th century. Upon the incarnation of Christ, people were afraid to speak the truth “for fear of the Jews”, and Christians are once again faced with that same circumstance today. This is not a coincidence. So we continue with the Florida law, which also prohibits:
Accusing Jewish people of being responsible for real or imaginary wrongdoing by a single Jewish person, group, or the state of Israel, or for acts of non-Jews.
We constantly hear of “White privilege” in the media, even while only a very small percentage of Whites are actually privileged. So the Jews do to others what they do not want others to do to them, even seeking to make the behavior of others illegal while they practice the same things themselves.
Events such as the destruction of the USS Liberty at the hands of the Israeli military, something which many survivors of the fated ship have clearly and authoritatively attested, can no longer be discussed because Jews can no longer be criticized by law. Note that this provision makes accusing Jews of real acts illegal, so Jews cannot be criticized or condemned even when they are guilty. Next the law protects the biggest Jewish lie of recent history, as it prohibits:
Accusing the Jewish people of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
Yet even by their own admission, Jews have exaggerated the Holocaust, and “official” numbers have been greatly reduced even in Jewish or other governmental sources. For example, the number of Jews supposedly killed at Auschwitz has been reduced from 4 million to 1.5 million. Many Jews who have claimed to be Holocaust survivors and who have told fantastic tales have been exposed, and many have even admitted that they fabricated their stories. But now any discussion of that is against the law, at least in the Florida public schools.
Many other obvious lies about the so-called “Holocaust” will also never be brought to light so long as Jews are in power, since Jews continue to profit from them both politically and economically. In Europe, many otherwise harmless individuals are in prison, especially in Germany, for nothing other than questioning the official version of the holocaust story. Elderly women such as the author Ursula Haverbeck have been imprisoned, lawyers such as Sylvia Stolz and Horst Mahler have been imprisoned simply because they attempted to defend their clients against charges of “holocaust denial”. Others, such as the chemist Germar Rudolf, have lost their academic credentials because they found evidence which refutes the Jewish tales. For Jews, the holocaust is a god which cannot be denied, just as Daniel was sent to the ovens because he refused to worship the idols of Babylon. Yet there is not one shred of proof that any Jew was ever sent to the ovens of Auschwitz. Next, the Florida law establishes the legality of a peculiar Jewish internationalism by prohibiting:
Accusing Jewish citizens of countries other than Israel of being more loyal to Israel than their own nations.
Of course, other nations are not supposed to be the Jews’ “own nations”, so perhaps the wording of the provision itself reveals Jewish attitudes towards their hosts. Perception of the truth of Jewish allegiance to a foreign government is now against the law in Florida schools, in spite of the fact that many Jews in America openly bear the mantra of “Israel first”. They only want to prohibit the Goyim from discussing this obvious truth. A popular liberal, pro-Jewish publication called The Huffington Post published an article in 2012, which was written by a Jew and titled Why the Term “Israel First” Matters, but perhaps that will also be proscribed from the Florida public schools. Finally, the law:
Prohibits demonizing, applying a double standard to, or delegitimizing Israel.
And here it becomes illegal to criticize a foreign, artificial political entity which was created on land that had already been occupied by another people for over 1,500 years. So people who are marginalized in their own nation, pushed out of their homes, and even butchered, can no longer be defended in Florida public schools. While we have no personal care for Arabs, the injustice is blatant, that this law precludes Israeli policies from even being discussed in a objective manner.
All of this is for fear of the Jews, and if the Jews have their way, similar laws will be imposed on the general public universally throughout the West. Many provisions of this bill have already been made into law in many European nations, and the Jews are constantly pushing the American congress to do the same here, where they are obstructed only by the first amendment of the Bill of Rights. Once they are successful at completely eroding the second amendment, something which they have already been working on and succeeding at incrementally for many years, then they will work on eliminating the first.
The adage is true, that if you want to know who rules over you, just look at those whom you are not allowed to criticize. Another adage is true, that when purported facts of history need to be upheld by law, then it is certain that the history itself is truly a lie. Truth does not need law to uphold it.
Jews constantly lie about history in order to gain political advantage, and their lies are indeed systemic among them. For instance, in 1959 a Jew named Alvin Rubinstein wrote an article for the journal Social Science titled Anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union, which lamented the supposed plight of Jews under the Soviet system, which was continued from the days of the Tsars. But Trotsky was a Jew, and Lenin was a Jew, something which was only admitted recently, was vehemently denied until then. There is also credible evidence that Stalin was a Jew, and that is still vehemently denied. It can be demonstrated that as much as eighty percent of the original Soviet government was comprised of Jews.
It is also documented that the Jews, under Communism, outlawed antisemitism. In an article posted at the Communist website Marxists.org there is a document, the veracity of which can also be verified in other sources, which is a statement on Anti-Semitism signed by Stalin, addressed to a Jewish news agency in the United States, and published in the Russian newspaper Pravda in 1936.
Here is a reproduction:
January 12, 1931
Reply to an Inquiry of the Jewish News Agency in the United States
Source: Works, Vol. 13, 1930 - January 1934
Publisher: Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1954
Transcription/HTML Markup: Salil Sen for MIA, 2008
Public Domain: Marxists Internet Archive (2008). You may freely copy, distribute, display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit "Marxists Internet Archive" as your source.
In answer to your inquiry :
National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of cannibalism.
Anti-semitism is of advantage to the exploiters as a lightning conductor that deflects the blows aimed by the working people at capitalism. Anti-semitism is dangerous for the working people as being a false path that leads them off the right road and lands them in the jungle. Hence Communists, as consistent internationalists, cannot but be irreconcilable, sworn enemies of anti-semitism.
In the U.S.S.R. anti-semitism is punishable with the utmost severity of the law as a phenomenon deeply hostile to the Soviet system. Under U.S.S.R. law active anti-semites are liable to the death penalty.
January 12, 1931
First published in the newspaper Pravda, No. 329, November 30, 1936
There is verifiable photographic and documentary evidence, some of it which is published at the Christogenea Mein Kampf Project, that in the Soviet Union the churches were all closed while the synagogues remained open and unmolested. One photograph of a plaque hanging outside the entry of a synagogue in Kiev attests in both English and Russian that “The Synagogue Chabad was founded in 1895. Till 1941 the synagogue was used as a prayer house of the Jewish community. But during the occupation of the city the building was destroyed.” The new synagogue built in its place was reopened in 2010. In stark contrast, there is much historical evidence that throughout the same period, the Christian churches were closed without exception, and many of them which even survived the Bolshevik Revolution were then used as warehouses or theaters. There is much contemporary and incontrovertible evidence that the Bolsheviks persecuted Christians, murdered the priests, raped the nuns, and shuttered the churches, all while leaving Judaism and its rabbis unmolested.
It must not be mistaken, that Communism is Jewish, Capitalism is Jewish, and the international corporations which are controlled by a handful of Jewish bankers are bringing the world down the path to global Communism, sometimes rapidly and sometimes in small and incremental steps. The ultimate goal of Jewish Communism is Jewish world supremacy, which is the aspiration of the Jewish Talmud. It is the Jewish-controlled Capitalist corporations which actively promote the Marxist agenda in our present time for that very purpose. For that same reason, those same corporations endeavor to completely deconstruct White Christian Society.
In the first few centuries after Christ, Christianity succeeded in spite of the fear of the Jews, and it is clear in the accounts of the apostles, in their epistles and in the Book of Acts, that Jews were persecuting Christians, or inciting the Romans to persecute them, across the pagan Roman world. The early Christian writer Tertullian, in chapter 21 of his Apology, explicitly attributed the persecution of Christians under Rome to the Jews. Minucius Felix credited “demons” with the fabrication of falsehoods about Christians, where he was using the term as an allegory for Jews, falsehoods which led to the persecution of Christians. Both men wrote in the 3rd century. Christians sought only to follow Christ and seek the righteousness of God, but Jews have always inherently persecuted the righteous. Wherever Jews are found, their endeavor has been to recreate the world into the image of Sodom and Gomorrah. For that reason modern Christians are now being forced by law to accept the persons of Sodomites and whores, and if they refuse, they are stripped even of their own private businesses.
There are countless examples of the parallels between the time of Christ and current world circumstances which we may exhibit here, however our purpose is not to make a full historical exhibition, but only a commentary on the Gospel of John. If the Jews are successful, and once their so-called antisemitism laws are finally enacted throughout the United States, once laws such as this one in Florida become universal throughout the West, the United States will indeed become a new Soviet Union, as in many respects it has already devolved into a Communist utopia. In that event, Christians will be openly persecuted once again, and all because they still refuse to speak out “for fear of the Jews”.
But even though Yahshua Christ had come into Jerusalem for this feast discreetly, even though He did not want to make an exhibition upon His entrance into the city, He still could not help but speak the truth, so John continues his account:
14 And it already being in the middle of the feast Yahshua went up into the temple and taught.
This would be three or four days, since the feast is a week long, and actually includes two Sabbath days for a total of eight days.
15 Then the Judaeans wondered saying “How does He know literature [γράμμα, literally “letters”], not being instructed?”
Just like today, most people only believe what they hear through “official” channels, and refuse to believe anything else regardless of the proofs which may accompany the testimony. Today, generally speaking, if people do not hear something from CNN, Fox News, or any of the other Jewish-controlled media outlets, they will not believe it at all. If someone learns something which they are told is true in a university, regardless of how much contrary evidence he may be shown in documentation, it is almost impossible to convince him otherwise. So men today act upon only what they hear from the Jews, or from those of whom the Jews approve, and they remain obedient to the Jewish teachings, not daring to stray from what they hear in the media or in schools in spite of the reality of whatever situation they may face, all “for fear of the Jews”.
16 Then Yahshua replied to them and said “My teaching is not Mine, but of He who sent Me! 17 If one wishes to do His will, he shall know concerning the teaching, whether it is from Yahweh or I speak by Myself. 18 He speaking by himself seeks his own honor, but he seeking the honor of He who has sent him, he is true and there is no injustice in him.
It is evident in the subsequent events of the Gospel, in the words of Christ where He condemned the scribes and Pharisees as hypocrites in Matthew chapter 23, and in the epistles of Paul of Tarsus and his struggles with the Judaizers which are described in the Book of Acts, that the authorities in Judaea saw the law as a means to rule over and suppress the people, while Christians sought to keep the commandments because they love God and sought to please Him.
From Matthew chapter 23: “25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. 26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. 27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. 28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.”
The people of Judaea kept the law for the sake of appearance, to please men or to be honored by men, while Christians were taught to keep the law out of love for their brethren and hoped only to be accounted worthy of the elect of God.
From earlier in that same chapter of Matthew: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. 4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. 5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, 6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. 8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.”
As a digression, the seat of Moses was destroyed along with Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD, so the scribes and Pharisees no longer have that authority.
So Paul later taught that the works of the law were vain, which men performed to seek after and to exhibit their own righteousness, in order to exalt themselves. But on the other hand, he taught that keeping the spirit of the law and seeking to edify one’s brethren in the love of Christ was the true path to righteousness. Realizing the difference between the two attitudes, that of Christ and that of the temple officials, one should realize that Christ was indeed following God, while the temple officials were only seeking to exalt themselves and to magnify their own power and authority.
So Christ challenges the people who questioned Him:
“19 Has Moses not given you the law? And not one from among you keeps [literally “does”] the law! Why do you seek to kill Me?”
As Paul also explained, no man can keep the entire law perfectly, and none of the Judaeans at the time were correctly keeping the law. Yet at least some of them sought to condemn Christ, although He had not actually done anything which was proscribed by the law. Ultimately, as the records show in the synoptic gospels, the people as a whole did seek to kill him. But not all of them understood that at this early time, so they responded in denial:
20 The crowd responded [D and the MT add “and said”; the text follows P66, P75, א, B, T and W] “You have a demon! Who seeks to kill You?”
Yahshua Christ had told the Truth, but He may have told it prematurely, so the people responded incredulously where they exclaimed “you have a demon!’ The subsequent events would prove that they were the ones with demons.
Today, as Jews have once again attained a dominant position in world politics and in social status, aware White Christians attempt to sound the alarm, that the Jews want to destroy them. And the modern Jews respond just as they did here, by issuing statements condemning White Christians which say “You have a demon! Who seeks to kill You?” Yet White nations everywhere are being overrun with diversity and non-White “immigrants”. Sadly, most White Christians refuse to believe it, because they did not hear it in school or on television, and many of those who do suspect that something is wrong with society still refuse to speak out, “for fear of the Jews.”
When we return, we will summarize these verses from John’s perspective, without the parallels comparing our present circumstances in these last days.