FourWinds10.com - Delivering Truth Around the World
Custom Search

FACTS ARE FACTS - FREEDMAN-GOLDSTEIN LETTER

CREATOR GOD ATON/HATONN

Smaller Font Larger Font RSS 2.0

Dec. 7, 2015

UNPUBLISHED PHOENIX JOURNAL #233 by Georgos Ceres Hatonn/Aton

 CHAPTER 6 

"FACTS  ARE  FACTS”

(Letter to Dr. David Goldstein, LL.D. from Benjamin H. Freedman)

[QUOTING:]

 

960  PARK  AVENUE

NEW  YORK  CITY

October 10, 1954

 

SPECIAL  DELIVERY

Dr.David Goldstein, LL.D.

Astor Post Office Station

Boston, Massachusetts

My dear Dr. Goldstein,

Your very outstanding achievements as a convert to Catholi­cism impress me as without a comparable parallel in modern history.  Your devotion to the doc­trines and the dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church defy any attempt at de­scription by me only with words.  Words fail me for that.

As a vigorous protagonist persevering so persistently in prop­agating the principles of the Roman Catholic Church—its pur­pose, its policies, its pro­grams—your dauntless determination is the inspiration for countless others who courageously seek to follow in your footsteps.

In view of this fact it requires great courage for me to write to you as I am about to do.  So I pray when you receive this com­munication from me you will try to keep in mind Galatians 4:16, “Am I therefore become your enemy, be­cause I tell you the truth?”.  I hope you will so favor me.

It is truly a source of great pleasure and genuine gratification to greet you at long last al­though of necessity by correspon­dence.  It is quite a disappointment to me to make your ac­quaintance in this manner.  It would now afford me a far greater pleasure and a great privilege also if instead I could greet you on this occa­sion in person.

[H: you will note that only in the beginning do “words fail him” for this does get tedious and long, so please bear with us until he finally gets to some points after the honey is smeared about most thickly.]

Our very good mutual friend has for long been planning a meeting with you in person for me.  I still wish to do that.  I look forward with pleasant anticipa­tion to doing this in the not too distant future at a time agreeable to you.

You will discover in the contents of this long letter valid evi­dence for the urgency on my part to communicate with you without further delay.  You will further discover this urgency reflected in the present gravity of the crisis which now jeopar­dizes an uninterrupted continu­ance of the Christian faith in its long struggle as the world’s most effective spiritual and social force in the Divine mission of promoting the welfare of all mankind without regard for their diver­sified races, religions, and nationalities.

Your most recent article coming to my attention appeared in the September issue of the A.P.J. Bulletin, the official publica­tion of the organization calling themselves The Archconfra­ternity of Prayer for Peace and Goodwill to Israel.  The headline of your article, News and Views of Jews, and the purpose of the organi­zation stated in the masthead of the publication, “To Pro­mote Interest in the Apostalate to Israel” prompts me to take Father time by his fore­lock and promptly offer my comments.  I beg your indulgence accordingly.

It is with reluctance that I place my comments in letter form.  I hesitated to do so but I find it the only expedient thing to do un­der the circumstances.  I beg to submit them to you now with­out reservation of any nature for your immedi­ate and earnest con­sideration.  It is my very sin­cere wish that you accept them in the friendly spirit in which they are submitted.  It is also my hope that you will give your consideration to them and favor me with your early reply in the same friendly spirit for which I thank you in advance.  In the best interests of that worthy objective to which you are continuing to dedicate the years ahead as you have so diligently done for many past decades, I most respectfully and sin­cerely urge you to analyze and to study carefully the data submitted to you here.  I suggest also that you then take whatever steps you consider appropriate and necessary as a result of your conclu­sions.  In the in­visible and intangible ideological war being waged in defense of the great Christian heritage against its dedi­cated enemies your positive attitude is vital to victory.  Your passive attitude will make a negative contribution to the total ef­fort.

You assuredly subscribe fully to that sound and sensible sen­timent that “it is better to light one candle than to sit in dark­ness”.  My solitary attempts to date “to given light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow” may prove no more success­ful with you now than they have in so many other instances where I have failed during the past thirty years.  In your case I feel rather optomistic at the moment.

Although not completely in vain I still live in the hope that one day one of these “candles” will burst into flame like a long smouldering spark and start a conflagration that will sweep across the nation like a prairie fire and illuminate vast new hori­zons for the first time.  That un­yielding hope is the source of the courage which aids me in my struggle against the great odds to which I am subjected for obvious reasons.

It has been correctly contended for thousands of years that “In the end Truth always pre­vails”.  We all realize that Truth in ac­tion can prove itself a dynamic power of unlimited force.  But alas Truth has no self-starter.  Truth cannot get off dead-center unless a worthy apostle gives Truth a little push to overcome its inertia.  Without that start Truth will stand still and will never arrive at its in­tended destination.  Truth has often died aborning for the most logical rea­son.  Your help in this respect will prove of great value.

On the other hand Truth has many times been completely “blacked out” by repeating con­tradictory and conflicting un­truths over and over again, and again, and again.  The world’s re­cent history supplies somber testimony of the dangers to civi­lization inherent in that technique.  That form of treason to Truth is treachery to mankind.  You must be very careful, my dear Dr. Goldstein, not to become unwittingly one of the many accessories before and after the fact who have appeared upon the scene of public affairs in recent years.

Whether unwittingly, unwillingly or unintentionally many of history’s most noted charac­ters have misrepresented the truth to the world and they have been so believed that it puzzles our generation.  As recently as 1492 the world was misrepresented as flat by all the best al­leged au­thorities on the subject.  In 1492 Christopher Columbus was able to demonstrate oth­erwise.  There are countless similar other instances in the history of the world.

Whether these alleged authorities were guilty of ignorance or indifference is here besides the point.  It is not important now.  They were either totally igno­rant of the facts or they knew the facts but chose to remain silent on the subject for reasons undis­closed by history.  A duplica­tion of this situation exists today with respect to the crisis which confronts the Christian faith.  It is a vital factor today in the struggle for survival or the eventual surrender of the Christian faith to its enemies.  The times in which we are living appears to be the “zero hour” for the Chris­tian faith.

As you have observed no institution in our modern society can long survive if its structure is not from its start erected upon a foundation of Truth.  The Christian faith was first erected upon a very solid foundation of Truth by its Founder.  To sur­vive it must remain so.  The deteri­oration, the disintegration, and fi­nally the destruction of the structure of the Christian faith to­day will be accelerated in direct ratio to the extent that misrep­resentation and distortion of Truth become the substitutes of Truth.  Truth is an absolute quality.  Truth can never be rela­tive.  There can be no degrees to Truth.  Truth either exists or it does not exist.  To be half-true is as incredible as to be half-honest or to be half-loyal.

As you have undoubtedly also learned, my dear Dr. Gold­stein, in their at­tempt to do an “ounce” of good in one direction many well-intentioned persons do a “ton” of harm in another di­rection.  We all learn that lesson sooner or later in life.  Today finds you dedicating your un­ceasing efforts and your untiring en­ergy to the task of bringing so-called or self-styled “Jews” into the Roman Catholic Church as converts.  It must recall to you many times the day so many years ago when you embraced Catholicism yourself as a convert.  More power to you, and the best of luck.  May your efforts be rewarded with great success.

Without you becoming aware of the fact, the methods you em­ploy contribute in no small de­gree to dilution of the devotion of countless Christians for their Christian faith.  For each “ounce” of so-called good you accomplish by conver­sion of so-called or self-styled “Jews” to the Christian faith at the same time you do a “ton” of harm in another direction by diluting the devo­tion of countless Christians for their Christian faith.  This bold conclu­sion on my part is asserted by me with the firm and fair convic­tion that the facts will support my con­tention.  In ad­dition it is a well known fact that many “counterfeit” recent con­versions re­veal that conver­sions have often proved to be but “infiltrations” by latent traitors with treasonable intentions.

[H: Please, just stay with us a while longer for it DOES get better.  If you are “turned Off” by the association of “church” involvement please just read on—it is specific in in­tent but is “infiltration” into all clubs and organizations and all denominations and government, Congress and military.  You will see the point as it unfolds herein—I ask that he not “lose you” by boredom of his upstart for it is so integrated into that which I have just given you that it is worth the in­put even at a level of boredom.  If ye do not come into Truth—ye will spend countless years wishing you had been a “bit more patient through the bore­dom”.]

The attitudes you express today and your continued activity in this work re­quire possible re­vision in the light of the facts sub­mitted to you in this letter.  Your present philosophy and the­ology on this subject seriously merit, without any delay, recon­sideration on your part.  What you say or write may greatly in­fluence a “boom” or a “bust” for the Christian faith in the very near fu­ture far beyond your ability to accurately evaluate sitting in your high “white ivory tower”.  The Christians implicitly be­lieve whatever you write.  So do the so-called or self-styled “Jews” whom you seek to convert.  This influence you wield can become a danger.  I must call it to your atten­tion.

Your reaction to the facts called to your attention in this letter can prove to be one of the most crucial verdicts ever reached bearing upon the security of the Christian faith in recent cen­turies.  In keeping with this great responsibility I sincerely commend this sentiment to you hop­ing that you will earnestly study the contents of this letter from its first word to its very last word.  All who know you well are in the fortunate position to know how close this subject is to your heart.  By your loyalty to the high ideals you have observed during the many years you have la­bored so valiantly on behalf of the Christian faith you have earned the admiration you enjoy.  The Christian faith you chose of your own free will in the prime of life is very proud of you in more ways than as a convert.  Regardless of what anyone anywhere and anytime in this whole wide-world may say to the contrary events of recent years ev­erywheres establish beyond any question of a doubt that the Christian faith today stands with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel figura­tively speaking of course.  Only those think otherwise who deliberately shut their eyes to reali­ties or who do not choose to see even with their eyes wide open.  I believe you to be too real­istic to indulge yourself in the futile folly of fooling yourself.

It is clear that the Christian faith today stands at the cross-roads of its des­tiny.  The Divine and sacred mission of the Christian faith is in jeopardy today to a degree never witnessed be­fore in its long history of almost 2000 years.  The Christian faith needs loyal friends now as never be­fore.  I somehow feel that you can always be counted upon as one of its loyal friends.  You can­not over-simplify the present predicament of the Chris­tian faith.  The problem it faces is too self-evident to mistake.  It is in a critical situation.

When the day arrives that Christians can no longer profess their Christian faith as they pro­fess it today in the free world the Christian faith will have seen the beginning of its “last days”.  What already applies to 50% of the world’s total population can shortly apply equally to 100% of the world’s total popula­tion.  It is highly conceivable judging from present trends.  The malig­nant char­acter of this malady is just as progressive as cancer.  It will surely prove as fatal also unless steps are taken now to re­verse its course.  What is now being done towards ar­resting its progress or reversing its trend?

Mr dear Dr. Goldstein, can you recall the name of the philoso­pher who is quoted as saying that “Nothing in this world is per­manent except change”?  That philosophy must be applied to the Christian faith also.  The $64. question re­mains whether the change will be for the better or for the worse.  The problem is that simple.  If the present trend continues for another 37 years the Christian faith as it is professed today by Christians will have disappeared from the face of the Earth.  In what form or by what instrumentality the mission of Jesus Christ will there­upon and thereafter continue to make itself manifest here on Earth is as unpredictable as it is in­evitible.  [H: IT HAS NOW BEEN EXACTLY 37 YEARS FROM THE TIME OF THE LETTER, SAVE A FEW SHORT MONTHS.  PON­DER IT MOST CAREFULLY!]

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

Dharma, allow us a break please for this is indeed a very long writing and it will serve better in bits rather than as a whole.  Thank you.  Please note the changes in your computer are a re­sult of our own adjustments.  If you are in continuing slow boot-up, etc., let one of the others look at it.  I prefer, how­ever, that it be left alone until we can come into some fur­ther adjust­ments our­selves.  It took a real blast to its electronics day before yes­terday but we don’t want to continue on alternate power for it only causes the “enemy” to tinker to regain input on his own systems and we care not that it is all monitored.  Salu.  Hatonn to stand-by.

 

2/16/91 #2    HATONN 

CONTINUATION:

FREEDMAN-GOLDSTEIN 

[QUOTING:]

In the existing crisis it is neither logical nor realistic to drive Christians out of the Christian “fold” in relatively large numbers for the dubious advantage to be obtained by bringing a com­paratively small number of so-called or self-styled “Jews” into the Christian “fold”.

It is useless to try to deny the fact that today finds the Chris­tian faith on the defensive throughout the world.  This realiza­tion staggers the imagination of the few Christians who un­derstand the situation.  This status of the Christian faith exists in spite of the magnificent contri­butions of the Christian faith to the progress of humanity of civilization for almost 2000 years.  It is not my inten­tion in this letter to expose the conspirators who are dedicating them­selves to the destruction of the Christian faith nor to the nature and extent of the conspiracy it­self.  That ex­posure would fill many volumes.

The history of the world for the past several centuries and cur­rent events at home and abroad confirm the existence of such a conspiracy.  The world-wide net-work of diabolical con­spirators implement this plot against the Christian faith while Christians appear to be sound asleep.  The Christian clergy ap­pear to be more ignorant or more indifferent about this conspir­acy than other Chris­tians.  They seem to bury their heads in the sands like the leg­endary os­trich.  This ignorance or indifference on the part of the Christian clergy has dealt a blow to the Chris­tian faith already from which it may never completely recover, if at all.  It seems so sad.

Christians deserve to be blessed in this crisis with a spiritual Paul Revere to ride across the nation warning Christians that their enemies are moving in on them fast.  My dear Dr. Gold­stein, will you volunteer to be that Paul Revere?

Of equal importance to pin-pointing the enemies who are mak­ing war upon the Christian faith from the outside is the ne­cessity to discover the forces at work inside the Christian faith which make it so vulnerable to its enemies on the outside.  Ap­plying yourself to this specific phase of the problem can prove of tremendous value in rendering ineffective the forces respon­sible for this danger­ous state of affairs.

The souls of millions of Christians who are totally unknown to you are quite uneasy about the status of the Christian faith to­day.  The minds of countless thousands among the Christian clergy are troubled by the mysterious “pressure” from above which prevents them exercising their sound judgment in this situa­tion.  If the forces being manipulated against the Christian faith from the inside can be stopped the Christian faith will be able to stand upon its feet against its enemies as firmly as the Rock of Gibralter.  Unless this can be done soon the Christian faith appears destined to crumble and to eventually collapse.  An ounce of prevention is far prefer­able to a pound of cure you can be sure in this situation as in all others.

With all respect rightly due to the Christian clergy and in all humility I have an unpleasant duty to perform.  I wish to go on record with you here that the Christian clergy are primarily if not solely responsible for the internal forces within the Christian faith inimical to its best inter­ests.  The conclusion on my part indicates the sum total of all the facts in my book which add up to just that.  If you truly desire to be realistic and constructive you must “hew to the line and let the chips fall where they may”.  That is the only strategy that can save the Chris­tian faith from a fate it does not deserve.  You cannot pussy-foot with the truth any longer simply because you find that now “the truth hurts”,—someone you know or like.

At this late hour very little time is left in which to mend our fences if I can call it that.  We are not in a position to waste any of our limited time.  “Beating it around the bush” now will get us exactly nowheres.  The courageous alone will endure the pre­sent crisis when all the chips are down.  Figuratively and possi­bly literally there will be live heroes and dead cowards when the dust of this secular combat settles and not dead heroes and live cowards as sometimes occurs under other circumstances.  The Christian faith today remains the only “anchor to windward” against universal barbarism.  The dedicated enemies of the Christian faith have suf­ficiently con­vinced the world by this time of the sav­age methods they will adopt in their pro­gram to erase the Christian faith from the face of the Earth.

Earlier in this letter I stated that in my humble opinion the apa­thy of the Christian clergy might be charged with sole re­sponsibility for the increasing di­lution of the devotion of count­less Christians for the Christian faith.  This is the natural conse­quence of the confusion created by the Christian clergy in the minds of Christians concerning certain fundamentals of the Christian faith.  The guilt for this confusion rests exclusively upon Christian leadership not upon Chris­tians generally.  Con­fusion creates doubt.  Doubt creates loss of confi­dence.  Loss of confidence creates loss of interest.  As confusion grows more, and more, and more, confi­dence grows less, and less, and less.  The result is complete loss of all interest.  You can hardly dis­agree with that my dear Dr. Goldstein, can you?

[H: Now it would appear from the pronouncement of “polls” and the rolls of the so-called Christian Churches that there is a great renewal of faith and seeking and coming back into the Christ-path in all “faiths” of whatever the “Christ” is called.  This is not so in the “Western cultures”—THERE IS ONLY A RETURN INTO THE CHURCH HOUSES AND INTO NEW DOCTRINES WRITTEN FOR THIS NEW AND “MODERN RELIGION”—whatever that might be?!?  Most of the church houses do not house Chris­tianity.  They DO hold bigoted, unforgiving and misled parishioners who anticipate a momentary “lift-off” to some neb­ulous being in the clouds the minute the Zionists get the temple going in Jerusalem and the temple is desecrated.  Let me assure, good people—the temples of God have been so desecrated that there is naught left with which to desecrate them—and the Zionists have simply led you a merry chase through the primroses.]

The confusion in the minds of Christians concerning funda­mentals of the Christian faith is unwarranted and unjustified.  It need not exist.  It would not exist if the Christian clergy did not aid and abet the deceptions responsible for it.  The Christian clergy may be shocked to learn that they have been aiding and abetting the dedicated enemies of the Christian faith.  Many of the Christian clergy are actually their allies but may not know it.  This phase of the current world-wide campaign of spiritual sab­otage is the most negative factor in the de­fense of the Christian faith.

Countless Christians standing on the sidelines in this struggle see their Christian faith “withering on the vine” and about ripe enough to “drop into the lap” of its dedicated enemies.  They can do nothing about it.  Their cup is made more bitter for them as they observe this un­warranted and this unjustified igno­rance and indifference on the part of the Christian clergy.  This apa­thetic atti­tude by the Christian clergy offers no opposition to the aggressors against the Christian faith.  Retreat can only bring defeat.  To obviate surrender to their dedicated enemies the Christian clergy must “about face” immediately if they expect to become the victors in the in­visible and intangible ideological war now being so subversively waged against the Christian faith un­der their very noses.  When will they wake up?

If I were asked to recite in this letter the many manners in which the Chris­tian clergy are confusing the Christian concept of the fundamentals of the Christian faith it would require vol­umes rather than pages to tell the whole story.  Space alone compels me here to confine myself to the irreducible mini­mum.  I will limit myself here to the most important reasons for this con­fusion.  Brevity will of necessity limit the references cited to support the matters pre­sented in this letter.  I will do my best under the circumstances to establish the authenticity of the incon­testible historic facts I call to your attention here.

In my opinion the most important reason is directly related to your present activities.  Your responsibility for this confusion is not lessened by your good intentions.  As you have heard said so many times “Hell is paved with good in­tentions”.  The confusion your articles create is multi­plied a thousand-fold by the wide publicity given to them as a result of the very high re­gard in which you personally are held by editors and readers across the nation, Christian and non-Chris­tian alike.  Your articles con­stantly are continually reprinted and quoted from coast to coast.

[H: And thinking back to the PROTOCOLS, I am sure you will in­stantly remind me that “The press is controlled!”  Ah, indeed, we are making progress!  Only the infiltrators from the Zionist element would be given such ear and fo­rum.]

The utterance by the Christian clergy which confuses Chris­tians the most is the constantly repeated utterance that “Jesus was a Jew”.  That also appears to be your favorite theme.  [H:  LIS­TEN UP PLEASE, TO THIS NEXT FOR IT IS FAR BE­YOND JUST IM­PORTANT!]  That misrepresentation and distortion of an incontestible historic fact is ut­tered by the Christian clergy upon the slightest pretext.  They utter it con­stantly, also without provocation.  They appear to be “trigger happy” to utter it.  They never miss an opportunity to do so.  Informed intelligent Christians cannot reconcile this truly unwar­ranted misrepre­sentation and distortion of an incon­testible historic fact by the Christian clergy with infor­mation known by them now TO THE CONTRARY WHICH COMES TO THEM FROM SOURCES BELIEVED BY THEM TO BE EQUALLY RELI­ABLE.  (Emphasis mine.)

This poses a serious problem today for the Christian clergy.  They can extri­cate themselves from their present predicament now only by resorting to “the truth, the whole truth, and noth­ing but the truth”.  That is the only formula by which the Christian clergy can recapture the lost con­fidence of Christians.  As ef­fective spiritual leaders they cannot function without this lost confi­dence.  They should make that their first order of business.

My dear Dr. Goldstein, you are a theologian of high rank and a historian of note.  Of neces­sity you also should agree with other outstanding authorities on the subject of whether “Jesus was a Jew”.  These leading authorities agree today that there is no foundation in fact for the im­plications, inferences and the innu­endoes resulting from the incorrect belief that “Jesus was a Jew”.

Incontestible historic facts and an abundance of other proofs establish be­yond the possi­bility of any doubt the incredi­bility of the assertion so often heard today that “Jesus was a Jew”. [H: Now aren’t you glad you stuck with us through that boring introduction?  PUT THE STONES BACK ON THE GROUND LEST YOU SHOW YOUR TOTAL IGNO­RANCE OF FACTS!]

Without any fear of contradiction based upon fact the most com­petent and best qualified authorities all agree today that Je­sus Christ was not a so-called or self-styled “Jew”. They now con­firm that during His lifetime Jesus was known as a “JUDEAN” and not as a “Jew”.  Contem­porary theologians of Jesus whose competence to pass upon this subject cannot be challenged by anyone today also referred to Jesus during His lifetime here on Earth as a “Judean” and not as a “Jew”.

[H: Satan always must wear a sign and our old fraud is be­ginning to show his a bit?  Ah, you say, “Hatonn, but you said that once you experienced as a Jew!”  Ah and so I did—both—I said it and I did so.  I come this time in company with the one you should know as Emmanuel.  Jesus is even incorrect for that label was given this perceived Christed being by Paul the apostle who was both confused and scrambled throughout his days and remains so in many ways, unto this very day and yet efforts to bring clarity to that confusion.  So be it, let us continue.]

During his lifetime here on Earth Jesus was not regarded by Pontius Pilate nor by the Judeans among whom He dwelt as “King of the Jews”.  The inscrip­tion on the Cross upon which Jesus was Crucified has been incorrectly trans­lated into the En­glish language only since the 18th century.  [H: Now just who do you think would change such important facts to mislead the generations and species of human?)  Pontius Pilate was ironic and sarcastic when he ordered in­scribed upon the Cross the Latin words “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudeorum”.  About to be Cruci­fied, with the approval of Pontius Pilate, Jesus was being mocked by Pontius Pi­late.  Pontius Pi­late was well aware at that time that Jesus (Emmanuel, son of Mary) had been denounced, de­fied and denied by the Judeans who alas finally brought about His Crucifixion as related by his­tory.  (Hatonn: And incorrectly at that!  I sug­gest you read, And They Called His Name Immanuel—I Am Sananda.  The correct spelling would have been represented as Jm­manuel had it been correctly translated.]

Except for His few followers at that time in Judea all other Judeans abhored Jesus and de­tested His teachings and the things for which He stood.  That de­plorable fact cannot be erased from history by time.  Pontius Pilate was himself the “ruler” of the Judeans at the time he or­dered inscribed upon the Cross the Latin words “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudeorum: in English “Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans”.  But Pontius Pilate never referred to himself as “ruler” of the Judeans.  The ironic and sarcastic reference of Pontius Pilate to Jesus as “Ruler of the Judeans” can hardly be accepted as recognition by Pontius Pilate of Jesus as “Ruler of the Judeans”.  That is inconceivable by any interpretation.

At the time of the Crucifixion of Jesus Pontius Pilate was the administrator in Judea for the Roman Empire.  At that time in history the area of the Roman Empire included a part of the Middle East.  As far as he was concerned offi­cially or person­ally the inhabitants of Judea were “Judeans” to Pontius Pilate and not so-called “Jews” as they have been styled since the 18th cen­tury.  In the time of Pontius Pilate in history there was no religious, racial or national group in Judea known as “Jews” nor had there been any group so identified anywhere else in the world prior to that time.

Pontius Pilate expressed little interest as the administrator of the Roman Empire officially or personally in the wide variety of forms of religious worship then practiced in Judea.  These forms of religious worship extended from phal­lic worship and other forms of idolatry to the emerging spiritual philosophy of an eternal, omnipotent and invisible Divine diety, the emerging Yahve (Jehovah) concept which predated Abraham of Bible fame by approximately 2000 years.  As the administrator for the Roman Empire in Judea it was the of­ficial policy of Pontius Pi­late never to interfere in the spiritual affairs of the lo­cal popula­tion.  Pontius Pilate’s primary responsibility was the collection of taxes to be forwarded home to Rome, not the forms of reli­gious worship prac­ticed by the Judeans from whom these taxes were collected.

As you well know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, the Latin word “rex” means “ruler, leader” in En­glish.  During the lifetime of Jesus in Judea the Latin word “rex” meant only that to Judeans fa­miliar with the Latin language.  The Latin word “rex” is the form of the noun from the Latin verb “rego, regere, rexi, rec­tus”.  The Latin verb “rego, regere, rexi, rectus” in English means as you also well know “to rule, to lead”.  Latin was of course the official language in all the provinces administered by a local administrator of the Roman Empire.  This fact ac­counts for the inscrip­tion on the Cross in Latin.

With the invasion of the British Isles by the Anglo-Saxons the English lan­guage substituted the Anglo-Saxon “king” for the Latin equivalent “rex” used before the Anglo-Saxon invasion.  The adoption of “king” for “rex” at this late date in British his­tory did not retroactively alter the meaning of the Latin “rex” to the Judeans in the time of Jesus.  The Latin “rex” to them then meant only “ruler, leader” as it still means in Latin.  Anglo-Saxon “king” was spelled dif­ferently when first used but at all times meant the same as “rex” in Latin, “leader” of a tribe.

During the lifetime of Jesus it was very apparent to Pontius Pi­late that Jesus was the very last Person in Judea the Judeans would select as their “ruler” or their “leader”.  In spite of this situation in Judea Pontius Pilate did not hesitate to order the in­scription of the Cross “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudeorum”.  By the wildest stretch of the imagination it is not conceivable that this sarcasm and irony by Pontius Pilate at the time of the Crucifix­ion was  solely mockery of Jesus by Pontius Pilate and only mockery.  After this reference to “Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans” the Judeans forthwith preceeded to Crucify Je­sus upon that very Cross.

[H: Dharma, I am sorry, chela, but this is GOING TO BE WRITTEN AND WE ARE GOING TO WRITE IT, DEAR ONE.  Beloved Joy may now go and rejoice with Peace within her heart for I was going to ask her and NB to pen these truths.  It can wait no longer for it has been buried in the lies piled upon lies and now you have the proof of who and why it has been dumped upon humanity.  Do not cower, child, for I stand at your front, back, and both sides and none shall strike you except for their foolish words—i.e. Mr. Cooper, who only shows his igno­rance beyond all belief unto the world.  Oberli, make sure that NB and Joy re­ceive this as it comes forth.  Can you now see how a whole civilization can be victims of a lie begun with intent for world control?  So be it.  We will herein cover a lot of territory in his­torical importance—bet­ter yet, it is laid forth by one who would be referred to as “Jew”—my, “What a tangled web ye weave when first ye practice to deceive!”]

In Latin in the lifetime of Jesus the name of the political sub­division in the Middle East known in modern history as Pales­tine was “Iudaea”.  It was then administered by Pontius Pi­late as administrator for the Roman Empire of which it was then a part.  The English for the Latin “Iudaea” is “Judea”.  In Latin “Iudaeus” is the adjective for the noun “Iudaea”.  In En­glish “Judean” is the adjective for the noun “Judea”.  The ancient na­tive population of the sub­division in the Middle East known in modern history as Palestine was then called “Iudaeus” in Latin and “Judean” in English.  Those words identified the indige­nous population of Judea in the lifetime of Jesus.  Who can deny that Jesus was a member of the indigenous population of Judea in His lifetime?

And of course you know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, in Latin the Genitive Plu­ral of “Iudaeus” is “Iudaeorum”.  [H: I believe our “Friar Pope” will enjoy checking this out for all you non-Latin “Priests” of the Holy Church!]  The En­glish translation of the Genitive Plural of “Iudaeorum” is “of the Judeans”.  In­scribed upon the Cross on which Jesus was Crucified was “Iudaeorum”.  It is utterly impossible to give any other English translation to “Iudaeorum” than “of the Judeans”.  Qualified and competent theologians and historians regard as incredi­ble any other translation into English of “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeo­rum” than “Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans”.  [H: Further, there is no mistaking the label “Iesus” by which he was called in many places as in “Esu, Issa, Iisa,” etc., Christ, Christos, Christed, etc.—you can even now get away with Iesus Sananda and be in the correct “ball-park”.]  You must agree that this is literally correct.

At the time Pontius Pilate was ordering the “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeo­rum” inscribed upon the Cross the spiritual leaders of Judea were protesting to Pontius Pilate “not to write that Jesus was the ruler of the Judeans” but to in­scribe instead that Jesus “had said that he was the ruler of the Judeans”.  The spiritual leaders of Judea made very strong protests to Pontius Pi­late against his reference to Jesus as “Rex Iudaeorum” insisting that Pontius Pilate was not fa­miliar with or misunderstood the status of Jesus in Judea.  These protests are a matter of his­torical record, as you know.

The spiritual leaders in Judea protested in vain with Pontius Pi­late.  They in­sisted that Je­sus “had said that He was the ruler of the Judeans” but that Pontius Pilate was “not to write that Je­sus was the ruler of the Judeans”.  For after all Pontius Pilate was a foreigner in Judea who could not understand the local situ­ations as well as the spiritual leaders.  The intricate pattern of the do­mestic po­litical, social and economic cross-currents in Judea in­terested Pontius Pilate very little as Rome’s administra­tor.

The Gospel by John was written originally in the Greek lan­guage according to the best au­thorities.  In the Greek original there is no equivalent for the En­glish that Jesus “had said that He was the ruler of the Judeans”.  The English translation of the Greek original of the Gospel by John, XIX, 19, reads “Do not inscribe `the monarch (basileus) of the Judeans (Ioudaios), but that He Himself said I am monarch (basileus) of the Judeans (Ioudaios)’”.  “Ioudaia” is the Greek for the Latin “Iudaea” and the English “Judea”.  “Basileus” is the Greek “monarch” in En­glish.  “Rex” is the nearest word in Latin for “basileus” in Greek.  The English “ruler”, or its al­ternative “leader”, define the sense of Latin “rex” and Greek “basileus” as they were used in the Greek and Latin Gospel by John.

Pontius Pilate “washed his hands” of the protests by the spir­itual leaders in Judea who de­manded of him that the inscription on the Cross authored by Pon­tius Pilate be corrected in the manner they insisted upon.  Pontius Pilate very impatiently replied to their demands “What I have written, I have written”.  The in­scription on the Cross remained what it had been, “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iu­daeorum”, or “Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans” in English.

The Latin quotations and words mentioned in this letter are ver­batim quota­tions and the ex­act words which appear in the 4th century translation of the New Testament into Latin by St. Jerome.  This translation is referred to as the Vul­gate Edition of the New Testament.  It was the first official translation of the New Testament into Latin made by the Christian Church.  Since that time it has remained the official New Testament version used by the Catholic Church.  The translation of the Gospel by John into Latin by St. Jerome was made from the Greek lan­guage in which the Gospel of John was originally written ac­cording to the best au­thorities on this sub­ject.

The English translation of the Gospel by John, XIX, 19. from the original text in the Greek language reads as follows, “Pilate wrote a sign and fastened it to the Cross and the writing was `Jesus the Nazarene the monarch of the Judeans’”.  In the origi­nal Greek manuscript there is mention also made of the demands upon Pontius Pilate by the spiritual leaders in Judea that Pontius Pilate alter the reference on the Cross to Jesus as “Ruler of the Judeans”.  The Greek text of the original manuscript of the Gospel by John establishes beyond any question or doubt that the spiritual leaders in Judea at that time had protested to Pon­tius Pilate that Jesus was “not the ruler of the Judeans” but only “had said that He was the ruler of the Judeans”.

There is no factual foundation in history or theology today for the implica­tions, inferences and innuendoes that the Greek “Ioudaios”, the Latin “Iudaeus”, or the English “Judean” ever possessed a valid religious connotation.  In their three respective languages these three words have only indicated a strictly topo­graphical or geographic connotation.  In their correct sense these three words in their respective languages were used to identify the members of the indige­nous native population of the geographic area known as Judea in the lifetime of Jesus.   Dur­ing the lifetime of Jesus there was not a form of religious wor­ship practiced in Judea or elsewhere in the known world which bore a name even remotely re­sembling the name of the political subdivi­sion of the Roman Empire, i.e. “Judaism” from “Judea”.  No cult or sect ex­isted by such a name.

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

Please allow to break the writing at this place.  I ask that as the portions are given forth, please make sure that our beloved RK be given them in the segments produced.

We real­ize this is very heavy to accept and absorb but none-the-less the time of Truth is upon the lands and so shall it be written for the hourglass lies empty if Man sees not the errors of his journey and accep­tance of the lies.

So be it and may the blessings of peace which passes your under­standing see you through this time of confrontation.  Saalomé

Hatonn to stand-by.

2/17/91 #2    HATONN 

CONTINUATION  OF

THE  FREEDMAN  LETTER

I desire to take no time in current comments until we have fin­ished this portion and presented the work in point.  There IS NOTHING more important for, if you do not set your thinking to straight, there is no point in anything else about your physical circumstance.

Yes, it will be through those who are considered “JEWS” who will make sure truth prevails from out of the lies of the Zionists for it is they who have suffered most and have been sorely treated by those they were taught were their elders and truth-bearers.  It will be these beloved ones from the Judean races who MUST set it to right that Man can see the truth and facts of the de­ceit.  As ones of God’s people check into the in­formation as given, the confirmation will flow as from the life­spring.

Let us continue:

TERM  “JEW”  CREATED

IN  1775—A.D.

 

[QUOTING:]

It is an incontestible fact that the word “Jew” did not come into existence until the year 1775.  Prior to 1775 the word “Jew” did not exist in any lan­guage.  The word “Jew” was in­troduced into the English for the first time in the 18th century when Sheridan used it in his play “The Rivals”, II,i, “She shall have a skin like a mummy, and the beard of a Jew”.  Prior to this use of the word “Jew” in the English language by Sheridan in 1775 the word “Jew” had not become a word in the English language.  Shakespeare never saw the word “Jew” as you will see.  Shakespeare never used the word “Jew” in any of his works, the common general belief to the contrary notwith­standing.  In his “Merchant of Venice”, V.III.i.61, Shakespeare wrote as follows: “What is the reason?  I am a Iewe; hath not a Iewe eyes?”.

In the Latin St. Jerome 4th century Vulgate Edition of the New Testament Jesus is referred to by the Genitive Plural of “Iudaeus” in the Gospel by John reference to the inscription on the Cross,—”Iudaeorum”.  It was in the 4th cen­tury that St. Jerome translated into Latin the manuscripts of the New Testa­ment from the original languages in which they were written.  This translation by St. Jerome is referred to still today as the Vulgate Edition by the Roman Catholic Church authorities, who use it today.

Jesus is referred to as a so-called “Jew” for the first time in the New Testa­ment in the 18th century.  Jesus is first referred to as a so-called “Jew” in the revised 18th century editions in the En­glish language of the 14th century first translations of the New Testament into English.  The history of the origin of the word “Jew” in the English language leaves no doubt that the 18th century “Jew” is the 18th century contracted and  corrupted En­glish word for the 4th century Latin “Iudaeus” found in St. Jerome’s Vulgate Edition.  Of that there is no longer doubt.

The available original manuscripts from the 4th century to the 18th century accurately trace the origin and give the complete history of the word “Jew” in the English language.  In these manuscripts are to be found all the many earlier English equiv­alents extending through the 14 centuries from the 4th to the 18th century.  From the Latin “Iudaeus” to the English “Jew” these English forms included successively “Gyu”, “Giu”, “Iu”, “Iuu”, “Iuw”, “Ieuu”, “Ieuy”, “Iwe”, “Iow”, “Iewe”, “Ieue”, “Iue”, “Ive”, “Iew”, and then finally in the 18th century, “Jew”.  The many earlier English equivalents for “Jews” through the 14 centuries are “Giwis”, “Giws”, “Gyues”, “Gywes”, “Giwes”, “Geus”, “Iuys”, “Iows”, “Iouis”, “Iews”, and then also finally in the 18th century, “Jews”.

With the rapidly expanding use in England in the 18th cen­tury for the first time in history of the greatly improved printing presses unlimited quantities of the New Testament were printed.  These revised 18th century editions of the earlier 14th century first translations into the English language were then widely distributed throughout England and the English speak­ing world among families who had never possessed a copy of the New Testament in any lan­guage.  In these 18th century editions with revisions the word “Jew” appeared for the first time in any En­glish translations.  The word “Jew” as it was used in the 18th century editions has since continued in use in all editions of the New Testament in the English language.  The use of the word “Jew” thus was stabilized.

As you know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, the best known 18th cen­tury editions of the New Tes­tament in English are the Rheims (Douai) Edition and the King James Authorized Edition.  The Rheims (Douai) translation of the New Testa­ment into English was first printed in 1582 but the word “Jew” did not appear in it.  The King James Authorized translation of the New Testament into English was begun in 1604 and first published in 1611.  The word “Jew” did NOT ap­pear in it either.  The word “Jew” ap­peared in both these well known editions in their 18th century revised versions for the first time.

Countless copies of the revised 18th century editions of the Rheims (Douai) and the King James translations of the New Testament into English were dis­tributed to the clergy and the laity throughout the English speaking world.  They did not know the history of the origin of the English word “Jew” as the only and as the accepted form of the Latin “Iudaeus” and the Greek “Ioudaios”.  How could they be expected to have known other­wise?  The answer is they could not and they did not.  It was a new English word to them.

When you studied Latin in your school days you were taught that the letter “I” in Latin when used as the first letter in a word is pronounced like the letter “Y” in English when it is the first letter in words like “yes”, “youth” and “yacht”.  The “I” in “Iudaeus” is pronounced like the “Y” in “yes”, “youth”, and “yacht” in English.  In all the 4th century to 18th century forms for the 18th century “Jew” the letter “I” was pronounced like the English “Y” in “yes”, “young”, and “yacht”.  The same is true of the “Gi” or the “Gy” where it was used in place of the letter “I”.

The present pronounciation of the word “Jew” in modern En­glish is a devel­opment of re­cent times.  In the English language today the “J” in “Jew” is pro­nounced like the “J” in the English “justice”, “jolly”, and “jump”.  This is the case only since the 18th century.  Prior to the 18th cen­tury the “J” in “Jew” was pronounced exactly like the “Y” in the English “yes”, “youth”, and “yacht”.  Until the 18th century and perhaps even later the English “you” or “hew”, and the word “Jews” like “youse” or “hews”.  The present pronounciation of “Jew” in English is a new pronoun­ciation acquired after the 18th century.

The German language still retains the Latin original pronoun­ciation.  The German “Jude” is the German equivalent of the English “Jew”.  The “J” in the German “Jude” is pronounced ex­actly like the English “Y” in “yes”, “youth”, and “yacht”.  The German “J” is the equivalent of the Latin “I” and both are pronounced exactly like the English “Y” in “yes”, “youth” and “yacht”.  The German “Jude” is virtually the first syllable in the Latin “Iudaeus” and is pro­nounced exactly like it.  The German “Jude” is the German contraction and cor­ruption of the Latin “Iudaeus” just as the English “Jew” is the contraction and cor­ruption of the Latin “Iudaeus”.  The German “J” is always pro­nounced like the English “Y” in “yes”, “youth”, and “yacht” when it is the first letter of a word.  The pronounciation of the “J” in German “Jude” is not an exception to the pronouncia­tion of the “J” in German.

The English language as you already know, my dear Dr. Gold­stein, is largely made up of words adopted from foreign lan­guages.  After their adoption by the English language foreign words were then adapted by contracting their spelling and cor­rupting their foreign pronouncia­tion to make them more easily pronounced in English from their English spelling.  This pro­cess of first adopt­ing foreign words and then adapting them by con­tracting their spelling and cor­rupting their pronounciation re­sulted in such new words in the English language as “cab” from their original foreign spelling.  Hundreds of others must come to your mind.

By this adopting-adapting process the Latin “Iudaeus” and the Greek “Ioudaios” finally emerged in the 18th century as “Jew” in the English lan­guage.  The English speaking peoples strug­gled through 14 centuries seeking to create for the English lan­guage and English equiva­lent for the Latin “Iudaeus” and the Greek “Ioudaios” which could be easily pronounced in English from its English spelling.  The English “Jew” was the resulting 18th century con­tracted and cor­rupted form of the Latin “Iudaeus” and the Greek “ioudaios”.  The En­glish “Jew” is eas­ily pro­nounced in English from its English spelling.  The Latin “Iudaeus” and the Greek “Ioudaios” cannot be as easily pro­nounced in English from the Latin and Greek spelling.  They were forced to coin a word.

The earliest version of the New Testament in English from the Latin Vulgate Edition is the Wiclif, or Wickliffe Edition pub­lished in 1380.  In the Wiclif Edition Jesus is there men­tioned as One of the “iewes”.  That was the 14th century En­glish version of the Latin “Iudaeus” and was pronounced “hew-weeze”, in the plural, and “iewe” pronounced “hew-wee” in the singu­lar.  In the 1380 Wiclif Edition in English and Gospel by John, XIX.19, reads “ihesus of nazareth kyng of the iewes”.  Prior to the 14th century the English language adopted the An­glo-Saxon “kyng” to­gether with many other Anglo-Saxon words in place of the Latin “rex” and the Greek “basileus”.  The An­glo-Saxon also meant “tribal leader”.

In the Tyndale Edition of the New Testament in English pub­lished in 1525 Jesus was like­wise described as One of the “Iewes”.  In the Coverdale Edition published in 1535 Jesus was also de­scribed as One of the “Iewes”.  In the Coverdale Edition of the Gospel by John, XIX.19, reads “Iesus of Nazareth, kynge of the Iewes”.  In the Cranmer Edition published in 1539 Je­sus was again de­scribed as One of the “Iewes”.  In the Geneva Edi­tion published in 1540-1557 Jesus was also described as One of the “Iewes”.  In the Rheims Edition pub­lished in 1582 Je­sus was de­scribed as One of the “Ievves”.  In the King James Edition published in 1404-1611 also known as the Authorized Version Jesus was described again as one of the “Iewes”.  The forms of the Latin “Iudaeus” were used which were current at the time these translations were made.

The translation into English of the Gospel by John, XIX.19, from the Greek in which it was originally written reads “Do not inscribe `the monarch of the Judeans’ but that He Him­self said `I am monarch’”.  In the original Greek manuscript the Greek “basileus” appears for “monarch” in the English and the Greek “Ioudaios” appears for “Judeans” in the English.  “Ioudaia” in Greek is “Judea” in English.  “Ioudaios” in Greek is “Judeans” in English.  There is no reason for any confusion.

My dear Dr. Goldstein, if the generally accepted under­standing today of the English “Jew” and “Judean” conveyed the identical implications, inferences and innuendoes as both rightly should, it would make no difference which of these two words was used when referring to Je­sus in the New Testament or else­where.  But the implications, inferences, and innuendoes to­day con­veyed by these two words are as different as black is from white.  The word “Jew” to­day is never re­garded as a syn­onym for “Judean” nor is “Judean” regarded as a synonym for “Jew”.

As I have explained, when the word “Jew” was first intro­duced into the En­glish language in the 18th century its one and only implication, inference and innuendo was “Judean”.  How­ever during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries a well-organized and well-financed international “pressure group” created a so-called “secondary meaning” for the word “Jew” among the En­glish-speaking peoples of the world.  This so-called “secondary meaning” for the word “Jew” bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word “Jew”.  It is a misrepre­sentation.

The “secondary meaning” of the word “Jew” today bears as lit­tle relation to its original and correct meaning as the “secondary meaning” today for the word “camel” bears to the original and correct meaning for the word “camel”, or the “secondary meaning” today for the word “ivory” bears to the original and cor­rect meaning of the word “ivory”.  The “secondary meaning” today for the word “camel” is a cigarette by that name but its original and correct meaning is a desert animal by that ancient name.  The “secondary meaning” of the word “ivory” today is a piece of soap but its original and correct meaning is the tusk of a male ele­phant.

The “secondary meanings” of words often become the gener­ally accepted meanings of words formerly having entirely dif­ferent meanings.  This is accom­plished by the expenditure of great amounts of money for well-planned public­ity.  Today if you ask for a “camel” some­one will hand you cigarette by that name.  Today if you ask for a piece of “ivory” someone will hand you a piece of soap by that name.  You will never receive either a desert animal or a piece of the tusk of a male elephant.  That must illustrate the extent to which these “secondary mean­ings” are able to practically eclipse the original and correct meanings of words in the minds of the general public.  The “secondary mean­ing” for the word “Jew” today has practi­cally totally eclipsed the original and correct meaning of the word “Jew” when it was intro­duced as a word in the En­glish lan­guage.  This phenomena is not uncommon.

The United States Supreme Court has recognized the “secondary meaning” of words.  The highest court in the land has estab­lished as basic law that “secondary meanings” can ac­quire pri­ority rights to the use of any dictionary word.  Well-planned and well-financed world-wide pub­licity through every available me­dia by well-organized groups of so-called or self-styled “Jews” for three centuries has created a “secondary meaning” for the word “Jew” which has completely “blacked out” the original and correct meaning of the word “Jew”.  There can be no doubt about that.

There is not one person in the whole English-speaking world to­day who re­gards a “Jew” as a “Judean” in the literal sense of the word.  That was the cor­rect and only meaning in the 18th cen­tury.  The generally accepted “secondary meaning” of the word “Jew” today with practi­cally no exceptions is made up of four almost universally-believed theories.  These four theo­ries are that a so-called or self-styled “Jew” is (1) a person who to­day professes the form of reli­gious wor­ship known as “Judaism”, (2) a person who claims to belong to a racial group as­sociated with the ancient Semites, (3) a person directly the de­scendant of an ancient nation which thrived in Palestine in Bible history, (4) a person blessed by Divine intentional design with certain superior cultural char­acteristics denied to other racial, religious or na­tional groups, all rolled into one.

The present generally accepted “secondary meaning” of the word “Jew” is fundamentally re­sponsible for the confusion in the minds of Christians regarding elementary tenets of the Chris­tian faith.  It is likewise responsible today to a very great extent for the dilution of the devotion of countless Christians for theirChristian faith.  The implications, inferences and in­nuendoes of the word “Jew” today, to the preponderant majority of intelli­gent and informed Christians, is contradictory and in complete conflict with incontestible historic fact.  Chris­tians who cannot be fooled any longer are suspect of the Christian clergy who continue to repeat, and repeat, and repeat ad nauseam their pet theme song “Jesus was a Jew”.  It actually now approaches psy­chosis.

Countless Christians know today that they were “brain washed” by the Christian clergy on the subject “Jesus was a Jew”.  The resentment they feel is not yet apparent to the Chris­tian clergy.  Christians now are demanding from the Christian clergy “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”.  It is now time for the Christian clergy to tell Christians what they should have told them long ago.  Of all religious groups in the world Chris­tians appear to be the least informed of any on this subject.  Have their spiritual leaders been reckless with the truth?

Countless intelligent and informed Christians no longer ac­cept unchallenged assertions by the Christian clergy that Jesus in His lifetime was a Member of a group in Judea which prac­tised a religious form of worship then which is today called “Judaism”, or that Jesus in His lifetime here on Earth was a Member of the racial group which today includes the preponder­ant majority of all so-called or self-styled “Jews” in the world, or that the so-called or self-styled “Jews” throughout the world today are the lineal descendants of the nation in Judea of which Jesus was a national in His lifetime here on Earth, or that the cultural char­acteristics of so-called or self-styled “Jews” throughout the world today cor­respond with the cultural character­istics of Jesus during His lifetime here on Earth and His teachings while He was here on Earth for a brief stay.  Christians will no longer believe that the race, religion, nation­ality and cul­ture of Jesus and the race, religion, nationality and culture of so-called or self-styled “Jews” today or their ancestors have a common ori­gin or character.

The resentment by Christian is more ominous than the Chris­tian clergy sus­pect.  Under ex­isting conditions the Christian clergy will find that ignorance is not bliss, nor wisdom folly.  Chris­tians everywhere today are seeking to learn the authentic rela­tionship between the so-called or self-styled “Jews” through­out the world today and the “Judeans” who populated “Judea” be­fore, during and after the time of Jesus.  Christians now insist that they be told cor­rectly by the Chris­tian clergy about the racial, religious, national and cultural background of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” throughout the world today and the basis for associating these backgrounds with the racial, reli­gious, national and cultural background of Jesus in His lifetime in Judea.  The in­telligent and informed Christians are alerted to the exploded myth that the so-called or self-styled “Jews” throughout the world today are the direct descendants of the “Judeans” amongst whom Jesus lived during His lifetime here on Earth.

Christians today are also becoming more and more alerted day by day why the so-called or self-styled “Jews” throughout the world for three centuries have spent uncounted sums of money to manufacture the fiction that the “Judeans” in the time of Jesus were “Jews” rather than “Judeans”, and that “Jesus was a Jew”.  Christians are becoming more and more aware day by day of all the eco­nomic and political advantages accruing to the so-called or self-styled “Jews” as a direct result of their success in making Christians believe that “Jesus was a Jew” in the “secondary meaning” they have created for the 18th century word “Jew”.  The so-called or self-styled “Jews” throughout the world today repre­sent themselves to Christians as “Jews” only in the “secondary meaning” of the word “Jew”.  They seek to thereby prove their kinship with Jesus.  They em­phasize this fiction to the Christians constantly.  That fable is fast fading and losing itsformer grip upon the imaginations of Christians.

To allege that “Jesus was a Jew” in the sense that during His lifetime Jesus professed and practised the form of religious wor­ship known and practised un­der the modern name of “Judaism” is false and fiction of the most blasphemous nature.

If to be a so-called or self-styled “Jew” then or now the prac­tise of “Judaism” was a requirement then Jesus certainly was not a so-called “Jew”.  Jesus abhored and denounced the form of reli­gious worship practised in Judea in His lifetime and which is known and practised today under its new name “Judaism”.  That reli­gious belief was then known as “Pharisaism”.  The Chris­tian clergy learned that in their theologi­cal seminary days but they have never made any attempt to make that clear to Christians.

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

Dharma, here is a good point at which to break the writing.  We will continue at the section re­garding the Jewish Theological Seminary of America—often re­ferred to as “The Vatican of Ju­daism”.  Thank you.  Salu.

 

2/17/91 #3    HATONN 

THE  VATICAN  OF  JUDAISM

JUDAISM/PHARISAISM

 

[CONTINUATION OF QUOTING:]

The eminent Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, the head of the The Jew­ish Theologi­cal Seminary of America, often referred to as the “The Vatican of Judaism”, in his Forward to his First Edi­tion of this world-famous classic “The Pharisees, The Sociologi­cal Background of Their Faith”, on page XXI states:

“. . .Judaism. . .Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism be­came Midieval Rabbin­ism, and Midieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbin­ism.  But throughout these changes in name. . .the spirit of the ancient Pharisees survives, unaltered. . .From Pales­tine to Babylonia; from Babylonia to North Africa, Italy, Spain, France and Ger­many; from these to Poland, Russia, and eastern Europe generally, ancient Phari­saism has wandered. . .demonstrates the enduring importance which attaches to Phari­saism as a religious movement. . .

The celebrated Rabbi Louis Finkelstein in his great classic quoted from above traces the ori­gin of the form of religious worship practiced today under the present name “Judaism”, to its ori­gin as “Pharisaism” in Judea in the time of Jesus.  Rabbi Louis Finkelstein confirms what the eminent Rabbi Adolph Moses stated in his great classic “Yahvism, and Other Dis­courses”, in collaboration with the celebrated Rabbi H.G.Enelow, published in 1903 by the Louisville Sec­tion of the Council of Jewish Women, in which Rabbi Adolph Moses, on page 1 states:

“Among the inumerable misfortunes which have befallen. . .the most fatal in its con­sequences is the name Judaism. . .Worse still, the Jews themselves, who have grad­ually come to call their religion Judaism. . .Yet, neither in biblical nor post-biblical, neither in talmudic, nor in much later times, is the term Judaism everheard. . .The Bible speaks of the religion. . .as `Torath Yahve’, the instruction, or the moral law re­vealed by Yahve. . .in other places. . .as `Yirath Yahve’, the fear and reverence of Yahve.  These and other appelations CONTIN­UED FOR MANY AGES TO STAND FOR THE RELIGION. . .To dis­tinguish it from Christianity and Islam, the Jewish philosophers sometimes desig­nate it as the faith or belief of the Jews. . .IT WAS FLAVIUS JOSE­PHUS, WRITING FOR THE IN­STRUCTION OF GREEKS AND ROMANS, WHO COINED THE TERM JUDAISM, in order to pit it against Hel­lenism. . .By Hellenism was understood the civilization, com­prising lan­guage, poetry, religion, art, science, manners, cus­toms, in­stitutions, which. . .had spread from Greece, its original home, over vast regions of Eu­rope, Asia and Africa. . .The Chris­tians eagerly seized upon the name. . .The Jews them­selves, who in­tensly detested the traitor Josephus, refrained from reading his works. . .HENCE THE TERM JUDAISM COINED BY JOSE­PHUS REMAINED ABSO­LUTELY UN­KNOWN TO THEM. . .IT WAS ONLY IN COMPARA­TIVELY RE­CENT TIMES, AFTER THE JEWS BE­CAME FAMILIAR WITH MODERN CHRISTIAN LITERATURE, THAT THEY BEGAN TO NAME THEIR RELIGION JU­DAISM.” (emphasis supplied) 

This statement by the world’s two leading authorities on this subject clearly establishes be­yond any question or any doubt that so-called “Judaism” was not the name of any form of reli­gious worship practiced in Judea in the time of Je­sus.  The Flavius Josephus referred to in the above quotation lived in the 1st cen­tury.  It was he who coined the word “Judaism” in the 1st cen­tury explicitly for the purpose recited clearly above.  Religious worship known and prac­ticed today under the name “Judaism” by so-called or self-styled “Jews” throughout the world was known and practiced in Judea in the time of Jesus under the name “Pharisaism” according to Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, head of The Jewish Theo­logical Seminary of America, and all the other most competent and qualified recognized authorities on the subject.

The form of religious worship known as “Pharisaism” in Judea in the time of Jesus was a reli­gious practice based exclu­sively upon the Talmud.  The Tal­mud in the time of Jesus was the Magna Charta, the Declaration of Indepen­dence, the Con­stitution, and the Bill of Rights, all rolled into one, of those who practiced “Pharisaism”.  The Talmud today occupies the same rela­tive position with respect to those who profess “Judaism”.  The Talmud today virtually ex­ercises totalitarian dictatorship over the lives of so-called or self-styled “Jews” whether they are aware of that fact or not.  Their spiritual leaders make no at­tempt to conceal the control they exercise over the lives of so-called or self-styled “Jews”.  They extend their authority far be­yond the le­gitimate limits of spiritual matters.  Their authority has no equal outside religion.

The role the Talmud plays in “Judaism” as it is practiced to­day is officially stated by the emi­nent Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer, the Director of Interreligious Activities of the American Jewish Committee and the President of the Jewish Chaplains Associa­tion of the Armed Forces of the United States.  In his present capacity as official spokesman for The American Jewish Commit­tee, the self-styled “Vatican of Judaism”, Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer wrote a most re­vealing and comprehensive article with the title “What is a Jew” which was published as a feature article in Look Magazine in the June 17, 1952 issue.  In that ar­ticle Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer evaluated the significance of the Talmud to “Judaism” today.  In that illuminating treatise on that impor­tant subject by the most quali­fied authority, at the time, Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer stated:

“The Talmud consists of 63 books of legal, ethical and his­torical writings of the an­cient rabbis.  It is a compendium of law and lore.  IT IS THE LEGAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS.”  [H: Please obtain of copy of RAPE OF JUSTICE by Eustace Mullins—which can, I believe, be obtained on Fourwinds at http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/government/fraud/us_government/news.php?q=1446951675  to see just how far the judicial system is entan­gled and practices “law” by the rules of the “Talmud”.] 

In view of this official evaluation of the importance of the Tal­mud in the practice of “Judaism” today by the highest body of so-called or self-styled “Jews” in the world it is very neces­sary at this time, my dear Dr. Goldstein, to inquire a little fur­ther into the subject of the Talmud.  In his lifetime the emi­nent Michael Rodkinson, the assumed name of a so-called or self-styled “Jew” who was one of the worlds great authorities on the Talmud, wrote “History of the Tal­mud”.  This great classic on the subject was written by Michael Rodkin­son in collab­oration with the celebrated Rabbi Isaac M. Wise.  In his “History of the Talmud” Michael Rodkinson, on page 70, states:

“Is the literature that Jesus was familiar with in his early years yet in existence in the world?  Is it possible for us to get at it?  Can we our­selves review the ideas, the state­ments, the modes of reasoning and thinking, ON MORAL AND RELI­GIOUS SUB­JECTS, which were cur­rent in his time, and MUST HAVE BEEN REVOLVED BY HIM DUR­ING THOSE THIRTY SILENT YEARS WHEN HE WAS PONDER­ING HIS FU­TURE MISSION?  To such inquiries the learned class of Jewish rabbis AN­SWER BY HOLDING UP THE TALMUD.  Here, say they, is THE SOURCE FROM WHENCE JESUS OF NAZARETH DREW THE TEACHINGS WHICH EN­ABLE HIM TO REVOLU­TIONIZE THE WORLD; and the question becomes, there­for, an inter­esting one TO EVERY CHRISTIAN.  What is the Talmud?  THE TAL­MUD, THEN IS THE WRIT­TEN FORM OF THAT WHICH, IN THE TIME OF JE­SUS WAS CALLED THE TRADITIONS OF THE EL­DERS AND TO WHICH HE MAKES FREQUENT ALLUSIONS.  What sort of book is it?”.

Stimulated by that invitation every Christian worth of the name should im­mediately take the trouble to seek the answer to that “interesting” question “to every Christian”.  My dear Dr. Gold­stein, your articles do not indicate whether you have taken the time and the trouble to per­sonally investigate “what sort of book” the Talmud is either before or after your conversion to Catholicism.  Have you ever done so?  If you have done so what is the conclusion you have reached regarding “what sort of book” the Talmud is?  What is your personal unbiased and un­prejudiced opinion of the Talmud?  Is it consistent with your present views as a devout Roman Catholic and a tried and true Christian?  Can you spare a few moments to drop me a few lines on your present views?

In case you have never had the opportunity to investigate the contents of the “63 books” of the Talmud so well summarized by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer in his illuminating article “What is a Jew”, previously quoted, may I here impose upon your precious time and quote a few pas­sages for you until you find the time to conveniently investigate the Talmud’s contents person­ally.  If I can be of any assistance to you in doing so please do not hesitate to let me know in what manner you can use my help.

From the Birth of Jesus until this day there have never been recorded more vicious and vile libelous blasphemies of Jesus, of Christians and the Christian faith by anyone, anywhere, or any­time than you will find between the covers of the infamous “63 books” which are “the legal code which forms the basis of Jew­ish religious law” as well as the “textbook used in the train­ing of rabbis”.  The explicit and implicit irreligious character and im­plications of the contents of the Talmud will open your eyes as they have never been opened before.  The Talmud re­viles Jesus, Christians and the Christian faith as the priceless spiritual and cultural heritage of Christians has never been reviled before or since the Talmud was completed in the 5th century.  You will have to excuse the foul, obscene, indecent, lewd and vile lan­guage you will see here as verbatim quo­tations from the official unabridged translation of the Talmud into English.  BE PRE­PARED FOR A SURPRISE.

In the year 1935 the international hierarchy of so-called or self-styled “Jews” for the first time in history published an offi­cial unabridged translation of the complete Talmud in the En­glish language with complete footnotes.  What possessed them to make this translation in En­glish is one of the unsolved mys­teries.  It was probably done because so many so-called or self-styled “Jews” of the younger generation were unable to read the Tal­mud in the many an­cient lan­guages in which the original “63 books” of the Talmud were first composed by their authors in many lands between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D.

The international hierarchy of so-called or self-styled “Jews” selected the most learned scholars to make this official transla­tion of the Talmud into En­glish.  These famous scholars also prepared official footnotes explaining pas­sages of the Talmud where they were required.  This official unabridged trans­lation of the Talmud into English with the official footnotes was printed in Lon­don in 1935 by the Soncino Press.  It has been always referred to as the Soncino Edition of the Talmud.  A very limited number of the Soncino Edition were printed.  They were not made available to any purchaser.  The Soncino Edition of the Talmud is to be found in the Li­brary of Congress and the New York Public Library.  A set of the Soncino Edition of the Tal­mud has been available to me for many years.  They have become rare “collector’s items” by now.

[H:  Do you also see that it is up to you-the-people as to whether or not these Journals end up removed from the hands of the world population and fall among the “rare” publications accidentally missed in the mass destruction of the information?  It is up to you, citizens of the world, as the world nears destruc­tion at the hands of those who have stolen your very “Truth of God Creator”.  How can you know Truth if all documentation thereof is destroyed by the would be KINGS AND CONTROLLERS OF THE PLANET?]

The Soncino Edition of the Talmud with its footnotes is like a double-edged sword.  It teaches the Talmud to countless millions of the younger generation of so-called or self-styled “Jews” who are not able to read the Talmud in the many ancient languages in which the Tal­mud was written by its authors between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D.  It also teaches Christians what the Talmud has to say about Jesus, about Christians and about the Christian faith.  Some­day this is bound to back-fire.  Christians will some day challenge the assertion that the Tal­mud is the “sort of book” from which Jesus allegedly “drew the teachings which en­abled him to revolutionize the world” on “moral and religious sub­jects”.  The rumbling is already heard in places.

[H: As you read the quotations, I want (especially you ones who objected to Germain and Ha­tonn using Bull-shit to see if a scribe would edit it out) to have you REALLY PAY AT­TENTION AS WE PUT THIS INFORMATION INTO YOUR HANDS AND SEE IF YOU STILL BELIEVE THE CHRIST FRAGMENT OF GOD/CREATOR/CREATION WOULD LIKELY UTILIZE THESE TERMS.]

The official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud pub­lished in 1935 was “Translated into English with Notes, Glos­sary and Indices” by such eminent Talmudic scholars as Rabbi Dr. I. Ep­stein, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rabbi Dr. Israel W. Slotki, M. A., Litt, D., The Reverend Dr. A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., M.Sc., Jacob Schater, A. Mishcon, A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., Maurice Simon M.A., and the Very Reverend The Chief Rabbi Dr., J. H. Hertz wrote the “Foreword” for the Soncino Edition of the Talmud.  The Very Reverend Rabbi Hertz was at the time the Chief Rabbi of England.

The following are but a few of the many similar quotations with footnotes from the Son­cino Edition of the Talmud, the “sort of book” form which Jesus allegedly “drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world” on “moral and religious” subjects:

(Book)  Sanhedrin, 54b-55a:  “What is meant by this?—Rab said: Ped­erasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as ped­erasty with a child above that.  Samuel said: Ped­erasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that (2).  What is the basis of their dispute?—Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual inter­course, may, as the passive subject of ped­erasty throw guilt (upon the actual offender); whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of ped­erasty (in that respect)  (3).  But Samuel main­tains: Scriptures writes, (And thou shalt not lie with mankind) as with the lyings of a woman (4).  It has been taught in accordance with Rab: Ped­erasty at the age of nine years and a day; (55a) (he) who com­mits bestiality, whether naturally or un­naturally: or a woman who causes herself to be bes­tiality abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punish­ment (5).”

Footnotes:

(1)  The reference is to the passive subject of sodomy.  As stated in supra 54a, guilt is incurred by the active participant even if the former be a minor, i.e. less than thirteen years old.  Now, however, it is stated that within this age a distinction is drawn. (emphasis is in original, Ed.)

(2)Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred.  Samuel makes three the mini­mum.

(3)At nine years a male attains sexual matureness.

(4)Lev. XVIII,22.

(5)Rashi reads (“xxx”) (Hebrew characters, Ed.) instead of (“zzz”) (Hebrew characters, Ed.) in our printed texts.  A male, aged nine years and a day, who commits etc.  There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha.  The first—a male aged nine years and a day—refers to the pas­sive sub­ject of pederasty, the punishment being incurred by the adult of­fender.  This must be its meaning: because firstly, the active offender is never ex­plicitly designated as a male, it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, where only the sex of the pas­sive participant is mentioned; and secondly, if the age ref­erence is to the active party, the guilt being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty: in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless the other party is at least nine years and a day?  Hence the Baraitha sup­ports Rab’s contention that nine years (and a day) is the mini­mum age of the passive part­ner for the adult to be liable.” (emphasis in original, Ed.) 

Before giving any more verbatim quotations from the “sort of book” from which it is falsely alleged Jesus “drew the teachings which enable him to revo­lutionize the world” on “moral and re­ligious subjects” I wish to here again re­call to your attention the official state­ment by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer in Look Magazine for June 17, 1952.  In that official state­ment made by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer on behalf of the American Jewish Commit­tee, self-styled “The Vati­can of Judaism”, informed the 20,000,000 readers of Look Magazine that the TalmudIS THE LE­GAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEW­ISH RELI­GIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS”.  Please bear this mind as your read fur­ther.

Before continuing I wish also to call your attention to another feature.  Con­firming the offi­cial view of Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer, the New York Times on May 20, 1954 ran a news item under the headline “Rabbis Plan a Fund to En­dow Two Chairs”.  The news item itself ran as follows: “Special to the New York Times, Uniontown, Pa. May 19—Plans for raising $500,000. for the cre­ation of two endowed chairs at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America were an­nounced today at the fifty-fourth annual convention of the Rabbinical Assem­bly of America.  THE PROFESSORSHIPS WOULD BE KNOWN AS THE LOUIS GINS­BERG CHAIR IN TALMUD. . .!  This is further proof that the Talmud is not yet quite a dead-letter in the “TRAINING OF RABBIS”.  Is further proof needed on that question?

The world’s leading authorities on the Talmud confirm that the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud translated into English follows the original texts with great exactness.  It is al­most a word-for-word translation of the original texts.  In his famous classic “The History of the Talmud” Michael Rodkinson, the leading authority on the Talmud, in collaboration with the cele­brated Reverend Dr. Isaac Wise, states:

“With the conclusion of the first volume of this work at the be­ginning of the twentieth century, we would invite the reader to take a glance over the past of the Talmud, in which he will see. . .that not only was the Talmud not de­stroyed, but was so saved that NOT A SINGLE LETTER OF IT IS MISSING; and now IT IS FLOURISHING TO SUCH A DEGREE AS CAN­NOT BE FOUND IN ITS PAST HISTORY. . .THE TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD.  During the twenty centuries of its existence. . .IT SURVIVED IN ITS EN­TIRETY, and not only has the power of its foes FAILED TO DE­STROY EVEN A SINGLE LINE, but it has not even been able materially to weaken its influence for any length of time.  IT STILL DOM­INATES THE MINDS OF A WHOLE PEO­PLE, WHO VEN­ERATE ITS CONTENTS AS DIVINE TRUTH. . .The colleges for the study of the Talmud are in­creasing al­most in every place where Israel dwells, especially in this country where millions are gathered for the funds of the two colleges, the He­brew Union College of Cincinnati and The Jewish Theological Seminary of America in New York, in which the chief study is the Talmud. . .There are also in our city houses of learn­ing (Jeshibath) for the study of the Talmud in the lower East Side, where many young men are studying the Tal­mud every day.”

 

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

***Dharma, there is something wrong with your computer key­board—write no more un­til it is checked and cleared.  We will take a respite while this is taken care of, please.*** 

2/17/91 #4    HATONN 

[QUOTING CONTINUED:]

This “divine truth” which “a whole people venerate” of which “not a single let­ter of it is miss­ing” and today “is flour­ishing to such a degree as cannot be found in its history” is il­lustrated by the additional verbatim quotations which follow:

(Book)   Sanhedrin, 55b:  “A maiden three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased hus­band’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his.  The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; (if a niddah) she de­files him who has con­nection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon (a person affliected with gonorrhea).’ (emphasis in original text of Soncino Edition, Ed.)

(Book)  Sanhedrin, 58b.  “R. Eleazar said in R. Hanina’s name; If a heathen had an un­natural connection with his wife, he incurs guilt; for it is written, and he shall cleave, which ex­cludes un­natural intercourse (2).  Raba objected: Is there any­thing for which a Jew is not punishable and a heathen is? (3).  But Raba said thus: A heathen who violates his neighbor’s wife is free from punishment.  Why so?—(Scripture saith) To his wife, but not to his neighbor’s; and he shall cleave, which ex­cludes un­natural in­tercourse (4).

Footnotes:  (2)  His wife derives no pleasure from this, and hence there is no cleav­ing.

(3)        A variant reading of this passage is: Is there anything per­mitted to a Jew which is forbid­den to a heathen.  Unnatural con­nection is permitted to a Jew.

(4)        By taking the two in conjunction, the latter as illustrating the former, we learn that the guilt of violating the injunction ‘to his wife but not to his neigh­bor’s wife’ is incurred only for natu­ral but not for unnatural intercourse.” (emphasis in origi­nal, Ed.)

(Book)  Sanhedrin, 69a. “‘A man’: from this I know the law only with respect to a man: whence do I know it of one aged nine years and a day who is capable of intercourse?  From the verse, And ‘if a man’? (2)—He replied: Such a minor can pro­duce semen, but cannot beget therewith; for it is like the seed of cereals less than a third grown (3).”

(footnotes)  “(2) ‘And” (‘) indicates an extension of the law, and is here inter­preted to include a minor aged nine years and a day.

(3)        Such cereals contain seed, which  if sown, however, will not grow.

(Book)  Sanhedrin, 69b.  “Our rabbis taught: If a woman sported lewdly with her young son (a minor), and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her,—Beth Shammai say, he thereby renders her unfit for the priesthood (1).  Beth Hillel de­clare her fit. . .All agree that the connection of a boy nine years and a day is a real connec­tion; whilst that of one less than eight years is not (2); their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old.

(footnotes  “(1) i.e., she becomes a harlot whom a priest may not marry (Lev. XXL,7.).

(2)        So that if he was nine years and a day or more, Beth Hillel agree that she is invalidated from the priesthood; whilst if he was less than eight, Beth Shammai agree that she is not.”

(Book) Kethuboth, 5b. “The question was asked: Is it allowed (15) to perform the first marital act on the Sabbath? (16).  Is the blood (in the womb) stored up (17), or is it the result of a wound? (18).

(footnotes) “(15) Lit., ‘how is it’?

(16) When the intercourse could not take place before the Sab­bath (Tosaf).

(17) And the intercourse would be allowed, since the blood flows out of its own accord, no wound having been made.

(18) Lit., or is it wounded?  And the intercourse would be for­bidden.”

(Book) Kethuboth, 10a-10b.  “Someone came before Rabban Gamaliel the son of Rabbi (and) said to him, ‘my master I have had intercourse (with my newly wedded wife) and I have not found any blood (7).  She (the wife) said to him, ‘My master, I am still a virgin’.  He (then) said to them: Bring me two hand­maids, one (who is) a virgin and one who had intercourse with a man.  They brought to him (two such handmaids), and he placed them on a cask of wine.  (In the case of) the one who was no more a virgin its smell (1) went through (2), (in the case of) the virgin the smell did not go through (3).  He (then) placed this one (the young wife) also (on a cask of wine), and its smell (4) did not go through.  He (then) said to him: Go, be happy with thy bar­gain (7).  But he should have examined her from the be­ginning (8).”

(footnotes)  “(1) i.e., the smell of wine.

(2)        One could smell the wine from the mouth (Rashi).

(3)        One could not smell the wine from the mouth.

(4)        i.e., the smell of wine.

(5)        Rabban Gamaliel.

(6)        To the husband.

(7)        The test showed that the wife was a virgin.

(8)        Why did he first have experiment with the two hand­maids.”

(Book)  Kethuboth, 11a-11b.  “Raba said, It means (5) this: When a grown up man has in­tercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (6), it is as if one puts the finger in the eye (7); but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown up woman, he makes her as ‘as a girl who is in­jured by a piece of wood’”.

(footnotes) “(5). Lit., ‘says’.

(6) Lit., ‘here’, that is, less than three years old.

(7) Tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the lit­tle girl under three years.”

(Book)  Kethuboth, 11a-11b.  “Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has inter­course with a grown up woman makes here (as though she were) in­jured by a piece of wood (1).  Al­though the intercourse of a small boy is not re­garded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood.”

(footnotes)  “(1)            Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nev­ertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood.”

(Book)  Hayorath, 4a.  “We learnt: (THE LAW CONCERN­ING THE) MEN­STRUANT OC­CURS IN THE TORAH BUT IF A MAN HAS INTER­COURSE WITH A WOMAN THAT AWAITS A DAY CORRESPONDING TO A DAY HE IS EX­EMPT.  But why?  Surely (the law concerning) a woman that awaits a day corre­sponding to a day is mentioned in the Scrip­tures: He hath made naked her fountain.  But, surely it is writ­ten, (1)—They might rule that in the natural way even the first stage of contact is forbidden; and in an unnatural way, however, consummation of coition only is forbidden but the first stage of contact is permitted.  If so, (the same might apply) even (to the case of) a men­struant also! (2)—The fact, however, is (that the ruling might have been permit­ted)  (3) even in the natural way (4) alleging (that the prohi­bition of) the first stage (5) has refer­ence to a menstruant woman only (6).  And if you prefer I might say: The ruling may have been that a woman is not re­garded as a zabah (7) except dur­ing the daytime because it is written, all the days of her issue (8).” (emphasis appears in Son­cino Edition original, Ed.)

(footnotes) “(13) Lev. XV,28.

(14)  Cf. supra p.17,n.10. Since she is thus Biblically consid­ered unclean how could a court rule that one having intercourse with her is exempt?

(15)  Lev.XX,18.

(1)        Ibid.13. The plural “xxxx” (Hebrew characters, Ed.) im­plies natural, and un­natural inter­course.

(2)        Why then was the case of ‘a woman who awaits a day cor­responding to a day’ given as an illustration when the case of a menstruant, already mentioned, would apply the same illustra­tion.

(3)        The first stage of contact.

(4)        In the case of one ‘who awaits a day corresponding to a day’; only consumma­tion of coition being forbidden in her case.

(5)        Cf. Lev.XX,18.

(6)        Thus permitting a forbidden act which the Sadducees do not admit.

(7)        A woman who has an issue of blood not in the time of her menstruation, and is subject to certain laws of uncleaness and purification (Lev.XV,25ff).

(8)        Lev.XV,26. Emphasis being laid on days.”

(Book) Abodah Zarah, 36b-37a.  “R. Naham b.Isaac said: They decreed in con­nection with a heathen child that it would cause defilement by seminal emission (2) so that an Israelite child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with it. . .From what age does a heathen child cause defilement by semi­nal emission?  From the age of nine years and one day. (37a) for inasmuch as he is then capable of the sexual act he likewise defiles by emission.  Rabina said: It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl (communicates defilement) from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux.

(footnotes) “(2).            Even though he suffered from no issue.”

(Book) Sotah, 26b). “R. Papa said: It excludes an animal, be­cause there is not adultery in connection with an animal (4).  Raba of Parazika (5) asked R. Ashi, Whence is the statement which the Rabbis made that there is no adultery in con­nection with an animal?—Because it is written, Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot or the wages of a dog etc.; (6) and it has been taught: The hire of a dog (7) and the wages of a harlot (8) are permissable, as it is said, Even both of these (9)—the two (specified texts are abominations) but not four (10). . .As ly­ing with mankind. (l2) But, said Raba, it excludes the case where he warned her against contact of the bodies (13).  Abaye said to him, That is merely an ob­scene act (and not adultery), and did the All-Merciful prohibit (a wife to her husband) for and ob­scene act?” (emphasis in original text, Ed.) (footnotes) “(4) She would not be prohibited to her husband for such an act.

(5).  Farausag near Baghdad v.BB.(Sonc.Ed.)p.15,n.4. He is thus distin­guished from the earlier Rabbi of that name.

(6)        Deut.XXIII,19.

(7)        Money given by a man to a harlot to associate with his dog.  Such an associa­tion is not le­gal adultery.

(8)        If a man had a female slave who was a harlot and he ex­changed her for an animal, it could be offered.

(9)        Are an abomination unto the Lord ibid.

(10) Viz., the other two mentioned by the Rabbi.

(11) In Num.V,13. since the law applies to a man who is in­capable.

(12) Lev.XVIII,22. The word for ‘lying’ is in the plural and is explained as de­noting also unnatural intercourse.

(13) With the other man, although there is no actual coition.” (emphasis ap­pears in original Soncino Edition, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 55b.           “Raba said; For what purpose did the All-Merciful write ‘carnally’ in connection with the designated bondmaid (9), a married woman (10), and a sotah (11)?  This in connection with the designated bond­maid (is required) as has just been explained (12).  That in connection with a married woman excludes in­tercourse with a relaxed membrum (13).  This is a satisfactory interpretation in ac­cordance with the view of him who maintains that if one cohabited with forbidden rela­tives with relaxed membrum he is exon­erated (14); what, how­ever, can be said, according to him who maintains (that for such an act one is) guilty?—The exclusion is rather that of intercourse with a dead woman (15).  Since it might have been as­sumed that, as (a wife), even af­ter her death, is described as his kin (16), one should be guilty for (intercourse with) her (as for that) with a married woman, hence we are taught (that one is exoner­ated).

(footnotes) (9) Lev.XIX,20.

(10)  Ibid.XVIII,20.

(11)  Num.V,13.

(12)  Supra 55a.

(13)  Since no fertilization can possibly occur.

(14)   Shebu.,18a,Sanh.55a.

(15)  Even though she dies as a married woman.

(16)  In Lev.XXI,2. where the text enumerates the dead rela­tives for whom a priest may de­file himself.  As was explained, supra 22b, his kin refers to one’s wife.” (emphasis in Soncino Edition original, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 103a-103b.  “When the serpent copulated with Eve (14) he infused her (15) with lust.  The lust of the Is­raelites who stood at Mount Sinai (16) came to an end, the lust of idolators who did not stand at Mount Sinai did not come to an end.”

(footnotes)  “(14) In the garden of Eden, according to tradi­tion.

(15)  i.e., the human species.

(16)  And experienced the purifying influence of divine Rev­elation.”

(Book)  Yebamoth, 63a.  “R. Eleazar further stated: What is meant by the Scriptural text, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh (5)?  This teaches that Adam had intercourse with every beast and animal but found no satisfaction until he cohabited with Eve.

(footnotes)  “(5)            Gen.II,23.  emphasis on This is now.” (emphasis appears in original Son­cino Edition, Ed.)

(Book)  Yebamoth, 60b.  “As R. Joshua b. Levi related: `There was a certain town in the Land of Israel the legitimacy of whose inhabitants was disputed, and Rabbi sent R. Ramanos who con­ducted an enquiry and found it in the daughter of a proselyte who was under the age of three years and one day (14), and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest (15).”

(footnotes)  “(13)  A proselyte under the age of three years and one day may be mar­ried by a priest.

(14) And was married to a priest.

(15) i.e., permitted to continue to live with her husband.”

P (Book)          Yebamoth, 59b. “R. Shimi b. Hiyya stated: A woman who had in­tercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a priest (4).  Likewise it was taught: A woman who had inter­course with that which is no human being (5), though she is in consequence subject to the penalty of stoning (6), is nevertheless per­mitted to marry a priest (7).

(footnotes) “(4) Even a High Priest.  The result of such in­tercourse being re­garded as a mere wound, and the opinion that does not regard an accidently in­jured hymen as a disqualification does not so regard such an intercourse either.

(5)        A beast.

(6)        If the offense was committed in the presence of witnesses af­ter due warning.

(7)        In the absence of witnesses and warning.”

(Book) Yebamoth, 12b.  “R. Bebai recited before R. Naham: Three (catagories of) women may (7) use an absorbent (8) in their marital intercourse (9), a mi­nor, a preg­nant woman and a nursing woman.  The minor (10) because (otherwise) she might (11) become pregnant, and as a result (11) might die. . .And what is the age of such a minor? (14).  From the age of eleven years and one day until the age of twelve years and one day.  One who is under (15), or over this age (16) must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner.”

(footnotes  “(7) (So Rashi.R.Tam: Should use, v.Tosaf s.v.)

(8)   Hackled wool or flax.

(9)   To prevent conception.

(10) May use an absorbent.

(11) Lit., ‘perhaps’.

(14) Who is capable of conception but exposed thereby to the danger of death.

(15) When no conception is possible.

(16) when pregnancy involves no fatal consequences.” (Book)  Yebamoth, 59b.  “When R.Dimi came (8) he related; It once happened at Haitalu (9) that while a young woman was sweeping the floor (10) a village dog (11) covered her from the rear (12) and Rabbi permitted her to marry a priest.  Samuel said: Even a High Priest.

(footnotes) “(8) From Palestine to Babylon.

(9)        (Babylonian form for Aitulu, modern Airterun N.W. of Kadesh, v.S. Kelin, Beitrage,p.47).

(10) Lit., ‘house’.

(11) Or ‘big hunting dog’ (Rashi), ‘ferocious dog’ (Jast.), ‘small wild dog’ (Aruk).

(12) A case of unnatural intercourse.

[H: Is any of this beginning to be a bit outlandish to any of you?  Dogs?  “A village `dog’ covered her from the rear..”?  Is this not the most confusing bunch of nonsense you have ever seen?  Does it cross anyone’s mind that you might be dealing with rules set up by ones totally un­familiar with much of any­thing suitable to behavior by Earth Hu­man?  Oh yes, you have bestial­ity but hardly anything so allowable as “trivial” in being covered from the rear by a dog—while sweeping the floor yet?  Would you be­lieve such a tale if anyone walked up to you and told you this—today?  Does anyone begin to relate any­thing in these outlandish dis­plays of obscenities with what you have heard of the activi­ties of “little gray aliens”?]  To continue:

(Book) Kethuboth, 6b.  “Said he to him: Not like those Baby­lonians who are not skilled in moving aside (7), but there are some who are skilled in moving aside (8).  If so, why (give the reason of) ‘anxious’?(10)—For one who is not skilled.  (Then) let them say: One who is skilled is allowed (to perform the first inter­course on Sabbath), one who is not skilled is for­bidden?—Most (people) are skilled (11).  Said Raba the son of R. Hanan to Abaye: If this were so, then why (have) grooms­men (12) why (have) a sheet?(13)—He (Abaye) said to him: There (the groomsmen and the sheet are neces­sary) perhaps he will see and de­stroy (the tokens of her vir­ginity) (14).

(footnotes)  “(7)            i.e., having intercourse with a virgin with­out causing a bleeding.

Thus no blood need come out, and ‘Let his head be cut off and let him not die!’ does not ap­ply.

(9)        If the bridegroom is skilled in “moving sideways’.

(10) He need not be anxious about the intercourse and should not be free from reading Shema’ on account of such anxiety.

(11)  Therefor the principle regarding ‘Let his head be cut off and let him not die!’ does not, as a rule, apply.

(12)  The groomsmen testify in case of need to the virginity of the bride.  V. in­fra 12a.  If the bridegroom will act in a man­ner that will cause no bleeding, the groomsmen will not be able to testify on the question of virginity.

(13)  To provide evidence of the virginity of the bride. Cf.Deut.XXII,17.

(14)  It may happen that he will act in the normal manner and cause bleeding but he will de­stroy the tokens and maintain that the bride was not a virgin; for this reason the above men­tioned provisions are necessary.  Where however he moved aside and made a false charge as to her virginity, the bride can plead that she is still a virgin (Rashi).”

After reading these verbatim quotations from the countless other similar quota­tions which you will find in the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Tal­mud in the English lan­guage are you of the opinion, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that the Talmud was the “sort of book” from which Jesus “drew the teachings which en­able him to revolutionize the world” on “moral and religious subjects”?  You have read here verbatim quotations and official footnotes on a few of the many other subjects covered by the “63 books” of the Talmud.  When you read them you must be pre­pared for a shock.  I am surprised that the United States Post Office does not bar the Talmud from the mails.  I hesitated to quote them in this letter.

[H: I also hesitated to quote them herein because the next bar­rage of accu­sations and de­nouncing will pile upon my people—but truth is truth and if you ones will not take time to look it up for self then hope for your journey is slim in­deed.  I MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT EXPECT YOU TO FIND TRUTH BY SIMPLY ASKING A NICE RABBI OR CLERGY­MAN.  I would like, herein, to remind you of something regarding these Zionists; Your own Jerry Falwell stood forth as leader of your “Moral Majority” and stated before the world: “I am proud to say that I am a Zionist!”  Does it mean that he KNEW all these things of heinous con­tent?  No, he is simply another of the igno­rant and inten­tionally uninformed!]

In support of the contention by the top echelon among the out­standing authori­ties on this phase of the present status of the Talmud, further proof of the wide influence exerted by the Tal­mud upon the so-called or self-styled “Jews” is sup­plied by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer’s article “What is a Jew” in the June 17, 1952 issue of Look Magazine.  Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer’s ar­ticle contains a lovely picture of a smiling man seated in a chair with a large opened book upon his lap.  Seated around him on the floor are about a dozen smiling men and women.  They are paying close attention to the smiling man in the chair with the opened book upon his lap.  He is reading to the persons on the floor.  He empha­sizes what he is reading by gestures with one of his hands.  Beneath this photograph of the group is the following explanation:

“ADULTS STUDY ANCIENT WRITINGS, TOO.  RABBI IN THIS PIC­TURE, SEATED IN CHAIR, LEADS GROUP DIS­CUSSION OF TALMUD BEFORE EVENING PRAYER.” (emphasis supplied)

This picture and explanation indicate the extent the Talmud is the daily diet of so-called or self-styled “Jews” in this day and age.  The Talmud is first taught to children of so-called or self-styled “Jews” as soon as they are able to read.  Just as the Tal­mud is the “textbook by which rab­bis are trained” so is the Tal­mud also the textbook by which the rank-and-file of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” are “trained” to think from their earliest age.  In the translation of the Talmud with its texts edited, corrected and formulated by the eminent Michael Rodkin­son, Reverend Dr. Isaac M. Wise, on page XI, it states:

“THE MODERN JEW IS THE PRODUCT OF THE TALMUD”. (emphasis supplied)

To the average Christian the word “Talmud” is just another word associated by them with the form of religious worship practised in their synagogues by so-called or self-styled “Jews”.  Many Christians have never heard of the Talmud.  Very few Christians are informed on the con­tents of the Talmud.  Some may believe the Talmud to be an integral part of the religious wor­ship known to them as “Judaism”.  It suggests a sort of bible or religious text book.  It is classed as a spiritual manual.  But otherwise few if any Christian has an under­standing of the con­tents of the Talmud and what it means in the daily lives of so-called or self-styled “Jews”.  As an illus­tration, my dear Dr. Goldstein, how many Christians have any conception of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer re­cited in synagogues on the Day of Atonement?

[H: For you readers of AND THEY CALLED HIS NAME IMMANUEL, allow me to point out that the original release of this information was titled TALMUD JMMANUEL.  I think it is now evident as to WHY Sananda chose to relabel it.  There is now a new copy of the book translated by Billy Meier—again called the TALMUD IMMANUEL.  I suggest you be most care­ful in the reading thereof for it is printed solely for the monetary value and these ones who are repro­ducing the work have done everything they could do to STOP our publish­ing of the truth.  Talmud” is a perfectly good word but as is always the case with the great deceiver, you do not get goodness and light—but lies and de­ceit.  Therefore, God will refrain from utilizing terms which will mislead you who are efforting to find Truth.  A word placed so blatantly upon the cover in­dicates misuse of the intent if it is there to connote TRUTH!]

In Volume VIII of the Jewish Encyclopedia on page 539 found in the Library of Congress, the New York Public Library and libraries of all leading cities, will be found the official transla­tion into English of the prayer known as the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer.  It is the pro­logue of the Day of Atonement ser­vices in the synagogues.  It is recited three times by the standing con­gregation in con­cert with chanting rabbis at the al­tar.  After the recital of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer the Day of Atonement religious ceremonies follow immediately.  The Day of Atonement religious observances are the highest holy days of so-called or self-styled “Jews” and are celebrated as such throughout the world.  The official translation into En­glish of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer fol­lows:

“ALL VOWS, OBLIGATIONS, OATHS, ANATHEMAS, whether called ‘konam’, ‘konas’, or by any other name, WHICH WE MAY VOW, OR SWEAR, OR PLEDGE, OR WHEREBY WE MAY BE BOUND, FROM THIS DAY OF ATONEMENT UNTO THE NEXT, (whose happy coming we await), we do repent.  MAY THEY BE DEEMED AB­SOLVED, FORGIVEN, AN­NULLED, AND VOID AND MADE OF NO EFFECT; THEY SHALL NOT BIND US NOR HAVE POWER OVER US.  THE VOWS SHALL NOT BE RECKONED VOWS; THE OBLIGATIONS SHALL NOT BE OBLIGATORY; NOR THE OATHS BE OATHS.” (emphasis supplied).

[H:  Go right back now and REALLY READ THAT PRAYER FOR YOU DID NOT PICK UP THE POINT THE FIRST TIME!]

The implications, inferences and innuendoes of the “Kol Nidre (All Vows) prayer are re­ferred to in the Talmud in the Book of Nedarim, 23a-23b as fol­lows:

(Book)  “And he who desires that NONE OF HIS VOWS MADE DURING THE YEAR SHALL BE VALID, let him stand at the beginning of the year and de­clare, `EVERY VOW WHICH I MAY MAKE IN THE FUTURE SHALL BE NULL (1).  (HIS VOWS ARE THEN INVALID,) PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW.”  (emphasis in original and supplied, Ed.)

(footnotes)  “(1)            This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement (Ran). . .Though the beginning of the year (New Year) is men­tioned here, the Day of Atone­ment was probably chosen on ac­count of its great solemnity.  But Kol Nidre as part of the rit­ual IS LATER THAN THE TALMUD, and, as seen from the fol­lowing statement of R. Huna b. Hinene, THE LAW OF REVOCA­TION IN ADVANCE WAS NOT MADE PUBLIC.  (emphasis supplied and in original text,Ed.)

The greatest study of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer was made by the emi­nent psycho-an­alyst Professor Theodor Reik, the celebrated pupil of the famous Dr. Sigmund Freud.  The analysis of the historic, religious and psychological background of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer by Professor Reik pre­sents the Talmud in its true perspective.  This important study is contained in Profes­sor Reik’s “The Ritual, Psyco-Analytical Studies”.  In the chapter on the Tal­mud, on page 168, Professor Reik states:

“THE TEXT WAS TO THE EFFECT THAT ALL OATHS WHICH BELIEV­ERS TAKE BETWEEN ONE DAY OF ATONEMENT AND THE NEXT DAY OF ATONEMENT ARE DECLARED INVALID.” (emphasis supplied)

Before explaining to you how the present wording of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer was introduced into the Day of Atonement synagogue ceremonies, my dear Dr. Goldstein, I would like to quote a passage to you from the Univer­sal Jewish Encyclopedia.

The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia confirms the fact that the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer has no spiritual value as might be be­lieved because it is recited in synagogues on the Day of Atonement as the pro­logue of the religious ceremonies which follow it.  The secular significance of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer is indicated forcefully by the analysis in the Uni­versal Jewish Encyclopedia.  In Volume VI, on page 441, it states:

“The Kol Nidre HAS NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL IDEA OF THE DAY OF ATONE­MENT. . .it attained to ex­traordinary solem­nity and popularity by rea­son of the fact that it was THE FIRST PRAYER RE­CITED ON THIS HOLIEST OF DAYS.”

My dear Dr. Goldstein, prepare for the shock of your life.  Compelled by what you have now read here about the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer you must be shocked to learn that many Christian churches actually “pealed their bells” on the Day of Atonement in celebration of that holy day for so-called or self-styled “Jews”.  How stupid can the Christian clergy get?  From what I have learned after a cursory inquiry I am unable to say whether it was a case of stupid­ity or cu­pidity.  With what you already know, together with what you will addition­ally know before you finish this letter, you will be able to judge for yourself whether it was stupidity or cupidity.  There is not one single fact in this entire letter which every graduate of a theo­logical seminary did not have the opportu­nity to learn.

The following news item was featured in the New York  on Oc­tober 7th only a few days ago.  Under a prominent headline “JEWISH HOL­IDAYS TO END AT SUN­DOWN” the New York World Telegram gave great prominence to the following story:

“Synagogues and temples throughout the city were crowded yesterday as the 24 hour fast be­gan.  Dr. Norman Salit, head of the Synagogue Council of Amer­ica, representing the three major Jewish bodies, had called on other faiths TO JOIN THE FAST. . .Cutting across reli­gious lines, MANY PROTESTANT CHURCHES IN THE CITY PEALED THEIR BELLS LAST NIGHT TO SOUND THE KOL NIDRE, TRADITIONAL MELODY USED AT THE START OF YOM KIPPUR.  THE GESTURE OF GOOD-WILL WAS REC­OMMENDED BY THE MANHATTAN OFFICE OF THE PROTESTANT COUNCIL.” (emphasis supplied)

That just about “tops” anything I have ever had come to my at­tention revealing the igno­rance and indifference of the Chris­tian clergy to the hazards today fac­ing the Christian faith.  From my personal contacts with the Manhattan Office of the Protes­tant Council in the recent past I hold out very little hope for any con­structive contribution they can make to the common de­fense of the Christian faith against its dedicated enemies.  In each in­stance they buckled un­der the “pressure” exerted upon them by the “contacts” for so-called or self-styled “Jews”.  If it was not so tragic it would be comic.  It was a joke indeed but the joke was on the Christian clergy.  Ye Gods!  “Many” Christian churches “pealed their bells”, as the Protestant Council re­ports the event, “TO SOUND THE KOL NIDRE, TRADITIONAL MELODY USED AT THE START OF YOM KIPPUR”.  Just where does betrayal of a trust and breach of faith be­gin?

The present wording of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer dates from the 11th century.  A political reversal in eastern Eu­rope compelled the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Eu­rope to adopt the present wording of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer.  That story involves the history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe.

Before relating here as briefly as possible the history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” of eastern Europe I would like to quote here another short passage from the Jewish Encyclopedia in Volume VII, on page 540, states:

“AN IMPORTANT ALTERATION IN THE WORDING of the ‘Kol Nidre’ was made by Rashi’s son-in-law, Meir ben Samuel, WHO CHANGED THE ORIG­INAL PHRASE ‘FROM THE LAST DAY OF ATONEMENT TO THIS ONE’ to ‘FROM THIS DAY OF ATONE­MENT UNTIL THE NEXT’ “.

(emphasis supplied)

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

We will herein stop quoting and for that matter, stop the writing at this point for this sitting.  Thank  you  for  the  long  hours  of  service, Dharma.  I ask you to be particularly attuned to my call for you are  in danger  and  hence is why we had to disengage your prior computer.  We will simply have to work our way through the next few days of bringing forth this infor­mation   for  as  you  might  well  note—THE EVIL BROTH­ERHOOD DOES NOT   WANT  IT BROUGHT FORTH!  When human      re­alizes how he has been duped he shall rise up and stop this mad­ness.  Ah, and may it be “in time”.

Hatonn to stand-by.  I shall keep the shielding in place but I must ask that you remain within my commands lest you be dam­aged.  The Truth is going to come forth now and it has confir­mation and credentials of proof—just as you were told at onset by “The Command”—”that you would be given credentials and credibil­ity from that which is the Silver Clouds and would be forthcoming from Earth-place.”  And so it shall be put to print that Man may see how sadly he has been made the dupe.

Good evening.  God grants his protection of his servants.  Salu.

2/18/91 #2    HATONN 

TODAY’S  WATCH 

Briefly we will attend today’s nonsense for I wish to move for­ward with mate­rial which may save your souls—loss of your bodies is simply “collateral dam­age” as I believe your military and ad­ministration refer to death of “innocent civilians”. Several points to note and then we will move on.  Firstly, note the involvement of the top Rus­sian leaders with the Iraq “set-up”.  Then also note the exchanges of notes between coun­tries.  Then note the “sudden” discovery of massive gold de­posits in the Soviet Union—which will “save the Soviet econ­omy”.  Come now, you can tell from the assay office pictures that the gold has long been known about and mined.  YOUR WORLD IS BEING TOLD THAT RUS­SIA IS VERY MUCH ALIVE AND WELL AND YOU HAVE BEEN DUPED INTO SEND­ING BIL­LIONS TO HER AID—BUT, THE  GAME IS BEING PLAYED ACCORDING TO THE RULES OF THE ELITE.  KEEP YOUR EYES OPEN!

One of the most IMPORTANT references today regarding Rus­sia is the fact that “...the Rus­sians are concerned about the gath­ering storm and anger of the 60 MILLION MOSLEMS within Russia who are on the march to uprising against the Mid­dle East attack by the United States.”  It will take more than walking gently and carrying a big stick, America, when you add 60 mil­lion upset Moslems to the Millions and Millions of upset Moslems elsewhere and all the Millions of Islamics in the world.  Then, you had better really watch the Chi­nese for—even though they claim communism as politics—they are Buddha fol­lowers for the most part and Buddha taught Christian commandments.  This event is getting large indeed, and out of con­trol, World!

You will have far more dramatics regarding the ground war or the propaganda won’t be worth anything.  I suggest you listen to your media “authorities” as they come forth on TV to “discuss the outlay of news”.  There is no earthly way you can tell a thing about the news outlay except that you CAN’T BE­LIEVE A WORD OF IT.  The head of CNN has said that what is pro­duced on the news is to simply get instant “coded mes­sages” to  one   another  and  the  REAL  negotia­tions  go  on  behind  the   scenes   in   absolute   secrecy  while allowing “leaks” as in­tended to distract.  Do you know why you continue to watch the lies and believe  them?  Be­cause  you  actually  don’t  believe a thing anyone tells you so you select that which pleases your own opinion—no more and no less.  You  simply, as  does  the UN  councils  and  national leaders, parrot what­ever is said, even unto the same  terminology  as  handed  out in the scripting prior to any “official state­ments”.

Next—look at your President Bush today.  He is dressed in black military-ap­pearing garb and is carrying a very big stick during his “POWER WALK” as the press called it.  This fol­lows a day in Church wherein a citizen objects to Bush’s mas­sacre and the man is hauled out by po­lice and ar­rested and charged with pub­lic disturbance.  The man has a child in Saudi Arabia and is against the killing of innocent citizens—AND YOU ARREST HIM!  YOU ARREST THE MAN WHO BELONGS TO THE GROUP, FOR SPEAKING OUT, AND AL­LOW THE ONE WHO COMMITS GENOCIDE AND GLOBAL ANNIHILA­TION TO GO IN PROTECTION.

You had better further note that this “elderly man Bush” is act­ing in advance of an athlete in Olympic competition—he can out-jog any of his secret service men and at a “walk” can out-run all of the press.  THIS IS THE STRATEGIC CLUE TO IDEN­TIFY A REPRODUCTION IN EFFORT TO HAVE HIM AP­PEAR SUPER-HUMAN.  THE LIES ARE SO GREAT AND THE DE­CEPTIONS SO INTENSE AND SO GREAT THAT IT IS INDEED DIFFI­CULT TO SEE TRUTH THROUGH THE BARRAGE OF BLOODSTAINED DRAP­ERY.

Let us please return to the Journal in penning.

CONTINUATION  OF

FREEDMAN’S  LETTER  TO  GOLDSTEIN

Yes, you will note that the names are of Judean lineage—YOU WILL ALSO NOTE THAT ALMOST ALL OF THE ONES WHO SPEAK ON YOUR TV AND IN THE PRESS ARE OF “JEWISH” LABELS.  IF YOU MISS THAT POINT, THEN YOU HAVE MISSED EV­ERYTHING.  IT WILL BE YOU OF JUDEAN ROOTS WHO WILL PUT A STOP TO THE IN­SANITY OF THE ZIONISTS OR YOU WILL BE TRAM­PLED INTO THE EARTH BY THEIR IRON BOOTS.  This is, of course, not easy for the lies have been so massive and you of the heritage of the “holy lands” have sought so long and dili­gently for your roots.  Yes, it shall be YOU of the REAL JUDEAN ROOTS WHO WILL BRING THIS TO A HALT OR IT SHALL NOT BE STOPPED.  FOR YOU  KNOW  THE  TRUTH OF WHAT IS BEING LAID BARE HEREIN.

[QUOTING CONTINUED:]

You will agree, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that Meir ben Samuel knew what he was doing.  The wording of that altered version of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer makes the recital of the prayer a release during the coming year from any obligation to respect any oath, vow or pledge made during the coming year.  Like any one-year license obtained from the Federal, State or Municipal gov­ernments, the altered version of the “Kol Nidre” prayer is also a “license” for one year only.  Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer extends immunity in advance for one year from all obligations to observe the terms of oaths, vows and pledges made in the year following the date of the Day of Atonement when the prayer was recited.  Each year however it becomes necessary to renew this “license” which automatically revokes in advance any oath, vow or pledge made during the next twelve months, by again appearing in a synagogue on the next Day of Atone­ment and reciting the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer again.  Do you ap­prove of this?

The passage in the Talmud referring to “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer certi­fies to several se­rious situations.  It certifies that “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer was added as a prologue to the Day of Atonement religious services long after the comple­tion of the Talmud between 500 A.D.-1000 A.D. by the state­ment, “as part of the ritual is later than the Talmud”.  It con­firms that Meir ben Samuel who authored the present altered version of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer lived in the 11th century.  Fur­thermore, the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Eu­rope believed it served their purpose better to keep secret from their Christian conquerors their attitude on oaths, vows and pledges, “the law of revocation in advance was not made public.”

Without a complete and accurate knowledge of the origin and history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe, my dear Dr. Goldstein, it is quite impossible for yourself or for anybody to intelligently understand the harmful influence the Talmud has exerted for ten centuries, and the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer for seven centuries upon the course of world his­tory.  These two little known factors are the hub and the spokes of the “big wheel” rolling merrily along the road to complete world domination in the not distant future, without arous­ing sus­picion, and wearing the innocent disguise of an alleged re­ligious belief as their only de­fense mechanism.  This insidious intrigue creates a most effective camouflage for the conspir­ators. The virility of their plot presents a problem in the defense of the po­litical, economic, social and cultural ideolo­gies developed under a Christian civilization.

[H: STOP—GO BACK AND READ THAT PARAGRAPH AGAIN, ALSO.  THANK YOU.]

You will probably also be as astonished as the 150,000,000 Christians years ago when I elec­trified the nation with the first publication by me of the facts disclosed by my many years of re­search into the origin and the history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Eu­rope.  My many years of intensive re­search established beyond any question of any doubt, con­trary to the generally accepted belief held by Christians, that the SO-CALLED OR SELF-STYLED “JEWS” IN EASTERN EUROPE AT ANY TIME IN THEIR HISTORY IN EASTERN EUROPE WERE NEVER THE LEGENDARY “LOST TEN TRIBES” OF BIBLE LORE.  THAT HISTORIC FACT IS INCONTROVERT­IBLE.

[H: Please note that the above said “lost ten tribes”.  This is why in refer­ring to the Khaz­ars (imitation Jews) we do re­fer to them as the Thirteenth—sim­ply, furthermore, as desig­nation and identification to separate them from the ac­cepted myths.  Re­member, as we unfold this in­formation, we are limited to that which is in your capability of receiving in understand­ing and the only means we have in printed or spoken material is through use of your own con­cepts and terminology.  This is the mastery of the deceiver—to change meanings of terms and give you “readings” in secret author­ity and you know not the difference.  YOU MUST LEARN THE DIFFERENCE, BROTHERS FOR YOU HAVE AL­LOWED YOURSELVES TO BE VIC­TIMS UNTO YOUR VERY DOOM.]

Relentless research established as equally true that the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe at no time in their his­tory could be correctly re­garded as the direct lineal de­scendants of the legendary “lost ten tribes” of Bible lore.  The so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe in modern his­tory cannot legitimately point to a single ancient ancestor who ever set even a foot on the soil of Palestine in the era of Bible history.  Re­search also revealed that the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe were never “Semites”, are not “Semites” now, nor can they ever be regarded as “Semites” at any future time by any stretch of the imagi­nation.  Exhaustive research also irrevo­cably rejects as a fantastic fabrication the generally ac­cepted be­lief by Christians that the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in east­ern Eu­rope are the leg­endary “Chosen Peo­ple” so very vocally publicized by the Christian clergy from their pulpits.

Maybe you can explain to me, my dear Dr. Goldstein, the rea­son why and just how the origin and the history of the Khaz­ars and Khazar Kingdom was so well concealed from the world for so many centuries?  What secret mysterious power has been able for countless gen­erations to keep the origin and the history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom out of history text-books and out of class-room courses in history throughout the world?  The origin and history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom are cer­tainly incontestible historic facts.  These incontestible historic facts also establish beyond any question of doubt the origin and history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe.  The rela­tionship to the origin and early history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe was one of history’s best kept secrets until wide publicity was given in recent years on the subject.  Do you not think, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that it is time the whole  subject  was  dragged  out  of  its  hiding  place?

In the year 1948 in the Pentagon in Washington I addressed a large assembly of the highest ranking officers of the United States Army principally in the G2 branch of Military Intelli­gence on the highly explosive geopolitical situation in eastern Europe and the Middle East.  Then as now that area of the world was a potential threat to the peace of the world and to the security of this nation.  I explained to them fully the origin of the Khazars and Khazar King­dom.  I felt then as I feel now that without a clear and comprehensive knowledge of that sub­ject it is not possible to understand or to evaluate properly what has been taking place in the world since 1917, the year of the Bol­shevik revolution in Russia.  It is the “key” to that prob­lem.

Upon the conclusion of my talk a very alert Lieutenant Colonel present at the meeting in­formed me that he was the head of the history department of one of the largest and highest scholastic rated institutions of higher education in the United States.  He had taught history there for 16 years.  He had re­cently been called back to Washington for further military ser­vice.  To my astonishment he informed me that he had never in all his career as a history teacher or otherwise heard the word “Khazar” be­fore he heard me mention it there.  That must give you some idea, my dear Dr. Goldstein, of how successful that mysterious secret power was with their plot to “black out” the origin and the history of the Khaz­ars and Khazar King­dom in order to con­ceal from the world and particularly Christians the true origin and history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Eu­rope.

The Russian conquest in the 10th-13th centuries of the little-known-to-his­tory Khazars ap­parently ended the existence for all time of the little-known-to-history 800,000 square mile sovereign kingdom of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in east­ern Europe, known then as the Khazar Kingdom.  Historians and theologians now agree that this political development was the reason for the “IMPORTANT CHANGE IN THE WORD­ING OF THE `KOL NIDRE’ by Meir ben Samuel in the 11th century, and for the policy adopted by the so-called or self-styled “Jews” that “THE LAW OF REVOCATION IN AD­VANCE WAS NOT MADE PUBLIC”.  Will you be patient with me while I review here as briefly as I can the history of that political emergence and disap­pearance of a nation from the pages of history?

[Hatonn: For you readers of the Journals, please do not skip over this particular segment sim­ply because we have covered it prior to this in a couple or three of the Journals.  You are so misin­formed that you need to hear it again and again until it comes into your consciousness as reality.  These pieces of in­formation being brought forth now are the most important docu­mentations ever brought unto your planet and this is only the be­ginning of the outlay of “how it RE­ALLY is!”  So please get the pieces in mental place so that you will be prepared for the facts yet to come forth.]

Prior to the 10th century the Khazar Kingdom had already been reduced by Russian con­quests to an area of about 800,000 square miles.  (See enclosed copy of map [on next page].)  As you will observe on this map reproduced from the Jewish Ency­clopedia the territory of the Khazar Kingdom in the 10th century was still by far the largest of any nation in Europe.  The popu­lation of the Khazar Kingdom was made up for the most part of Khazars with the addition of the rem­nants of the populations of the 25 peaceful agricultural nations which had inhabited this ap­proximate 1,000,000 square miles before their conquest by the invading Khazars.  In the 1st cen­tury B.C. the Khazars had in­vaded eastern Europe from their homeland in Asia.  The Khaz­ars invaded eastern Europe via the land route between the north end of the Caspian Sea and the south end of the Ural Mountains. (see map)

The Khazars were not “Semites”.  They were an Asiatic Mon­goloid nation.  They are classi­fied by modern anthropolo­gists as Turco-Finn racially.  From time immemorial the home­land of the Khazars was in the heart of Asia.  They were a very warlike nation.  The Khazars were driven out of Asia finally by the na­tions in Asia with whom they were continu­ally at war.  The Khazars invaded eastern Europe to escape furtherdefeats in Asia.  The very warlike Khazars did not find it difficult to sub­due and conquer the 25 peaceful agricultural na­tions occupying ap­proximately 1,000,000 square miles in eastern Europe.  In a com­paratively short period the Khazars established the largest and most powerful kingdom in Europe, and probably the wealthiest also.

The Khazars were a pagan nation when they invaded eastern Europe.  Their religious wor­ship was a mixture of phallic wor­ship and other forms of idola­trous worship practiced in Asia by pagan nations.  This form of worship contin­ued until the 7th century.  The vile forms of sexual excesses indulged in by the Khazars as their form of religious worship produced a de­gree of moral degener­acy the Khazar’s king could not endure.  In the 7th century King Bulan, ruler at that time of the Khazar King­dom, decided to abolish the practice of phallic wor­ship and other forms of idolatrous worship and make one of the three monothe­istic religions, about which he knew very little, the new state religion.  After a historic session with representatives of the three monotheistic religions King Bulan decided against Christianity and Islam and se­lected as the fu­ture state re­ligion of the Khazar Kingdom the religious worship then known as “Talmudism”, and now known and practiced as “Judaism”.  This event is well documented in history.

King Bulan and his 4000 feudal nobles were promptly con­verted by rabbis imported from Babylonia for the event.  Phallic wor­ship and other forms of idolatry were thereafter forbid­den.  The Khazar kings invited large numbers of rabbis to come and open synagogues and schools to instruct the population in the new form of religious worship.  It was now the state religion.  The con­verted Khazars were the first population of so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe.  So-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe after the con­version of the Khazars are the de­scendants of the Khazars converted to “Talmudism”, or as it is now known “Judaism”, by the 7th century mass con­version of the Khazar population.

After the conversion of King Bulan none but a so-called or self-styled “Jew” could occupy the Khazar throne.  The Khazar Kingdom became a virtual theoc­racy.  The religious leaders were the civil administrators also.  The religious leaders im­posed the teachings of the Talmud upon the population as their guide to living.  The ideologies of   the   Talmud   became  the   axis   of   political, cultural, economic and social attitudes and   activities   throughout   the  Khazar  kingdom.  The Talmud provided civil and religious law.

It might be very interesting for you, my dear Dr. Goldstein, if you have the patience, to allow me to quote for you here from Volume IV, pages 1 to 5, of the Jewish Encyclopedia.  The Jew­ish Encyclopedia refers to the Khazars as “Chazars”.  The two spellings are optional according to the best authorities.  The two are pronounced alike.  Either Khazar or “Chazar” is pronounced like the first syllable of “costume” with the word “Czar” added onto it.  It is cor­rectly pronounced “cos(tume)Czar.  The Jewish Encyclopedia has five pages on the Khazars but I will skip through them:

“CHAZARS: A people of Turkish origin whose life and his­tory are interwoven with THE VERY BEGINNINGS OF THE HIS­TORY OF THE JEWS OF RUS­SIA. . .driven on by the no­madic tribes of the steppes and by THEIR OWN DE­SIRE FOR PLUNDER AND RE­VENGE. . .In the second half of the sixth century the Chazars moved westward. . .The kingdom of the Chazars was firmly estab­lished in MOST OF SOUTH RUS­SIA LONG BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE RUS­SIAN MONARCHY BY THE VARANGIANS (855). . .At this time the kingdom of the Chazars moved westward. . .The king­dom of the Chazars stood at the height of its power AND WAS CONSTANTLY AT WAR. . .At the end of the eighth century. . .the chagan (king) of the Chazars and his grandees, TO­GETHER WITH ALARGE NUMBER OF HIS HEA­THEN PEOPLE, EMBRACED THE JEWISH RELI­GION. . .The Jewish population in the entire domain of the Chazars, in the pe­riod between the seventh and tenth centuries, MUST HAVE BEEN CON­SIDERABLE. . .about the NINTH CENTURY, IT APPEARS AS IF ALL THE CHAZARS WERE JEWS AND THAT THEY HAD BEEN CONVERTED TO JUDAISM ONLY A SHORT TIME BE­FORE. . .It was one of the succes­sors of Bulan named Obadiah, who regenerated the kingdom and STRENGTHENED THE JEWISH RE­LIGION.  He invited Jewish scholars to settle in his dominions, and founded SYNA­GOGUES AND SCHOOLS.  The people were in­structed in the Bible, Mish­nah, and the TALMUD and in the `divine service of the hazzanim’. . .In their writings the CHAZARS USED THE HEBREW LETTERS. . .THE CHAZAR LAN­GUAGES PRE­DOMINATED. . .Obadiah was succeeded by his son Hezekiah; the latter by his son Manasseh; Manasseh by Hanukkah, a brother of Obadiah; Hanukkah by his son Isaac; Isaac by his son Moses (or Manasseh II); the latter by his son Nisi; and Nisi by his son Aaron II.  King Joseph himself was a son of Aaron, AND ASCENDED THE THRONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW OF THE CHAZARS RELATING TO SUCCES­SION. . .The king had twenty-five wives, all of royal blood, and sixty concubines, all famous beauties.  Each one slept in a separate tent and was watched by a enuch. . .THIS SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN THE BEGINNING OF THE DOWNFALL OF THE CHAZAR KINGDOM. . .The Russian Varangians estab­lished themselves at Kiev. . .until the final conquest of the Chazars by the Russians. . .After a hard fight the Russians con­quered the Chaz­ars. . .Four years later the Russians conquered all the Chazarian territory east of the Azov. . .Many members of the Chazarian royal family emi­grated to Spain. . .Some went to Hun­gary, BUT THE GREAT MASS OF THE PEOPLE RE­MAINED IN THEIR NATIVE COUNTRY.”

The greatest historian on the origin and the history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe was Professor H. Graetz, himself a so-called or self-styled “Jew”.  Professor H. Graetz points out in his famous “History of the Jews” that when so-called or self-styled “Jews” in other countries hear a rumor about so-called or self-styled “Jews” in the Khazar Kingdom they believe these converted Khazars to be the “lost ten tribes”. 

These rumors were no doubt re­sponsible for the legend which grew up that Palestine was the “homeland” of the converted Khazars.  On page 141 in his “History of the Jews” Professor H. Graetz states:

“The Chazars professed a coarse religion, which was com­bined with sensuality and lewdness. . .After Obadia came a long series of Jewish Chagans (kings), for ACCORDING TO A FUNDA­MENTAL LAW OF THE STATE ONLY JEW­ISH RULERS WERE PERMITTED TO ASCEND THE THRONE. . .For some time THE JEWS OF OTHER COUNTRIES HAD NO KNOWL­EDGE OF THE CONVERSION OF THIS POW­ERFUL KING­DOM TO JUDAISM, and when at last a vague rumor to this ef­fect reached them, THEY WERE OF THE OPINION THAT CHAZARIA WAS PEOPLED BY THE REMNANT OF THE FORMER  TEN  TRIBES.” 

When the Khazars in the 1st century B.C. invaded eastern Eu­rope their mother-tongue was an Asiatic language, referred to in the Jewish Encyclopedia as the “Khazar languages”.  They were primative Asiatic dialects without any alphabet or any written form. 

When King Bulan was converted in the 7th cen­tury he de­creed that the Hebrew characters he saw in the Talmud and other He­brew documents was thereupon to become the alphabet for the Khazar language. The Hebrew characters were adapted to the phonetics of the spoken Khazar lan­guage in order to pro­vide a means for providing a written record of their speech.  The adoption of the He­brew characters had no racial, political or reli­gious implication.

The western European uncivilized nations which had no al­phabet for their spoken language adopted the alphabet of the Latin lan­guage under comparable circumstances.  With the inva­sion of western Europe by the Romans the civi­lization and the culture of the Romans was in­troduced into these uncivilized ar­eas. 

Thus the Latin alphabet was adopted for the language of the French, Spanish, English, Swedish and many other western Eu­ropean languages.

These lan­guages were completely foreign to each other yet they all used the same al­phabet.  The Romans brought their al­phabet with their culture to these uncivi­lized nations exactly like the rabbis brought the Hebrew alphabet from Babylo­nia to the Khazars when they introduced writing to them in the form of the Talmud’s alphabet.

Since the conquest of the Khazars by the Russians and the dis­appearance of the Khazar Kingdom the language of the Khaz­ars is known as Yiddish.

For about six centuries the so-called or self-styled “Jews” of eastern Europe have re­ferred to themselves while still resident in their native eastern European coun­tries as “Yiddish” by nation­ality.  They identified them­selves as “Yiddish” rather than as Russian, Polish, Galician, Lithuanian, Rumanian, Hungarian or by the nation of which they were citizens.

They also referred to the common language they all spoke as “Yiddish” also.  There are today in New York City as you know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, many “Yiddish” newspapers, “Yiddish” theatres, and many other cultural organi­zation of so-called or self-styled “Jews” from eastern Europe which are identified publicly by the word “Yiddish” in their title.

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

Dharma, allow us a rest please.  We will take up with the “Yiddish” language when we return so please mark the Journal.

*****

FREEDMAN/GOLDSTEIN—

ZIONISTS  UNCOVERED

[QUOTING CONTINUED:]

It no doubt grieves you as much as it grieves me, my dear Dr. Goldstein, to see our nation’s moral standards sink to new all-time lows day by day.  Of that there is very little doubt.  The moral standards of this nation in political, eco­nomic, social and spiritual fields are the factors which determine the position we will occupy in world affairs.  We will be judged on that basis from afar by the other 94% of the world’s total population.  Our 6% of the world’s total popula­tion will succeed or fail in its ef­forts to retain world leadership by our moral standards because in the last analysis they influence the attitudes and activities of the nation.  The moral standards are the crucible in which the nation’s character is refined and moulded.  The end product will never be any better than the ingredients used.  It is some­thing to think about.

There is much for which this Christian country can still feel very proud.  But there is also much for which we cannot feel proud.  A correct diagnosis of our nation’s rapidly deteriorating moral standards in all walks of life will reveal the cause as the nation’s current psychosis to con­centrate primarily on how to (1) “make more money” and (2) “have more fun”.  How many per­sons do you personally know who include among their daily du­ties service and sacrifice in the de­fense against its enemies of that priceless birthright which is the God-given heritage of all those blessed to be born American?  What services?  What sac­rifices?

With very few exceptions this generation seems to regard ev­erything as sec­ondary to our ac­countability tounborn genera­tions for our generation’s breach of the faith and betrayal of our trust to posterity.  The sabotage of our nation’s moral standards is more incidental to the pro­gram of that inimical conspiracy than accidental in the continued march of mankind towards an easier existence.  The guidance and control of this nation’s place in history has gravitated by de­fault into the hands of those per­sons least worthy of the trusteeship.  This no­table achievement by them is their reward for their success in obtaining effective and numerous Christian “male prostitutes” to “front” for them.  Too many of these efficacious Christian “male prostitutes” are scattered throughout the nation in public affairs for the security of the Christian faith and the nation’s political, social and eco­nomic stability.

A “male prostitute” is a male who offers the faculties of his anatomy from the neck up for hire to anyone who will pay his “asking price” exactly as the female of the same species offers the facilities of her anatomy from the neck down to anyone who will pay her “asking price”.  Thou­sands of these pseudo-Chris­tian “male-prostitutes” circulate freely unrecognized in all walks of life proudly pandering pernicious propaganda for pecuniary profit and political power.  They are the “dog in the manger”.  The corroding effect of their subtle intrigue is slowly but surely disinte­grating the moral fibre of the nation.  This danger to the Christian faith cannot be overesti­mated.  This peril to the nation should not be underestimated.  The Christian clergy must re­main alerted to it.

The international “crime of crimes” of all history, that repre­hensible iniquity in which this na­tion played the major role, was committed in Palestine almost totally as a result of the interfer­ence of the United States in the situation on be­half solely of the Zionist world-wide organization with its headquarters in New York City.  The interference of the United States in that situa­tion on behalf of the aggressors illustrates the power by the “male prostitutes” fearlessly func­tioning on behalf of the Zionist conspirators.  It is the blackest page in our his­tory.

The responsibility for that un-Christian, non-Christian and anti-Christian “cause” can be honestly deposited on the door-step of the Christian clergy.  They must assume the full guilt for that inhuman and unholy crime committed in the name of Chris­tian “charity”.  Sunday after Sunday, year in and year out, the Christian clergy dinned into the ears of 150,000,000 Christians who go to church regularly that Christians must regard it as their “Christian duty” to sup­port the Zionist conspiracy for the con­quest of Palestine.  Well, we “sowed a wind”, now we will “reap a whirlwind”.

The 150,000,000 Christians in the United States were “high pressured” by the Christian clergy to give their unqualified sup­port to the Zionist program to “repatriate” to their “homeland” in Palestine the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe who were the de­scendants of the Khazars.  Christians were ex­horted by the Christian clergy to regard the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe as God’s “chosen people” and Palestine as their “Promised Land”.  But they knew better all the time.  It was a case of cupidity (cupidity: Eager desire for pos­sessions especially of wealth; avarice; greed.) NOT stupid­ity you can be sure.

As a direct result of the activities of the “male prostitutes” on behalf of the Zionist program, and contrary to all the interna­tional law, to justice and to eq­uity, anything to the contrary notwithstanding, the 150,000,000 Christians in the United States, with few exceptions, de­manded that the Congress of the United States use the prestige and the power of this nation, diplomatic, eco­nomic and military, to guarantee the successful outcome of the Zionist program for the conquest of Palestine.  This was done and the Zionists conquered Pales­tine.  We are re­sponsible.

It is well established and an undeniable historic fact that the ac­tive participa­tion of the United States in the conquest of Pales­tine, on behalf of the Zionists, was the factor responsible for the conquest of Palestine by the Zionists.  With­out the active par­ticipation of the United States on behalf of the Zionists it is cer­tain that the Zionists would never have attempted the con­quest of Palestine by force of arms.  Palestine today would be an in­dependent sovereign country under a form of government estab­lished by self-determination of the lawful and legal Pales­tinians.  This was aborted by the payment of countless millions of dollars to Christian “male prostitutes” by Zionists on a scale difficult for the uninitiated to even imagine.

With your kind permission anticipated, I beg to respectfully and sincerely now submit to you here my comments on several pas­sages in your latest article which appeared in the September is­sue of the A.P.J. Bulletin under the headline “News and Views of Jews”.  Deep down in my heart, my dear Dr. Goldstein, I truly feel that I can make a modest contribution towards the big success I wish you in the valuable work you are attempting, un­der such discouraging handi­caps.  My reactions to what you state in your article may prove helpful to you.  My comments here were conceived in that spirit.  May I suggest that you favor them with your consideration ac­cordingly.  I feel that you may be so close to the “trees” that you cannot see the “forest” in its true perspective.  You may find a genuinely sincere outsider’s point of view helpful to you in ori­enting your yesterday’s atti­tudes to today’s realities and to tomorrow’s seemingly certain proba­bilities.  I believe you will.

You realize, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that all “Laws of Na­ture” are irrevoca­ble.  “Laws of Na­ture” can neither be amended, suspended or repealed regard­less how we feel about them.  One of these “Laws of Nature” is fundamentally the basic reason “WHY JEWS BECOME CATHOLICS”, the subtitle in your ar­ticle which attracted my attention.  The “Law of Nature” to which I refer is the law that “TO EVERY ACTION THERE IS AN EQUAL AND OPPO­SITE REACTION”.  In my re­spectful opinion that “Law of Nature” is the alpha and omega of all questions as to “WHY JEWS BECOME CATHOLICS”.

In your article you make this mystery sound very compli­cated.  However, it really is very sim­ple.  The so-called or self-styled “Jews” who become Catholics today are subconsciously reacting to that “Law of Nature”.  The conversion to Catholi­cism of so-called or self-styled “Jews” is the “EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION”.  THEIR CONVERSION IS A “REACTION” NOT AN “ACTION”.  CAN YOU ANY LONGER DOUBT THAT AFTER READING THESE FACTS?

Catholicism has proven itself spiritually the “EQUAL AND OP­POSITE REACTION” of the religious worship practised to­day under the name “Judaism”, and prior to that name under the names “Talmudism” and “Pharisaism”.  What is spiritually con­spicuous in Catholicism is conspic­uous by its absence in so-called “Judaism”.  What is spiritually conspicuous in so-called “Judaism” is conspicuous by its absence in Catholicism, thank God.  Anything which may be said by anyone to the contrary notwithstanding, Catholicism and so-called “Judaism” are at the opposite ex­tremes of the spiritual spectrum.

Our subconscious mind never sleeps.  It remains awake all the while the conscious mind is asleep.  This subconscious mind of so-called or self-styled “Jews” is “WHY JEWS BECOME CATHOLICS”.  The more spiritually sensi­tive subconscious minds of so-called or self-styled “Jews” for 2000 years have been seeking a spiritually secure beach-head as a refuge from the ter­ror of the Talmud.  After a  lifetime breathing the atmo­sphere of the Talmud so-called or self-styled “Jews” found Catholicism a wholesome and refreshing change of spiritual cli­mate.  They could not resist the spiritual force of the “EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION” WHICH ATTRACTED THEM TO CATHOLICISM.

Catholicism supplied a sacred sanctuary for the more spiritu­ally sensitive subconscious mind of the so-called or self-styled “Jew” seeking security in his escape from the Talmud.  [H: Please un­derstand that which is “inferred” herein regarding the Holy Catholic Church—for it was assumed that the one converting would find that which he was seeking in truth of Godness.  However, what is actually found is collusion and total usurpa­tion of the truth in favor of the same lie—the de­ception has been most insidious but effective indeed!]  Be­fore sailing into the safe port of Catholi­cism the subconscious mind of the more spiritually sensitive so-called or self-styled “Jew” is tossed like a ship in a storm which has lost its rudder.  When the ship anchors safely in the port of Catholi­cism spiritual peace of mind is restored and the ship re­mains securely at an­chor in that safe port.  Many millions of so-called or self-styled “Jews” would em­bark upon that voyage of their more coura­geous co-religionists but for one rea­son.  They fear reprisals by their co-religionists.

In your article you mention just a few of the many penalties im­posed by re­actionary so-called or self-styled “Jews” upon their co-religionists who become converts to Catholicism.  Con­version to Catholicism has even deprived many former so-called or self-styled “Jews” from earning their living.  Many families faced starvation for that reason.  A convert to Catholicism must be ready and willing to suffer the economic, social and political hardships his former co-reli­gionists will make him pay as the price for the spiritual wealth he will acquire with conversion to Catholicism. 

Investigation by you will convince you that so-called or self-styled “Jews” never turn spiritu­ally to Catholicism “BECAUSE SUCH WAS THE JEWISH RELIGION: BECAUSE SUCH IS THE CATHOLIC RELIGION”, as you state in your article.  A so-called or self-styled “Jew” might question the wisdom of conversion from the Original to a copy of the original.  Inas­much as so-called “Judaism” is a modern name for “Talmudism”, and “Talmudism is a name given to the ancient practise of “Pharisaism”, how can you reconcile what you state that “. . .SUCH WAS THE JEWISH RELIGION:. . .SUCH IS THE CATHOLIC RELIGION”.

Several so-called or self-styled “Jews” who were recently con­verted to Catholicism are my personal friends.  Not one of those whom I have asked be­came a Catholic because they felt “THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE JEW­ISH CHURCH GLORI­FIED”, as you state in your article.  What “JEWISH CHURCH” they ask me?  I am unable to answer.  What “JEWISH CHURCH” I ask you?  “Pharisaism”?  “Talmudism”?  Surely you would not venture the opinion that the Catholic Church is “Pharisaism” or “Talmudism” now “GLORIFIED” as Catholicism, would you?

It must be quite apparent to you now that so-called or self-styled “Jews” who become con­verts to Catholicism do not be­lieve that the Catholic Church, as you state in your article, “IS THE CHURCH OF JEWISH CONVERTS AND THEIR DE­SCENDANTS”.  They do not re­gard Jesus as a “CONVERT” to the Catholic Church.  You include Jesus with others you de­scribe as “JEWISH CONVERTS” to the Catholic Church, in your article.  In your article you state, “FIRST CAME CHRIST, THE JEW OF JEWS”.  I never heard that designa­tion before.  Is it original?  Nor will converted so-called or self-styled “Jews” concur at all with “THEN CAME THE APOS­TLES, ALL JEWS”, as you also state in your article.  There is unquestionably too big an area of disagreement here to disregard the views of those who have become converts to Catholicism.  Nor can these converts to Catholicism be made to believe as truth “THEN CAME THE THOUSANDS OF THE FIRST MEMBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, WHO WERE JEWS”, as you state in your article un­der discussion here.

My dear Dr. Goldstein, as a former so-called or self-styled “Jew” for almost half your life, when you became a convert to Catholicism did you do so for the reasons you state in your arti­cle “WHY JEWS BECOME CATHOLICS”?  That would be difficult for me to believe in spite of the further statement you make in your article “IN FACT THERE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A CATHOLIC CHURCH WERE IT NOT FOR THE JEWS”.  That statement appears incredi­ble in view of incon­testible facts, but these facts may not have been available to you when you made it.

[H: I believe the facts are quite obvious, in this instance, wherein you have a man who has risen to position of influ­encing the masses of people through a controlled media and he is sim­ply a tool of the Zionist Elite who said: “A FIF­TEENTH CEN­TURY ‘PROTOCOL’: (No. 4.)  As for what you say of their destroying your synagogues: MAKE YOUR SONS CANONS AND CLER­ICS IN ORDER THAT THEY MAY DESTROY THEIR CHURCHES.”  You who continue to be deceived with the facts before thine eyes shall reap the like rewards of thine ignorance by re­maining in the trap whilst the master-deceivers pull you all the way into the PIT!]

If so-called or self-styled “Jews” believed what you state in your article they would undoubt­edly prefer to stay put spiritually in their “JEWISH CHURCH”, by which you mean no doubt so-called “Judaism”.  They would query why Catholics expected them to leave their “JEWISH CHURCH” to enter the Catholic Church (or any other `church’).  It might appear more logical to ex­pect Catholics to return to the original of the Catholic Church, the “JEWISH CHURCH”, or so-called “Judaism”.  On the basis of what you state, that would not be inconsistent.

You take away my breath when you further state, “CATHOLICISM WOULD NOT EXIST WERE IT NOT FOR JUDAISM”.  That leaves very lit­tle for me to say after writing these 62 pages of facts and comments.  In a cer­tain sense there is certain sense to what you state if you feel that the existence of so-called “Judaism”, in the time of Jesus and since then, created the necessity for the existence of Catholicism.  But in no sense can the Catholic Church be adjudi­cated the projection of “Pharisaism”, “Talmudism”, or so-called “Judaism”.

We should get together in person to go into this matter more fully.  I hope you will extend that privilege to me in the not too distant future.  In closing this letter I sincerely request that you bear in mind while reading this letter Gala­tians,4:16, “Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?”  And to this I add, “I hope not”.  I hope that we shall continue to be the very best of friends.  If the Christian faith is to be res­cued from its dedicated enemies we must all join hands and form a “human life-line”.  We must pull together, not in different direc­tion.  We must “bury the hatchet” but not in each others heads.

Looking forward with pleasant anticipation to the delight of a meeting with you in person whenever you find it convenient and agreeable for yourself, and awaiting your early reply for which I take this opportunity to thank you in ad­vance, and with best wishes for your continued good health and success, please be­lieve me to be,

Most respectfully and very sincerely,

Benjamin H. Freedman.

[END OF QUOTING]

I believe I will just leave you with this to ponder at this point.

Try on for size, the moccasins that fit.  The Christian Church in its lies unto the Native Ameri­cans in practice of that Christ pro­jected action in every facet of the lie has driven thousands into confusion and ridicule of that very thing you at­tempted to bring unto them—or did you?  It is fact and TRUTH from onset that your antecedants intended to defraud them and “save them” from that which was balanced and harmonious within the Truth of God and Planet and mold them into your own sickness.  You have a long way to go, those of you who CALL yourselves “CHRISTIANS”, for it is long since you acted as “CHRISTED” be­ings.  Ponder it for the time of confrontation is upon you and the choosing and sorting is under way—NOW!

In deference to you ones who will pick this material to pieces with toothpicks and magnifying glasses—ah, would that all of you would make such effort to find the proof and confirmation—please realize that we have utilized another’s  material  and  I  give  great honor and would not change it.  I will make com­ments and if a thing be in gross error I will most surely change of  it—otherwise, it is given that you might  SEE  THE TRUTH AS PRESENTED IN  YOUR  DIMEN­SION  BY  YOUR  OWN  HISTORIANS.

IMPORTANT  ANNOUNCEMENT

Hatonn has asked us to run the Freedman letter to Goldstein, OFTEN [A letter from a Jew to a Jew covering in­formation that is critical for all to know if we are to restore any political freedom to our dying world].  It offers good informa­tion along with excellent reference material.  HE FEELS IT URGENTLY NECESSARY TO KEEP CONSTANT RE­MINDERS BEFORE OUR READERS, AND THE JEWS, THAT WE ARE ONLY REPRINTING INFORMATION.  THIS IS OUR KEY TO SURVIVAL AS A PAPER AND AS PEOPLE.

In this letter Mr. Freedman covers many topics several of which are: Jesus Was Not A Jew—Some Of The History Of The Modern Day Jew And His Origins—Some Of The History Of The Talmud [Some Very Important Quotes From It Including Permission For Sexual Attacks Upon Babies, Etc.]—The Kol Nidre Oath. The Very Harmful Influence The Talmud and Kol Nidre Writings Have Exerted On The Entire World For Cen­turies—The Jews Are Not Any Part Of The “Lost Ten Tribes”.

This letter takes over 100 pages in a Journal so we will only give the sources for it: Phoenix Journal #223 BIRTHING THE PHOENIX, Vol. 2 & #233 RISE OF ANTICHRIST, Vol. 5 or CONTACT March 17, 1998, Vol. 20, #4.

http://fourwinds10.com/journals/UnPublished/J233.pdf

Other sources of "FACTS are FACTS"

1.  Phoenix Journal 25 " The Bitter Communion - Altars of Hemlock"   http://www.fourwinds10.net/journals/pdf/J025.pdf

2.  Phoenix Journal 223, Vol 2, "Rise of Antichrist"   http://www.fourwinds10.net/journals/pdf/J223.pdf

3.  CONTACT Newspaper, March 17, 1998   http://www.phoenixarchives.com/contact/1998/0398/031798.pdf