Summary
➡ The text delves into the origins and implications of the Schofield Reference Bible, specifically its interpretation of Genesis 12.3 and its potentially misleading footnotes claiming God’s promise of land to Israel and invoking anti-Semitism if nations persecicute Jews today. It also outlines the potential implications and how this interpretation might have played a role in shaping modern geopolitical attitudes particularly stemming from Christian Zionism.
➡ The text highlights the works and beliefs of Philip Morrow and Dr. F. Furman Curley, two prominent figures who questioned Christian Zionism, dispensationalism, and other deviations from traditional Christianity. Morrow’s writings and observations revealed the growing acceptance of dispensationalism and its potential dangers, while Curley challenged the concept of Armageddon and Christian endorsement of warfare. They both encouraged a return to traditional Christianity and emphasized peaceful teachings over violent interpretations.
➡ The Illuminati, aided by the Rockefellers, sought to undermine the authority of Christianity by funding seminaries that questioned fundamental biblical principles and promoted modernism, with notable figures like Charles Briggs, Harry Emerson Fosdick, and John Foster Dulles playing key roles. Their influence extended into major institutions and contributed to the formation and consolidation of American Christianity into the Federal Council of Churches, which eventually morphed into the National Council of Churches. The intention was not only to weaken Christianity but to unite it with other faiths in the long term.
➡ The text discusses various diluted Christian teachings and liberal interpretations being championed by significant figures like Pearl Buck and organizations like the Jesus Seminar. These narratives often reduce doctrinal emphasis and endorse more social engagements. Simultaneously, popular mediums such as novels and films like ‘The Da Vinci Code’, and mainstream media platforms, skew Christian doctrines to influence public perception. The text also highlights certain Christian groups, such as the National Council of Churches and World Council of Churches, and their continued relevance today.
➡ The text discusses the rise of ecumenism promoted by influential figures such as Tony Blair and Rick Warren, who aim to unite all faiths for social action projects and global initiatives. This approach, intertwined with power politics and media influence, has raised concerns about the potential for establishing a one-world religion and straying from traditional doctrine, all under the guise of combating global challenges.
➡ The text examines the beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons, focusing on their origins and links to Freemasons and the Illuminati. It suggests that these sects were intentionally created to fragment and disorient the Christian church. It also warns about unity efforts related to specific figures and initiatives, urging listeners to closely examine the motives behind such attempts. Finally, it promises a deeper exploration of Christian Zionism in a future discussion.
Transcript
Welcome, everybody, to the Untold History Channel. Apologize for the delay, guys, I had to restart my computer and had to do a couple things on my end. My green screen wasn’t showing up. I mean, I was having all kinds of funky issues with my computer tonight. So, anyway, it seems like everything is functioning now on going to see if it’s working on this end. And it looks like it is.
Okay, cool. We are here and live. So I did the thing last night. In fact, let me show something. Here’s. Where is it? Where is it? Let’s see here. I don’t know if. Was it here? I thought it was last night, but I could be wrong. Maybe it was a different night. Maybe it was this. Here it is. Yes. Here it is. Okay, so, yarn addict. Yarn addict.
You are the winner. You are the winner because you were the one when I did the show on the ODid Yiddon plan, you made the suggestion. You said I had to go back and listen to this again. I don’t know why I’m surprised. This was out in the public way back then and no one paid attention or more likely, buried in the media. It makes me sick that we have funded and helped all of this.
Shaking my head and I said, doesn’t surprise me. Americans are easily fooled by virtue of the Schofield Bible. That should be my next show. And then you said, that’s a great idea. So you, yarn addict, are the culprit for this particular show. Now. This show is. Yeah. Thank you. Yarn. I know you. I know what you mean. I know what you mean. It’s so funny you say that.
As I’ve mentioned to you guys multiple times, there are days when I wake up and I have absolutely no idea what I’m going to do. Something just comes to me and I decided to do it last minute and like, whatever. And sometimes those are the days that some cool shows, like last night, the one that I did with where I played the video of Susan Lindauer, that one just kind of came to me because I’d have been talking about doing that.
And sometimes it just hits me. I don’t know. I can’t explain it. But I think that’s one of the reasons why my shows are. I don’t know. Some shows are probably boring and some shows are interesting. I don’t know. I try to just kind of allow myself to just be led by certain. We could call it God. Allow God to lead me in certain ways or to let people say something in the chat or if I’m listening to some sort of show like that.
One day I listened to a show and it was talking about the odd Yiddon plan. And I’m like, what? What is that? And he looked it up and I’m like, oh, my gosh, this is interesting. I should do a show on, um. And then the Yinon plan led to this, to the always had. I’ve always been just suspect of the Schofield Bible and have heard quite a bit about.
So there is a couple of things that I’m going to do here tonight. Number one is there’s about a 15 minutes video that I’m going to play. And I’m just going to play this because it’s going to be a good warm up. And there’s a strong possibility that I may not get through all of this tonight. I may have to break this up into two parts because the Parloff articles that I’m talking about, they are long.
Well, they may be long, but they may be. I don’t know if. I don’t know how long they’re going to be in terms of reading, but I just know that there’s a lot of material in them. So I may only get through one and then I may have to come back and finish with a part two. I also have another video that I need to upload that I haven’t uploaded yet.
Time has not permitted. But I did the video with Mike Harris and Dr. Sabroski about a week and a half ago, and Mike Harris was. He said a few things in there that about he talked about black people and I don’t think he meant it in a negative way, but I think a lot of people took it in a really negative way. So he requested that we kind of come back and do another show to address that straight up.
And we did. We did that yesterday, and I just have not had an opportunity to go through that. And there’s a few edits that I wanted to make. I just haven’t had the time to get that done. But he’s anxious for me to get that up. And so I need to get that up. But it may not be tonight, it may be tomorrow morning, but anyhow, and then tomorrow night, if you guys have any suggestions for Friday Night Watch Party, I’m wide open to suggestions.
I was contemplating maybe playing Valkyrie because we recently talked about the plot against Hitler. I thought that was interesting. But there’s another one that’s a movie that came out of the UK that was kind of a B movie again, but in fact, it was one of the actors who did it. It was his final project. He died suddenly. And this was like probably 2014, 2015 ish time frame.
A lot of people suspect that his death, there was foul play around it. So anyway, I found that movie and I may play it. It’s just kind of by talking about waking people up and stuff like that. Anyway, it’s different. It’s not something that you’re going to see every day. And those are the types of movies that I prefer to show. I mean, anybody can go watch Valkyrie, the Tom Cruise in.
It’s like, Tom Cruise, whatever. Not that I have this really huge animosity towards Tom Cruise, but I’m just like, why play a movie that is Hollywood? Wag the dog was a little bit different than Valkyrie. But anyhow, I digress. All right, so I’m going to go ahead and since there’s about 70 people in the thing, right, and in the chat right now, or at least watching right now, so I’m going to go ahead and I’m going to play this 15 minutes video.
And the video is entitled how the Schofield Bible turned Christians into Zionists. So it is going to be a good primer. In fact, I’m not going to make it at a 1. 25 speed. So speed it up just a little bit. It shouldn’t be too fast, but it’ll make it go a little bit faster so that it won’t be totally 15 minutes, maybe about twelve. So I’m going to go ahead and we’re going to watch that and then I’m going to play or then I’m going to read at least the first article about the war on Christianity by Dr.
James Perloff. So here you go, guys. This is the first thing. This is the Schofield study Bible. Here we go. A more direct attack on Christianity came from Oxford University Press in England in 1908 when it published a false and intentionally misleading Bible called the Schofield Reference Bible. Its mission was to inject into the Christian text reinterpretations that made the future state of Israel the way to God.
This book was so important that Oxford University Press opened its first branch in the United States to publish it. They had never published an American book before. They had not published Whittier’s books, his poetry. They had not published Longfellow. They had not published any of our great American authors, but they published this. The Oxford University Press published the Schofield Book. They promoted it into key American seminaries and Bible schools where the beliefs of future generations of pastors could be molded to cloud the peacemaking traditions of Christianity and benefit the state of Israel.
Most pastors and teachers were unaware of any danger. Since there was no state of Israel at the time, most of them did not even know the Chewy state was being planned. Few guessed that the Schofield Book would be used by secular powers to bend Christians into political and financial servitude to the Chewy state. Presentday Israel American Christianity became increasingly Zionized after 1948 when the State of Israel appeared as a result of the United nations edict.
Oxford University Press was strongly Zionist influenced, and it provided a huge financial and promotional boost when it opened a publishing branch in New York City. This for the purpose of publishing the Christian Zionist Manual in 1908. Called the Schofield Reference Bible, this book was to be a foundational document upon which Christian Zionism, by a host of other names, including evangelicalism, would begin its methodical growth by deception. The founders of World Zionism, especially Heim Weitzman, successor to Theodore Herzel, had much to do with drawing the United States into World War I.
A mere handful of dominant American Zionists were able to influence President Wilson, possibly by blackmail, to join the war in Europe. Over his advisors objections, America lost over 100,000 men who were entirely innocent of any involvement in European politics. And out of all this, the world Zionist movement gained a piece of land called Palestine. The land of the Philistine was England’s payoff to world Zionism for causing America to enter World War I on the side of Great Britain, which was losing the war to Germany.
By 1917, the world Zionist movement was in high gear toward occupying Arab Palestine after the Balfour Declaration gave them a claim without title to any land occupied by the Palestinians. The Schofield Reference Bible was copyrighted in 1909. It is an Old and New Testament with most of the notes in the original text added in the Old Testament. Later, many notes were added to the New Testament as the Schofield Reference Bible was reedited several times with the most radical change being made in 1967.
The book has been updated over and over again, each time by Oxford University Press, always having Mr. Schofield’s name on the front of it. In fact, he’s listed as the editor in the most recent edition, even though he’s been dead for about 40 years. The COVID shows the editor, Cyrus I. Schofield, with seven other men on the editorial board. One of these was Reverend James M. Gray, president of the Moody Bible Institute, one of the most influential organizations and evangelical circles of the day.
There were also two other seminary leaders on the editorial board. Those lending their names were predominantly heads of seminaries and Christian colleges. What happened is the distribution took place through these seminaries and then when young pastors were graduated from these schools and they went back out and took a church and started to. It was a little bit too fast for me guys, so I made it back to just straight 1 minute or just one to one.
So apologize for that. Anyway, back to the to teach from the pulpit. They had one of these in their hands. This is what was given to them. And I suppose that they were probably given to the seminaries. It was likely that the Oxford press was very generous in making sure that all these people had these what exactly is the Schofield reference Bible? Let us look critically at just one page of the book that has become the guide for secularist Jews in Israel and evangelical Christians in America to explain why they think present day Israel has the right to all of the land in the Middle east, beginning with Palestine.
Genesis Twelve three is part of the Torah and is quoted in the Quran. These three verses are standard in the King James translation and very similar in other Bibles. Let me paraphrase it as you read the Old English. The Lord told Abram to leave his home and family and go into a land that God would show him. God promised to then make of Abram a great nation, bless him and make his name great, protect him by blessing his friends and cursing his enemies.
And from Abram’s seed all the nations of the earth would be blessed. Now for the part that is important to traditional Christians, I quote in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. Christianity has for 2000 years taken this to be the first notice from God of the coming Savior of mankind. Genesis Twelve three is the earliest covenant that God made to Abram, and it is the one used by Israelis and Christian Zionists to justify the idea that the entire Middle east should be Israeli property.
I quote yet thee out of thy country and from thy kindred and from thy Father’s house into a land that I will show thee. Zionists of all races interpret the phrase into a land that I will show thee as a perpetual land grant to present day Israel. Now we will examine the most effective corruptor of Scripture in history, one Cyrus Ice Schofield, a 19th century American note on page 19 that the footnotes dwarf the text.
Note also that the italicized insertions in between the verses that are not part of the Bible. In the 1967 version of the Schofield Reference Bible, there are more footnotes than in the original 19 nine version. And since the death of Schofield in 1921. The Footnotes have grown to dwarf the text in these very important pages. Let’s look again at the vital Footnote two found in the Schofield Reference Bible in 1967.
On page 19, the footnote reads, God made an unconditional promise of blessing through Abram’s seed to the nation of Israel to inherit a specific territory forever. But the passage doesn’t say anything like this. God orders Abram to go to a land that God will show him using the first person familiar, the meaning Abram, and no one but Abram. The passage does not say that God is giving any piece of land to anybody forever.
It doesn’t say anything about Israel. Now, how complicated is it? Leave your land. Go, or I tell you to go and I will protect you. How complicated is that? How many footnotes does it take to understand what God was saying to mean? Anybody who reads that should be able to figure that out. That’s what the message is. But Mr. Schofield wrote all of this to explain it. In fact, if we accept biblical history, we know that Abram had no children when this happened and not for quite a while.
So there was no person or nation named Israel when this promise was made, there was no state or nation named Israel. The man Israel did not even exist in Abram’s imagination when God spoke to him. How then could Schofield or the Oxford University Press say that God was promising the land to the present day state of Israel forever? Where did the state of Israel get in this? When Abraham was spoken to by God, Israel, the man known as Israel, hadn’t been born yet.
He was two generations in the future. And he was not a state. He was a person that eventually had a tribe. And then after him, 3000 years later, along comes a bunch of Europeans who name their state after him. But this says that God gave that land to the nation of Israel forever. Imagine 70 million people who are taught this every day. The Oxford University Press did not stop there.
Note three on page 19 reads, there is a promise of blessing upon the individuals and nations who bless Abram’s descendants. And a curse lay upon those who persecute the Jew. The word Jew is used in the Footnotes in describing an occurrence two to 3000 years before the word Jew existed. In fact, Jew is taken from the name Judah. Who was, it is told, one of the twelve grandsons of Abraham, Abram of Genesis.
Twelve. Neither Judah nor Jew existed. And this footnote is a false concoction. Note three continues. God’s promised Abram and his seed certainly did not terminate at Sinai with the giving of the law. The New Testament and Old Testament are full of post Sinai promises concerning Israel and the land which is to be Israel’s everlasting possession. Listeners should be asking, why is Oxford University press putting words in the mouths of the readers of this Bible? To make them think their God promises blessings and curses on people today based on how they think about or act toward present day Jews and present day Israel? What about all the other people in the world? Let’s read further in the footnotes to Genesis twelve three promise to the Gentiles I will bless them that bless thee.
Those who honor Abram will be blessed, and curse them that curse thee. This was a warning literally fulfilled in the history of Israel’s persecution. It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the Jew, and well with those who have protected him. And here is the punchline for a nation to commit the sin of anti Semitism brings inevitable judgment. The future will still more remarkably prove this principle.
Isn’t that convenient? Now you have anti Semitism as created in Abraham’s time. The footnote to Abraham’s words create the word anti Semitism. Christian Zionism believes that our nation will be judged if we are not sufficiently kind as a nation to the state of Israel. They have made sin a sort of a national corporate event rather than an individual thing. Of course, there is no such thing as national sin.
Nations don’t sin. We do. Individuals do. Men do. But this has created a national sin so that Christian Zionists like John Hagee believe that God will rain fire down on our country, will somehow punish our entire nation for being insufficiently kind to the state of Israel. Zionist friendly Oxford University Press says in our Bible that the whole country will be considered in sin and we will be in line for judgment from God if we are not properly friendly to the nation of Israel.
And remember, there was no Jew in the time of Abram. There was no Israel at the time that Schofield penned the original notes. And it is doubtful that Cyrus Schofield would have even understood the enormity of the evil purpose for which his book was written. It was to have the most prominent Zionist publisher in the world, and it would deify a country that did not exist and would be born of force 40 years after his death.
Not all Orthodox Christians were asleep during that time. Philip Morrow was one who saw both the heretical and the warmaking dangers of the new religion and actually called it Zionism. Morrow was a wellknown patent attorney, counsel for the Columbia Phonograph Company and the Christian researcher who wrote legal briefs for William Jenning Bryan’s famous Court cases. In his 1927 book entitled Gospel of the Kingdom with an Examination of Modern Dispensationalism, Philip Moore wrote, through an incident of recent occurrence, I was made aware of the extent far greater than I imagined to which the modern system of dispensationalism has found acceptance among Orthodox Christians, and also the extent correspondingly great to which the recently published Schofield Bible, which is the main vehicle of the new system of doctrine referred to, has usurped the place of authority that belonged to God’s Bible alone.
Philip Morrow tells us that he had been caught up himself in the evangelicalism or Christian Zionism of his day and learned about it from the inside. This has been the case with most of us who come to an understanding of Christian Zionism. The late Philip Morrow had been a source of encouragement to many critics of Judea Christianity who thought they were alone. Philip Morrow was a dedicated scholar with an engineer’s logic and a lawyer’s tenacity that allowed him to foresee error in 1927 that Christian scholars are only beginning to acknowledge 80 years later.
We, like Morrow, should also be profoundly sympathetic for those who are caught up in the error of Christian Zionism, dispensationalism, or Judeo Christianity by any name. Because they are among our families and best friends, Jesus words require that we reclaim them back to traditional Christianity. Dr. F. Furman Curley is another unsung Christian scholar who saw the path to war in the error of dispensationalism. He was the head of graduate studies at Abilene Christian University.
In 1983 he wrote a short book entitled the Middle East Crisis and Biblical Perspective, in which he takes sharp issue with those he calls Israel first millennias and Christian Zionism’s evil fruits of perpetual war in the Middle East. He names Hal Lindsay and the late Jerry Falwell as radical Zionist prophets who would help nudge the US into endless war with Islamic states. Dr. Curley explained why, when the concept of Armageddon, as in Revelation 1616, is raised, those who believe in a literal war at Armageddon often feel that Christians should work to start this war and should vigorously participate in it.
Those in particular who view this present situation as Armageddon believe that Christians should support Israel with vigor, and they urge our government to take an active part in the conflict in the Middle East. Curly saw Christian Zionist support for Israel’s brutal occupation of Palestine as a precursor to more wars in the Middle east and concluded, one needs to be absolutely certain that the doctrine he follows is God’s and not of men before he advocates a doctrine that would put the blood of other men on our hands.
He explains the neo Christian love affair with war as a religious fixation, stating, whereas Christians must pray for peace in the Middle east, pre millennialists must pray and work for World War II. So Armageddon will come. They cannot pray for peace in the Middle East. If a follower of Christian Zionism will only examine the simple teachings of Jesus in the New Testament, he will find there is not a single passage or phrase that would give a follower of Christ the cause to take the life of another man or another man’s wife or a child in a faraway country.
All right, hit the wrong button. Okay. Yes, agree. Dispensationalism, disgusting. Non biblical disgusting. And another term that I’m going to say is absolutely reprehensible to me is the term Judeochristian. We are not a Judeochristian country. We never have been a Judeochristian country. We are a Christian country. Judeochristian is. In fact, I was actually doing a little bit of. I was just doing a search, and I came across this article, and I’m not going to read it tonight, but I think it would be wise to incorporate this, possibly, if I make this into two parts, to bring this in on the back end of the second part, called the myth of Judeochristianity, because we never have been a Judeo Christian country.
You’ve always been a Christian country. So we were not found on Judeo Christian principles. Anyway. But I digress. I want to say something. There was a couple of people in the chat that were talking about stuff. It’s like, look, my channel is a history channel. My channel is not a Christian channel. My channel is not a biblical channel. My channel is a history channel. But in this particular case, there is crossover of religiosity into history.
And history takes on many different shapes and sizes and colors, and religion is part of history. So this is historical. It just happens to be that it also is touching upon faith. So there are probably going to be some of you who may find what we discuss in here maybe a little offensive. And if that’s the case, my sincerest apologies. I am not trying to offend anybody with this.
However, if you are offended by it, I can’t control that. That’s on you. I don’t mean to be offensive, but I seek truth, and I don’t care where the truth leads me. That also said, the one thing that is absolutely one hill you’ve heard me talk about many times, that there are very few hills that I will stand and defend to the death. One hill that I will defend to the death is the fact that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior, and he came down as man.
He became man as God in the flesh and was a perfect specimen, sacrificed on the cross for the salvation of my soul. That is a hill that I will die on. Now, there’s a lot of things in here that are probably going to necessarily what we’re talking about here, aren’t they? Circumvent that issue. So just know that if we have differences of opinion on other things, we probably agree on the most important thing.
So take that into consideration. When I’m going through this stuff tonight, before I jump in here, I’m going to just kind of do R1 quick of the chat. Yes. Biblical is history. Yes. Let’s see. Hello. Can I connect all the evil going on now through time without looking? Yes, exactly. Without looking through religious topics? 100%. I know you can, Jackie. I absolutely know you can. All right, guys, so that with me checking the chat, let’s jump in to the war on Christianity, part one a little bit here.
Okay. All right. Producing a one world religion, a three step plan. Karl Marx denounced religion as the opiate of the people, and communist states tried extensively to abolish it. However, the Illuminaist oligarchs who run most of our world know or knew that man has a spiritual nature which cannot fully or that cannot be fully eradicated. They therefore deemed it more practical to infiltrate and control religion rather than try to destroy it outright.
The basic mechanism underlying the Satanic New World order, consolidation. In the context of nations, this has meant ending national sovereignty, bringing Europe from the common Market to the European Union, and the North America from NAFTA to the proposed American Union. I don’t know if the North American Union is still on the table or not. I would venture to guess that has been shelved, at least for now and possibly in perpetuity, eventually merging these regional structures into a one world government.
In the world of big business, a parallel consolidation process is taking place as multinational corporations merge with each other and buy up small competitors. The illuminati also want consolidation of religions. The technical word for this is ecumenism. Ecumenism. I hope I’m saying that properly, which comes from the Greek word oicamene, meaning world and earth. All avenues of life must be consolidated for the Antichrist to rule. And religion is no exception, British globalist historian Arnold Toynbee stated, I believe that in the field of religion, sectarianism is going to be subordinated to the ecumenicalism that in the field of politics, nationalism is going to be subordinated to the world government.
Of the many tasks to which the Rockefellers committed their vast fortune, one was the ecumenical religion, which apparently requires three steps. One, degrade Christianity as a unique faith. This necessitated providing loans to major churches in exchange for doctrinal changes and funding seminaries that would produce modernist ministers who would undermine the faith. The subsequent weakening of Christianity would ultimately ripen it for consolidation with other religions. Two specific organizations, such as the National Council of Churches, would be formed as the framework by which various denominations and ultimately various religions could be brought together under the ecumenical banner and three, to give churches motive for unification.
Social causes acceptable with the most morals of or with within the morals of most denominations and religions would be promoted as rallying points for united action. The early years degrading Christianity the Illuminati understood that Christianity would be difficult to incorporate into a world ecumenical movement because Christianity has always been unique among religions, offering salvation not by good deeds but faith in Jesus Christ through his finished work on the cross.
And the illuminati goal then was to attack the authority and historicity of the Bible. To this end, the Rockefellers heavily funded seminaries that would question the Gospel, the most notorious probably being Union theological seminary in New York City. It was Presbyterian theologian Charles Briggs, both a graduate and professor of Union theological, who in the late 19th century prominently introduced into America higher criticism, claiming the Bible was full of errors and denying that many of its books were actually written by the attributed authors.
I think this is Briggs right here is Professor Briggs, a heretic. In 1922, Baptist pastor Harry Emerson Fosdick, another graduate of Union Theological Seminary, delivered a controversial sermon called shall the fundamentalists Win? At the First Presbyterian Church of New York. In it, he casts doubts on the Bible being God’s Word, the Virgin birth, the Second Coming of Christ, and even Christ’s death on the cross, serving as atonement for sins.
And he denounced fundamentalists who held these beliefs as intolerant. Interesting. Henry Emerson Falsdick, who got MSM stamp of. Oh, interesting. Yeah, he got the Time magazine and Raymond B. Fosic’s in her right. Wow. The sermon sparked outrage. The General assembly of the Presbyterian Church demanded an investigation of Fosdick, who was forced to resign his pastorship. However, he was then immediately hired as pastor of Riverside Church, the church attended and built by John D.
Rockefeller, Jr. At a cost of $4 million. Rockefeller paid for 130 copies of Fosdick’s notorious sermon, to be printed and distributed to Protestant ministers. Significantly, Fosdick’s brother Raymond was president of the Rockefeller foundation for twelve years. The views expressed by theologians like Briggs and Fosdick were called Modernism, which also included Denying Christ’s divinity, miracles and resurrection. In short, modernism was not merely a quibbling over some gray area and a passage of scripture.
It was a complete repudiation of the faith’s major tenets. And with Rockefeller backing it, it made its way into seminaries, Christian colleges and churches across America. Modernism did not simply happen. It was an orchestrated, financed agenda. Wow. So that’s the Rockefellers and Riverside Church. Christians who opposed this movement were called fundamentalists because they defended the fundamental doctrines of the modernists were assaulting in the Illuminati’s long view, once modernism had sufficiently degraded Christianity into just another religion, it could be bonded with other faiths.
But before achieving this last step, Christian denominations themselves had to be united. The Federal Council of Churches, later called National Council of Churches, was founded in 1908. Heavily funded by the Rockefellers, it was to become the structural core of the drive to consolidate American Christianity. The man chosen to spearhead ecumenism was John Foster Dulles. Oh, what a shocker. An in law of the Rockefellers. Dulles was the attorney who defended Harry Emerson Fosdick during his heresy investigation.
And he served as chairman of the trustee of the Rockefeller foundation, where Emerson’s brother Raymond was president. John Foster Dulles. And his brother Alan Dulles, was the guy who was in charge of the JFK assassination and the head of the CIA for a long time, Alan Dulles. In fact, whenever you fly to Dulles Airport in Washington DC, it’s after, it’s named after that gentleman, right? It wasn’t after John Foster Dulles.
It was after Alan Dulles. At the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, which formed a League of nations, the first step toward world government. John Poster Dulles was legal counsel to the United States delegation. A founding member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Dulles contributed articles to the CFR’s journal Foreign affairs, beginning with its very first issue in 1922. And inveterate globalist, he eventually helped write the preamble to the United Nations Charter, which makes no mention of God.
Dulles also chaired the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where his choice for President of that institution was Aldra Hiss, the notorious Communist spy who was Secretary General at the UN’s Founding conference in 1945. Part of Dulles religious agenda was to persuade American churches to accept world government. In 1937 he wrote in the magazine Region of Life, where then does this solution lie? A theoretical solution lies in the abolition of the entire concept of national sovereignty and the unification of the world into a single nation.
All boundary barriers are thus automatically leveled. And then this is. I don’t know what this is. Together the churches allied for a great task. Federal Council of the Churches of Christ of America. And then this is of course John Foster Dulles. With his brother Alan, who served as both president of the CFR and the director of the CIA. John Foster Dulles was on the executive committee of the Federal, later National Council of Churches.
In 1942, he chaired a meeting of 30 religious denominations brought together by the Federal Council of Churches. And time March 16 of that year reported they adopted a program calling for a world government of delegated powers, strong and immediate limitations on national sovereignty, a universal system of money, and various other globalist measures. Since the Illuminati ambition was not merely to consolidate churches in America, but throughout the planet.
In 1948, the World Council of Churches was formed. John Foster Dulles attended the founding conference in Amsterdam. The conference’s director of Research was John C. Bennett, member of the Council on Foreign Relations and president of the Union Theological Seminary. Also attending was Reinhold Nieber. CFR Union Theological funding for the World Council of the Churches came from the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations. What a shock. The social Gospel, a method for implementing.
I’m saying, I’m butchering that woRd. Ecumenism. Although the national and World Council of Churches provided structure for consolidation, the question remained of how to motivate churches to unite. Christian denominations often differ over various theological issues, but they generally agree on values helping the poor and the sick, for example. The strategy for unification, therefore, was to encourage them to collaborate. What they did agree. This took the form of an action oriented program known as the Social Gospel.
Walter Rashen Bush, a Baptist minister trained at Rochester Theological Seminary, also funded by the Rockefellers, became a socialist and was known as father of the social Gospel. In 1893, about the time Charles Augustus Briggs was initiating the US modernist movement, Roshan Bush declared that the only power that can make socialism succeed if it is established is religion. He said that Christianity is in its nature revolutionary, denied that Christ died in substitutionary atonement for our sins, and said, the kingdom of God is not a matter of getting individuals to heaven, but of transforming the life on earth into a harmony of heaven.
That’s concerning. Perhaps the most notorious social gospel pusher was Rockefeller backed Reverend Harry F. Ward, who taught for 23 years at Union Theological Seminary. Ward was also founding chairman of the American Civil Liberties Union and an ironic position, since the organization has been a dedicated opponent of religious displays on public property. Ward also chaired the American League Against War and Fascism, which was founded by the Communist Party USA.
Manning Johnson, a former Communist Party official, told Congress in 1953 that Ward had been chief architect for Communist infiltration and subverted in the religious field. Union leader Samuel Gompers, founder of the American Federation of Labor, called Ward the most ardent pro Bolshevik cleric in this country. Note the irony of clergymen supporting communism, an ideology that denounces religion as the opiate of the people and has slaughtered millions of Christians.
By the way, show you something here real quick. Manning Johnson wrote a book called Color Communism and Common Sense. He literally was ten years I labored in the cause of communism. I was a dedicated comrade. All my talents and efforts were zealously used to bring about the triumph of communism in America and throughout the world. To me, the end of capitalism would mark the beginning of an interminable period of plenty, peace, prosperity, and universal comradeship.
All racial and class differences and conflicts would end forever after the liquidation of the capitalists, their government, and their supporters. Little did I realize until I was deeply enmeshed in the red conspiracy that just and seeming grievances are exploited to transform idealism into a cold and ruthless weapon against the capitalist system. That is the end toward which all of the Communist efforts among Negroes are directed. Indeed, I had entered the red conspiracy in the vain belief that it was the way to a new, better and superior world system of society.
Ten years later, though thoroughly disillusioned, I abandoned communism. And that is who he’s talking about. Where was it? Right. Where was it? Amy Johnson. Right here. Ward’s social Gospel was a push for ecumenism. He helped found in 1908 the Methodist Federation for Social Service, now called Methodist Federation for Social Action. Ward was its secretary for 33 years, and the Federation, the Gospel of Christ, took a backseat to the social Gospel, which called for Christians to fight for things like social justice, better labor conditions, and world peace.
Not surprisingly, these were the same goals proclaimed by Marxists. Christians were thus to be united into a cheap, volunteer workforce for a socialist New World Order. Missionary work was not neglected. In 1930, at John D. Rockefeller’s Jr’s request and with his financial support, a group of Baptist laymen persuaded seven denominations to participate in the layman’s foreign Missions Inquiry. Their report, Rethinking missions, a layman’s inquiry after 100 years, recommended that the missionaries deemphasize Christian doctrine and seek to ally themselves with other religions in doing good works.
The denominations distanced themselves from the report, however. Pearl Buck, author and former missionary to China, praised it in the Christian century, saying, every Christian should read it. In articles published in Harper’s and Cosmopolitan, Buck rejected the doctrine of the original sin and said that belief in the divinity and even historicity of Christ was unessential to the faith. She criticized the typical missionary as narrow, uncharitable, unappreciative, and ignorant.
In place of evangelization, she recommended that missionaries help with agricultural, educational, medical and sanitary work, I. E. The Social Gospel. In short, Pearlbuck’s pronouncement it fit perfectly with the Rockefeller scheme for a modernized ecumenical Christianity. It should not be overlooked that subsequent to praising Rockefeller’s missionary inquiry, her novel the Good Earth was awarded the Nobel Prize on Literature and was turned into an Oscar nominated movie. And incidentally, that is something that a lot of these people do.
What they’ll do is the elite will reward some of these things as far as they’ll give you a book, you write an article and you get the piloter. You write a book and it’s given a huge book contract and an award, and there’s a movie made out of it. I mean, there’s all kinds of things that they do to promote their agenda. And how do we know? The little people don’t know that.
We just think it’s just fun. We don’t realize that are forces of, nefarious forces behind the pushing of a lot of this agenda onto us. Recent years the three step plan continues degrading Christianity. The process begun by Charles Briggs introducing modernism with the attack, or with its attack on every fundamentalist of Christianity and the Bible continues today. One prominent assault on the Bible’s authenticity has been the Jesus seminar, begun in 1985 by the late Robert Funk.
With backing from the Westar Institute, whose financial supporters are not publicized, Funk packed his seminar with liberal scholars. More than a dozen had studied at the Union Theological Seminary, and about half came from three liberal establishment schools, Harvard and Vanderbilt, both of whose divinity schools were heavily funded by the Rockefellers and the openly ecumenical Claremont School of Theology. A Jesus seminar used a system of colored beads to vote on whether something was really said or done by Jesus.
A red bead meant definitely yes, a pink bead meant probably yes, a gray bead meant probably no, and a black bead meant definitely no. In short, the Bible’s historical accuracy was to be determined by votes based on personal opinions of people living 2000 years after the original eyewitnesses to the events. The seminar concluded that over 80% of the sayings attributed to Jesus were not actually said by him, and that only 2% were definitely accurate.
Likewise, the seminar followed modernist tradition by denying the miracles, the divinity and resurrection of Jesus. Funk, who himself held these views, had handpicked his seminar’s participants. Thus its outcome was no surprise. Nonetheless, the media touted the proceedings as scholarly reputation of most of the New Testament and then this is the looks like this is from the Oregonian March 9 of 1991. Scholars discount 80% of Jesus Sayings let’s read this real quick.
The provocative Jesus Seminar Sunday concluded six years of voting on what the Jesus of History most likely said, ruling out about 80% of words attributed to him in the Gospels and emerging with the picture of a prophetic sage who told parables and made pithy comments. Virtually all of Jesus’s words in the Gospel of John were voted down by scholars meeting in Sonoma, California, including a pulpit favorite, John 316 for God so loved the world that he gave his only son.
Formed in part to counteract literalist views of the Bible, the Jesus Seminar, a 200 member group of mainline biblical scholars from all over the United States, has stirred controversy since its first meetings in 1985. Televangelists on talk shows say. It’s the work of the Devil, said founder Robert Funk of a New Testament scholar who has published widely in Gospel studies. The scholars have met twice a year examining either particular gospels or types of sayings, basing their discussions on earlier scholarships and their own studies.
Many academic colleges or colleagues have criticized, among other things, the seminar’s unconventional voting techniques. Red and pink beads dropped into a ballot box for probable or possible authentic sayings gray and black beads for sayings that allegedly reveal the theological bias of the gospel authors or of the beliefs of the beleaguered early Christians, but not necessarily the messages of Jesus. Almost 200 scholars from universities and seminaries have participated.
Their conclusions are often the same as those taught outside of fundamentalist and evangelical circles, Funk said. Seminar members Marcus Borg of Oregon State University, who also chairs the historical Jesus section of the large Society of Biblical Literature, said that his experience of teaching adults is that the findings will feed a hunger in the churches. Many mainstream Christians can no longer believe the picture of Jesus that they got as children, Bork said.
Funk contended that most mainline scholars would agree with the Jesus seminar that in the parallels Gospel Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, Jesus speaks regularly in adages or aphorisms, or in parables, or in written or in witticisms created as rebuff or retort in the context of dialogue or debate. It is clear he did not speak in long monologues of the type found in the Gospels of John. The only saying in John that received a pink vote was 1444, which has parallels in the other gospels, that a prophet has no honor in his own country.
Funk had not tallied the full results, but he said that in all 31 sayings in the four biblical gospels and several apocryphal, apocryphal Good Lord. Apocryphal sources fell into the red category of authentic sayings, only 15 of which are actually different due to parallel versions in more than one gospel. They include the Good Samaritan, the mustard seed parables, the advice to your love to love your enemies, and some sermon on the Mount pronouncements such as Blessed Are you poor, for you shall inherit the kingdom of God.
I find that very interesting, almost like they want people to become poor and celebrate it because their reward is in heaven so that these people can get all the riches on earth. Another 200 sayings were recorded pink votes, meaning that Jesus said something similar to the recorded words. Together, the red and pink sayings totaled about 20% of the total. Another 30% fell into the gray class. A gray vote meant that some of the ideas may have gone back to Jesus, but not those words.
Fox ed Additionally, a slew of documentaries aimed at casting doubts on all the Bible have aired on TV. These almost typically spend most of their airtime interviewing modernist theologians rather than conservative ones. The documentaries have aired prominently on the History Channel, owned by an e joint venture groups with CFR Fingerprints, Disney, ABC Television groups NBC International and the Hearst Corporation the National Geographic Channel, owned by CFR member Rupert Murdoch’s Fox cable News Network and National Geographic Television and the Discovery Channel, which in 2005 hired its managing editor Ted Coppel, former CFR member and good friend of CFR heavyweight Henry Kissinger.
Perhaps the most ambitious strike at the Bible has been Dan Brown’s 2003 novel the Da Vinci Code. As of 2009, it has sold over 80 million copies, making it the best selling English language novel of the 21st century. It was also made into a film released in 2006, which grossed over 200 million. Although the Da Vinci Code is cast in the mold of a historical mystery, much like the Indiana Jones movies, its punchline is an assault against the ChRistian faith.
It’s rife with false assertions regarding the early church. Despite thorough refudiation by church historians, many people caught up in the hype accepted the Da Vinci Code’s disinformation is fact at the heart of the message. Jesus was not divine, was never resurrected, and married Mary Magdalene and had children by her. Incidentally, this right here is one of the main things, if you guys will recall. There was a big move out there.
I’m going to say the name, but I’m going to say the name of who it was. But there was a big move out there and it was called what, the guy’s name? I think it was negative 48. And he was like talking about the Jesus strain. And basically he was just regurgitating the work by Brown’s Da Vinci Code because he was saying that Abraham Lincoln and JFK and Donald Trump were all descendant from Jesus.
It was just like, yeah, no, I’ll buy that. But anyway, that was all from. It all originated from that. Lo and behold, within months of the film’s release, the Discovery Channel aired a documentary claiming the tomb, claiming a tomb had been found containing the bones of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. This was not a chance sequence. Media events are being orchestrated to deceive the public. The National Council of Churches, encompassing 37 Christian faith groups and World Council of Churches, representing 345 churches, denominations and Christian fellowships, continue today.
They have been churches reinforced by such organizations as Christians Uniting in Christ, established in 2002, and Christian churches together in the USA. Former in 2006. Not to be missed is the Tony Blair Faith Foundation. Yes, the former Prime British Prime Minister, a consummate insider who recently refused to speak at the World Hunger Conference because he could not meet his speaker’s fee of 330,000 pounds, has formed another ecumenical organization.
Blair might be compared to John Foster Dulles, the globalist politician who helped form the World Council of Churches. On the foundation’s website, Blair stated, I launched the Tony Blair Faith foundation to promote respect, friendship and understanding between the major religious faiths. I’ve always believed that faith is an essential part of the modern world. As globalization pushes us ever closer and it is vital, as globalization pushes us ever closer, it is vital.
It’s not used as a force for conflict and division. Rather, faith is something that has much to give and to teach a world in which economic globalism and political change is offering many opportunities, but also presenting many dangers. Note Blair’s emphasis on globalization and his desire for unity among all faiths. Behind the fuzzy talk about respect, friendship and understanding is an aim for a one world religion which the Antichrist will require to rule the world.
In fact, the Antichrist probably couldn’t set it much better. The new Social Gospel Today’s methods for implementing ecumenism was what is used to motivate today’s churches to unite. As before, it’s social action. Just as Marxist Pastor Harry F. Ward headed the Methodist Federation for Social Action, the website for Tony Blair’s Faith foundation originally had a section called Social Action Projects. Fewer viewers were asked to sign a declaration which stated, I commit to working together with people of all faiths to fight against disease and poverty.
In short, it’s not about what you believe. Social action should transcend your faith so that it can be melded with all the others in America. The push for ecumenical social action has been spearheaded by Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California. He is perhaps best known for his book the Purpose Driven Life, which by 2007 had sold over 30 million copies. Many churches were persuaded to join Warren’s purpose driven movement because his book topped the New York Times bestseller list and he was featured on MSM shows such as Good Morning America.
After all, didn’t this prove Warren was anointed by God? Somehow there were other evangelical spokesmen. Somehow, where other evangelical spokesmen had failed, Warren had penetrated the anti religious bias of America’s mainstream media. CNN even called him America’s pastor, and Barack Obama invited him to give the invocation at his inauguration. Oh, how sweet. The true reason for Warren’s bursting onto the scene suggests something besides God’s anointing. Warren is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
He has distinct ties to media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, whose empire includes Wall Street Journal and England’s the Times. Warren’s book, the Purpose Driven Life, was published by Zondervan, a division of Harper Collins, which has been owned by Murdoch’s News Corp. Since 1989. Murdoch also controls Fox, which produced the viciously Antichristian TV show Family Guy, and he owns pornographic channels in Europe. Yet Rick Warren was quoted in the New Yorker as saying that he is Rupert Murdoch’s pastor.
If so, Christians have been asking, why does he not influence Murdoch away from his anti faith, anti family programming? And then here’s a picture of Rick Warren, the purpose driven pastor. Rick Warren, America’s most powerful religious leader, takes on the world. And then the last tycoon. Once one realizes that Rick Warren is intimately connected to a man who is arguably the world’s most powerful media magnet and that both have been CFR members, Warren’s rising star becomes more fathomable.
While many Christians have criticized Warren for his theology and for his use of questionable Bible translations, his most disturbing attribute may be acumenism. I still struggle with that word. In 2008, helped by a $2 million donation from Murdoch. Warren launched the Peace Coalition. Time magazine reported the initiative with the headline Rick Warren Goes Global. The organization’s website states that the plan is a massive effort to mobilize 1 billion Christians to attack the five global evil giants of our day, spiritual emptiness, self centered leadership, extreme poverty, pandemic disease and illiteracy.
Education. Once again, behind idealist languages lies a plan for an ecumenical world. Would it be healthy for Rick Warren to preside over an empire of a billion Christians? Warren’s Peace Coalition was an obvious complement to the Tony Blair Faith Foundation. Not surprisingly, Warren was on the religious Advisory council of Blair’s Foundation. On the latter’s website, Warren stated, the vision and values of the Tony Blair Faith foundation are desperately needed when every major issue of our world is influenced for good or harm by faith factors.
As America’s point man for ecumenical social work, Rick Warren might be called the Harry F. Ward of today. Unlike Ward, Rick Warren does not praise communism, which as an ideology is considered passe. But like Ward, his coalition plan would forge churches into a volunteer, I. E. Unpaid, army, of the service of the globalist Socialist New World Order. Among adding yet more fuel to the ecumenical fire is the 2009 Manhattan Declaration.
Though intended to appeal to conservative Christians with its antiabortion traditional marriage religious freedom proclamation, it is highly ecumenical. The Declaration states. We as orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical Christians have gathered together in New York on September 28, 2009, to make the following declaration. One of the three men on the declaration’s drafting committee was Robert George, a CFR member who served the UN on UNESCO’s World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology.
A signer of the Declaration is Richard Land, then president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission and a CFR member. A major ecumenist. Land also signed the 1994 Document Evangelicals and Catholics Together and is a member of the leadership group on US Muslim Engagement, a role he shares with several other CFR members, such as Stephen Hines, president of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, an analog in Catholicism? See how much longer we got here.
The Rockefellers as Baptists made non Catholic churches their zone of influence. However, parallels exist in Catholicism, on whom pressures tend to I am butchering that word more from European than American sources. The Catholic Church had its own experience with attempts to degrade faith through modernism, pressures to reject the authority of Scripture, to compromise with Darwinism as prominently advocates by the priest Pierre Tyle Tugge Desardin to accept abortion and to ordain women and homosexuals as priests.
Like the non Catholic Church, the Catholic Church has recently seen major ecumenical developments, such as the signing of the Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification by Lutheran and Catholic representatives in 1999, dialogue with Eastern Orthodox Churches resulting in the Common Declaration of Pope Benedict XVI and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I 2006, an unprecedented Catholic Muslim summit at the Vatican in 2008, and visits of Pope Benedict XVI to Israel and to the Great Synagogue of Rome in 2009.
Pope Francis also is prioritizing ecumenism and has issued a 192 page encyclical on climate change, a cause which globalists view as a major pretext for world government and Catholicism has experienced its own social action movement comparable to the tactics of Harry F. Ward as the doctrine of Liberation theology, which was seen especially in Latin America beginning in the 1950s and 60s, where the Gospel took a backseat to fighting poverty and social justice via Marxist precepts.
Unity and discernment Unity is a complex matter. The Apostle Paul did say, to be endeavoring to keep the unity and to keep the unity of the Spirit, Ephesians four three, and to be like minded one toward another, according to Christ Jesus in Romans 15 five. Furthermore, we know that a Satanic strategy is to divide and conquer. At the signing of the Declaration of Independence, Benjamin Franklin famously warned his peers, we must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.
So has Satan’s goal been to unite the Church or to divide it? It appears that he has employed both strategies, but that essentially division was the first phase and ecumenism the second. Intelligence analysts have cogently argued that the Illuminati were behind nearly every major split in the Christian Church, beginning with the Catholic Orthodox division of 1054. Illuminati infiltrators in the Catholic Church spawned the Inquisition to deliberately alienate Christians from their faith.
This infiltration was also responsible for the 16th century papal corruptions, such as selling indulgencies and squandering the Church budget that resulted in the Protestant split. Martin Luther, while himself a sincere reformer, was encouraged by Illuminati seeking church division. The Protestant church was in turn infiltrated to split it into smaller and smaller denominations, ostensibly over doctrinal issues, some less essential to the Gospel than others. Unquestionably, many of those who argued for division were sincere in their beliefs, and truths can probably be found on both sides of most doctrinal riffs.
But Satan held the long view to divide and conquer as part of its strategy to fragmentize Christianity. The cartel was also reportedly behind the formation of major cults, including Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormonism. I mentioned this while having great respect for the morality and sincerity of many of the followers of these two sects. Jehovah’s Witnesses deny Christ’s divinity, his physical resurrection, and the existence of hell. Mormons believe in multiple gods, that Jesus is a created being, Lucifer’s brother, and treat the Book of Mormon as Holy Scripture equal or even senior to the Bible.
Charles Taser Russell, founder of the Witnesses, and Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormons, were both Freemasons. Early issues of the Watchtower, the witnesses official publication before the Freemason for the Freemasonic cross on their covers. Interesting. Russell is buried next to the great Pittsburgh Masonic symbol. A pyramid displaying a Masonic cross marks his. Hmm. Thanks to the website Jesus’Savior, which features these images. Masonic symbols also adorn Mormon temples and all seeing eye crowns the interest of the Salt Lake City temple right there.
Interesting. According to some researchers, such as David Icke, initial funding for both the Jehovah’s Witness and Mormons originated with the Rothschild banks. These sects did not just happen, but were created to confuse and splinter the Christian church. From the perspective of the 21st century, it appears that the strategy of division has now essentially completed its season. With the church successfully fragmented and disoriented by modernism, it appears nearly ripe for the in Illuminati’s final phase, ecumeninism, the uniting of all Christian denominations, in turn to emerge with the other face to create a one world religion over whom Antichrist can rule.
However, this does not mean churches should never stand together. For example, if several location pastors from different denominations wish to engage in a joint protest against abortion, nothing is inherently wrong with this. Discernment is called for. It is unity for the purpose of serving God or serving Satan’s ecumenical goal. Examine the hearts and motives of those calling for unity and follow the money. Efforts tied to Rockefeller, Murdoch, Warren Blair initiatives should be absolutely avoided.
Okay, part two of this post will address an equally pernicious and even more controversial step in the war on Christianity, infiltration and subversion, and the fundamental evangelical churches themselves, especially through the introduction of Christian Zionism. So that’s why I read the first part of this war on Christianity, because it laid kind of a foundation for part two. And I’m not going to read part two tonight because part one is.
This is pretty long, but part two is twice as long. It’s very long, and I just don’t have it in me to do it tonight. Guys, I’m sorry. I’m an hour and 15 minutes into this and I didn’t sleep real well last night, so I’m just tired and I’m not going to fall asleep on you guys while I do this. So I’m going to call it a night and Let you guys just kind of chew on this.
I have included, you know what actually, you know what I will do is I will read the myth of the Judeo Christianity because that’s actually fairly short. So I will do that. The myth of Judeo Christianity explained. Let me make this a little bit bigger. The myth. See the, not only is the term Judeo Christian inaccurate, it’s also anti Semitic and Islamophobic. So I don’t like the fact that they’re using Islamophobic.
To me, this is, to me, I don’t like that word that means it’s potentially a woke in a way, but we’ll see what they have to say. The idea of Judeo Christianity and Judeochristian values is a relatively new one. Born out of World War II and the Cold War, it is a term that has been adapted by many Christians and American political leaders in an attempt to talk about the shared values between the Jewish and Christian religions.
But in reality, it erases Jewishness. Jewishness and excludes people of other faith backgrounds, particularly Muslims. Yeah, I’m not really liking that. I already don’t like the direction that we’re going about. Why are we talking about it now? On November 29, Dr. David Samani, a contributor to the conservative Newsmax Network, tweeted, Our churches must reopen. We need to pray this time of the year. It is the holiest time in the Judeo Christian calendar.
If we can have Walmart, Costco liquor stores, strip clubs and supermarkets, we can have our churches quickly. Many pointed out that the Judeo Christian calendar is absolutely not a thing. Hanukah, which is what we can assume he was referring to, is not the holiest time of the year for Jews. That’s reserved for a period called the High Holidays, also called the High Holy Days, the ten days spanning Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur.
Also, Jews notably use a lunar calendar rather than the growing and solar one. It’s kind of our whole deal. Yeah, so this is written from the Jewish perspective, so I’m not going to go. I already don’t like that one. I do agree that I don’t like the Judeo Christian thIng, but I don’t like the perspective that these guys are coming from. So I’m going to nip that in the bud anyway.
In the meantime, I’ll actually look for a better article that is a little bit more apropos for not necessarily what I believe, but I’m not coming from the perspective of trying to push Judaism, but trying to talk about it from the standpoint that the United States is a Christian nation, not a Judeo Christian nation. But in any event, thanks, everybody. I appreciate y’all tuning in tonight. And I hope this heard this got to some ears again.
This is going to be just part one. Part two will dive much deeper into this. And you know what? Actually, one other thing before I go, I want to look something up about James Perloff, if memory serves. I want to say that. I want to say that he started off as somebody who, he started off as somebody who was very much like, almost like an atheist, and he turned into a really hardcore Christian.
And I could be wrong on that, but, yeah, that’s all I’m right. Let’s see here. I remember seeing this. It’s redirecting me. Okay. That doesn’t say. Yeah, I was reading his author, James Perloff, a former fanatical atheist and anti creationist, understands the other side’s point of view. Okay. So it was probably just a comment on that page. But he was, at one time, he was a hardcore, if I understand it, he was a hardcore atheist and he became a Christian basically doing research and whatnot.
In fact, here, I’ll share this. So you can see. So this is a folder on my computer, and this is my James Perlaf folder. And this has all of the PDF stuff. There’s a lot of PDF stuff that he’s done. So just a lot of a. He’s somebody who has done a lot of writing on, call it conspiracy stuff. Somebody who I have a lot of respect for.
If I. Looking at that, looking at this, it says something about. He had. Did it say obituary? He die? Wow. James Perloff passed away Monday, August 14. Wow. That’s sad. So he just recently passed. Man, that’s terrible. Wow. He was 71. Now the community lost somebody who was really an awesome truth. So very sorry to hear that. All right, guys, well, I’m going to skedaddle here, and I hope you all have a wonderful evening, and I look forward to seeing you guys tomorrow.
I probably won’t do the part two of this tomorrow because tomorrow night is the watch party. And did anybody have any suggestions on the watch party? Did I miss it? Don’t know if I saw anybody put anything in there, but. But anyway. Okay, well, I have an idea what I’m going to do. So if you guys see something that you want to see. And you want to put it in the comments.
You can make some suggestions. But if I don’t get anything that really strikes my fancy. I’m just going to play the one that I’ve already decided on. In any event, I will be uploading that video. From drawing a blank Mike Harris tomorrow. And then we’ll do the watch party later in the evening. So y’all have a fantastic evening. Appreciate every single one of you guys. And I look forward to seeing Yao Mina.
Good night. .
Author
