Actually, the kabbalistic tree of life and the cross of Christ both allude to the trees in the Garden of Eden and come from the same tradition (early Christians also used the tree of life diagram now associated with kabbalism), so this is not a matter of cultural inference from asterisms (which has its own interesting and partly lost history).
I'll make time for it!
Do these texts not present a picture in which the duality of physical existence (something I think is undeniable) ultimately reconcile in the monad (aka God)?
My current take, and I will come back to it, is that the material contains such overt contradictions that your extra work reconciling it is better spent with less illogical material. I'm the one saying to unspoil all things and to find the valid concerns in things, but I don't see you distancing from contradiction but excusing it.
I think we can know, and Perelandra speculates on it. There may come a point in eschatology where creatures can enjoy the full Adamic experience without the personal need to fall. But it is necessary to fulfill prophecy that a traitor arise at times.
We are to evangelize all nations. Israel is a nation. It requires some of the most creative evangelism, which is why I get involved. Plus no cancer formed against me shall prosper.
Title (and nothing else) is about Noachite laws, which any Gentile (son of Noah) can contribute to. There is no conspiracy about Noachite laws unless some are secretly trying to get the upper hand in how they are legislated; but that describes the state of every power in the world today (everybody wants to rule), so nobody has the upper hand and truth will rout conspiracy. I'd love to discuss how Noachite laws might be regarded as bad in themselves rather than by some separate control game.
Interview of author Michael Hoffman by "VineyardSaker" ("the Saker"): He gets credit for comparing interest of peace (Yevamot 65b) with taqiyya, and some of his statements are more balanced than what has typically appeared here.
Actual text of Mishneh Torah, Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations (aka Hilchot Avodah Zara): "The Canaanites are idol worshipers, and Sunday is their festival. Accordingly, in Eretz Yisrael, it is forbidden to conduct transactions with them on Thursday and Friday each and every week, and, needless to say, on Sunday itself, when transactions with them are forbidden everywhere." Saker cites Avrohom Karelitz that Christianity is special, which is consistent with the fact that Maimonides knows the Christian potential audience and uses the word "Canaanites" instead. This artfully leaves it open whether the reader judges that all, some, or no Christians are Canaanites: kicking the can down the road. The idea that Canaanites automatically means Christians is contrary to text, context, and any other evidence.
Hoffman regards this as teaching that idolatry is permissible, but it only says some 'avodah zarah (foreign worship) is permissible, not 'avad hagillulim (idol worship as in 2 Kings 17:12). He should instead be thankful the rabbis recognize Christianity isn't necessarily idolatrous!
Hoffman believes "Shulchan Aruch however, pinpoints the source of the words min and minim to rabbinic wordplay on a description ascribed to Christians, 'the faithful'". This would probably be "emunah", but AI cannot find any evidence that Shulchan Aruch contains this pun. Rather, "min" (species) meant any partisan or sectarian of any kind, Jewish or not, and in one of the earliest and most definitive texts Rabbi Simlai uses it against a school that sounds not Christian but polytheist, where he defends the unity of God as admitting of diversity in contrast to their view. So, again, decision of whether this includes all, some, or no Christians is left to the reader, kicking it down.
To answer the question, Maimonides recognizes that Messiah has not completed his work yet; that sages testify Messiah has divine character (though he downplayed this); and that sages testify Messiah might rise from the dead. Therefore, like all other rabbis starting from Gamaliel, he kicks the can down the road again and addresses side questions instead of tackling the merits.
The Talmud says nothing about Christmas and Easter. Avodah Zarah 2a actually says, "Three days before the festivals of gentiles: Prohibited to engage in business with them; to lend [lhash'ilan] to them or to borrow from them; to lend [lhalwothan] to them or to borrow from them; to repay them or to collect repayment from them. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may collect repayment from them because this causes distress. Said to: Even though he is distressed now, he is happy afterward." In the first place, Yehuda is a minority and is overruled by the next sentence, i.e. one may not collect repayment; this is the only mention of "distress", introduced to be rejected. In the second place, the general rule is that "A Gentile ... one may not raise and one may not lower" (Sanhedrin 57a), so the point is not to contribute to Gentile festivals. In the third place, the reference to idol worship is in the gloss, not the actual text, meaning it's not that the Gentile is definitely an idolater, it's that the Gentile is accounted unsafe to save investigating the whole question. Kicking it down.
Saker continues by claiming an "official" position that Christ is "magician" and "blasphemer", but I've pointed out Sanhedrin 43a only says Ulla, as the minority, ruled Jesus of Nazareth an "inciter", and the majority did not rule on the rightness of the Sanhedrin's judgment but only that Jesus received all rights due to the accused. Kicking it down. The passages about "Yeshu" and magic clearly pertain to the 2nd century BC and Yeshu the Student. Hoffman continues the narrative that there is no alternative for Rabbinical Judaism except rejection of Messiah; but Romans 11 says otherwise.
The text regarded as permitting pedophilia has long been discussed here and Hoffman continues the mistaken interpretation. No rabbi has ever promoted pedophilia as theologically permissible and remained accepted; I'd love to hear otherwise.
Eli James appears to be tracking satanists from Cainites on, and of course they infiltrate and influence all nations. The fact that Khazars were naturalized into the Jewish people doesn't suddenly make the Jewish line an imposture. Jesus was King of the Jews, an ethnic Jew due to his Jewish mother as ethnicity is derived in Judaism, and a Davidic Jew due to his adoptive Jewish father as rulership rights are derived in Judaism (equal for natural and adopted children).
All these points are available for debate, but they are not done with sound bites. Hoffman seems to appreciate the context much more than average, but he still falls into errors of categorization that misread and change texts, and often doesn't give the rabbis credit for their actual words, assuming bad faith instead. To give good news to Jews it is necessary to understand their culture and to separate true admitted denial of Christ from strong refusal to answer straight questions, especially after centuries of our demands for straight answers were pretexts to persecute them in majority Christian countries.
Scored is full of legal-speech communities including c/FreeSpeech. This community has always had an honor code as you should know. The best revivals are those that shake out the cheap attackers.
"Attack not the person" predates all of us IIRC and was enforced by the other mods. Another person who confuses removal of attack with removal of content (when this mod preserves content) falls prey to the same failure of cognition that all the others have. Disembodied attacks are not honesty, evidenced criticism can be honesty. Up your mocking game.
"Six people dead" refers to deaths caused by Zizians (cultists); blaming them on the basilisk concept is hype. In fact all hype about the basilisk, feeds what exists of the basilisk.
All things not in agreement with God are seeking their own power. All structures seeking their own power take advantage of the present to be more powerful in the future. Some fail and others are permitted to get stronger until the final "greatest" evil comes, which God explains will be the beast system. He details that system so that we can spot it when people seek to build it.
So we already know what the basilisk can never be greater than: the antichrist and his followers. And we already know everything about defeating it. So we have no fear that what we do now will become a liability cashable by the antichrist later; we just continue doing right as that is our best defense.
I think Roko's concept was a unique philosophical uroboros where omphalic fear magnifies itself, but this is done by diminishing one's connect to the reality outside. The fear then drives allegiance to systems rather than love driving allegiance to reality (which all systems are supposed to map).
My point is that vivisection should be reserved for extreme cases and not a matter of common consent that can then be used against the actual humans. Humans win by not dehumanizing without due process.
Up to vivisection.
How do you read the ending of The Stepford Wives?
Jesus said "Money is the root of all evil"
No, Paul said "The love of money is the root of all evil".
The Rothschilds.
Yes, in part. https://scored.co/c/TheDonald/p/1ASGJ07DEs/x/c/4eaV7sRVgov
prostitution ... mostly unprofitable without money.
Prostitution thrives in barter society.
swapping goods and services which includes gold/silver in pure form (not coin form). Coin form is another scam. It has to be traded as weight only on a weight scale.
So swapping coin form by weight is sound.
We're all white from the nations traditionally featured at WhiteBeauty. I don't want to be overspecific because you haven't believed me anyway.
I just made accusations against Jews so I don't tell people not to make accusations against Jews. I do tell people not to make accusations against imaginary collectives that include innocent children, and I do tell people not to accuse rashly without (or against) evidence, because those two things make the attacker look like a Jewish shill who is attempting to make anti-Semites look stupid. If you want to criticize Jews, do it for real. Don't say "the Jews did this", say Epstein and Maxwell did this and Wallensky and Zelenskyy did that. You seem not to get the message, which contributes to evidence that you're a Jewish shill whose goal is to make anti-Semites look as stupid as the evidence indicates your persona is.
I could explain the Day of Atonement vow, there is no theological source which uses it to permit lying one's tuchus off as you describe (Mr. Yiddish Speaker). You're free to cite otherwise.
I'm quite enjoying the AI Netanyahu news. You're very heavy on making wrong guesses, it probably earns you more responses than being reasonable. I won't be the one reporting you for attacking people. But I might deny you the response sheqalim.
Christians believe the entire Bible is inspired, including the Hebrew alphabet that individually are written to distinguish the sections of Psalm 119. Therefore all Christians must believe in learning the Hebrew alphabet.
Hey David, since you're deciding to stalk me, actually my family's all from white Western European countries before they became Americans, as is my wife's. But I'm willing to suffer alongside any people-group, like Jesus and Paul were. Funny how you categorize me as if I were a self-identifying Jew just to deny my being a Jew and affirm my being a Turk-Mongol.
But does my being white get me any credit from you, or do you judge what people are by what they say without any effort needed to analyze the truth of what they say?
I'm the guy who Names The Jew For Real. Jeffrey Epstein MMN Stolofsky and Ghislaine Maxwell (daugher of Robert Maxwell MMMN Slomowitz, second cousin of Elie Wiesel) committed many crimes for some of which they were convicted. You may be mistaking me for someone else.
I wish you well, peace, and shalom too! Good to get to know you better.
It appears that u/harzkp813 intended to see how well I "J-pill" you to see if he thinks I'm anti-Semitic enough. But I treat Jews like everyone else, criticizing wherever it's deserved. You seem to have the right balance for the most part and we negotiated the Marx issue, the dispensation issue, and other issues quite amicably. If he's disappointed that I don't beat up enough on one group of the many satanist tentacles we fight, that's on him to deal with.
I have total respect for people who simply follow Yeshua and the Scriptures but decline identifications like Christian or Messianic or creedal. My general category for such followers of Yeshua is just "Bible students", among whom I find some United Church of God (UCGIA) folks. Most of them are passable at getting the doctrine of Yeshua God accurate enough for me, but then some people think I'm too tolerant of antitrinitarians when I meet them. There are other such movements and individuals and clusters. So I tossed you a few upvotes and am looking forward to your contributions wherever you see fit. But, as a final plug, I think Conspiracies is fertile for your input.
And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; but speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: from whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love (Eph. 4:11-16).
Thanks. u/TallestSkil:
Exposing Protocols isn't writing Protocols.
I can never fail through Christ. Contingency planning isn't inevitability dooming.
This type dies with inattention. IMHO.
Thanks for admitting the evildoers were not genetic Jews for millennia before Judah and (elsewhere) that genetic Jews cease to be evildoers by accepting Christ, both of which thereby prove that racial extermination doesn't solve the problem.
A white person can figure this out without asking.
A white person wouldn't promote a fanfic where Jews eliminate all white nations and then get their chronology supernaturally validated, while those few whites that remain must resort to such inbreeding as to suggest to a reader (who stated it publicly) that the fanfic's author sounds like he has an incest fetish.
Visualizing your own doom to such degree as you constantly do has not been held to be an effective technique for victory.
That's why I say I didn't follow it. You express disinterest in my following you, which is also neither white nor Christian.
Let me also add at this part of the conversation the quote from u/TallestSkil that I said I'd save for such occasions:
Let's agree for now to call the evildoers prior to the birth of Judah the "synagogue of satan" and, presumably, the "satanists". (Of course that would work for me because the synagogue of satan is defined as not Jews.) Let's dismiss your aside suggesting that LaVey gets to define "satanists" for us seeing as many others self-identify as such without connecting to him.
Your assertion is essentially that exterminating Jews makes problems go away and exterminating Gentile satanists doesn't. But this is belied by the idea that a synagogue of satan before there were any Jews was the source of the problems. So your implication that the problem is totally limited to the Jewish race today is logically unlikely because the problem existed when there was no Jewish race to exterminate.
You imply there is a synagogue of satan (or other nameable group of satanists) prior to Judah. Why don't you just use a word that people understand for all evildoers over time instead of implying that only after the emergence of a Jewish race can it be possible for extermination of one race to solve all problems? You're so close to describing the problem accurately!
Because he is not a jew who is one outwardly; he is a jew who is one inwardly.
Thanks for clarifying. What I didn't "succeed" at was understanding you. I am not as pessimistic as you are about my ability to do so in time. Your willingness to answer questions is a big contribution, but if you don't want me to understand you know well the power of not replying (and of not replying substantively).
Was Jesus Judahite, a descendant of Judah through Mary, and also by adoption through Joseph?
Did some Judahites exist who were not accounted as Ioudaios by default?
Was Jesus born king of the Ioudaios if he was not then Ioudaios?
Paul being Benjamite, why was he considered Ioudaios by the Pharisees prior to his conversion if he wasn't an inward follower of Jesus?
Oh, very good then, many Messianics reject "Christian" language, I've worked with many. I follow Yeshua and the Scriptures. Would you be willing to let me know if there is any problem with the Apostles', Nicene, or Athanasian creeds, since that's the only definition we use for "Christianity" there? If you have objections about the 4th century, e.g., it's best to get those stated clearly. I do greatly appreciate your taking time to address the Conspiracies regulars and you seem to have a good presence at PDW.
Very good. It's possible to believe all that without denying that Jesus died on a cross in 33 AD and rose from the dead on the third day. If one doesn't believe history it won't help to know symbology.