Clearly Sinai & Horev stand as the Zenith of the revelation of the Torah.

The Torah operates as common law, founded on evolving precedents, not statutory declarations—exposes a deep conceptual error in how Xtian theology has often misrepresented the Torah. Torah simply not a statute law code of Hammurabi – the 6th king of Babylon. Statute Law – simply a different breed of fish from judicial common law.

Statute law by definition, some kind of Legislative decree(s) ruled by the Government. Torah common law the court justices do not receive a salary from the State. The Torah refers to this vertical legal system as “bribery”. British common law the justices receive their salary from the State.

Shabbat, for example, commanded before Sinai, in the wilderness of Manna (Shemot 16), where no tablets had yet been given, and no voice thundered from the cloud. This precedent constitutes as a legal reality, a lived ruling. And when Shabbat appears again in the two versions of the Decalogue—one in Shemot, the other in Devarim—Xtian translations note minor differences and call them contradictions. But these are not contradictions—they expose case law interpretations! “Shamor” and “Zachor” simply not two commands but two angles of the same diamond, revealed through the evolution of judgment.

Our sages taught: Israel heard only the first two commands directly from the Divine before recoiling, pleading that Moshe receive the rest (Makkot 24a, Shabbat 88b). The church response, both Popes and Kings decreed the burning of the Talmud. Ten Commandments do not remotely qualify as the revelation of the Torah common law judicial legal system.

Torah, not simply revealed in a flash. But this revelation unfolded in the tent of meeting, in the wilderness, in the courts of elders. D’varim/Mishna Torah 100% not a simple repetition of Sh’mot. The mitzva of shabbat essentially remembers the enslavement of Israel in Egypt. Just as that enslavement oppression did not occur just one day of the week but the entire week, so too and how much more so Shabbat does not mean only the 7th day but rather the entire week.

Xtian theology flattens the Torah revelation into a compartment slogan. Torah common law does not comparable to children’s nursery rhyme stories. The printing press cannot reproduce the 4-part logic system of the Divine Name which has 4 letters. To address the Sinai revelation divorced from the oaths sworn by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov utterly degrades and undermines the foundation upon which Sinai stands.

Xtian theology misconstrues Torah by treating it as statutory law rather than a precedent-driven judicial common law system. The Torah operates as judicial common law, founded on evolving judicial precedents, not statutory Legislative decrees. This fundamental flaw exposes a deep conceptual error in how Xtian theology has historically misrepresented the Torah.

Statute law is vertical, legislative, top-down. It is imposed by the sovereign ruler and enforced by bureaucratic power. It functions by decree. Torah, a judicial common law system built through case rulings, oral transmission, precedent, and collective adjudication לשמה. Interpreted to mean, according to the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva: פרדס. The judges of Torah do not receive salaries from the state, and the Torah itself declares that such financial entanglement with government constitutes shochad—bribery (Devarim 16:19).

In contrast, modern states pay their judges, and their rulings enforce the will of Parlieament. Torah judges, by contrast, remember & interprets the sworn Avot oaths as law from within the brit alliance masoret—not enforceable political decrees. When the Decalogue later presents Shabbat again—in Shemot 20 and then Devarim 5—subtle Calculus like variables, but crucial different witness testimony distinctions. These differences do not qualify as contradictions. They expose interpretive evolutions—case law adaptations. “Shamor” and “Zachor”—observe and remember—two different but complementary legal perspectives, not opposing slogans. They validate different precedential frames through which to understand the same mitzvah. The sages even interpret them as having been spoken simultaneously—two facets of the same diamond stone.

The Xtian flattening of this into a list of “Ten Commandments,” cut off from halakhic context, entirely misses the dynamic legal character of Torah, and baptises it unto a static fossil discovery, as if words carved into stone. Xtian theology promotes and exposes the meaning of false prophets. Its replacement theology declares these verses, frozen in a single moment, constitute the whole of the Torah revelation. Xtian and Muslim belief in some Universal God(s) ignores that only the 12 Tribes of Israel received the Torah at Sinai. Yet the Talmud teaches (Makkot 24a, Shabbat 88b) that Israel heard only the first two utterances at Sinai before begging Moshe to receive the rest. Have repeated this point like the Torah does the decalogue as a point of emphasis.

In Devarim, the mitzva of shabbat not tied to creation, but to the Exodus. It becomes a political-ethical memory of slavery: “So that your servant and your maidservant may rest as you do… and you shall remember that the Egyptians oppressed their slaves.” The implication profoundly radical: Shabbat simply not merely one day of rest, but a comprehensive rejection of permanent bondage. Just as enslavement afflicted the Israelites every day of the week, so too does Shabbat reshape the entire rhythm of labor and liberty across all seven days. The word shabbat means week.

Torah operates within the four-part logic of the Divine Name (Y-H-V-H)—each letter unfolding layers of י\law, ה/prophecy, ו\wisdom, and ה/judgment. A theology that isolates Sinai from the oaths sworn by Avraham, Yitzḥak, and Yaakov utterly not reverent—rather destructive. It severs the root from the tree, divorcing the revelation from the oath brit Cohen alliance inheritance that breathes life unto all generations of the chosen people.

A Post Pesach Condemnation of Easter on the 7th Day of the Omer, one full week after Seder Night.

Given the profound theological distortions and centuries of bloodshed carried out in the name of the “resurrected Christ”—especially the horrors committed during Easter and Holy Week—How should a Jew respond to Happy Easter from a Goy, especially the bloody history of blood libels, pogroms, taxation without representation, forced ghetto imprisonment for 3 Centuries, and forced expulsions from virtually all Xtian nations of Europe – the mother of Xtianity?

As an atheist – praise HaShem, I do not believe in your new God Jesus the Son of God, trinity belief system. It seems to me that all religious rhetoric belief systems stand upon theology and Creeds, and possess absolutely no wisdom what so ever. Hence both Xtianity and Islam forced to import ancient Greek wisdom of logic because their personal belief in this, that, or those Gods – failed to prioritize wisdom. The Torah by contrast teaches according to the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive logic format – the wisdom of Oral Torah common law.

The Torah does not require belief in any god, the way Christianity or Islam does. It requires allegiance to our oath brit contractual obligations, fidelity to justice, and the pursuit of chochmah (wisdom) through structured interpretation and judicial legal discernment. That’s a completely different paradigm. As an atheist—praise HaShem, a very Talmudic turn of phrase, almost like saying: “I reject your idol, and in doing so I uphold the Name.” Torah has space for this kind of irony. “The Name” (HaShem) – a spirit and not a word metaphor or Rubic’s cube puzzle. The revelation of the Name in the first commandment at Sinai, shares absolutely zero common ground with an theological/creed based idolatry “belief object”—Torah a legal common law judicial legal system of law, defined by the sworn oath brit terms, Like a living-blood-sealed treaty carved into stone, by the Avot: Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov.

Henceforth known as the brit (alliance). The Torah simply not a metaphysical abstraction as the Nicene Creed or Muslim Universal conversion by simply declaring belief in Allah and Mumammad as the Final prophet, any more than the prophet of the Church of the Latter Day Saints and their Holy Book substitute theology, in any way shape or form resembles the revelation at Sinai and Horev. This common thread links the attempts made by the new testament, koran and book of Mormon to supplant all earlier, specifically T’NaCH scriptures. The latter targets, like the rear and front sights of a sniper rifle, only the tiny Jewish audience. Whereas the fraudulent old testament/new testament bible, koran and morman holy books make an appeal to all Mankind. The Talmud teaches in mesechta avoda zarah that all Mankind other than the Chosen Cohen People reject to this day the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Horev.

Herein, this response represents the classic standard Jewish response to “Happy Easter”, based upon Jewish inter-actions with the European church abomination. Unlike the peoples who reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, the Talmud understands the 2nd Sinai commandment: Not to worship other Gods, with the interpretation of: A – Do not assimilate nor embrace the cultures and customs of any people or society which rejects the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. For example when king Shlomo built his first Temple, because he based this vision upon non Jewish cultures and customs, like the Catholic church, for example, builds great Cathedrals which took generations to complete those huge static dinosaur fossilized beastly constructions.
Rather than establish Sanhedrin lateral common law Federal courtrooms, Shlomo judged the Capital Crimes Case of the two prostitutes before his private Paro like, Monarch dominated and controlled vertical courtroom, where the State pays the salaries of the Judges and Prosecuting Attorney. Hence the First Temple in Jerusalem defines the Xtian translation of the 2nd Sinai commandment – “idolatry”. B. Do not intermarry with these foreign alien people who reject the revelation of the Torah oath brit remembrance cut at Sinai and Horev. Again king Shlomo serves as the objective model for this negative interpretation of the meaning of the 2nd Sinai commandment. The Book of Ezra serve as a support to the mussar rebuke taught in the Prophetic Book of Kings. Comparable to how the Gemara functions as a commentary to the Mishna.

This wisdom stands as the eternal foundation of everything: Torah simply not a religion—rather its serves, directly comparable to the 1789 US constitution, a judicial covenant sworn by the Avot and ratified at Sinai and Horev which established the first Commonwealth of the Israelite Republic. Its פרדס logic – contractual, not mystical. Its sacredness lies not in “what one believes,” but in how one lives in fidelity to a sworn brit—a legal-political alliance sealed with mutual oath allliance(s) – something like the NATO alliance established after WWII. How do Jews dedicate their “world to come” behavior with our wives, family, neighbors, and people in the future as the definition of our t’shuva to honor the oath brit alliance faith throughout all generations the Jewish people live on this Earth. The metaphor “World to Come” does not refer to life after death, but how a man contracts to marry a woman with the obligation to instruct his future born children to honor the oath alliance faith\contract commitments.

Unlike Christianity (which demands acceptance of the Nicene Creed) or Islam (which requires the Shahada), Torah demands: the righteous pursuit of judicial justice which honestly dedicates – like a korban on the altar – to restore fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B among the chosen Cohen people throughout the generations. “As an atheist – praise HaShem”, this phrase encapsules Talmudic inductive reasoning. It echoes Moshe breaking the tablets—not out of disbelief, but out of fidelity to the brit terms violated when the “mixed multitudes” (assimilated and inter-married Jews) attempted to make the Golden Calf a substitute for Moshe Rabbeinu. Chag Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) utterly rejects all substitute theologies, like as encorporated in the theologyies of Xtianity, Islam, and Mormonism. On Yom Kippur, HaShem sanctified t’shuva rather than “repentance”. HaShem annulled the vow, to make of Moshe the chosen Cohen people which would have profaned the oath sworn with the Avot, specifically the oath first sworn to Avram at the brit cut between the pieces.

I do not subscribe to your new gods or universalizing metaphysics. My allegiance only to the brit sworn at Sinai—to the Name לשמה. This foundation of all Av tohor time oriented commandment k’vanna, simply not a belief, and specifically belief in any cult of personality or object. The spirit of justice breathing in the hearts of a chosen people bound to the terms of the oath brit contractual alliance.

Impossible for the Johnny Come Lately replacement Holy Books, which prioritize Xtian creedal salvation or Islam’s conversion formula; these foreign theologies share no common ground with the oath brit alliance which applies strictly and only to the Jewish people and how we behave and interact among ourselves, throughout the generations we independently rule and govern the oath promised land. Obedience to the oath alliance contracts has nothing to do with DNA or racial Race theories, so popular during the 20th Century and post Shoah shallow reactionary racist morons.

HaShem simply NOT a theological idea – and neither Jesus nor Muhammad has the power or authority to change this simple fact; any more than the two legs of a right triangle – any one of them longer than the length of the hypotenuse leg of that right triangle; any more than anything observed in the Seas, Heavens, or Earth comparable to HaShem – the God of Israel alone. This Name lives within the Yatriz HaTov within the bnai-brit Cohen peoples’ hearts, not in some heavenly throne room or philosophical abstraction. Creedal theologies turn “God” into a thing you believe in, a noun. The Torah presents HaShem as a verb—a living oath alliance contract which judges the hearts of the chosen Cohen people in all generations – equally.

The Talmud, not a theology book. Rather it reflects as record of legal case/rule argument precedents, a debate between the prosecutor and defense attorneys before the 3rd judge of a Torts Court, inductive dialectic of logic, and interpretation of the intent of the Framers of both the T’NaCH and Talmud visions of Mitzvot and Halacha.

Talmud teaches in tractate Avodah Zarah that the nations of the world rejected the brit at Sinai. Hence the universalizing books—the New Testament, Koran, Book of Mormon—must create substitute theologies aimed at global appeal, because they lack brit-based legitimacy. These texts override, supplant, and erase the specificity of the original brit by asserting new revelations—all of which are detached from oath law and legal testimony. All of which violate the Torah negative commandment not to Add or Subtract from this Torah.

Every one of these super-sessionist texts seeks universality, which the Torah totally rejects without any question or doubt. The Torah oath brit cut with Israel, (the chosen Cohen people) and not mankind. The nations were offered Torah, but they rejected it—as per midrash and tractate Avodah Zarah. Therefore, these later texts construct a counter-Torah. The New Testament: salvation by blood of a Roman-executed man/son of God. The Koran: denies Jewish oath brit contract cut with all future born children of Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov. Both the Church fathers and Muslim shieks call Jews accursed, hated by either God the Father or Allah in Heaven. Book of Mormon: absurd American-based fantasy of divine destiny, with fabricated Semitic claims. Each of these attempts not only fail to uphold the brit—they declare war on it. Therefore all three foreign counterfeit religions define the intent of the 2nd Sinai commandment – Not to worship other Gods.

Herein, this response represents a standard Jewish response to “Happy Easter”. Unlike the peoples who reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, the Talmud understands the 2nd Sinai commandment: Not to worship other Gods, with the interpretation of: A – Do not assimilate nor embrace the cultures and customs of any people or society which rejects the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. For example when king Shlomo built his first Temple, because he based this vision upon non Jewish cultures and customs, the Catholic church builds great Cathedrals which took generations to complete on structure, rather than establish Sanhedrin lateral common law Federal courtrooms! Hence the First Temple in Jerusalem qualifies as “idolatry”. B. Do not intermarry with these alien people who reject the revelation of the Torah oath brit remembrance cut at Sinai and Horev. Again king Shlomo serves as the model of this negative interpretation of the meaning of the 2nd Sinai commandment.

This is the foundation of everything: Torah is not a religion—it is a national constitution, a judicial covenant sworn by the Avot and ratified at Sinai and Horev. Its logic is contractual, not mystical. Its sacredness lies not in “what one believes,” but in how one lives in fidelity to a sworn brit—a legal-political alliance sealed with mutual oath allliance(s) – something like the NATO alliance established after WWII.

Unlike Christianity (which demands acceptance of the Nicene Creed) or Islam (which requires the Shahada), Torah demands: the righteous pursuit of judicial justice which honestly restores fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B among the chosen Cohen people throughout the generations. “As an atheist – praise HaShem”, this phrase encapsules Talmudic inductive reasoning. It echoes Moshe breaking the tablets—not out of disbelief, but out of fidelity to the brit violated when the “mixed multitudes” (assimilated and inter-married Jews) attempted to make the Golden Calf a substitute for Moshe Rabbeinu. Chag Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) rejects substitute theology. HaShem made t’shuva and annulled the vow to make of Moshe the chosen Cohen people which would have profaned the oath sworn with the Avot, specifically the oath first sworn to Avram at the brit cut between the pieces.

I do not subscribe to your new gods or universalizing metaphysics. My allegiance is to the brit sworn at Sinai—to the Name, which is not a belief object but the spirit of justice breathing in the hearts of a chosen people bound to the terms of the oath brit contractual alliance. Impossible as the Johnny Come Lately replacement Holy Books which prioritize creedal salvation or Islam’s conversion formula. These foreign theologies share no common ground with the oath brit alliance which applies strictly and only to the Jewish people and how we behave and interact among ourselves. Obedience to the oath alliance contracts has nothing to do with DNA or racial Race theories.

HaShem simply NOT a theological idea – any more than anything observed in the Seas, Heavens, or Earth comparable to HaShem – the God of Israel alone. This Name lives within the Yatriz HaTov within the bnai-brit Cohen peoples’ hearts, not in some heavenly throne room or philosophical abstraction. Creedal theologies turn “God” into a thing you believe in, a noun. The Torah presents HaShem as a verb—a living oath alliance contract which judges the hearts of the chosen Cohen people in all generations – equally.

Every one of these super-sessionist texts preaches universality, which the Torah totally rejects without any question or doubt. The Torah oath brit cut with Israel, (the chosen Cohen people) and not mankind. The nations, offered the Torah, but they rejected it—as per midrash and tractate Avodah Zarah. Therefore, these ‘later day saints’ texts construct a counter-Torah. The New Testament: salvation by blood of a Roman-executed Hercules son of God. The Koran: denies Jewish oath brit contract cut with all future born children of Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov. Both the Church fathers and Muslim Sheiks call Jews accursed, hated by either God the Father or Allah in Heaven. Book of Mormon: that utterly absurd American-based fantasy of divine destiny, with fabricated Semitic claims, comparable to the Chicago Black Hebrews Xtians who came to Israel in the 1960s. Each of these attempts, not only fail to uphold the brit—they declare war on it. Therefore all three foreign counterfeit religions define the intent of the 2nd Sinai commandment – Not to worship other Gods.

“As an atheist, praise HaShem”—captures that paradoxical brilliance found in Talmudic reasoning: not belief, but allegiance; not metaphysics, but brit; not salvation, but justice. The Jewish people never received justice: not from the courts of Par’o, nor any court of Europe including the ICC or ICJ, nor any court in Islamic lands – ever. Goyim religions of avoda zarah prioritize belief over judicial wisdom. Only after the vertical Star Courts of the British Crown legalized impressment of American sailors on the High Seas, did the Founding Fathers institutionalize a lateral Jury system of law. Torah stands as the only non-theological, non-creedal path—a national legal-political constitution built not on universal abstractions focused upon cults of personality and God mythologies, but upon concrete obligations to a specific people through an oath alliance with the purpose to rule the Promised land with trust and shalom among the chosen Cohen people. Torah common law simply does not compare to foreign fiction stories like Harry Potter or Nancy Drew. The purpose of judicial justice, simply simple to understand: to restore a broke trust among our People within the oath sworn Promised land.

Xtianity, Islam, and Mormonism, not simply “different religions,” but reactionary projects—constructed precisely because the nations rejected the brit and had to manufacture alternate paths to the Torah Constitutional Republic within the borders of the Promised Land. The lip service these foreign religions give to respect the “Holy Land”, proven by the simple fact that no Xtian, Arab, Turkish Muslim ever established a Palestinian independent State ever in human history. Only the Jewish people ever built an independent Jewish state on multiple occasion within the borders of the Promised Land. Avoda zara, its Av tuma attempts to pervert Jewish just rulership of the Promised land unto mythical and esoteric religions as their disguised camouflage which conceals their lack of wisdom.

The 2nd commandment, this national anti-assimilation clause—rather than a metaphysical prohibition—both halakhic and historically grounded. Shlomo’s First Temple interpreted as another prime example of idolatry, on par with the sin of the Golden Calf. This perhaps radical interpretation yet easily supportable view based upon similar Torah common law precedents, especially in contrast to the later obsession with architectural grandeur (e.g., Catholic cathedrals) over legal restoration (e.g., Sanhedrin courtrooms). Combined with his gross opulance of accumulated vast wealth and foreign wives – both direct Torah violations!

Torah = national brit by mutual sworn oath, not belief. Xtianity = creedal faith, with a long history of hoarding fabulous wealth inequalities. Islam = universal conversion, more of the same; Islam stuck in a Feudal model of Lord/peasant relationships to this very day. Mormonism = a mythological Harry Potter substitute of fiction, comparable to the Church of Scientology. The famous “Do not add or subtract” command in Devarim becomes a polemic weapon here—one that slices through any claim to new testaments, final prophets, or American scriptures. NATO as a legal-political metaphor for the brit alliance—it’s not about who “believes in democracy,” but about binding treaties and mutual obligations, and shared National and Inter-national strategic objectives.

Framing the Torah as a brit-based constitutional legal system—rather than a metaphysical religion—re-centers the Jewish people not as just another but far smaller religious “faith community,” but as a sovereign legal-political nation with a judiciary-bound ethic, a contractually governed land, and inter-generational obligations among Cohanim, Zera Yisrael, and converts who accept the terms of the brit as law, rather than religious theology.

The 2nd commandment as a national prohibition against assimilation and intermarriage, especially when held up against the rabbinic midrashim on Parashat Yitro and the Gemara in Avodah Zarah. It flips the script on “universalism” and reframes the conversation entirely: instead of Judaism being “narrow,” it is specific—rooted in oath law and Sanhedrin courts common law; especially when held up against the rabbinic midrashim on Parashat Yitro and the Gemara in Avodah Zarah. The 2nd Sinai commandment flips the script on “universalism” and reframes the conversation entirely: the chosen Cohen people, who alone accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and the Oral Torah at Horev 40 days after the Sin of the Golden Calf.

Consider the halachic mitzvot of Shabbat and Kashrut as specific examples of the contractual oath alliance terms of the “brit treaty”. Perhaps comparable to the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which serves as the foundation of modern Zionism today; meaning Jews equal rights to achieve self-determination in the Middle East. Shabbat fundamentally requires that the chosen Cohen people discern the fundamental distinctions with separates work from work: מלאכה from עבודה. The Rabbeinu Tam tefillen remembers the oath sworn by Yehoshua and Israel when entering Canaan to conquer the kingdoms of the land. At Sh’Cem the chosen Cohen people commit to honor the contract, not to interpret Torah law — other than viewed through the lenses of Horev Oral Torah middot logic methodologies. The rabbinic mitzva of lighting the lights of Hanukah likewise expresses this exact intent.

Mapping Torah onto a constitutional model that’s grounded in oath-bound specificity, not metaphysical abstractions or cults of personality nonsense. In this light, “religion” as a category becomes utterly irrelevant—Torah does not exist nor functions as a religious spiritual experience, nor as an explosion of intense private feeling as if it compared to a sexual orgasm or Xtian “passion”, rather the Torah serves as the Constitution of the national Republic. Just that simple and nothing more.

The specific examples of Shabbat and Kashrut used to gage the depth of treaty stipulations—they’re not “rituals”, as latter-day statute halachic fossilized codes which emphasize religious piety, but legal-demonstrative affirmations of national identity and brit fidelity. Same with Rabbeinu Tam tefillin—not about mysticism, but about loyal testimony to the oath sworn at Shechem which reaffirms the oath brit sworn at Horev. Every mitzvah in the Torah, functions as an act of juridical allegiance, not belief-based, static bound fossilized devotion devotion to halachic ritual observances. The metaphor to the he Balfour Declaration—it attempts to parallel how modern Zionism mirrors ancient brit logic: political self-determination based on sworn obligations, not belief systems. In both cases, it’s about territory, contract, and national law—not ideology. The Churchill and Chamberlain White Papers by stark contrast prioritized British imperial strategic interests lie the Church and Mosque place religion upon a pedestal and worship it.

Every mitzvah becomes an act of juridical allegiance, not belief-based devotion. Torah stands not as a metaphysical religion but as the foundational constitutional document of a legal-political nation bound by public law, mutual obligation, and historical mussar remembered oaths. All generations of Jews have a Torah mitzva obligation to remember the oaths sworn by both the Avot and our forefathers. The act of remembering the specific details of these sworn oaths, this act of remembrance defines the k’vanna of all Torah time oriented tohor Av commandments. This Torah wisdom permits all toldot positive and negative commandments from the Torah and hall halachot from the Talmud to make the regal aliyah and transform into Av tohor time oriented commandments which possess the power תמיד מעשה בראשית to turn curses into blessings and make a new creation, comparable to the Jewish state in 1948 and again in 1967.

Why did the rabbis of Paris France place the ban of נידוי upon the writings the Rambam in 1232?

Why do some rabbis argue that the Rambam remains in נידוי? Why does Traditional Judaism utterly reject Conservative and Reform converts as being Gere Tzeddic converts to Judaism? T’NaCH commands prophetic mussar rather than the perversion that the T’NaCH teaches history.

A ger tzeddik required to accept the yoke of the commandments fully, which means adhering to all aspects of Jewish law as outlined in the Torah and rabbinic literature. Neither the Rambam, Conservative and how much more so Reform Judaism has any concept of Av tohor time oriented commandments. Their box thinking limits these primary most essential commandments to time. Wrong. Observance of the mitzva of shabbat, for example, constitutes as a time oriented commandment. Shabbat distinguishes between מלאכה from עבודה. Both verbs translate as work. Failure to understand, distinguish, and discern like from like defines the Torah concept of “Understanding”. Shabbat opens and closes with the discernment “הבדלה”, comparable to grains separated between t’rumah and chol grains! Failure to discern forbidden מלאכה from forbidden עבודה, effectively means that Jews fail to observe the mitzva of shabbat.

Conservative and Reform “Judaism”, these “closest thing to Judaism” like the Chabad rebbe as Moshiach, know absolutely nothing of tohor time oriented Av commandments which require prophetic mussar as the most essential k’vanna of all tohor time oriented commandments. The B’HaG ruled in his classification of the 613 Commandments that Chag Purim qualifies as a mitzva from the Torah.

Assimilated to Greek culture and customs, the rabbi known as Rambam, failed to grasp the most essential Av Commandments collectively known as tohor time oriented commandments. Traditional Judaism utterly rejects converts from Conservative and Reform based on the simple fact that these obtuse & perverted religions know nothing, like the Rambam, of Av time-oriented commandments. The precedent of Chag Purim, a tohor time oriented commandment from the Torah – according to the B’HaG.

The Rambam and how much more so Conservative and Reform “Judaism” – embrace and assimilate to Greek schools of logic. They do not teach משנה תורה – understood as Common law. Rather they view the Torah colored by assimilation to Greek and Roman statute law. This alien legislative law completely rejects Sanhedrin Courts lateral common law legalism. The halachot debated throughout the Gemara serve most essentially a בנין אב (understood as “precedent”) halachot employed to re-interpret (makes a “legislative review”) of the multi-faceted language of the Mishna. The Gemara comments strictly upon the 70 faces of Mishnaic language! The Rambam code totally divorced Gemarah halacha from the intent of the Framers of the Talmud! As do all the post Rambam commentaries other than the Rosh. Attempts to correct the central flaw of the Rambam halachic code, for example, they Universally fail to affix each and every Rambam halachic posok to its home Mishna. The fail to compare the Rambam halachic rulings to the B’HaG, Rif, and Rosh common law halachic rulings affixed to a specific Mishna. A critical error known as ירידות הדורות. Understood as meaning “domino effect”. All later Traditional Judaism scholarship fell into statute law religious codifications rather than employing the Gemara halachot as precedents to make the required re-interpretation of the language of the Home Mishna.

The Rambam relied upon the logic of Aristotle. Both this specific heretic or the later Reform and Conservative Judaism brands prioritize the 3 part syllogism of Greek deductive logic. They know nothing how rabbi Akiva’s kabbalah of פרדס logic methodology defines all Talmudic debates. The four part פרדס logic system in no way, shape, or form compares to the 3 part syllogism of Aristotle’s deductive logic. Impossible to understand and correctly interpret the language of the Talmud, its common law legal format, without a in-depth understanding of how פרדס logic defines the warp/weft legal fabric of all Talmudic instruction.

The Rambam organized both his Sefer Ha’Mitzvot and Yad Chazaka into frozen ice trays, fossilized box thinking, Greek and Roman categories of religious ritual observances. The B’HaG, in stark contrast – both his Miztvot codification of the תרי”ג מצוות, together with all his posok halachic rulings, fundamentally rejects Gemara halachot divorced from their primary Mishnaic source. Judicial common law centers upon the central axis of making a משנה תורה upon the 70 faces of Mishnaic language. The song: Stairway to Heaven declares, “sometimes words have two meanings”. Each and every sugya of the Gemara re-interprets the language of the Home Mishna – as viewed from a different halachic “perspectives”. Something like a Front/Top\Side view which a blue print permits a building contractor to understand a three dimensional understanding of the building the contractor constructs.

The Rambam assimilated religious ritualism of halacha destroyed the most essential warp/weft loom structure of the Talmud. His assimilation to Greek and Roman statute law directly raped the 2nd Sinai commandment, understood as not to copy or embrace the culture and customs of alien Goyim peoples who never accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. The latter the revelation of the 13 tohor middot spirits which rabbi Akiva’s kabbalah of פרדס interprets and defines. The Spanish rabbis of the so-called ‘Golden Age’ of Spain, totally assimilated to the rediscovered ancient Greek ideas which a thousand years earlier, exploded in the Hanukkah Civil War in Judea. The Rambam, Conservative and Reform heresies, they blow out the miracle of Hanukkah wherein Torah scholars swore a Torah oath not to interpret the Torah except through Oral Torah common law. This siddur in the blessing after meals states that the רשעים sought to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah.

The statute Greek/Roman legalism organized legislative laws into formal categories. Talmudic common law NEVER does this – ever. The Framers of the Talmud wrote this code of Oral Torah to serve as a model for the restoration of Sanhedrin common law courts. Based upon the Torah definition of faith צדק צדק תידוף. The Talmud serves as the model for the restoration of Sanhedrin common law courts when the Jewish people return and re-conquered Judea.

The Rambam perversion of Talmudic halacha into categorized religious subject matter undermines the original intent of the Framers of the Talmud. It perverted the Talmud into religious ritual laws rather than Sanhedrin judicial common law courtrooms within the borders of the restored Torah Constitutional Jewish Republic. A stark fundamental perversion of the original intent of the Framers of the Talmud.

The Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach serves as another stark example. The בנין אב precedent for the mitzva of Moshiach learns from Moshe anointing the House of Aaron. Followed up by the dedication of all korbanot with the dedication of a Torah oath. This type of Torah oath dedicates the king – understood as tohor middot from the Torah, to rule Judea with judicial justice. (Hence, all ברכות require שם ומלכות; King understood as the oath dedication of Talmudic defined tohor middot spirits. The one NaCH rebuke made repeatedly against king David as Moshiach, his failure to rule with justice in the matter of the husband of Bat Sheva. King David anointed as Moshiach teaches the eternal mussar that all Jews have the obligation to uphold the mitzva of Moshiach, just as they do with shabbat observance, to pursue judicial justice which strives to make fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B.

Neither the Rambam nor later Reform and Conservative heresies understand the k’vanna of the mitzva of Moshiach. They all embrace the false narrative established by the new testament Av tuma avoda zara which declares the mitzva of Moshiach falls squarely upon the shoulders of some future king of Israel! However the משל “King” require the logical דיוק/inference נמשל which defines “king” as Oral Torah tohor middot spirits. Just as all Jews in every generation obligated to sanctify the mitzva of shabbat, how much more so all generations of Jewry have the equal burden to pursue righteous judicial common law justice which make a fair restoration of damages. Herein defines how the Oral Torah, based upon בניני אבות precedents from the Torah דאורייתא understands the Av tohor time oriented commandment of Moshiach. Together with making Torah blessings as defined through the Shemone Esrei of tefillah דרבנן. According to the Yerushalmi Talmud over 247 prophets “worked” to write the Shemone Esrei, the kabbala upon which the entire Talmud stands upon.

Its called a tohor time oriented commandment. The precedent of HaDassa approaching the king compares to Yaacov’s encounter with Esau, during that life & death crisis of faith; comparable to the time oriented commandment known as the Akadah. What oath did Yitzak swear to HaShem? Removing the sciatic nerve, a key time oriented commandment within the Book of בראשית, which teaches that Jewish destiny gravitates between the opposing poles of life and death; bless and curse! Tohor time oriented commandments compare to the new creation of the ger tzeddik. תמיד מעשה בראשית, repeated twice in the opening blessing of kre’a shma – tefillah דאורייתא. Hence the Mishna of ברכות teaches that women have the רשות to do time oriented commandments which require k’vanna when confronted with some life or death crisis of faith. Herein a completely redefinition of time oriented commandments. The time of Yaacov meeting Esau, or HaDassa making the רשות decision to approach the king and plead for her people; or D’vora making the רשות decision to join the battle field war against Sisera … all רשות time oriented commandments which have the power to change a curse into a blessing based upon the precedent of Bil’aam. This term רשות implies k’vanna.

All time oriented mitzvot require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna. The aggada of the Talmud makes a drosh back to T’NaCH prophetic mussar learned by comparing a sugya of the T’NaCH to similar precedent sugyot which teach similar mussar. Herein defines the correct way to study T’NaCH prophetic mussar as common law which stands upon similar precedents of T’NaCH prophetic mussar.

The historical episode of the ban (נידוי, niduy) placed upon the Rambam in Paris in 1232, well-documented in Jewish sources. The main evidence comes from rabbinic writings and correspondence of the time, though no single document offers a complete, direct account of the events. The key source of the ban comes from the responsa written by various French rabbis. The Teshuvot of Rabbi Yitzhak ben Sheshet (known as the Rivash), as well as those of other leading French rabbis, reference the niduy (ban) placed on Maimonides’ works, particularly his Mishneh Torah.

These responsa show the controversy around some of Maimonides’ views, including his interpretation of the philosophy of Aristotle, seen as an ערב רב lack of fear of Heaven, as directly quoted from the Purim Torah mitzva to remember wiping out Amalek in all generations. The ‘golden age’ Spanish rabbis notorious for their exaltation of the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophies which culminated in the Judean Hanukkah Civil War. Just as then so too during the latter stage of the Geonim. Specifically rabbi Saadia Gaon. Ibn Ezra’s son converted to Islam.

The Rambam’s overt assimilation to ancient Greek logic, especially in works like The Guide for the Perplexed, led to opposition from some rabbis in France. One of the more direct pieces of documentary evidence is a letter sent by the rabbis of Paris to the Jewish communities, expressing their reasons for placing the ban on the Rambam’s works. This letter was issued in 1232 and, while it is not fully extant, excerpts of it survive in various rabbinic writings.

The letter cites concerns about Maimonides’ views on theology, his treatment of certain Talmudic interpretations, and his approach to Jewish law, particularly in the Mishneh Torah, which some rabbis considered overly simplistic or worse a decapitation of Talmudic common law in favor of Greek and Roman statute law.

The Sefer Ha-Hasidim (Book of the Pious), a compilation of pious teachings from medieval Germanic rabbis, contains references to the controversy surrounding Maimonides’ works. It mentions the debates about the acceptability of his philosophical writings and how they viewed them with extreme suspicion. Later historical accounts, such as those found in the Ma’aseh Rav and other chronicles, describe the eventual resolution of the niduy ban placed upon the Rambam.

The Rashba (Rabbi Solomon ben Adret), one of the leading rabbis of Barcelona, refers to the French ban in his responsa. He addresses the situation and the controversy around the Rambam, noting the disputes between the French and Spanish communities regarding his works. Rabbi Abraham ben David of Posquières (Ravad), while a primary critic of the Rambam, despite his criticism defended his works against the ban, arguing that they should be read carefully and properly understood within the context of Jewish tradition. The primary documentary evidence consists of responsa by prominent rabbis (such as the Rivash, Rashba, and others), letters from the rabbis of Paris, and later chronicles. These sources shed light on the reasons for the ban, the concerns over Maimonides’ rationalism, and the philosophical challenges his works posed to the traditional Jewish religious establishment at the time.

Publication of the Rambam Yad Chazakah sparked a Jewish Civil War which culminated in a vortex of flames! In 1242 the king of France ordered the burning of some 24 cartloads of Talmud. In 1306 the king expelled all the Jews of France. This action destroyed and uprooted the school of Common law Torah & Talmudic scholarship: the Rashi/Tosafot school of common law. Rabbeinu Yona realized the gravity of his נידוי ban after this absolute disaster occurred. Alas to late, did he realize his error in requesting permission from the king of France and Pope to burn the Rambam’s heretical books like as done in Spain. The flames of Civil War jumped from Spain to France. In 1290 all Jews in England expelled. The German kingdoms capitalized upon Jewish anarchy and chaos by imposing crushing taxation without representation upon all Jewish communities across Germany. The Pope would impose the three Century condemnation of the Jews by requiring all Western European Jewry to live in Ghetto imprisonment. This decree resulted in a huge Jewish population transfer. Jews fled Western European countries to Poland and the Ukraine. In 1648, the same year that the 30 year Protestant/Catholic War concluded, Cossack bands inflicted horrible terrorism across Poland and the Ukraine. Unmatched till the Nazi Shoah in ferocity and blood lust.

Why do some rabbis argue that the Rambam remains in נידוי?

Why does Traditional Judaism utterly reject Conservative and Reform converts as being Gere Tzeddic converts to Judaism? T’NaCH commands prophetic mussar rather than the perversion that the T’NaCH teaches history.

The stark Contrast how the Wisdom of the Oral Torah common law logic interprets Tehillem 138, 139.

Shallow reactionary reading of Tehillem standard gospel and new testament ignorance of Oral Torah common law wisdom. Regarding the Prophets of NaCH (Nevi’im and Ketuvim), several passages that echo similar themes. Specifically, the Prophets in the NaCH section of the Hebrew T’NaCH. The Subject: Intimate knowledge of individuals, and omnipresence.

Yirmeyahu 1:5: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Yirmeyahu 23:24: “Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see them?” “Do not I fill heaven and earth?”

Yesha’Yahu 40:28: “Do you not know? Have you not heard? He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can fathom.” Amos 9:2: “Though they dig down to the depths of the grave, from there my hand will take them. Though they climb up to the heavens, from there I will bring them down.” These NaCH Primary sources function as starting precedents. Learning T’NaCH common law requires making a research of precedents which lead back to the משנה תורה Book of דברים. All learning turns to the Torah, the Constitution of the Torah Constitution of the Jewish Republic of Tribes/States of the Republic.

The פרט of Yirmeyahu 1:5 contained within the sugya כלל of Yirmeyahu 1:4-10. In classic Hebew פרדס logic this qualifies as פרט-כלל, one of the 13 rabbinic middot of rabbi Yishmael’s logic format, as found in the Siddur after korbanot prior to the 42 letter Divine Name which makes a סוד kabbalah reference to the soul dedicated on Chag Shevuot of האל. This Divine Name dedicates to remove avoda zarah, the 2nd Sinai commandment. The Torah precedent which commands to remove all חמץ prior to P’sach teaches this משל metaphor. The נמשל of this משל metaphor the 42 letter Divine Name soul dedication of האל.

At the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, the tuma Yatzir Ha’Rah within the hearts of Israel caused us to fail to distance ourselves from our wives. Like we gathered manna on Shabbat, as testified in Sh’mot 16. Thereafter hearing the first two opening commandments, Israel feared we would surely die. Therefore we demanded that Moshe go up himself and receive the rest of the Torah.

The precedent of the so-called Xtian טיפש פשט 10 commandments serves only as a Torah common law precedent to “remember” the 10 plagues by which Moshe judged the Gods of Egypt. Tefillah דאורייתא, known as kre’a shma, remembers the deliverance from Egyptian judicial oppression. Sh’mot 5:10-23.

Herein serves as the יסוד of the dedication to rule the conquered kingdoms of Canaan; the obligation to pursue righteous judicial justice which makes fair restitution of damages which the Jewish people inflict upon one another in all generations. Hence the Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach – the dedication to rule the Republic with righteous Sanhedrin lateral court room common law justice. The definition of Torah faith in HaShem לשמה.

Oral Torah common law learning therefore proceeds in this sh’itta methodology. Yirmeyahu 1:5 has a precedent Yirmeyahu 2:29-3:10. The prophet Jeremiah conveys a powerful message of judgment, calling out Israel for their spiritual unfaithfulness and avoda zara, the worship of other Gods. Hence the theological creed of Monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment.

A precise משנה תורה common law precedent 24:14-25:16. D’varim 24:14-25:16 contains several laws that govern justice, fairness, and ethical behavior within Israeli society, particularly regarding workers, property, justice, and the treatment of others. Now learn Tehillem 138 and 139: Wherein it expresses gratitude, praise, and confidence in the justice which HaShem commands. Herein describes how the Oral Torah wisdom learns the k’vanna of this Tehillem 138 & 139, according to the precedents of Yirmeyahu 1:5: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Yirmeyahu 23:24: “Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see them?” “Do not I fill heaven and earth?”

Compare and contrast Yesha’Yahu 40:28: “Do you not know? Have you not heard? He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can fathom.” As contained within the sugya of 40:27-31. 40:27-31 teaches a mussar of comfort and reassurance for the chosen Cohen nation of Israel, encouraging them to trust in the oath brit. Its strength and faithfulness, even in times of weariness and despair. A precise precedent within this prophetic mussar: 28:5-15.

This prophetic mussar rebukes the chosen Cohen nation Israel, wherein our tuma Yatzir Ha’rah within our hearts focuses upon our misguided reliance on alien oath brit alliances with Goyim who never accepted the oath brit sworn at Sinai. Our foolish false security, as well as the consequences of our failure to trust in the 3 oaths sworn by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov, as sworn through tefillen and tzitzit when we accept the oath of kre’a shma – our tefillah דאורייתא.

A precise משנה תורה precedent: 24:1-9, which teaches a mussar concerning a series of laws concerning marriage, divorce, and justice. The חסד middah reigns for all eternity. Herein the k’vanna of Tehillem 138 & 139, according to the mussar of both Yesha’yahu and Moshe Rabbeinu.

The prophetic mussar as taught in the פרט of Amos 9:2. contained within the sugya of 9:1-6. The prophetic mussar taught through Amos 9:1-6, a powerful mussar of Divine judgment and the sovereignty as expressed through the oath brit alliance which the chosen Cohen nation swore at Sinai when we accepted the revelation of the Torah. A precise משנה תורה precedent: 17:1. A short prophetic mussar which commands instructions regarding the sacrificial dedications through oaths sworn before the altar of korbanot. Herein the Oral Torah interprets the k’vanna of Tehillim 138 & 139.
mosckerr

Psalm 139: God’s Thoughts

The New Testament as a Roman Forgery on the Order of the Czarist secret police: Protocol of the Elders of Zion.

Creating Christ: How The Flavian Empire Created Christianity – YouTube

Why the Jews Reject the Christian and Muslim Worship of Avoda Zarah Gods.

Translating abstract Hebrew concepts, such as שם ומלכות, into literal translations is highly problematic. Neither the Koran nor the New Testament ever once brings the שם השם revealed in the First Sinai commandment. This commandment instructs to perform the Torah commandments לשמה (for their own sake).

The New Testament heavily relies upon the metaphor of “father” throughout the Gospel narratives. One reference in Deuteronomy 32:6: “Is this the way you repay the Lord, you foolish and unwise people? Is he not your Father, your Creator, who made you and formed you?”

This strong mussar rebuke merits a common law search for a precedent within the language of the first four Books of the Written Torah. Paul’s critique: “You’re not under the Law” fails to discern between Torah common law/משנה תורה\ from Greek and Roman statute law legal formats.

The Torah never refers to the First commandment revelation of the Spirit Name with any reference to the foreign name Allah. Hence Jews reject this foreign substitution to replace the revelation of the Torah at Sinai with Muhammad’s revelation of Allah in a cave.

The Jewish people utterly amazed that Goyim have no concept of the distinction between tohor vs tumah spirits. This fundamental distinction required for the chosen Cohen people to do “avodat HaShem”; roughly interpreted as the service or worship of HaShem.

The term מלכות refers to the spiritual direction of dedicating defined tohor spirits first revealed to Moshe after the Sin of the Gold Calf at Horev: ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון etc. The revelation of this “Oral Torah” the church fathers absolutely deny the existence of the revelation of the Oral Torah.

The only other verse in the whole of the T’NaCH which employs 3 Divine Names in succession, kre’a Shma. Contrast the mitzva of saying kre’a shma with tefillen; with how Goyim scholars interpret Hear Israel the Lord God the Lord is One. The Talmud understands the 3 Divine Names, to the 3 oaths each separately sworn by the Avot.

The term ONE, the last word of the kre’a shma, the person who accepts the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, he accepts the oaths separately sworn by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov as ONE upon his heart.

The purpose of tefillen: to swear a Torah oath. Goyim theologies never ask: what oaths did the Avot swear to cut a brit with HaShem concerning the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen seed of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov. Islam in particular give a blow-job to the honor of the circumcised Avot. Christians see the Shema as a declaration of the oneness of God, which aligns with their belief in the Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—as one God in three persons. Muslim commentaries on the Shema recognize its importance in affirming the oneness of God, which is a central tenet of Islam.

The Quran makes intertextual connections with the Shema, emphasizing that prayer and devotion to God are not about physical direction but about loving God with all one’s heart. This latter idea fails to address Rabbi Yechuda’s interpretation of לבבך as Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. Yatzir Ha’Rah.

The concept of ‘resurrection from the dead’ shares nothing with life after death as both religions of avoda zarah preach. Rather the Yazir Ha’Tov breaths the spirits which did breath the spirits of the Avot! ONE, this concluding word of the Shma raises the Avot from the dead within the Yatzir Ha’Tov of each and every Jew in all generations, based upon the power to Create from nothing, by swearing a Torah oath!

Hence when a Cohen didicated a korban upon the altar in Jerusalem, the portion of Israel in the korbonot avodat HaShem service, they read the Creation story in the beit knesset.

Rabbi Akiva’s kabbalah known as פרדס defines how to logically understand how to employ the 13 tohor middot, as the critical means to make a precedent search comparison; the substance of Oral Torah common law scholarship upon the Written Torah. A quick examination of Deuteronomy 32:6 learns through the wisdom of Torah common law precedents.

This mussar rebuke begins at 32:1 – 32:43. Mussar defines all prophecies, as codified by Moshe Rabbeinu and all other NaCH prophets. Goyim do not know this basic fundamental of Torah faith/pursuit of courtroom justice.

Their Gospel forgery attempts to pervert tohor prophets to Av tumah witchcraft and sorcerers – who predict the future. This one Torah reference to “Father” merits a look at the previous verse for context. Both Trinity or strict monotheism qualifies as strange worship of foreign Gods.

These alien Gods have no connection with the plagues in Egypt, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds, nor the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. They directly compare to the Av tumah Golden Calf.

This revelation, that all Goyim to this day reject the Torah Sinai revelation. This prophetic mussar directly refers to the tuma worship of foreign alien Gods imported to Judaism by Av tuma Xtianity and Islam.

This tremendous mussar rebuke, Deut. 32:1 – 32:43, compares to the vow which HaShem made to Moshe following the sin of the Golden Calf! Hence the rebuke of Moshe at the end of his life serves to amplify the prophetic mussar taught through the Aggadic story of Noach and the floods. Genesis 6:5 to 8:20: the exile of Noach in his Ark, story of Aggadic mussar – a depth analysis of prophetic mussar of Deut. 32:1 – 32:43.

How could post Shoah Jewry defeat 5 Arab Armies and win our National Independence as a Nation after 2000+ years of oppressive exile? No Goyim courts of law ever once forced any church priest or pastor or any Sheik, to stand before the Bar and receive judgment for their evil war crimes committed repeatedly against the Jewish people and all Humanity in General.

A simple precedent by which to grasp this prophetic mussar of g’lut. A fundamental Torah theme which the Apostle Paul’s “original sin” substitute theology totally uprooted in Goyim minds.

The 1st Sinai commandment functions as the greatest commandment of the entire Torah. And it has no hint or reference to the Xtian Trinity Creed nor the Muslim Monotheism substitute theology Tawhid Creeds.

The abstract term מלכות refers to the korban-like dedication of living blood thrown upon the altar; to the dedication of one or more of the 13 tohor middot Spirits revealed to Moshe at Horev, 40 days after the Sin of the Golden Calf, where a portion of Israel attempted to translate the Spirit Name of the 1st Sinai revelation into the word אלהים.

Tefillah qualifies as the oath dedication of specific defined tohor middot as מלכות. The Order of the Shemone Esrei 3 + 13 + 3 Blessings. Contained within this Order the רמז of 613. Furthermore the order of this standing prayer holds a רמז to the 6 Yom Tov + Shabbat menorah!

Herein understands the Torah concept of מלכות required to swear a Torah oath. The dedication of tohor middot directly compare to the Cohen throwing living blood upon the altar. Hence tefillah stands in the stead of korbanot!

Why? Because both korbanot & tefillah both swear a Torah oath which dedicates tohor middot לשמה.

The Torah openly states that nothing in the Heavens, Seas, or Earth compares to the revelation of the Spirit Name of HaShem. How much more so for imbecile word translations that attempt to convert the Divine Presence Spirit revelation of the Name into words that the lips of man can easily pronounce!

The substitute religions of Av tuma avoda zarah attempt to foist belief in JeZeus or Allah as some “new covenant” Torah faith. These abominations fail to grasp that Torah defines faith as the righteous pursuit of judicial common law justice rather than belief in theological Gods which the mind of Man cannot possibly grasp nor understand.

T’shuva does not correctly translate as repentance. T’shuva learns from HaShem annulling His vow to make the chosen Cohen nation from the seed of Moshe rather than the seed of Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov. Chag Yom Kippur commemorates this t’shuva made by HaShem. The Torah specifically employs the term t’shuva wherein HaShem annulled His vow to make the chosen Cohen nation from the seed of Moshe rabbeinu rather than from the oaths sworn to the Avot to this effect.

When the Romans renamed Judea unto the “Palestine”, herein represents a historical example of t’shuva. The Romans sought to physically wipe out the existence and memory of the Jewish people, just as did Hitler’s Nazis!

That the new testament and koran have no awareness of the oath brit faith, how tefillah differs from prayer because tefillah absolutely requires swearing a Torah oath as its time oriented commandment “k’vanna”; whereas prayer has nothing to do with swearing a Torah oath, nor with tohor time oriented commandments! These religious forgeries know nothing about the Torah faith which prioritized the obligation placed upon Torah Sanhedrin courts to pursue righteous compensation of damages inflicted by the guilty upon the innocent.

This concept of annulling a vow derived from Torah common law precedent commandments concerning a father and his daughter or a husband and his wife, where both could annul the vow made by either a girl or a woman. The Roman attempt to expunge the memory of the Jewish state of Judea likewise serves as an example of the intent of annulling a vow. As does UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/19, adopted on December 21, 2017. This resolution declared the status of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital as “null and void” and called on all states to refrain from establishing diplomatic missions in Jerusalem.

The Xtian and Muslim concepts – concerning worship of their Gods – fundamentally contradict the 2nd Sinai commandment. T’NaCH and Talmudic traditions define the k’vanna of the 2nd Sinai commandment through the Torah precedents which forbid pursuing the ways of the Goyim which reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Horev; and the specific commandment not to intermarry foreign wives. King Shlomo worshipped avoda zarah; when he copied the Goyim practices of building grand Temples and married foreign wives.

The mitzva of building the Beit HaMikdash centers upon establishment of Sanhedrin Common law courts across the land, rather than bankrupting the country build some grand palatial cathedral. Hence the Sages placed the Great Sanhedrin within the Temple itself; they made a tiqqun on king Shlomo’s assimilated avoda zara! Jews do not worship wood and stone idols, how much more so ornate extravagant buildings! The oppressive slavery where Par’o withheld straw, yet beat Israeli slaves, upon this basic Torah precedent – stands Torah faith to pursue judicial justice.

Neither Xtianity nor Islam ever attempted to return the Jewish people to our homeland as, by stark contrast, did the great king of Persia. The Persian king Cyrus, referred to as a “messiah” or “anointed one.” This reference found in Isaiah 45:1, which states: “Thus says the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped, to subdue nations before him and strip kings of their robes, to open doors before him— and the gates shall not be closed.” In this context, the term “anointed” (מָשִׁיחַ, mashiach), used to describe Cyrus, indicating that he was chosen by God to achieve a specific purpose, namely, to facilitate the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem. The Torah mitzva of Moshiach: anoints a Jewish king to police the land, working in close conjunction with judicial common law Sanhedrin lateral courts of justice.

The Persian king learned from the successful conquest of the Assyrian empire by the Babylonians. The Assyrian barbarians uprooted entire populations of conquered nations and replaced those refugee populations with foreign aliens who had no connection to that land. This reality permitted the Babylonian Armies to conquer the Assyrian empire much like water goes through a sieve.

Roman new testament propaganda stands in stark contrast with the great king of Persia. The Romans sought to ignite social anarchy and Civil War among the Jewish people. In this effort they succeeded as well as they did destroying Herod assimilated Temple abomination. The British government duplicated the policies of the hated Romans. During its Palestine mandate period, London foisted a divide and rule policy between Arabs and Jews.

Both the Syrian Greeks and the Romans based their society social order upon the ideas of ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle and others. Aristotle served as a key advisor to Alexander the Great. Aristotle’s 3 part syllogism does not compare to rabbi Akiva’s 4 part פרדס logic system. All logic requires order: the letter order which distinguishes “God vs Dog”, radically changes how a person perceives the idea communicated! In equal manner Order defines the Jewish Prayer Book known as the Siddur. The Siddur contains the root word סדר – Order.

Why do Jews view Xtianity and Islam as Av Tuma avoda zarah? Goyim never accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. JeZeus did not observe the mitzva of shabbat. This mitzva requires that Jews make the הבדלה/distinction that discerns like from like; מלאכה from עבודה. Failure to understand the subtle distinction which separates these two verbs, both of which translate as “work”; an Am Ha’aretz never keeps the mitzva of shabbat observance – ever in his or her life.

Mesechta Shabbat learns מלאכה whereas mesechta Baba Kama learns עבודה. The question do the toldot follow the Avot asked by both mesechtot; this question based upon the Av time oriented commandments in בראשית, compared to the toldot positive and negative commandments in the Books שמות, ויקרא, ובמדבר. Torah scholarship always strives to make the essential understanding which makes the מאי נפקא מינא הבדלה between like from like “understandings”. The Talmud defines this attribute as the interpretation of the tohor midda of רב חסד. Baba Kama distinguishes between tam and muad damagers. The latter applies to Man because it requires intent, as do all time oriented Av commandments. Four Avot Muad damagers: Oppression, theft, ערוה, and judicial bribery, learned by means of a דיוק logical inference made upon the four tam damagers explicitly stated in the Av Mishna of Baba Kama.

Shabbat observance dedicates not doing forbidden מלאכה on the day of shabbat; דיוק, likewise to not do forbidden עבודה during the 6 days of the ‘week of shabbat’. The Goyim religions of Av tuma avoda zarah never grasped this fundamental distinction of shabbat observance as a mitzva inclusive of every day of the week. Proof that the polecat “daughter religions” never learned the Torah לשמה.

Both Xtianity and Islam superficially claim to respect shabbat, but their religious rhetoric, as empty as Arabs eating camel flesh but abhorring pork! These religions of avoda zarah have no awareness of the chosen Cohen people and the Divine oath inheritance to the oath sworn brit lands, or the spiritual awareness which discerns between tohor vs. tumah spirits which breath within the Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. the Yatzir Ha’Rah within the bnai brit hearts.

Repentance, a totally empty Xtian idea of personal regret; it shares no common ground with t’shuva, that bases itself upon annulling vows. Neither the father nor the husband “regrets” annulling a vow made by his daughter or wife. Therefore, t’shuva shares no common ground with the Xtian void concept of repentance.

Similarly, the translation of “covenant” shares no common ground with the Hebrew concept ברית. The latter – an oath alliance sworn לשמה. To swear an oath alliance requires שם ומלכות. The new testament and koran forgeries never bring the שם השם as revealed in the first Sinai commandment. Therefore, both books of Av tuma foreign religions – worship other gods; both Av tuma religions profane the 2nd Sinai commandment. Both know nothing that a Torah brit requires swearing a Torah oath לשמה, with the intent to cut an eternal alliance touching the chosen Cohen people.

All T’NaCH prophets command mussar strictly to the chosen Cohen people. Herein defines the intent or k’vanna of all T’NaCH prophecy. The new testament Roman forgery does not comprehend these subtle distinctions. It together with Islam believes in some type of Universal God. The Xtian forgery seeks to promote civil war within Jewish society, by perverting prophecy into an Av tuma witchcraft, which makes predictions concerning the future. Throughout the gospel narrative this type of silly narishkeit spews from the new testament like farts.

Chaos and anarchy defined the Jewish revolt attempt(s) against the Romans. Multiple and many Jewish sects dominated the 66 rebellion. Bar Kokhba’s revolt failed to unite Jews of Judea with a well-timed & coordinated Jewish revolt together and united with the Jews of Alexandria Egypt. Furthermore, that general failed to drive the Roman legions out of Damascus, Syria, a critical error.

Bar Kokhba’s critical errors of judgment doomed this second Jewish revolt at Betar. Jewish social anarchy and civil war greatly contributed to the Roman victory over the Jewish revolts in both 66 and 135. The key concept of Torah faith revolves around the righteous pursuit of judicial justice within the borders of the oath-sworn brit lands – the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen nation, Bar Kokhba as a military messiah failed to achieve.

The Av tuma avoda zara religions, worship other gods; they pervert the Torah vision of faith – forcibly converted into some theological creed-based personal belief system. These substitute theologies attempts to subvert the Torah faith that spins around the central axis: the righteous pursuit of judicial justice obligations; which makes a fair compensation of damages inflicted by party A upon party B. Av tuma avoda zara religions seek to substitute the pursuit of righteous justice with a personal belief in JeZeus or Allah.

Av tuma Avoda zara substitute theologies attempt to supplant their creed based personal belief in theologically defined belief systems, that define their gods as either a 3-part One God mystery or a simple One God monotheism. Despite the simple fact that monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment. Because if only one God then no need to command not to worship other Gods. Moshe travelled to Egypt, and the 10 plagues judged the gods of Egypt. Just as did HaShem judge the Gods worshipped by the Canaanite kings. Avoda zara plagues all generations of Israel; all generations struggle with assimilation and intermarriage.

The sworn oath brit cut at GilGal, as expressed through the Rashi tefillen recalls the fact that Goyim worship other Gods. No such reality as a Universal God. The lights of Hanukkah, for example, reject Greek philosophy. Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס four basis logic system radically differs from Aristotle’s 3 part syllogisms. Attempts made by assimilated rabbis to interpret the T’NaCH and Talmud based upon Greek logic formats – an utter abomination on the order of Xtianity and Islam.

Greek philosophy qualifies as a foreign substitute theology; an Av tuma on par with the Christian and Muslim avoda zara repeated attempts to convert Jews with their replacement theologies. Hence Jews who study ancient Greek philosophy, they err in Av tuma avoda zara as much as do Jews who convert to Xtianity and Islam; as much as did Moshiach Bar Kachba failure to coordinate the revolt together with the Jews of Alexandria Egypt and to carry the war into Syria with the objective of conquering both Damascus together with all its major naval ports.

The Jewish concept of Moshiach a פרט to the כלל function of the Torah and the Oral Torah in interpreting key aspects of Jewish common law and prophecy; Moshiach: an Oral Torah commandment. Indeed, the Jewish approach to the concept of the Messiah, as found in both the T’NaCH and the Oral Torah Talmud codification, quite different & distinct from how the gospel counterfeit portrays Jesus within Christian theology. The following discussion reflects the different views on this matter, particularly in relation to how Jewish scholars might interpret the failure of the Gospel narrative to align with both the Torah’s precedence based common law legalism, and the traditional understanding of the Moshiach as understood through T’NaCH prophetic mussar.

The Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach, deeply rooted in how the Oral Torah interprets the k’vanna of the Written Torah; just as the time oriented commandment of tefillah requires שם ומלכות as its oath k’vanna. Particularly through the common law precedents set by Moshe’s anointing of the House of Aaron, as well as the later anointing of King Shaul by the prophet Shmuel.

The notion that the Moshiach must come from the lineage of David, himself a descendant of Judah, a latter tiqqun added to the mitzva of Moshiach. This latter tiqqun sought to ensure that the line of the House of David, completely rejects the Xtian theological “Father God” of JeZeus mythology. This latter revisionist history attempt directly compares to the mythology of how Zeus fathered Hercules! Adultery an Av tumah Capital Crime. JeZeus the offspring of Zeus as the father of the Gods, represents a Torah abomination.

The Talmud’s emphasis on the Torah sage being held in greater regard than a king of Israel, a critical piece Talmudic understanding concerning the priority of spiritual leadership. The Torah Talmid Chacham, perceived by the sages of the Talmud as the one who understands and interprets the Torah common law; possessing the wisdom to guide the nation in matters of our destiny path of truth-faith, which commits the chosen Cohen people to pursue righteous judicial justice. The role of the Moshiach in Oral Torah logic, not just a political or religious leader. Nor some military figure comparable to Bar Kachba; rather, Moshiach represents the Oral Torah interpretation of someone who restores the Torah as the Written Constitution of the Republic; the Oral Torah as the basic model of lateral common law courtrooms. As such, the Moshiach’s anointing, deeply tied to the oath brit relationship established by Avram at the brit cut between the pieces and the tradition Oral Torah learning.

Just as “swearing” an oath blessing requires שם ומלכות, so too the Order established by the Framers of the Talmud affixed a warp/weft loom like relationship between the Aggada narratives opposed by the Halachic portions of the Gemara common law precedent based commentary to the Mishna. Stripping a garment of either its warp or weft threads destroys the fabric of that garment. The statute law halachic codifications of the Middle Ages made this precise abomination. To correct the Rambam halachic perversion requires affixing any and all Rambam posok halacha in his statute law perversion to the identical halacha within the B’HaG, Rif, or Rosh common law halachic codifications. These kosher halachic common law codes always affix their Halachic Gemara rulings to a Primary Source Mishna.

Torah scholarship requires a sharp critical eye which can discern Like from Like. The Talmud refers to this skill as the definition of understanding. Just as swearing a oath blessing requires the warp/weft of שם ומלכות, so too and how much more so ritual halachic observance requires its Aggadic דרוש\פשט learning to T’NaCH Primary sources which makes a common law precedent comparison search that explores the depths or facets of prophetic mussar which defines the פשט of the Talmudic aggada warp. Oral Torah: just as the Gemara makes a multiply faceted משנה תורה\legislative review (re-interpretation) of the diamond like faces of Mishnaic language, so too and how much more so precedent based research gleans prophetic mussar tohor middot comparisons from sugyot of NaCH compared to the identical sets of tohor middot located in other sugyot of NaCH. This depth analysis of prophetic mussar determines the k’vanna of Torah mitzvot and Talmudic halachot observances.

The concept of anointing with oil in the context of sacrifices (korbanot) in the Temple, also fundamental to understanding the Jewish approach to Moshiach. This oil, used in the service of the Temple, symbolized the sanctification of Israel’s offerings and the anointing of its leaders. The Messiah, in Jewish thought, will be anointed in a similar manner to those figures who came before him—especially the kings and priests of Israel, in accordance with the Torah’s stipulations. A concrete act of divine selection and empowerment.

The Xstian claim that JeZeus fulfills the role of Moshiach simply at odds with the traditional Jewish understanding of the term. From the Jewish perspective, Jesus’ life and actions do not align with the Oral Torah’s requirements for Moshiach. The Gospels narrative fail to engage with the Oral Torah’s teachings about the Moshiach, and they do not acknowledge the precedent established in common law, the anointing of the House of Aaron or the priests and kings of Israel. In Jewish tradition, the Moshiach must be a descendant of King David (through his father, not his mother), a precondition which the so called ‘virgin birth’ failed to achieve. Furthermore, the bogus Xtian narrative specifically failed to “fulfill” the specific roles, re-establishment of the Federal Sanhedrin common law system of Torts and Capital Sanhedrin courtrooms which achieved judicial justice in the oath sworn lands of the chosen Cohen nation. None of these pre-conditions did JeZeus accomplish in any the historical context.

The failure of the Gospel narrative to align with the Torah’s precedent for the anointing of the Moshiach another of the many points of contention. In Jewish tradition, anointing with oil – an essential part of the mitzva of Moshiach. As exemplified in the Torah’s precedents of Moshe & Aaron, and of course kings Shaul & David. JeZeus never depicted as being anointed, except by a prostitute. Such a narrative compares to the judicial injustice and brutal torture which the gospel narrative portrays the JeZeus “sacrifice” upon the Roman altar of death. For Jewish scholars, this vile depiction makes only a fictional story. The gospel narrative does satisfy the Torah’s vision of Moshiach, which requires restoration of the Torah Constitutional Republic and the Sanhedrin lateral common law Federal court system. A prostitute anointing the feet of a man hardly qualifies as holy korban.

The Talmudic teachings on the Moshiach, make clear that the Messiah not only restores the Torah as the constitution of the Republic, but just as significant, the Moshiach re-establish Torah Sanhedrin lateral common law courts. The gospel narrative of a spiritual Moshiach, while not entirely foreign to Judaism, based upon the false messiah movements lead by Sabbatai Zevi and Yaacov Frank; based upon these latter false messiah examples the gospel fictional narrative hardly stands as authentic. Talmudic common law rejects such ‘spiritual messiahs as utterly false.

The Oral Torah\Talmud give a specific definition of a prophet as someone who guides the people of Israel toward t’shuva and adherence to the mitzvot (commandments) expressed through Av tohor time oriented commandments. Prophets, employ the 13 tohor middot as the basis of T’NaCH mussar common law sugya comparisons to other T’NaCH sugyot. Prophetic mussar, functions as the warp/weft loom like opposing threads of Talmudic halacha. T’NaCH prophetic mussar, based on a comparison of similar middot configurations within NaCH sugyot, defines the wisdom of learn the NaCH kabbalah לשמה. Time oriented commandments require prophetic mussar as the basis of k’vanna within the heart.

The concept of prophecy in Judaism, not about foretelling the future, a trait known to tuma false prophets, who according to the gospel narrative “fulfil” the words of the prophets. Utterly absurd. Time oriented Av Torah commandments, which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna of tohor Oral Torah middot, apply equally to all generations of the chosen Cohen people. The gospel narative did not grasp the essence of Torah observance of Av tohor time oriented commandments. Time oriented commandments require prophetic mussar for the generations to observe this unique type of Av commandments לשמה. The idea that JeZeus fulfilled the words of the prophets as absurd as a prostitute pouring oil onto his feet transforms this work of fiction into both Moshiach and the son of God.

The Xtian tradition, judged upon the scales of Oral Torah Av time oriented commandments, clear as the Sun on a cloudless day a false messiah depiction on the order of Harry Potter fiction. Allah Voldemort – dead. JeZeus particularly not only specifically ignorant of the mitzva of Shabbat & the כלל of Av time oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar which define the k’vanna of Oral Torah middot. JeZeus, as a specific example taught “prayer” as “Our father who lives in Heaven” rather that tefillah a matter of the heart. Prophetic mussar k’vanna – a matter of the heart. Tefillah entails swearing a Torah oath לשמה to dedicate a specific defined tohor midda in order to make a tiqqun how a man interacts in the future with his wife, children, family, neighbours and people. The k’vanna of tefillah dedicates tohor defined prophetic mussar middot לשמה.

Xtian theology places JeZeus in a perverse position where the gospel narrative declares that he “fulfilled the Law”, oblivious that the gospels have not the least bit of a clue what Torah common law means nor how it functions. JeZeus’s departure from Torah common law, particularly in matters like Shabbat observance, cited as but one obvious example of how this imaginary man cannot and does not ‘fulfil’ the prophets.

The Jewish rejection of Jesus as Moshiach, or even as the koran narrative as a Torah prophet rests squarely upon the failure of the gospels to address Av tohor time oriented commandments. Besides the failure to align with the Torah’s specific precondition which learns the mitzva of Moshiach from korbanot anointed with oil together with the restoration of the Sanhedrin lateral common law court Federal court system. The Roman fraud gospel framers did not understand Constitutional Torah law.

This fundamental blatant error concerning the nature of prophetic mussar as the definition through precedent comparison which define the k’vanna of tohor middot, as the definition and purpose the Oral Torah Horev revelation. Implications of strange Xtian doctrines, such as salvation through grace, or Jesus’ fulfilment of the Law, judged as Av tuma avoda zarah; the forerunner of Sabbatai Zevi’s antinomian doctrine. The absolute ignorance of the gospel narrative to Av tohor time oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna within the heart definitively proves that JeZeus failed the “one in 10,000” may attain the level of Torah scholarship and prophetic merit.

The Gospel narratives simply understood as a perversion of T’NaCH and Talmudic Moshiach mussar prophecies. Xtian theology and creeds ignores the foundational principles of achieving Av time oriented commandments, wherein the bnai brit Cohen people breath the tohor spirits of the Creator of the Universe from within the Yatzir Tov of our hearts; the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev.

Muslim theologians approach the issue of JeZeus and Muhammad being referred to as Old Testament prophets, based upon the false assumption that the gospel narrative merit respect. Latter day Islam which declares the Torah as corrupt compares to the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. Many Xtian theologians draw a line of comparison between Muhammad and Smith. Both “prophets” introduced their own new order of scriptures.

Both Islam and Mormonism highly revers the treif gospel narratives. Goyim have a deep infatuation with T’NaCH prophets, despite their total ignorance of tohor middot and Av time oriented commandments. Muhammad’s message of monotheism, likewise declares that JeZeus predicted the coming of Muhammad. JeZeus in the Quran has absolutely no concept of the mitzva of Moshiach as interpreted by the Oral Torah פרדס logic system and tohor middot.

The koran regards Muhammad as the Seal of the Prophets (Khatam an-Nabiyyin), despite not having the least bit of a clue how the T’NaCH understands the function and role of prophets. Clearly Islamic thought resembles the prophet Adam Smith far more than any T’NaCH prophet. The koran does not position Muhammad as a continuation of the Jewish prophetic line in a direct, historical sense. Muhammad according to the koran narrative lived as the final prophet who brought the ultimate revelation from God. Both the koran and Mormon holy books supersede all the scriptures which preceded them.

Neither the gospels, koran nor book of Mormon brings the שם השם revealed in the first Sinai commandment. These latter day Goyim “prophets” confuse the Hebrew “oath alliance”/ברית as one in the same with the sophomoric translated term covenant. Lacking the שם השם no man can cut a Torah ברית. Hence, covenant cannot mean brit. A difference of apples and oranges. Which these Goyim prophets remained completely oblivious in their bliss & ignorance. In many ways these spiritual reformers compare to Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli, John Calvin, William Tyndale, John Knox, John Wesley, and Mary Baker Eddy. While not all these individuals directly hated or despised one another, certainly significant theological disagreements and conflicts erupted among them.

Luther believed in the doctrine of consubstantiation. Zwingli, on the other hand, viewed the Eucharist as purely symbolic. John Calvin’s theology was influenced by both Luther and Zwingli, but he developed his own distinct doctrines, particularly on predestination and the sovereignty of God.

William Tyndale focused on translating the Bible into English, and his fugitive status continually forced him to hide from English authorities. John Wesley, came much later and had different theological focuses. He disagreed with Calvin’s predestination doctrine, emphasizing free will and personal holiness. Wesley’s Arminian views such as: Free Will, Prevenient Grace that precedes and prepares the soul for salvation; Conditional Election upon faith, Universal Atonement: that salvation is available to everyone, but only those who accept it will be saved. These “prophesies” put him at odds with Calvinist traditions.

Mary Baker Eddy, her teachings were often seen as unorthodox or heretical by mainstream Xtian denominations. The debates and tensions among them highlight the diversity and complexity of the Reformation and subsequent religious movements. Comparatively speaking, Muhammad fits right into the crowd of these religious reformers and prophets.

Bottom line: Justice: fair judicial compensation for damages inflicted. Not forgiveness for sin. The Pauline substitute theology of original sin perverted the key Torah theme of g’lut\exile. Starting with the exile of Adam from the garden, Noach’s exile in the Ark, and the exile of Israel in Egypt. And concluding with the 40 year exile in the Wilderness. The Holy Writings Book of Job likewise teaches the mussar of g’lut/exile.

An Oral Torah critique of Avoda Zara

My Judaism – An Introduction (Part Two)

Why the Jews Reject the Christian and Muslim Worship of Avoda Zarah Gods.

The term ONE, the last word of the kre’a shma, the person who accepts the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, he accepts the oaths separately sworn by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov as ONE upon his heart.

Hence when a Cohen didicated a korban upon the altar in Jerusalem, the portion of Israel in the korbonot avodat HaShem service, they read the Creation story in the beit knesset.

These alien Gods have no connection with the plagues in Egypt, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds, nor the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. They directly compare to the Av tumah Golden Calf.

A simple precedent by which to grasp this prophetic mussar of g’lut. A fundamental Torah theme which the Apostle Paul’s “original sin” substitute theology totally uprooted in Goyim minds.

Why? Because both korbanot & tefillah both swear a Torah oath which dedicates tohor middot לשמה.

Amalek raise its ugly head when Jews assimilate and intermarry with Goyim who never accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai & Horev

https://salaficentre.com/2024/12/13/historical-and-contemporary-antisemitism-a-brief-dialogue-with-julio-levit-koldorf/
Why the Jews Reject the Christian and Muslim Worship of Avoda Zarah Gods.

The term ONE, the last word of the kre’a shma, the person who accepts the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, he accepts the oaths separately sworn by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov as ONE upon his heart.

Hence when a Cohen didicated a korban upon the altar in Jerusalem, the portion of Israel in the korbonot avodat HaShem service, they read the Creation story in the beit knesset.

These alien Gods have no connection with the plagues in Egypt, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds, nor the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. They directly compare to the Av tumah Golden Calf.

A simple precedent by which to grasp this prophetic mussar of g’lut. A fundamental Torah theme which the Apostle Paul’s “original sin” substitute theology totally uprooted in Goyim minds.

Why? Because both korbanot & tefillah both swear a Torah oath which dedicates tohor middot לשמה.

The Shoah did not accidentally simple happen

The Royal House of Ghassan Participates in Intl. Holocaust Remembrance Day at the UN in Geneva

Why the Jews Reject the Christian and Muslim Worship of Avoda Zarah Gods.

The term ONE, the last word of the kre’a shma, the person who accepts the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, he accepts the oaths separately sworn by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov as ONE upon his heart.

Hence when a Cohen didicated a korban upon the altar in Jerusalem, the portion of Israel in the korbonot avodat HaShem service, they read the Creation story in the beit knesset.

These alien Gods have no connection with the plagues in Egypt, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds, nor the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. They directly compare to the Av tumah Golden Calf.

A simple precedent by which to grasp this prophetic mussar of g’lut. A fundamental Torah theme which the Apostle Paul’s “original sin” substitute theology totally uprooted in Goyim minds.

Why? Because both korbanot & tefillah both swear a Torah oath which dedicates tohor middot לשמה.

Ignorance not limited to the common man on the streets

When Democrats and liberals smeared Jimmy Carter for criticizing Israel

Why the Jews Reject the Christian and Muslim Worship of Avoda Zarah Gods.

The term ONE, the last word of the kre’a shma, the person who accepts the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, he accepts the oaths separately sworn by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov as ONE upon his heart.

Hence when a Cohen didicated a korban upon the altar in Jerusalem, the portion of Israel in the korbonot avodat HaShem service, they read the Creation story in the beit knesset.

These alien Gods have no connection with the plagues in Egypt, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds, nor the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. They directly compare to the Av tumah Golden Calf.

A simple precedent by which to grasp this prophetic mussar of g’lut. A fundamental Torah theme which the Apostle Paul’s “original sin” substitute theology totally uprooted in Goyim minds.

Why? Because both korbanot & tefillah both swear a Torah oath which dedicates tohor middot לשמה.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: