What's the point in adding the "judeo-" ?

We have Talmudists posting here now? It's very explicit in the Talmud where it blasphemes the King of Kings, and His holy mother, Mary. The chutzpah of this guy.

I wouldn't trust a new atheist to tell me how to interpret the NT as a christian, why would I trust a person out of the faith to tell me about Judaism then? I'm not referring to race when I said jew.

They have some, but lacking grace, sure, prob messed up in many ways.

Not a talmudist, I've spoken to orthodox Jews on this and how they explained passages like this changed my perspective about the interpretive abilities of people who weren't them, even other jews. Like I said, am I in trying to tell them about their faith not just like a nu-atheist trying to tell me about mine?

It says no such thing

so we have no right to tell muslims that the clear command to smite unbelievers is wrong and that it ACZCCHTUALY means something else, even though we see by their behaviors and religious leaders this teaching? ( applies to jews as well )
also
bruh

Lmao I personally checked the, included the reference and the original text for all to see. Jesus is mentioned several times, as a sorcerer with discipled who was executed by the romans by "hanging". Jews even had to self-censor it from the Talmud to hide it lmao, and now where it is mentioned how he is burning in excrement in Hell, it read "the sons of Israel", but the older copies still mention "Jesus".

It is, after all, what is expected from those who murdered him.

Oh I forgot: executed during the evenof passover, in case you want to spew more lies to the goyim.

It's not that simple. Read this article.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud#Possible_Talmudic_references
There are references to Jesus The Nazerene but most of these passages do not mention him in a particularly disparaging way. The ones that do make disparaging remarks about him use the slightly different name, Jesus which is the aramaic pronunciation of the Hebrew Jesus, but is spelled incorrectly. Seeing how the rabbinic jews already chopped up the Old Testament to remove any and all references to Christ as The prophesied Messiah, I wouldn't put it passed them to replace a name in The Talmud in order to avoid persecution by the Christian nations they parasitize.

First of all it never says Jesus because there is no "J" sound in hebrew. If you want to misstate facts at least try to get the excuses right.

Secondly if you read that wiki page you will see most similar names are clearly referencing someone else. For example the Nazerene references references a guy with 5 followers, which doesn't match the Jesus story. Also your claim that rabbis chopped up the Torah to remove references is patently false.

Goypedia will also tell you how "scholars" thing that the servant of the centurion was a homosexual sex toy. So if I were ypu I would think twice before using that repulsive site again

Lmao yes that "sorcerer" Jesus the nazarene with disciples who was executed in the eve of passover by the romans by hanging totally isnt Jesus because the jew who came up with that slander centuries afterwards mentioned 5 disciples lmao.

Are you even trying jew?

Also of course they did, just like they self censored the part when they mention how he burns in excrement in Hell.

My God the only pathetic defense of the murderers of God is to claim that some jew didnt write whatever letter correctly so it is not blatantly Jesus, who they murdered and despise

Just a question, user, but didn't the Catholic Church excuse them for this? I'm assuming you're Catholic.

Did you even read my post?
Pic very related.

Attached: septuagint vs masoratic.jpg (769x993, 265.81K)

I merely say what Paul, the apostles, and every single Father of the Church said. It is a fact, and literally nothing is going to change that. The current judaizers can cry all day saying "b-but it was other jews!", but that doesnt change the fact that jews murdered him, that jews are defined by the murder and rejection of Christ, and that all jews consciously identify with it. People just suffer from the disease John Chrysostom identified very well

The church didn't excuse them, it merely recognized that the claim is retarded. Unfortunately some caths continue on. Part of the reason I generally don't like my own church

...

I think we should raise our concerns to them and allow them to interpret it and change the behavior of their own faith community

Obvious Jewish subversion. It's redundant and/or inaccurate, it does no historic sense.

The Judeo-Christian narrative is the preferred means of subversion used by neoconservatives and zionists, spread when Jews took over the world after winning the WWII.

There's also another subversive change in our vocabulary: Mohammedanism was changed to Islam and Mohammedans to Muslims. It's a progressivist approach and was embraced by the Jewish establishment.

Neocons aside, both Mohammedans and Jews love to brag to each other about their invasion (and killings, and heavy taxes, and forced conversions, and slavery, and rapes) of the Iberian Peninsula. At same time, whie they try to falsify history telling the 700 years of Mohammedans invasion were an act of charity towards Jews (who were indeed conspiring in there), they also try to ERASE that from history, saying that event is an anti-semitic lie, they even erase real history from Wikipedia just so Jews don't get "defamed".

There's a historically accurate, but non-used term: it's Judeo-Mohammedan. That was fighting against this enemy Spain and Portugal came to be what they are. That was this enemy who forcefully converted, killed, raped and took as slaves Christians over Palestine as well, which was relatively devoid of Jews, it was mostly Christian, before Mohammedans allying with the neo-Pharisees and winnie the pooh the region. The Judeo-Mohammedan alliance and culture was the one trading European (mostly Christian) slaves to Mohameddans' lands.

That's the Judeo-Mohammedan alliance who created the Islamic and Jewish "Golden Age", forged over the disgrace and slavery of Christians. Now they brag about it.

The civilization we used to live, at least before both world wars, is a CHRISTIAN civilization. The only thing Jews had given us is usury and promotion of wars, then conspiracies and corruption. Crypto-Jews were a problem deep down to the 17th century and managed to defame Jesuits and consolidate the slave trades. Then, in the last century, finally we got completely corrupted by Jewish promoted nihilism, anti-Christianity and usury, consolidated by the Jewish faction winning the WWII, having their strawmen and victimist propaganda set and abused until this day. Now we can say we live in a Judeo-Christian civilization, something new and rotten, born from lies and a cult of suicide targeted to Christians.

European blood, Greek philosophy and science, Roman law and language AND THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH; these are what helped to give birth to our common civilization, the Christian civilization where—until before Enlightenment appeared (and not less faulty were Protestants) to subvert everything, falsify history and defame our own past—, Christ was the main reason for progress, for the spreading of our own common culture. Things were done for Christ. Way differently what we have now, where they can push such bullshit and out of reality term: "Judeo-Christian".

As if Christianity didn't inherit every good thing from God's true religion. As if Jews were the same people and had the same customs as in Bible, as if Talmudists or Talmud were to be taken seriously, as if they didn't antagonize Christians from the very beginning, persecuting them and conspiring against them, as if the Jews from Palestine didn't convert to Christians as they witnessed Christ and His followers, as if Pharisees weren't a criticized group by Christianity… No relevance beyond negative things in forming our civilization. Academy is corrupted, Anglo-American customs got corrupted and corrupted other peoples as well, as they were the ones now dominating the world, with globalization happening and having a worldwide lingua franca. Now all of the world is corrupted with the use of that subversive term. Now history is being rewrited, and our kids will believe it was the "Judeo-Christian" civilization who created everything good we have and even some blue-pilled evangelicals on this board will join their choir.

and we can't criticize their scriptures and faith? because we would be eternally misunderstaning them?

And what do you do with those content with their interpretation and fight & kill us to this day? I'm not sure you really thought this one through, mate.

And before someone purposely "misunderstands" what I said, when I talk about post-Christianity "Jews", I don't even considerer them, Talmudists, worth of using such gentilic term, they are frauds, usurpers of customs and legitimacy, have only dug the way of their own people to Hell, along with what used to be faithful Christians, in a truly Christian civilization. They take part of anti-Christianity to this day, where we are in the worst point of the last 500 years.

Neocons subverting Christianity by one side; atheist ethnic "Jews" destroying Christian morals and beliefs by the other, filling us with vanity; and the orthodox still conspiring to dominate the world by summoning their Messiah, their to-be king, and conspiring against the rest of the world so they can accomplish this.

The dualist morality remains their biggest flaw. It's satanic and it seems to be in their nature, so deep it is on them, even on atheist progressive "Jews" who pretend to follow some upside-down universal morality (but push Christians and whites to their annihilation, for they HATE Christians, just as "Jews" have always "openly" done in the past, before "integrating" in the last decades, hiding their true intentions). Materialism, subversion, nihilism, slavery, dualistic morality, inverted morality to goyim, that's the nature of Judeo-"Christian" civilization.

I agree with your post, user, however I believe the Church "let go", for lack of a better word, on this issue in Vatican II, becoming more lax on the Jews.

youtube.com/watch?v=KA-Sx_Mp19c&t=10m52s

10:52

Proof that it is stated in the Talmud that Jesus is burning in excrement and that his mother's a whore.

The Mohammedans won't change it unless their religion is subverted, and I don't like this idea. They won't do it by their own, it would be like denying the divinity of Christ or denying baptism, salvation, the Holy Trinity… To convert by force, to lie for "Islam", to kill a deserter… it's all dogma. There's nothing to interpret on their bloody cult. The "nicer" Mohammad was just a farce which failed, being "substituted", with time, by the blood-hungry Mohammad. Chronology takes priority when interpreting Mohammad words. The murderous orders take priority. That's their religion. To change it, is to change their religion. And why to change it to something else than Christianity? Why to take the trouble to subvert Mohammedans from a wrong religion into some artificial and not less wrong one? That's retarded.

The Mohammedans who say their religion is not tainted with blood from its bones are lying. If they say they are a religion of peace, THEY ARE LYING, and they are oriented by their leaders to lie. Or they are some Mohammedan "protestant", they diverge very much from the original and main murderous sects (and that includes both from Sunni and Shia sides). Still so, they will insist, "Islam is a religion of peace".

Either we focus in converting them to Christianity, or we (forcefully if needed) apart them from our Christian peoples out of safety and self-preservation. Practicing Mohammedans are expansive, aggressive, treacherous and violent. It's in the nature of their religion and we can't change it.

To make it clearer. We wouldn't change because that's the base of our religion. The same way they won't change, except via heresies and apostasy, so that won't be "Islam" anymore.

I'm not the quoted user and I will leave the video to be watched later, but it's also documented through our history that Jews insulted Saint Mary all the effing time. Rabbis and common Jews alike took pleasure in insulting Jesus, our Lord, and His holy mother. That probably continues to this day in orthodox circles.

Until a century ago, Jews took the name "Mary" (or Maria) as an insult if they had one of their own kind named like that. They were very used to call her a whore.

It would be a great contribution if you could compile some primary sources about this to verify it and add it to my arsenal.

Good idea. I don't promise anything, but I will keep this in mind and, if successful, I'm coming back here with the info I get.

Nice post

I believe my video gives a primary source as it uses Talmud quotations.

Be extremely wary of "Christians" who fall over themselves to suck up and defend and make excuses for Jews. You have to wonder what exactly is going on with someone who loves to stick up for the most wicked, Christ-hating nation on the entire planet.

No true Christian shall ever forget (much less forgive) the filthy jews that killed Our Lord and Saviour. They remain the number one enemy of Christendom to this very day.

I was rather refering to the insults through history apart from the Talmud.

This is just egregious

He was talking about the Roman soldiers and officers. Jews are reprobates.

John 8. You and your kind are of your father the devil.

Never thought God would be blasphemed on account of my name

The thing I really hate on these images is that the quotation system is utter shite.
What is "Sanhedrin 54b" supposed to mean?
The tract Sanhedrin has 11 chapters, where the frick do the "54" and the "b" play at?

Lmao do you really think that baptism makes you this perfect untouchable thing? Do you really think when Christ tells that to some it was because they weren't baptised?

Zig Forumsyp pls go and stay go

Answer me, did Christ say that because the people he was addressing werent baptized?

I will answer for you: no, it was because of their evil. And since baptism doesnt make you a sinless wonder, dont expect baptism to make you somehow inmune

We must forgive them to be true Christians, the same way God forgives us for our own sins. If you're blaming a whole group for their infinite insult against God, the same thing can be applied for all of Mankind, we, ourselves, Christians, included. Let God deal with their punishment for that if they don't repent and convert.
But you're correct they are one of the groups most used by the Devil to corrupt us. They are very often anti-Christians, not only openly against Christianity as a group, and much less now than in the past, but against our values and the morality God's given us – and even against our "goy" blood(!). This extends to the atheist Jews, who have discarded religion, but not their tradition of antagonizing Christianity (and the Logos, as Dr. Jones would say). If they have evil tendencies coming from their own blood or some God's curse on their lineage, that's a very important thing (specially to acknowledge if you're a Zig Forumsack, one of the few people who seem to care about it currently), but not the critical point. The critical point is they (and anyone else!) shouldn't be spreading evil. Faith and obedience to Christ must overcome their tendencies to sin, and we shouldn't pretend to be blind about their mistakes and deal with it the best way we can think, but forgiveness is our duty, at least, at least, as long as they repent. And making them repent and convert is our duty as well.

It looks like you're forcefully interpreting it out of convenience. Have more humility and see the huge insult Humanity has thrown and throws everyday to God. The Son died for us, God died for us, and was humiliated by us: Men. The holiest and most powerful being in the universe came to us as a "mere" man and suffered as a man. Every and each of our sins, as well, is an infinite insult to God. We must never forget this, although He forgive us and sacrificed Himself for our salvation. If God can forgive us, so we must forgive other people's sins and insults against us, so we must open their eyes against the insults they throw against God, so they repent, and get God's forgiveness.

Your point?

because judaism was the only other religion in Europe other than christianity and perhaps islam in southern spain.

The religion of the enemy. That was fighting and winning against Jews and Mohammedans Portugal and Spain developed their identity. If Mohammedanism hadn't appeared, Jews would be restrained to jewing by usury, the Holy Land would remain basically Christian and all of the Middle East and North of Africa would be not only Christian, but would have a compatible culture, based on Romans' and Greeks'. Slavery wouldn't have happened at the scale it happened as well.

So why to name your own civilization based on the enemy? It only does sense from after the last century, since usurer's "capitalism" dominated completely the world. It only does sense after "Enlightenment" and liberalism started to ruin our culture and civilization. When there was a huge defamation and history rewriting against the Catholic Church, Christianity and Europe's true history, thanks to the Protestants who never ceased with their lies and gave birth to this atheistic and nihilistic aberration that is this parallel modern "parasite culture", Jews got everything open to them to subvert our culture in a suicide cult.
What we would call judeo-Christian is this movement and culture of parasitism and hate targeted to Christians and to our true civilization itself (which is a Christian civilization and has been like that since it spread to Anatolia and Roman lands, since the barbarian tribes invaded and converted to Christianity).

A question, user. How is Protestantism responsible for what you stated they're responsible for? How was it responsible for the Enlightenment, etc?

Subversion

I didn't believe "Approves of Child Sacrifice" so I went to the text:
sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.64a.17?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

So you can burn up your own child, OR give your child to the priests of Molech to be killed in any other way - but only if you give your child to the priests of Molech and they burn him up are you guilty? This is the Talmud folks: read whatever into the text and if use pilpul to ensure all favored behaviors are approved. The only solace I have is that most Jews probably don't read their Tamuld - it is far too long.

reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9siczt/help_understanding_babylonian_talmud_tractate/

Perhaps I am hasty, here are some Jewish opinions of the passage.

Attached: IMG_20190703_135340.jpg (1280x679, 123.07K)

The massive defamation of the Church and the Christian civilization, and with political support, happened centuries before with the Protestants and their revolution. So you get the lie, from protestants, of the "dark ages" "being real" and "being promoted by the Church". Enlightenment used those lies to further rewrite history, artificially rising them as superior in morals, logic and knowledge, as the saviors of mankind, opening the doors to more lies, to nihilism, self-hate and anti-Christianity. Now we see the fruits of the bloody hatred of liberal revolutionaries in Europe against the Church and Catholic monarchies, liberal revolutionaries who accused monarchs and the Church to be totalitarian (which they usually were not) while having totalitarian dreams of their own. These lies keep increasing to this day in a slightly different way (with morality inversion and open anti-Christianity and suicide cults, promoted by devils like some Jewish lobbies), but our generation, thanks to the Internet, is slowly getting rid of them as dogma (sadly things are getting and remaining polarized about it). Who was born in 60s had it worse, were homogeneously indoctrinated to despise our civilization's past. The Dark Ages/totalitarianism myth was (pseudo)scientific dogma and forced by anyone or any group who wanted to keep their "intellectual" superiority. I don't see the "Inquisition" meme dying anytime soon, for example.

Bravo.

Subversion by kikes and their Boomer servants.

youtube.com/watch?v=EGJnqE_7Mn8

Attached: 1560728866262.png (1000x500, 41.48K)

when Jesus was crucified, the nails pierced his wrists, not the palms of his hands. specifically, they went through Destot's space, which is near the heel of the hand.

Experiments have shown that nails driven through the hands, coupled with nails through the feet, would support the full body weight. It's also speculated that the crosses had a small piece of wood that acted as a kind of seat to support body weight.

The Greek word "chier" is used when describing the wounds and chier = hands.

Sorry … "cheir", not chier.

The wrists seem to be more structurally sound, and the shroud of Turin supports this.

Of course, someone who describes the events without caring much about whether the nails are 3cm upwards or downwards, would refer to just the "hands"

That's odd. Whenever a saint has had stigmata appear, surely it's been in the palms of their hands rather than on their wrists, I think.

Maybe that tells you something about the validity of those stigma claims

...

The validity is proven by the saintly lives and enedless miracles around those people, so better watch your tongue before slandering saints, snake.

Like clockwork.
Who cried "crucify him!"? Who said "may his blood fall upon us and our children"?

Not to mention some of those saints became incorruptible.

No one is bound to believe a claim about stigmata.

right, it's easy to see how 'cheir' (hand) might be used in a more general sense to refer to the wrist as well.

I'm not sure if that's the case.

You look suspiciously like a jew to me.

Attached: christkillers.gif (2157x392, 131.76K)

If you don't believe Church approved apparitions/mystics, you are causing scandal.

That's stupid. The Church explicitly says that things worthy of belief aren't mandated belief. Are you saying the Church allows blatant sin without anyone noticing this?

I don't claim the accusations are petty because you are bound to believe anything. I say that they are petty because they imply some kind of nonsensical fraud from people with well known saintly, humble lives.

I thought it was because Christianity came from Judaism, and so God the Father was the same in both religions.

No, judaism spits on God the Father by spitting on Christ. As John Chrysostom says, it is as if a wise old man was beaten in a tavern, and you said that the tavern is virtuous because the old wise man is in it. Yes, he is in it, being beaten and spat on.

Judeo-Christian values don’t exist. Here’s an article from a Rabbi explaining exactly why:
jewishpress.com/blogs/yoris-news-clips/theres-no-such-thing-as-judeo-christian-values/2013/12/26/
The conflation only serves the purposes of evil, nothing more.

You have to look into what tribe Judaism actually came from. The modern day Rabbinical "Judaism" is actually younger than Christianity. It descends from the Talmud, an oral compilation of the man-made laws from the Pharisees, the ones who killed Jesus.

Attached: Jews are not Israeli, they are Edomites.jpg (638x479 813.52 KB, 117.8K)

It comes from Ezra, the beginning of scholarly rabbinical Judaism, the fathers of the Pharisees. It was written later, but existed long before Christ, but long after Moses.

Rick Wiles does a good job of exposing Kabbalah in modern day Christianity

I'm no bible scholar, but even i know the reason Israel was going to war against jews was because the tribes had split into 2 kingdoms, after Solomon died, because his son was an idiot that pissed people off.