[Since what the reader sent is so long, I am putting my re-response here rather than at the end.]
Okay, no one has to accept the term Judeo-Christian if they don't want to. But I'm not uncomfortable with it, even though I agree with much of what is said in this reader's response, which does not seem to invalidate any of the points I made in my short post it is responding to, as long as one does not read into my post what is not there. (However, I do not agree that the Archangel Gabriel can be interpreted as Jesus' father; it is clearly indicated that it was "the power of the Holy Spirit". But Jesus' ancestry does not change His announcement that He is the fulfillment of Jewish Messianic prophecy. He did indeed state that the time had come for the Judaic religion to advance to a new stage, with which the Pharisees violently disagreed, leading to the crucifixion and the schism between the Jews (and Gentiles) who accepted Jesus as the Messiah and the Jews who did not, which is where we stand today; but in spite of the depth of the schism, a reconciliation in the last days is predicted in Revelation.)
From Reader Ron:
I trust that you are well.
I disagree with your assertion that Christians should be the last to condemn the term 'Judeo-Christian'
Arguably religions are political ideologies designed to control people. They are people control mechanisms. Their central tenets vary depending on whether the ideology is inclusive or exclusive. To the extent that the teachings of Jesus the Christ (whose real name was Esu Immanuel) have NOT been distorted by the Pharisee Saul of Tarsus and others, they represent a completely inclusive ideology based on the divine message that all are One in God. Hence the core Christian message is that God is love and we need to seek to love God, self and others as God loves us. In contrast, Jewish religious ideology, based on the Talmud and Torah, is exclusivist. It holds that Jehovah, the god of the Jews, ONLY loves Jews, and that only Jews have souls; the rest of humanity being cattle to be used and abused at whim, by Jehovah?s chosen people. The two ideologies could not be more opposite
Arguably the modern vogue for splicing these two ideologies into one is part of a ploy by Zionists to confuse and thus divide and conquer Christians and especially Amerikkan Christians with a fundamentalist orientation.
Encyclopaedias and sources of Satanically influenced disinformation (including so-called Christian churches) state that the Old Testament is of equal divine authority with the New Testament. That lie distorts all non Judaic thinking about Judaism and its adherents, and pollutes the personal paradigms of those who seek to follow the core message in New Testament teachings.
Since the beginning of the 20th century news and information has been superseded by propaganda, and general education (like religious education) became just another form of mind control and indoctrination, reinforced by Television. TV and all forms of advertising together with factory-style school and higher education systems, are designed to make children and adults into mind controlled robots. Bernays inspired PR (propaganda) has displaced truth almost completely in daily life.
Since WWII we have been bombarded with references to the Western world's "Judeo-Christian religion," and "our Judeo-Christian heritage." We are told by both church leaders and scholars that Western society is based on a supposed "Judeo-Christian tradition". Getting Christian churches and global society to accept that the exclusivist and genocidal Judaic (Talmudic) Law and the Christed divine law of unconditional universal love, are compatible was no mean feat. But Khazar controlled global political, educational and publishing systems and media have achieved it.
However, the contrived conventional wisdom that Christianity evolved out of Judaism and hence Christians have a Judeo-Christian ethic and cultural history is bullshit. There is NO common ground between Judaism and the New Testament injunction to love neighbour as self for the love of God. The pretence that there is ANY compatibility between these two diametrically opposed ideologies is a huge Satanic lie.
In 1992 a Newsweek article stated:
The idea of a single Judeo-Christian tradition is made-in-America. It quoted eminent Talmudic scholar Jacob Neusner: "Theologically and historically, there is no such thing as the Judeo-Christian tradition. It's a secular myth favoured by people who are not really believers themselves.
Newsweek cited authorities indicating that the idea of a common Judeo-Christian tradition first surfaced at the end of the 19th century but did not gain popular support until the 1940s, as part of an American reaction to Nazism . . , and concluded that:
Since then, both Jewish and Christian scholars have come to recognize that -- geopolitics apart -- Judaism and Christianity are different, even rival religions.
Joshua Jehouda, a prominent French Jewish leader, observed in the late 1950s:
The current expression 'Judaeo-Christian' is an error which has altered the course of universal history by the confusion it has sown in men's minds, if by it one is meant to understand the Jewish origin of Christianity . . . If the term 'Judaeo-Christian' does point to a common origin, there is no doubt that it is a most dangerous idea. It is based on a 'contradictio in abjecto' which has set the path of history on the wrong track. It links in one breath two ideas which are completely irreconcilable, it seeks to demonstrate that there is no difference between day and night or hot and cold or black and white, and thus introduces a fatal element of confusion to a basis on which some, nevertheless, are endeavouring to construct a civilisation. (l'Antisemitisme Miroir du Monde pp. 135-6).
In truth Christianity has nothing in common with Judaism. Jesus Christ (Esu Immanuel) and his birth mother, Mary, were not Jewish (Judean or Indumean), she was a Galilean. Galileans were descendants of the Sumerians, having migrated from Sumer to Galilee. The great lie that both Mary and Esu Immanuel were Jewish was and is perpetrated by Judaic leaders and propagandists to justify the lie that Christianity has Judaic roots. That lie is the basis of the Judeo-Christian myth. In truth the angry, vengeful god of the Torah and Talmud has NOTHING in common with the loving God of the New Testament.
Archangel Gabriel was Esu Immanuel's birth-father. He was/is a distant descendant of the Sons of Heaven, Rasiel, who was the guardian angel of the secret. According to Divine Plan, Gabriel secretly inseminated Mary with his own seed, thus becoming Immanuel's birth-father. Esu Immanuel was therefore both Galilean (a descendent of the Sumerians) from his mother Mary, and the Son of a distant descendant of the Sons of Heaven, from his birth-father Gabriel. Accordingly Esu Immanuel was NOT 'King of the Jews'.
Joseph became the spouse of Mary, adopted Esu Immanuel, and became his earthly father. Joseph of Jakob, was a distant descendant of David, who was a distant descendant of Abraham, whose lineage goes back to Adam.
See also: Phoenix Journal #2, 'AND THEY CALLED HIS NAME, IMMANUEL --- I AM SANANDA'
And: 'CHRIST WAS NOT A JEW', the author Jacob Elon Connor.
Phoenix Journal #50, 'GOD, TOO, HAS A PLAN 2000! DIVINE PLAN, VOL. I', chapter 6, pages 82 - 83. http://fourwinds10.com/journals/pdf/J050.pdf
Phoenix Journal #57, 'GOD, TOO, HAS A PLAN 2000! DIVINE PLAN, VOL. II', chapter 4, pages 54 - 58 and chapter 5, page 63 - 66. http://fourwinds10.com/journals/pdf/J057.pdf
Phoenix Journal #2, 'AND THEY CALLED HIS NAME, IMMANUEL --- I AM SANANDA' http://fourwinds10.com/journals/pdf/J002.pdf ]
Reviewing the last two thousand years of Western Christian history there is really no evidence of a Judeo-Christian tradition and this has not escaped the attention of honest Christian and Jewish commentators.
The Jewish scholar Dr. Joseph Klausner in his book Jesus of Nazareth expressed the Judaic viewpoint that there was something contrary to the world outlook of Israel in Christ's teachings, 'a new teaching so irreconcilable with the spirit of Judaism,' containing: within it the germs from which there could and must develop in course of time a non-Jewish and even anti-Jewish teaching.
Dr. Klausner quotes the outstanding Christian theologian, Adolf Harnack, who in his last work rejected the hypothesis of the Jewish origin of Christ's doctrine:
Virtually every word He taught is made to be of permanent and universal humanitarian interest. The Messianic features are abolished entirely, and virtually no importance is attached to Judaism in its capacity of Jesus' environment.
Gershon Mamlak, an award-winning Jewish Zionist intellectual, has claimed that the 'Jesus tradition' is essentially the ultimate extension of ancient Greek Hellenism and is in direct conflict to Judaism's role as the Chosen people.
Dr. Mamlak, writing in the Theodor Herzl Foundation's magazine of Jewish thought, Midstream, maintains that the prevailing theory that Christianity originated in the spiritual realm of Judaism:
is anchored in a twofold misconception: 1) the uniqueness of Judaism is confined to its monotheistic God-concept; 2) the 'parting of the ways' between the Jesus coterie and Judaism is seen as the result of the former's adaptation of the doctrines of Christology.
The first misconception means: When the affinity of the Jesus coterie with Judaism is evaluated by common faith in the One, severed from the believer's duty to execute the Law of the One and to acknowledge the Chosen Nation of Israel as His instrument-faith in the One becomes anti-Judaism par excellence!
In Gershon Mamlak's view;
The conflict between Judaism and the Jesus tradition goes beyond the confines of theology. [The Jesus tradition] was the cosmopolitan renunciation of the national phenomenon in general and extreme hostility to Israel's idea of a Chosen Nation as the divine instrument for the perfection of the world.
Evidently the concept of a common Judeo-Christian tradition has more to do with post 1945 politics and a certain amount of public relations than it does with historical and Biblical reality. Confusion over the origin of Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity is the root of the Judeo-Christian myth.
In the Scriptures the terms "Israel", "Judah" and "Jew" are not synonymous, nor is the House of Israel synonymous with the House of Judah. The course of history is widely divergent for the peoples properly classified under each of these titles. The authoritative 1980 Jewish Almanac says:
Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a Jew or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew.
A writer for The Dearborn Independent, published in Michigan back in 1922, summarised the problem thus:
The pulpit has also the mission of liberating the Church from the error that Judah and Israel are synonymous. The reading of the Scriptures which confuse the tribe of Judah with Israel, and which interpret every mention of Israel as signifying the Jews, is at the root of more than one-half the confusion and division traceable in Christian doctrinal statements.
Jesus Christ and the Pharisees
The New Testament Gospels reveal an intense conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees, one of the two principal Judean religious sects (see Matthew chapter 3, verse 7; Matthew chapter 5, verse 20; Matthew chapter 23, verses 13-15, 23-29; Mark chapter 8, verse 15; Luke chapter 11, verse 39). Much of this controversy was centred on what was later to become the foundation and highest authority of Judaism, the Talmud. In the time of Jesus Christ, this bore the name of "The Tradition of the Elders" (see Matthew chapter 15, verses 1-9).
The Judean historian Josephus wrote:
What I would now explain is this, that the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the laws of Moses...
While the Pharisees recognized the laws of Moses, they also claimed that there was a great body of oral tradition which was of at least equal authority with the written Law - and many claimed that the Tradition was of greater authority. By their tradition, they undertook to explain and elaborate upon the Law. This was the Tradition of the Elders, to which the name of Talmud was later given. It had its beginning in Babylon, during the Babylon captivity of the people of Judah, where it developed in the form of the commentaries of various rabbis, undertaking to explain and apply the Law. This was the foundation of Rabbinic Judaism.
This Judaism was very different from the religion of the ancient Israelites. The late Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, who was the Chief Rabbi of the United States, expressed this conclusively when he said:
The return from Babylon, and the adoption of the Babylonian Talmud, marks the end of Hebrewism, and the beginning of Judaism.
The Jewish Encyclopedia tells us that the Talmud is actually:
the product of the Palestinian and Babylonian schools" and is generally referred to as "the Babylonian Talmud.
Dr. Boaz Cohen in Everyman's Talmud states the Talmud is the work of 'numerous Jewish scholars over a period of some 700 years, roughly speaking, between 200 [B.C.] and 500 [A.D.].'
Rabbi Louis Finkelstein in Volume 1 of The Pharisees, the Sociological Background of their Faith says;
Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Medieval Rabbinism, and Medieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes of name, inevitable adaption of custom, and adjustment of Law, the spirit of the ancient Pharisee survives unaltered.
According to The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. VIII, (1942) p.474 :
The Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent, without a break, through all the centuries, from the Pharisees. Their leading ideas and methods found expression in a literature of enormous extent, of which a very great deal is still in existence. The Talmud is the largest and most important single member of that literature.
The Talmud, more than any other literature, so defined Judaism that Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser admitted: Judaism is not the religion of the Bible. (Judaism and the Christian Predicament, 1966, p.159) It is the Talmud that guides the life and spirit of the Jewish people.
The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart's blood of the Jewish religion. Whatever laws, customs, or ceremonies we [Jews] observe -- whether we are Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or merely spasmodic sentimentalists -- we follow the Talmud. It is our common law. (A History of the Jews, Solomon Grayzel).
Both Jewish and Christian scholars agree that it was Jesus Christ's total rejection of this 'Tradition of the Elders' and his open confrontation with the powerful Pharisees that created the climate that led to his crucifixion. Historically, Christian thinkers argued that the Talmud was directly responsible for the rejection of Christ.
Found at: http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?noframes;read=221437