Was ‘Jesus’ A ‘Racist Zionist’ Who Described Goyim (‘Gentiles’) As ‘Dogs’ ?

originally posted by: Illumimasontruth
a reply to: Sigismundus

Jesus was a race car driver.

Or was that Jerry?

Jesus builds hot rods.
Jerry drives them.
Junior tows them off the track after the crash.

OP.....No.You misunderstand the usage of the term back then. It was a TEST to see if the woman was actually worth helping. Asking for help while being insulted and not flinching was a testament to her FAITH she had.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Hi Razor--

You wrote :

QUOTE

"So racist he healed her daughter after testing her."

UNQUOTE

I don't know about you, but it seems heartless to me, at least, that a purported religious-healer who boldly asserts that he was ONLY 'sent' (in this case, by a misogynist-sexist-racist-bigoted-xenophobic desert-wandering tent-dwelling blood-thirsty middle-eastern clan god) to save ONLY one certain/identified group, and not to help others, to the point of degrading pejorative name-calling those who have come to him for help is nothing short of appalling. At least I wouldn't stand for my people being called 'dogs' to my face - in fact if he had said that to me, I would have spit right into his.

Maybe I'm just too proud, I don't know. But I suppose, in the end, it was the 'dogs snatching under the table' who eventually had the last laugh.

a reply to: chr0naut

HI Chr0--

You wrote

QUOTE

'Jesus didn't call all gentiles dogs in the same way that He didn't call all Jews His 'sheep'.

UNQUOTE

Ultimately we don't know what the man thought of the goyim; all we have are late traditions written down in Greek in the mangled gospel textual material that has chanced to come down to us--all written more than 40 years after the events they purport to relate and, what is worse, which often mistranslate and misconstrue/misrepresent the original oral Galilean Aramaic sayings ('logoi') aka the 'ipsissima verba' which in view of their orality have been lost to us forever.

There did exist a separate class of goyim in the 1st century who were still unmutilated/uncircumcised and who did not keep strictly kashrut diets (they abstained from worshipping idols, eating strangled animals or ingesting animal meat with blood in it etc.) but were allowed to attend synagogue services (kept behind the rope with the women); they were called 'god-fearers' (Heb. yerei-haShem, lit. 'fearers of the Name' i.e. of YHWH) many of whom lived and worked alongside Jews in both Palestine and in the Diaspora.

'Jesus' seems to have tolerated this type of semi-gentile somewhat more than the purer-straight-up idol-worshipping ritually-unclean dog-men that he seems to have avoided any truck with altogether. There is a pericope in the 3rd canonical Greek gospel ('according to Luke', whoever he was) about a centurion who was a member of this class of god-fearing gentile who had raised funds to build a synagogue near Kaphar-Nahum ('Capernaum'), 'being a supporter of the nationalist-zionist cause'; but, at least to hear the anonymous gospel-writer tell it, he seems to have felt 'unworthy' (the implication being that he was an 'untouchable' ritually-unclean gentile) for the good Rebbe to enter into his house where his male-military-adjutant boy-lover ('a boy whom he loved with a passion amounting to distraction', that some apologists translate as 'son' or 'servant') lay stricken with an apparently fatal infection --see Luke 7:1-10.

But we must always remember the literary-theological-propagandistic aims of the anonymous canonical 3rd Greek gospel-writer was to shew 'Jesus' more gentile-friendly and even approaching a universalist Weltanschauung (at least, at times...) which betrays the late date of its final composition and editing for use in gentile-friendly 'churches' after the destruction of the Jewish homeland in 72 CE at the hands of the 'Kittim' (i.e. the Roman Army).

a reply to: Sigismundus

What are you even talking about then? Anger does not equal understanding. Find fault in everything you disagree with if you want. It doesn't mean you're right. The real truth is in Christ. Someday, I hope you will see that.

a reply to: Toolman18

Hi Tool--

You wrote:

QUOTE

'What are you even talking about then? Anger does not equal understanding. Find fault in everything you disagree with if you want. It doesn't mean you're right. The real truth is in Christ...'

UNQUOTE

I'm certainly not angry--what I am is frustrated with certain persons on this thread who adamantly refuse to examine so much of the racist-zionist underpinnings to the canonical Greek gospel naaratives--hard literary evidence that is staring right at them in front of their eyes for everyone to see...

As for your last phrase, I'm afraid I will have to echo a phrase of Pontivs Pilatvs Praefectvs Ivdaeorvm on this one, viz. 'Mah-Kushta (What Is 'Truth') ?'

Was it racism or test of faith. In Matthew 15:28 when Jesus answered "O woman, great is thy faith" implies that her faith was being tested. Similarly told in parable of the widow in Luke 18:1-8. So Matthew 15:22 likely didn't take place. Its a parable to inform people never to give up their faith. No matter who or what the obstacle.

3rd Century Origen said...
Where the word found that things done according to the history could be adapted to these mystical senses, he made use of them concealing from the multitude the deeper meaning; but where in the narrative of the development of super-sensual things, there did not follow the performance of those certain events which were already indicated by the mystical meaning, the scripture interwove in the history the account of some event that did not take place, sometimes what could not have happened; sometimes what could but did not.

(De Principiis)

originally posted by: Sigismundus

see also Proverbs 26: 11 ...

Proverbs 26:11:

11 Like a dog that returns to its vomit,

The stupid one repeats his foolishness.

Very appropiate for this thread.

2 Peter 2:

However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you. These will quietly bring in destructive sects, and they will even disown the owner who bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. 2 Furthermore, many will follow their brazen conduct,* [Or “their acts of shameless conduct.”] and because of them the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively. 3 Also, they will greedily exploit you with counterfeit words. But their judgment, decided long ago, is not moving slowly, and their destruction is not sleeping.
...
12 But these men, like unreasoning animals that act on instinct and are born* [Or “are born naturally.”] to be caught and destroyed, speak abusively about things of which they are ignorant. They will suffer destruction brought on by their own destructive course, 13 suffering harm as their reward for their own harmful course.
...
22 What the true proverb says has happened to them: “The dog has returned to its own vomit, and the sow that was bathed to rolling in the mire.”

Jude 10

But these men are speaking abusively about all the things they really do not understand. And in all the things that they do understand by instinct like unreasoning animals, they go on corrupting themselves.

"Slander" is another word for "abusive speech". The slanderer gets pleasure in revealing things that cause sensation.

Proverbs 26:20-25

20 Where there is no wood, the fire goes out,

And where there is no slanderer, quarreling ceases.

21 As charcoal for the embers and wood for the fire,

So a contentious man kindles a quarrel.

22 The words of a slanderer are like tasty morsels;* [Or “like things to be swallowed greedily.”]

They are gulped right down into the stomach.

23 Like a silver glazing over a piece of earthenware

Are affectionate words from* [Lit., “fervent lips with.”] an evil heart.

24 The one who hates others disguises it with his lips,

But inside he harbors deceit.

25 Although he speaks graciously, do not trust him,

For there are seven detestable things in his heart.* [Or “For his heart is completely detestable.”]

a reply to: Sigismundus

Anyone with any education knows that Zionism was a political movement started in Central Europe in the late nineteenth century by Theodor Herzl.

a reply to: Sigismundus

Jesus had to be very careful about what he said during his short time of ministry in Israel, so not to be killed sooner. He had to act like them (partake in Jewish traditions) and speak like them to convince them that He was the Messiah that the scriptures talked about. The Jews wanted God all to themselves to restore them, but he had other plans from the very beginning, and he told them so in John 10:16...

John 10:16

16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

Throughout Matthew, Jesus told his disciples not to tell any man what they had witnessed (the transformation or transfiguration) of him being Jesus the Christ until after his death. Jesus also did not instruct his disciples to witness to the whole world until after his death either, for they were going to need the power of his Holy Spirit to complete his ministry upon the earth.

Mark 1:8

8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

It's through the power of the Holy Spirit that ALL of the sheep are able to recognize the voice of the shepherd as outlined in John 10, but Jesus had to die first and then ascend to heaven before he returned as the Holy Spirit to gather the rest of the sheep.

a reply to: Sigismundus

Finally ‘Jesus’ spoke to the woman saying, ‘Woman, the Bar Enasha (‘the Son of Man’) was sent ONLY (Gk. ‘mono’) to the Elect of the Lost Sheep of the House of Yisro’el, and anyway, since when is it right to take the holy-bread belonging to the sons of the Kingdom and throw it away on dogs [panting for a snatch] under the table?’

Nothing true in your above inferences. Yahusha came to the lost sheep of Israel and not the chosen among the lost sheep of Israel as you have tried to cleverly disguise.

I don't know about you, but it seems heartless to me, at least, that a purported religious-healer who boldly asserts that he was ONLY 'sent' (in this case, by a misogynist-sexist-racist-bigoted-xenophobic desert-wandering tent-dwelling blood-thirsty middle-eastern clan god) to save ONLY one certain/identified group, and not to help others, to the point of degrading pejorative name-calling those who have come to him for help is nothing short of appalling. At least I wouldn't stand for my people being called 'dogs' to my face - in fact if he had said that to me, I would have spit right into his.

Your hatred has blinded you to the point that you do not understand this matter of which you accuse Yahusha who is the Begotten Son of Yahuah. Please refrain from your mixture of English with your limited understanding of Greek You impress no one.

In your above quote you have unwittingly accused Yahusha of calling your people [whatever that means] dogs as though you have the power of authority among people. There is nothing in this Matthew account that confers with your accusation of Yahusha insulting any individual or group of people by calling them dog or dogs. In fact Yahusha defends the people by saying that it is not right to take the bread from the children and give it to the dogs.

Mat 15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.

You also misunderstand Matthew 15:24 in that Yahusha does not say [in this event] that He came only for the Jew. You must read verse 23 and verse 24 together. It was certain disciples [whoever they may be] who wanted Yahusha to ignore this woman. It was not of Yahusha, who you accuse, that wanted to ignore this woman. Yahusha then said that He was not sent just for the lost sheep of the house of Israel [I am not sent just [but] unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.]

Mat 15:23-24
(23) But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
(24) But he answered and said, I am not sent just [but] unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

There are many more instances in your post that are nothing but misinformation and disguised with word play.

1Co_12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

You cannot believe in the Giver of Peace and Righteous Teacher of earth.

I cannot believe, that you choose to believe the Romans when it is so completely obvious in history that they lied to you about the legacy of Christ and the Nazarenes.

It is so clear cut in history, how you choose to believe treacherous murderers over the peaceful saints!

The Nazarenes claim that the brother of Christ James, was the first bishop of the church.

The Romans claim that Peter was the first head of the church.

If you people for just one day let all the pride and ego deflate out of your heads, it is not even a fair match to see and understand who is lying. Just look at the fact that in history, it has been mentioned by other scholar and historians of that day that James was the first bishop of the church. But if you look up what the Romans had to say about that - they are completely silent over the life and death of James. They just don't say anything about it - as if there was that period of 40 years after Christ that was just silent and nothing happened. But things did happen! Even important things happened!! But just because the authors of our history are Silent over an important period of 40 years - you all just believe them and figure that nothing happened just because they are silent and do not give us a story of what happened!

You are leading yourself to sin and judgment. Because I cannot understand how the liars of history just say that nothing happened and they just walk around the truth and say nothing about it and you believe them!! That alone is so horrible that you would believe people who just say nothing as to what happened in history, hoping that people would just forget about it and pretend that nothing happened!!! Absolutely Remarkable!!!!

That is not going to be me!!! I am not going to be filled with such arrogance and pride, to think that during an utmost important time for Christians to understand what happened in their history and the birth of their religion, to just accept that the Roman version of history can just be complete silent over the events that took place when James was head of the church. You all just ignore it!!!!!!!!!!!! That is not acceptable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You deserve to be judged!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

a reply to: DJW001

Hi DJ--

You wrote :

QUOTE

Anyone with any education knows that Zionism was a political movement started in Central Europe in the late nineteenth century by Theodor Herzl.

UNQUOTE

I speak on this threadlet of 'zionism' in its most generic connotational nuance, viz, 'a Jewish nationalist movement that has as its goal the creation of a Jewish religio-national state in Palestine, the one-time homeland of Jews,' which, as you must know, ceased to exist as a nation-state in 587 BCE when Babylon wiped the tiny kingdom from the map and exiled its leaders and its formerly influentual/financially & politically-substantive persons to Babylon & Egypt.

It became a client state of Babylon (587-531 BCE) before becoming a Satrapy (province) of Persia (present day Iran beginning in 531 BCE) until its substation under the Syrian-Greek Ptolmeys (331-163 BCE) at which time Jerusalem Tsadukkites (the 'Macabbees')
exercised semi-autonomous control over the region until the Roman general Pompey annexed the country as a Roman province (63 BCE to 138 CE) at which time following the 2nd Failed Jewish War against Rome under bar-Kosiva-Kockhba, the Emperor Adrian dissolved the remaining Jewish religious-elements (replacing them with pagan temples), exiling the remaining locals to places like Alexandria and into the Diaspora and renaming Jerusalem as Aeolia Capitolina.

You must surely also be aware that there existed many different forms of 'zionism' in the world from antiquity, (cf. the passages in Acts where the anonymous author of the 3rd gospel, 'according to Luke', whoever he was, has words placed into a Greek-speaking centurion 'god-fearer' e.g. 'moreover he was a supporter of our nation-state') and to-day includes 'religious zionism' and [essentially atheistic] 'political zionism', which are the two main political elements to-day vying for power in the modern state of Yisro'el.

So please do not take my reference to the 'zionist-Weltanschauung' on this thread to understand the term only in its narrower Herzlian 19th century sense--try to see it in broader terms when speaking about the 1st-century Roman provinces within greater region of Syro-Palestine in their fight since BCE 587 to establish an autonomous nation-state free of the gentile control of far more powerful entities like Persia, Greece and Rome.

a reply to: Deetermined

Hi Deet--

You quoted a passage from the 4th canonical council-approved Greek gospel ('according to John,' whoever he was):

QUOTE

John 10:16

'And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.'

UNQUOTE

It is clear that the reference here being made by R. Yehoshua bar-Yosef the Galilean is to the Ingathering of the Lost Sheep of the House of Yisro'el scattered among the Gentiles, i.e. to Diaspora Jews in the 1st century CE that the long-hoped-for Meshia'q was to re-collect and bring back to Eretz-Yisro'el 'in the Last Days', which process was known to later Rebbes (see Pes. 88a) as the 'Kibbutz-galuyyot i.e. the Re-Gathering of the Exiles...'

For an earlier basis for the Ingathering of the Lost Sheep in the Last Days see Trito-Isaiah 56:8 and 66:20 as well as Deuteronomy 28:63 and Deut. 30:1-5.

This 'Re-gathering of the Lost sheep scattered among the goyim in the Last Days' with the Meshia'q leading them in a final procession to Eretz-Yisroel is part of the greater Messianic Fantasy of ultimate world-conquest with a new Yisro'el being established with Jerusalem as its centre and refers always to Israelites only and has nothing whatsoever to do with 'gentiles' being converted or being preached-to

a reply to: Sigismundus

It is clear that the reference here being made by R. Yehoshua bar-Yosef the Galilean is to the Ingathering of the Lost Sheep of the House of Yisro'el scattered among the Gentiles, i.e. to Diaspora Jews in the 1st century CE that the long-hoped-for Meshia'q was to re-collect and bring back to Eretz-Yisro'el 'in the Last Days', which process was known to later Rebbes (see Pes. 88a) as the 'Kibbutz-galuyyot i.e. the Re-Gathering of the Exiles...'

Jesus didn't say that the "other sheep" were the other lost sheep of Israel. He said that they were the sheep who recognized his voice and obeyed him.

Here are some other verses that show who the "other sheep" are...

Ephesians 3:5-6

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

Jesus didn't tell his disciples to go find the remaining lost sheep of Israel. Here's what he told them...

Matthew 28

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in EARTH.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach ALL NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

a reply to: Sigismundus

I think they called the Zionists from that time Zealots.

a reply to: Deetermined

Hi again Dee--

You wrote

QUOTE

'Here are some other verses that show who the "other sheep" are...

Ephesians 3:5-6 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel...'

UNQUOTE

Your citation from the purported Pauline Epistle to the Laodecaeans (or in some MSS 'Ephesians') demonstrates the pro-gentile/anti Nazorean views of Sha'ul of Tarsus (aka Paul), a man born in the Diaspora among the Gentiles in the Turko-Roman province of Cilicia, who had never actually met the historical 'Jesus' in the flesh but only in dreams and visions--like my gardner, and who moreover fought tooth and nail with both the blood-brother of 'Jesus' (R. Yakkov bar Yosef, haTzaddiq, aka 'James the Just' who ran a Messianic yahad ('congregation') in Jerusalem called the 'Ebionim' (the 'poor ones') and the leading disciples who knew the Galilean Aramaic oral teachings of 'Jesus' first-hand, e.g. Shimeon bar Yonah, haKefah (=Simon Peter) and Yakkov bar-Zavdai, aka the other James, one of the two brotherly 'sons of Thunder' (Aram. benei-regesh, warped into Greek as Boanerges), whom he derided as 'those two so-called pillars [of the church]' in that very infamous passage in Galatians chapter 2.


No one doubts that this 'Paul' personage really did believe the goyim could be brought into the fold; but there is absolutely no evidence that 'Jesus' ever gave them a second thought in his whole tumultuous life. Your quotation of the mangled ending from the first canonical council-approved Greek gospel ('According to Matthew', whoever he was) is only found in a few late manuscripts and exists in many different forms, so we cannot say with any confidence whatsoever that these words placed into the mouth of a Greek-speaking 'Iesous' are in any way, shape or form his actual teaching which moreover knew nothing of the 'trinity' of Father, Son & Holy Spirit' which shews the ending to have been a 2nd or 3rd century spurious addition to the text.

If you want a further idea of how the Nazorean Ebionim thought about the world, take a look at the Greek adaptation of an Aramaic Epistle of James in the NT which is attributed to 'James the Just' and who is given short shrift in today's
Pauline-spouting 'Christian' (!) churches that claim to follow 'Jesus'.

a reply to: Sigismundus

Ignore Paul all you want, but you do so at your own peril...

Isaiah 49:5-6

5 And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength.

6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

Matthew 8:8-12

8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.

9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.

10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

a reply to: Sigismundus

But you do see the different time models the different paradigms the different dispensations throughout scripture don't you?

a reply to: Sigismundus

Here are more verses from the Old Testament...

Isaiah 56:3-7

3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.

4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;

5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.

6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

Zechariah 2:11

11 And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto thee.