22 responses to “PARABLE OF PARABLES: REVIEW EP. 1-4”

1. 

   UNRAVELLING THE KNOTS THE DEVIL TIES: RULE ONE – The Hungry Hearts Collective

   23rd Nov 2024

   […] PARABLE OF PARABLES: REVIEW EP. 1-4→ […]

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   mosckerr

   16th Dec 2024

   Why does the Gospels amount to a false messiah foreign Roman counterfeit on par with the Czar’s Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

   Fundamental error in quoting opinions made by “Big Authorities”, cult of personalities, similar to placing an idol upon a pedestal, with absolutely no knowledge of משנה תורה common law. Simple question never asked? How does the mitzva of Moshiach qualify as a Torah commandment? Reliance solely upon NaCH sources of kabbalah fails to grasp the mitzva of Moshiach as a Written Torah time oriented tohor commandment which weighs upon the scales of Life or Death.

   The mitzva of Moshiach, an Oral Torah time oriented commandment, only secondarily limited to time – like looking at ones’ watch! What type of commandment qualifies as a Life/Death-time oriented commandment? Korbanot require swearing a Torah oath, and life & death! Aaron and his House “anointed” to dedicate “Moshiach” korbanot! Hence the Moshiach of the House of Aaron serves as the Torah foundation for the mitzva of Moshiach for the House of David as taught by NaCH kabbalah. Impossible to learn Torah common law without the wisdom of learning by means of comparative, similar mitzvot precedents! Torah common law/משנה תורה\ stands upon the יסוד/foundation\ of positive & negative toldot Torah commandments which function as logical פרדס precedents to Av tohor time oriented commandments.

   Meaning, Common Law precedents based upon positive and negative ((think Gemarah halachot as precedents to re-interpret the k’vanna of the language of the Mishna)) commandments. Impossible to understand tohor time oriented commandments ignorant – also – of the role of tohor middot!!!! Time oriented commandments require the dedication of defined & specific tohor middot, just as does the dedication of korbonot by the Moshiach House of Aaron. The wisdom which discerns the middah of אל from the middah of רחום from the middah of חנון etc. What middah tohor does the mitzva of Moshiach dedicate holy to the G-d of the 1st Sinai Commandment? An absolutely critical and crucial question. This most essential question concerning the Torah mitzva of Moshiach, the church has never asked in its entire history as a religious faith belief in its Trinity god(s)!

   In point of fact, the church fathers deny the existence of the Oral Torah. Despite the fact that the mitzvah of Moshiach qualifies as an Av tohor time oriented commandment, which sanctifies the middah of justice, holy to HaShem, as THE sanctification of the mitzva of Moshiach. Based upon the Oral Torah revelation to Moshe at Horev. Despite, justice not included in the 13 tohor middot, the mitva דאורייתא of Moshiach dedicates the pursuit of judicial justice among our people inside the oath sworn lands, as the midda korban dedication holy לשמה. The fact that the mitzva of Moshiach the Torah of דברים defines through the middah of צדק צדק תרדוף, as the k’vanna of the mitzva of Moshiach in all generations of the chosen Cohen nation. We Jews do not wait for the coming of the Moshiach, any more than We Jews wait for some stranger ICC Court of the Hague to establish just rule of judicial justice in the land of Israel! Post Shoah, Europe has forever lost any mandate to judge the Jewish people; as likewise the dead Olympus Gods of the Xtian post Shoah fictional mythology.

   Brit – as an oath alliance, does not mean covenant. A bad translation. Just that simple. Tefillah does not mean prayer. A bad translation. Just that simple. Tefillah unlike saying Tehillem entails swearing a Torah oath. Just that simple. Impossible to swear a Torah oath without שם ומלכות. The concept of שם breathes the spirit of life through the Yatzir Ha’Tov. This Spirit Name raises the souls of the Avot from the dead within the chosen Cohen nation’s Yatzir Ha’Tov. The concept of מלכות has the k’vanna of dedication of some defined tohor middah. This tohor time oriented commandment which requires a שם ומלכות Torah oath, impossible to grasp without the Oral Torah logic system known as פרדס. The 4 part פרדס does neither resembles nor compares to the 3 part syllogism of Aristotle’s logic, nor to Hegal’s system of dialectic metaphysics of greater and lesser logic. Translating abstract Hebrew words to other languages amounts to false translations. Just that simple.

   The Name שם, directly refers to the revelation of the Divine Presence Spirit revealed in the revelation of the 1st Sinai commandment. Any attempt to “convert” this Spirit Name to words: such as – YHVH, Jehova, Jesus, Allah etc amounts to the sin of the Golden Calf – wherein Israel 40 days after the revelation of the Spirit Divine Presence Name, many of Israel translated the revealed Spirit Name to a false translation word אלהים! The Torah revelation at Sinai exposes the tumah of any and all attempts to translate the Spirit Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment, ((which the Xtian bibles and Muslim korans exclude this 1st Commandment Spirit Name revelation)), as the “Sin of the Golden Calf”. Just that simple. Righteousness does not come by way of Av tumah avoda zarah. Just that simple.

   T’shuva does not mean repentance. A bad translation. Just that simple. T’shuva has everything to do with the struggle, think of Esau and Yaacov in the womb of Rivka, between the two opposing Yatzirot within the bnai brit chosen Cohen peoples’ hearts. Hence the Torah incorrectly spelled heart as לבב rather than לב. Rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nasi, explained in the Mishna of ברכות the additional ב, as a reference to the two opposing and conflicting Yatzirot within the heart.

   This, the author of the Mishna, the foundation to study the Oral Torah revelation of the 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe, 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf, on Yom Kippur. Yom Kippur where HaShem did t’shuva and annulled the vow to make Moshe the chosen Cohen nation rather than the seed of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov! T’shuva as a Torah mitzva, learns from the precedents of a father who annuls the vow made by his young daughter, or the Husband who annuls the vow made by his wife. Both of these Torah precedents serve to define the mussar of T’shuva! Repentance has no portion, it plays no part in annulling a vow. Just that simple. The translation of t’shuva to repentance a false translation. Just that simple.

   Peace a false translation of Shalom. The latter a verb which stands upon the foundation of trust. The former evil translation a noun that amounts to pie in the sky false rhetoric. Like the “peace negotiations” between Arabs and Jews. Post Oct 7th Jews do not trust Arabs of Gaza. Shalom learns from the Torah mitzva of Shabbat. This precedent mitzva of shabbat, the Talmud builds around the 3 meals. A person does not invite an enemy into his home to sit and meal together – ever. No trust No shalom. Just that simple. The false & sophomoric translation of the substitute word “peace”, just that simple – utterly false.

   The term יראת שמים, commonly mistranslated as: Fear of Heaven – another false translation. A טיפש פשט literal translation on par with the fundamentalist belief that the Genesis creation story literally refers to the creation of the Universe in 6 days! Bible toting Xtian fundamentalists absolutely abhor Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. In 1925 the Monkey Trial between John T. Scopes teaching evolution in a state-funded school! Comparable to the dispute between Galileo vs. the Poop. יראת שמים, a metaphor which refers to protecting ones’ Good Name reputation. Hence the Hebrew term: Baal Shem Tov/Master of the Good Name. Mistranslating this abstract Hebrew metaphor to “fear of Heaven” as false as the absurd notions of Xtian fundamentalists concerning the Creation story in the opening Aggadic mussar of the first Book of the Torah – which introduces Av tohor time oriented commandments.

   Emunah does not correctly translate into “faith”. Emunah learns from the precedents of Moshe standing before the Court of Par’o, on the matter of Par’o, his decree which withheld the straw required to make brick and the consequent beating of Israelite slaves. Another precedent: the rebuke of Yitro when Moshe judged the nation alone by himself. The Torah defines emunah as the righteous pursuit of judicial justice; wherein the Courts make fair restitution of damages inflicted by party A upon party B. The false substitution of faith as personal belief in some theologically decreed Creed concerning the nature of the Gods, such as Islam’s strict Monotheism; this latter perversion of emunah, it defines the Av tumah 2nd Sinai commandment known as avoda zarah: do not worship other Gods.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   1. 

      Peter Hasert

      23rd Dec 2024

      Hi Moscker, thank you for taking the time to share such a detailed comment. While I truly appreciate your passion and effort, the length makes it a bit challenging to address fully. Perhaps we could focus on just one key issue at a time for a deeper discussion? Once again, thank you—I value your enthusiasm and thoughtfulness.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      1. 

         Peter Hasert

         23rd Dec 2024

         We could begin by defining key terms and the meanings associated with them. While there may be an orthodox definition for each, it could be helpful to also explore interpretations that reflect their true essence more accurately. This would ensure we’re on the same page as we continue the discussion.

         LikeLike

      2. 

         Peter Hasert

         23rd Dec 2024

         Could you provide us with a shorthand list we can use for reference?

         LikeLike

      3. 

         mosckerr

         23rd Dec 2024

         Sure the Gospel model of Moshiach — utter bull shit. It has no basis in Torah common law.

         LikeLike

      4. 

         mosckerr

         23rd Dec 2024

         The thesis argues that the Gospels present a false and distorted messiah, analogous to a fabricated narrative like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It critiques the Christian portrayal of Jesus as the Messiah for failing to align with key Torah commandments, particularly regarding the concept of Moshiach (Messiah). The central point is that the Christian view ignores the essential Torah framework—especially the Oral Torah—and misrepresents the spiritual and legal qualifications of the Messiah.

         The Torah has specific, time-bound commandments related to the Messiah (Moshiach), particularly involving the House of Aaron and the role of judicial justice. These commandments are rooted in the Oral Torah and must be understood within the context of Torah law, which is absent in Christian doctrine.

         Christian theology misinterprets core concepts like the Name of God (Shem), justice, and repentance. These misunderstandings, according to the thesis, result in a flawed, “foreign” understanding of the Messiah, a theology built on misinterpretations of Hebrew terms (e.g., T’shuva as repentance, Emunah as faith).

         The thesis highlights that key Hebrew terms, such as Shem (God’s Name) and T’shuva (the act of spiritual return), have been mis-translated into false Christian or secular equivalents. This, it argues, leads to a theological error comparable to idolatry, such as the Christian portrayal of Jesus or the Quranic understanding of God.

         The Messiah, according to Torah law, is deeply connected with the establishment of judicial justice (Tzedek), a responsibility that Christianity overlooks. The Moshiach must sanctify justice, not merely fulfill prophetic predictions.

         The thesis concludes by arguing that the Christian concept of the Messiah, along with its theology of sin, faith, and divine justice, fundamentally contradicts the Torah. It claims that Christian teachings about the Messiah are a foreign, Roman-influenced construct that misrepresents the Jewish understanding of divine law, justice, and messianic prophecy.

         The thesis asserts that the Gospel narrative is not only a false representation of the Torah mitzva of Messiah, but is a theological construct that distorts the core values of the Torah, particularly concerning the nature of divine justice and the messianic mission. Xtianity knows nothing about tohor time-oriented Commandments. The mitzva of Moshiach a tohor time oriented commandment, which the Gospel forgery knows nothing about. Just that simple.

         The thesis argues that the Gospel narrative of Jesus as the Messiah is a complete fabrication, akin to a false, foreign narrative like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It claims that Christianity misrepresents the true Torah concept of the Messiah (Moshiach), ignoring key commandments and spiritual principles that are integral to Jewish law. The central critique is that Christianity distorts the qualifications and role of the Messiah, particularly by overlooking the Oral Torah and its time-oriented commandments.

         The mitzva of Moshiach as a time oriented commandment applies equally to all Jews in every generations. Jews do not wait for the coming of the Moshiach like Xtians wait for the 2nd Coming. Justice understood as judicial courts which makes fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B.

         The thesis argues that Christianity’s portrayal of the Messiah, alongside the misinterpretations of terms like T’shuva (translated as repentance) and Emunah (translated as faith), leads to a false and foreign theology. This misrepresentation, it claims, parallels idolatry, particularly in the Christian deification of Jesus, which the thesis likens to the sin of the Golden Calf in Jewish tradition.

         The thesis suggests that the Christian concept of the Messiah is not rooted in Jewish tradition but is instead a Roman-influenced construct. This fabricated theology distorts the original Jewish understanding of divine law, justice, and messianic prophecy.

         The thesis concludes that the Gospel narrative is a complete fabrication, failing to align with the true Torah commandment of the Moshiach. Christianity, according to the thesis, has no understanding of the Torah’s time-oriented, holiness-focused commandments, especially the Mitzvah of Moshiach, which is an essential and central part of Jewish law. The Gospel, therefore, is not just a misrepresentation but a theological forgery, which distorts the fundamental principles of divine justice and the messianic mission.

         In essence, the thesis argues that Christianity’s portrayal of Jesus as the Messiah is a theological construct that bears no resemblance to the true Jewish concept of Moshiach as outlined in the Torah. The Gospels misinterpret key Hebrew concepts and ignore essential commandments, leading to a false narrative of the Messiah that is incompatible with Torah law and spiritual principles.

         LikeLike

      5. 

         Peter Hasert

         23rd Dec 2024

         Could you provide examples of how the Gospels misinterpret key Hebrew concepts?

         LikeLike

      6. 

         mosckerr

         24th Dec 2024

         I did from brit to justice to faith to tefillah to love etc

         LikeLike

      7. 

         Peter Hasert

         26th Dec 2024

         Your points are certainly thought-provoking, but a truly cohesive argument benefits from being rooted in specific scripture. By anchoring your claims in the text, you can provide a foundation for your perspective. Perhaps you could take just one of your points and demonstrate its validity through scripture to strengthen your case further rather than relying on second hand knowledge?

         LikeLike

      8. 

         mosckerr

         26th Dec 2024

         Talmud a Primary Source. משנה תורה found in the 5th Book of דברים means — Common law.

         LikeLike

      9. 

         Peter Hasert

         28th Dec 2024

         It seems you may be conflating the relationship between Jewish legal texts and traditions, particularly as they relate to the Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible) and subsequent rabbinic interpretations. Let’s break it down piece by piece:

         You say “Talmud a Primary Source”:
         While the Talmud may be a central text in Jewish tradition, consisting of the Mishnah (a compilation of Jewish oral laws) and the Gemara (a commentary on the Mishnah), and while it is considered a primary source of Jewish law (Halakha) and interpretation, it is still not the Torah. The Torah provides the foundational written law, while the Talmud attempts to elaborate, explain, and apply these laws in various contexts. Your comment suggests the Talmud holds authoritative weight as a key source for understanding and applying Jewish law. In truth, however, it applies rabbinic law, which is a human interpretation and expansion, not the divinely inspired Word of God.

         You say “משנה תורה found in the 5th Book of דברים”:
         The phrase משנה תורה (Mishneh Torah) means “repetition of the law” and is often associated with the fifth book of the Torah, Devarim (Deuteronomy). This is because Deuteronomy serves as a restatement or summary of the laws and events described earlier in the Torah. The term Mishneh Torah is specifically used in Deuteronomy 17:18 to describe the “copy of the law” that a king is required to write and study.

         In a broader sense, Mishneh Torah has also been applied in Jewish tradition to describe works that systematically codify or repeat the law, such as Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, a monumental legal code that organises and explains Jewish (Rabbinic) law comprehensively. This appears to be what you are referring to as “common law.”

         You say it “Means — Common law”:
         This phrase connects the idea of Mishneh Torah to “common law,” but is it? In your context, “common law” seems to refer to the body of rabbinic law developed through practice, precedent, and interpretation, as opposed to being explicitly written in the Torah. This aligns with how rabbinic law evolved: the written Torah (explicit law) was expanded through oral (human, limited, jaded) traditions, which were eventually codified in the Mishnah and elaborated upon in the Talmud (e.g., Speyer, etc.). Together, these texts form the basis for applying Torah laws to real-life situations as interpreted by rabbis, much like how common law systems interpret statutes through precedent and judicial rulings.

         However, you cannot conflate what humans think with what God says and claim they are the same thing or even that they hold the same authority. Yeshua (Jesus) highlighted this distinction repeatedly, which is precisely why “they” opposed Him. He pointed out the flaw in their thinking—a flaw upon which their entire human authority precariously rested.

         LikeLike

      10. 

          mosckerr

          28th Dec 2024

          The Torah serves as the Constitution of the Jewish Republic. The Talmud serves as the model for lateral common law Sanhedrin courtrooms. Repetition? טיפש פשט. משנהתורה means Common law. Just that simple. The Yad Chazaka of the Rambam perverted T’NaCH/Talmudic Common law to Roman statute law. Rabbi Yishmael’s 13 rules include two rules of בנין אב. This refers to precedents. Common law stand upon precedents. Rabbi Akiva’s kabbalah of the 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf … פרדס. This explanation of Oral Torah 13 tohor middot as a 4 part logic system explains how the Mishna and Gemara learn as common law. The Book of דברים\משנה תורה defines faith as צדק צדק תרדוף.

          LikeLike

      11. 

          Peter Hasert

          28th Dec 2024

          From a Christian perspective, the authority of the Talmud is not recognised in matters of faith and doctrine, as it is seen as a human interpretation and expansion of the Torah rather than the inspired Word of God. While the Talmud holds a significant place in Jewish tradition as a repository of rabbinic commentary and oral law, its authority is not binding for Christians because it is not part of the divinely inspired Scriptures.

          The Torah, as the first five books of the Bible, is acknowledged by Christians as the revealed Word of God. It forms the foundation of God’s covenant with His people and contains His commandments, promises, and moral law. Christians believe that the Torah, along with the rest of the Old Testament, points to the coming of Jesus Christ, who fulfils the law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17).

          In contrast, the Talmud is a product of rabbinic tradition and human reasoning, developed centuries after the Torah was given to Moses at Sinai. While it seeks to interpret and apply the Torah to various aspects of life, it often introduces additional layers of legalism and tradition that, from a Christian standpoint, go beyond the intent of God’s original revelation. Jesus Himself criticised the Pharisees and scribes for elevating human traditions above the commandments of God, saying, “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions” (Mark 7:8).

          Furthermore, Christians do not see the Talmud as authoritative because it does not recognise the centrality of Jesus Christ as the fulfilment of the Torah. The new covenant, inaugurated by Christ, supersedes the old covenant, providing a better and eternal way to approach God (Hebrews 8:6–13). Under this new covenant, believers are no longer bound by the ceremonial and legalistic aspects of the Torah but are called to live in the freedom and grace of Christ, who fulfilled the law on our behalf.

          Why? Because no one who was born of the same blood as Adam was able to keep the law, and therefore “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23). The only person who was not born of the same blood, and therefor infected with sin, was Yeshuah HaMashiach (יֵשׁוּעַ הַמָּשִׁיחַ). He alone kept the law without fault, and He alone is righteous, through the New Covenant (Marriage) our debt are transferred to Him and His righteousness to us (2 Cor 5:21)

          While the Talmud may be of historical and cultural interest, it is ultimately a human document and not divinely inspired. For Christians, only the Torah and the entirety of Scripture—the Old and New Testaments—are considered the authoritative Word of God, sufficient for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Therefore, the Talmud cannot hold the same weight or authority as the Torah, which is God’s revealed truth.

          LikeLike

      12. 

          mosckerr

          28th Dec 2024

          Greetings Peter,

          Jews don’t recognize the false messiah JeZeus. The Xtian abomination of avoda zarah, its opinion concerning the Written and Oral Torah no different than opinions expressed by Hinduism concerning the Written and Oral Torah.

          T’NaCH prophets to not teach history. Pathetic avoda zarah error. T’NaCH prophets command mussar.

          LikeLike

      13. 

          Peter Hasert

          28th Dec 2024

          I appreciate your initiative in bringing up this topic. There is, however, one undeniable point to consider: while the scribes who authored the Talmud are long gone, Jesus Christ remains very much alive. You can experience this firsthand by speaking to Him—simply ask Him to reveal Himself to you. You have nothing to lose…

          LikeLike

3. 

   Peter Hasert

   28th Dec 2024

   Regrettably, you have yet to provide evidence or a compelling argument to substantiate your claim that the Gospels represent a false messiah or a foreign Roman counterfeit akin to the Czar’s Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Until you do so, your statement remains an opinion rather than an established fact, no matter how passionately or loudly you state it.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply