Redstone said:

---

Sure bud. Start another thread about Anglin if you want to argue about humorists, or about the radical leftists he also platforms.

The point here is those details about Baal, or the requests for your definitions after I've provided some detailed ones, or about any of the other questions you've been asked.

Im curious, just as I was on the other threads where you sadly declined to engage in such details and discussions.

---

Except you didn't provide any details. You offered the word of a rabid antisemite with no ability as a scholar making idiotic claims that the Carthaginians converted to Judaism en masse as proof.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

Finished the stick episode today. Will hopefully get to the next one tomorrow.

I very much enjoyed listening to it. Jesus representing both Goats of atonement, specifically the exiled one was new to me.

---

I'm excited for you. Listening to those 4 or 5 episodes was exciting. Just pure mind blowing. There's just so much beauty revealed through the orthodox understanding. It truly is the fullness of the faith.

---

Into the third one. It's been very good the entire way through. I guess Im technically a Protestant or something. Personally I've never felt like I've belonged to any group as my thoughts have often disagreed to some degree with whatever denomination I've been around. I've found my natural inclinations and understandings when reading have been aligning more and more with orthodox views. So far I haven't heard anything I disagree with but there's certainly been a tremendous amount of depth added or new enlightenment.

Part way into the third episode they are mentioning some of the basic rituals etc. and it made me think of maybe the antithesis question here.

For those who lean to Israel being the modern day Jews: If an ethnic Jew was not circumcised and refused to be so would you consider them apart of Israel? I think no matter how one would answer that question demonstrates how Israel cannot be the modern day country.

The context was speculation about Baal worship. It's informative and I hope people check it out.
https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory

As to your typical name calling, I'll AGAIN ask for your definition of terms. It is absolutely essential in conversations such as these.

What is Jewish?
What is Semitic?
What is anti-Semitic?
Who are the people Israel?

My definitions are just above. Are you avoiding these questions, Redux?

Redstone said:

---

What is Jewish?
What is Semitic?
What is anti-Semitic?
Who are the people Israel?

My definitions are just above. Are you avoiding these questions, Redux?

---

No. I want to know why you're promoting people who want Jews expelled or murdered and promote blood libels and then expect me to have a bull**** academic discussion with you?

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

Finished the stick episode today. Will hopefully get to the next one tomorrow.

I very much enjoyed listening to it. Jesus representing both Goats of atonement, specifically the exiled one was new to me.

---

I'm excited for you. Listening to those 4 or 5 episodes was exciting. Just pure mind blowing. There's just so much beauty revealed through the orthodox understanding. It truly is the fullness of the faith.

---

Apparently not.

So, once again false characterizations, name-calling, and decline to engage in the topic at hand, especially when asked for your definitions, which is essential when discussing heated topics.

Similar behavior to the other threads on this topic, linked above.

I'll be around should you decide to actually engage.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

Finished the stick episode today. Will hopefully get to the next one tomorrow.

I very much enjoyed listening to it. Jesus representing both Goats of atonement, specifically the exiled one was new to me.

---

I'm excited for you. Listening to those 4 or 5 episodes was exciting. Just pure mind blowing. There's just so much beauty revealed through the orthodox understanding. It truly is the fullness of the faith.

---

Into the third one. It's been very good the entire way through. I guess Im technically a Protestant or something. Personally I've never felt like I've belonged to any group as my thoughts have often disagreed to some degree with whatever denomination I've been around. I've found my natural inclinations and understandings when reading have been aligning more and more with orthodox views. So far I haven't heard anything I disagree with but there's certainly been a tremendous amount of depth added or new enlightenment.

Part way into the third episode they are mentioning some of the basic rituals etc. and it made me think of maybe the antithesis question here.

For those who lean to Israel being the modern day Jews: If an ethnic Jew was not circumcised and refused to be so would you consider them apart of Israel? I think no matter how one would answer that question demonstrates how Israel cannot be the modern day country.

---

One of the first real nudges towards orthodoxy I had was listening to Whole Counsel of God podcast walk through Acts. Its Father Stephen De Young's weekly bible study walkthrough at his church. Great companion to The Lord of Spirits as WCOG goes chapter by chapter and TLOS goes subject by subject.

I was part of a nondenominational church at the time, leading a bible study. We were given a leadership packet that walked through Acts. Probably 2-3 pages of readers digest content per chapter. Did the normal baptist/nondenom thing where you go, 'Now what does this passage mean to you?' where we pass the pope hat around.

Listening to the WCOG on the same chapters was just absolutely eye opening how much context and depth was missing. 2-3 hours of content per chapter. Our bible study just became overflowing with what WCOG shared. I was asked to cut it back as it was a nondenom church, not orthodox. That was one of many cues to exit stage left.

Jumping into orthodoxy whole heartedly has been the best decision for me, my wife, and my kids. Every question you have about what and why about orthodoxy has a satisfying answer. And 90% of the things protestant churches get wrapped up in either A) got settled a long time ago in church counsels or B) just are on their face nonstarters.

Come taste and see. DM me and I'll help you find an orthodox church by you and someone to help host you on a sunday morning.

Thank you. I've been doing some digging. When it comes to doctrine of things scripturally I think orthodox form everything I've read/heard is really really spot on. Where my caution is is in regards to traditions etc. For example I was reading on an orthodox parish website the process for confessions. I can't think of scripturally how that process is valid. Or the kissing of icons etc.

Would you mind starting a separate thread on this? Seems like a discussion worth having.

Will do. Give me an hour or so.

What was actually wrong or incorrect about what the "antisemite" said?

cvenag03 said:

---

What was actually wrong or incorrect about what the "antisemite" said?

---

What are you putting "antisemite" in quotes? The author goes by "Prof Groyper" on Twitter and attacks Jews regularly. And he offers zero support beyond a couple of selective quotes and wild claims involving millions of people with zero hard evidence

Antisemite!!

Yet more nonsense use of a nonsense weaponized term, undefined and sadly still successful at stopping thought and conversation.

Glad this ridiculousness may be crumbling.

When I have time today, let's turn to Peter Schafer on this question who accepts the lamentable Wilhelm Marr turn I detailed above. (And check out Jesus in the Talmud)

How is his Twitter posting relevant to my question? You're pretty bad at discussions.

cvenag03 said:

---

How is his Twitter posting relevant to my question? You're pretty bad at discussions.

---

This is generally how Sapper works. He'll take the first exit to call someone an anti-semite and shut discussion down.

Granted, Redstone over here isn't exactly engaging with neutral sources so its easy to just shut it down.

Catholic writers and Jews probably converting to Christianity like Ron Unz working through difficult and historically clouded questions is ….. good.

My biggest frustration, shared with E. Michael Jones, another Catholic that offers detailed definitions and asks for engagement similarly, is:

- Criticism / Definition > "Anti-Semite" !!!!!
- Let's Discuss?
- More name-calling and distraction….and "evil sources"…. "Nazi" eventually thrown around

People are really tired of this, and hopefully such tactics of weaponized terminology and thought stop will end.

This past week, on this thread, I literally called the large, diverse umbrella term "Judaism" inherently Satanic and explained why, from the Apostolic (Catholic / Orthodox) understanding, this is justified. Related, why it's an act of love and affection to do so.

A discussion centered around such thorny THEOLOGICAL points is useful.

Name calling and refusing to define terms is not useful at all.

Redstone said:

---

Catholic writers and Jews probably converting to Christianity like Ron Unz working through difficult and historically clouded questions is ….. good.

My biggest frustration, shared with E. Michael Jones, another Catholic that offers detailed definitions and asks for engagement similarly, is:

- Criticism / Definition > "Anti-Semite" !!!!!
- Let's Discuss?
- More name-calling and distraction….and "evil sources"…. "Nazi" eventually thrown around

People are really tired of this, and hopefully such tactics of weaponized terminology and thought stop will end.

---

I agree that I am tired of it. But I also think you lose some ability to reach across the isle just even with the website you shared. It looks unhinged.

Granted, Sapper isn't a fair discussion partner, but I can totally see why you're getting pushback with your sources. Now, its a bit disingenuous that Sapper won't even begin to comment on the material, just flailing anti-semitic accusations.

There is a complete lack of honest engagement from Sapper about A) The inability for pharisees to uphold the torah because there is no temple anymore. B) The lack of any prophets post temple explaining what the next step for Israelites is like we see during the exile and the return. C) The denigration of Christ in jewish circles and the fallout of that across time and space D) rabbinical judiasm's schisms and slide into esoteric-ism that is clearly demonic from a Christian point of view.

Sapper was caught unaware that Baal was even a big figure of Israelite worship, or what the Baal cycle even was/is. Pointing out that Baal is still worshiped by ethnic jews, just forced by Christ to exist under his real identity as satan is anti-semetism.

Sapper thinks the prophecy that the second temple was to be destroyed was post fact added by Christians to the gospels.

Sapper probably also believes the academic critique that the prophecy of Daniel about the 4 kingdoms is also post fact added because it was too perfectly described in Daniel about how they actually fell.

There is another unfortunate pattern of criticism and refusal to actually engage.

It's happened with Israel Zolli, Benjamin Freedman, Oswald Rufeisen, some of the 2 dozen or so Jews that E. Michael Jones has helped convert to the Apostolic faith.

Very bright and curious Jewish person looks into its history, starts to write and speak, and …. "Nazi !!!' ect."

This, as we can see, occurs with Ron Unz. His writings on Jewish faith and practice are very formidable and I hope people read them.

Forgot to add: happened with Norman Lear's daughter as well, who became a Catholic at Harvard. Praise God she led her father to Christ, as one of the most prominent Jews in modern history, for over a half century, became ….. not Jewish.

Theology - that's the crux of these discussions.

Redstone said:

---

This past week, on this thread, I literally called the large, diverse umbrella term "Judaism" inherently Satanic and explained why, from the Apostolic (Catholic / Orthodox) understanding, this is justified. Related, why it's an act of love and affection to do so.

A discussion centered around such thorny THEOLOGICAL points is useful.

Name calling and refusing to define terms is not useful at all.

---

You're quoting people who want me dead, who actively promote conspiracy theories about Jews, deny the Holocaust, and justify violence as Jews as your sources and then complain about why I won't engage? Take a long ****ing look in the mirror.

You are wrong.

And when you look in the mirror, I hope you know there are people here who actually do want your definitions and opinions.

Perhaps someday. I'll ask periodically. And read Ron Unz, you might learn something. He heavily cites sources, which you claim to care about.

Redstone said:

---

You are wrong.

And when you look in the mirror, I hope you know there are people here who actually do want your definitions and opinions.

Perhaps someday. I'll ask periodically. And read Ron Unz, you might learn something. He heavily cites sources, which you claim to care about.

---

You just used ****ing E. Michael Jones as a source. A man who loudly blames every ill in the world on Jews and justified the Tree of Life synagogue massacre. **** all the way off.

You have no clue whatsoever what you're talking about.

I would ask you to cite and detail, but we've seen how that (doesn't) go.

Edit: I do so ask. Go ahead.

Redstone said:

---

You have no clue whatsoever what you're talking about.

I would ask you to cite and detail, but we've seen how that (doesn't) go.

Edit: I do so ask. Go ahead.

---

Here's a right wing Christian with whom I agree about almost nothing politically and on matters of religion and philosophy on Jones:
https://jrnyquist.blog/2020/03/02/the-antisemitism-of-e-michael-jones/

Here's the Catholic League on Jones:
https://www.catholicleague.org/playing-fast-and-loose-with-theology/

This is a quote from Jones himself on the Unz Review:
" we must deny Jews the rights of citizenship, something which no country in Europe granted them before Napoleon emancipated the Jews at the beginning of the 19th century. The Biden Administration has shown clearly what happens when Jews take over our government...Jonathan Pollard stated plainly after Donald Trump pardoned him that the Jew has a duty to betray any country which grants him citizenship...we can say that we have met the enemy and he is not us, because we are Americans and they are rootless supporters of the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit."

So again, if these are the people you're taking as the sources of your arguments, I have less than zero interest in any kind of debate with you. I'm not going to pretend that a debate where I am seen as a subhuman, Satanic subversive as a baseline is a valid or worthwhile use of my time or energy.

Taking a quote from RationalWiki instead of linking direct. So here it is: https://www.unz.com/ejones/cherchez-le-juif-satanism-as-the-hidden-grammar-of-america/

I heartily endorse The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, which EXPLICITLY REJECTS "RACIAL" DEFINITIONS and focuses on THEOLOGY, exactly as the Apostolic faith teaches.

If only his critics, including those you highlighted, would internalize these points. They don't define "Semitic" or "anti-Semitic" either, do they?

The promised Marr details from Schafer coming soon. His false and nonsensical re-definition in the 1870s is very important, and one sadly taken up by Nazis and many Zionists.

Redstone said:

---

Taking a quote from RationalWiki instead of linking direct. So here it is: https://www.unz.com/ejones/cherchez-le-juif-satanism-as-the-hidden-grammar-of-america/

I heartily endorse The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, which EXPLICITLY REJECTS "RACIAL" DEFINITIONS and focuses on THEOLOGY, exactly as the Apostolic faith teaches.

If only his critics, including those you highlighted, would internalize these points. They don't define "Semitic" or "anti-Semitic" either, do they?

The promised Marr details from Schafer coming soon. His false and nonsensical re-definition in the 1870s is very important, and one sadly taken up by Nazis and many Zionists.

---

Of course you heartily endorse a blantant antisemite who takes stereotypes about Jews as a people at face value to make his points. We're done.

By the way, if Ron Unz leaves Judaism for the Apostolic faith, which is my prediction and partly based on our emails, I'll be sure to post it here.

Such conversions are very noteworthy because they highlight the reality of WHAT POST-70 JUDAISM IS, AND WHY CHRISTIANITY IS OLDER.

Just as Ivanka's formal renunciation of her Christian baptism as a REQUIREMENT for her conversion tells us something very important.

Among the many conversions of the Levant to the Messiah, 33 to 67 (when Christ predicted many would and should flee for their lives), it is reasonable to speculate these 2 of 5 Judean groups converted to Him en mass:
- Samaritans (amazing details of this in the visions of Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich)
- Essenes (same)
The other major Judean groups of the Levant during this time being Herodians, Pharisees, Sadducees

These years are the 2nd most consequential in world religious history, after the days of the Holy Cross

Peter Schafer of Princeton and Berlin Jewish Museum, book is Judeophobia, Harvard UP, 1997.

His later book Jesus in the Talmud I strongly recommend, although its details are … bad.

Page 284