Wednesday, 2 November 2011

Mary The Levite

http://truthorheresy.com/mary-the-levite



Mary the Levite

The majority of Christians assume that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was the daughter of Eli in the genealogy listed in the gospel of Luke and she was of the tribe of Judah. The reason that they believe this is because this is the explanation that their churches give them, which has been handed down through the centuries via the Catholic Church. However, Mary was of the tribe of Levi and not the daughter of Eli. The reasons Christians believe this this are the following:

First, because Jesus in order to qualify to be the Messiah, he had to be of royal lineage of the house of David (Judah).

Second, because the lineage in the gospel of Matthew is obviously that of Joseph, so it could only be the genealogy in Luke (so they think).

Third, because the church fathers needed to prove in some way that Jesus was God and the Messiah at the same time, so they came up with this theory (with no proof) that the lineage in Luke, though it seems to be that of Joseph, it is some how the lineage of Mary. This is most likely since they reason that Joseph couldn’t possibly have two lineages.

We are not talking here about some gray area in doctrine of the bible, this is black and white stuff that we have mostly as solid proof.

Mary’s cousin, Elisabeth and her husband Zachariah were Levites, which makes Mary a Levite.

The bible says so:

Luk 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

So they were both of the tribe of Levi and not of Judah. So Mary was at least half Levite on this count, assuming that her mother was the sister of either Zachariah’s mother or father or Elisabeth’s mother or father.

If the relative of Zachariah and Elisabeth was Joachim then that would make Mary a full-blood Levite since priests only married women within the tribe of Levi. The prime example here being Zachariah who married Elisabeth a Levite woman.

Eli, the supposed father of Mary in the gospel of Luke died childless.

So Eli could not possibly be Mary’s father. This eliminates Mary from being of the lineage of Eli, thus she wasn’t of royal lineage.

And even if she had been the daughter of Eli, she would not have been able to give birth to the Messiah, since the Messiah’s lineage had to come through Solomon. Eli’s lineage was through Nathan, not Solomon.

Jesus’ flesh and blood relatives say that Eli was Joseph’s step father.

Jacob raised up seed to him, begetting Joseph, his own son by nature, but by law the son of Eli. Thus Joseph was the son of both.”

This explains why Joseph had a different lineage in both gospels, Matthew and Luke.

James, the flesh and blood brother of Jesus said Mary’s father was a priest of the name Joachim.

Mary herself was not of the tribe of Judah but of the tribe of Levi; her father being a priest of the name of Joachim .

(http://www.orthodox.cn/patristics/apostolicfathers/mary.htm)

So both Mary’s father and mother were obviously both Levites. Therefore, Mary was a full-blooded Levite. Though a Levite could legally ascend to the throne, if Jesus were only of the tribe of Levi he could not qualify as the Messiah since he would not be of the lineage of Solomon and of the tribe of Judah.

Mary was raised in the temple

Another thing that points to Mary being of the tribe of Levi was that she was raised in the temple. According to James, the brother of Jesus, Anna, her mother dedicated Mary to the Lord:

And Anna answered, as the Lord my God lives, whatever I bring forth, whether it be male or female, I will devote it to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in holy things, during its whole life.

Jesus could only be a high priest if he were a descendant of Aaron, who would be of the tribe of Levi.

Another fact that points to Mary being of the tribe of Levi is the fact that Jesus, himself was a high priest of the order of Aaron which is recorded in the bible and as well as the Nazarenes:

Luk 4:16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

…and He taught there and in Jerusalem as an accepted Rabbi, even in the temple, none hindering Him. (GON 6.15)

Rabbi was a term used to address priests and Nathanael was a prominent leader of the Jews:

Joh 1:49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.

Even the epistle of Hebrews declares that Jesus was a high priest:

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.

Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest (as was Aaron); but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

Heb 2:17 Wherefore it behoved Him in all things to be made like unto His brethren, that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest before God, that He might be a propitiation for the sins of the people.

The prophecies of the Messiah say that he would be a priest:

Zec 6:13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne
Jesus, being a high priest, would have to have one of his parents of the tribe of Levi.

If the “holy ghost” were Jesus’ father, then the only one who it could possibly be would be Mary. However, the whole point of this article is that since, according to messianic prophecy, Jesus had to be of the house of David, and his mother Mary was obviously of the tribe of Levi and not of the tribe of Judah, then there is no one left for Jesus to be the son of save Joseph in order for him to qualify as the Messiah of the old testament prophesies.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_(mother_of_Jesus)



According to Luke, Mary was a cousin of Elizabeth, wife of the priest Zechariah of the priestly division of Abijah, who was herself part of the lineage of Aaron and so of the tribe of Levi.[Luke 1:5;1:36]

Some of those who consider that the relationship with Elizabeth was on the maternal side, consider that Mary, like Joseph, to whom she was betrothed, was of the House of David and so of the tribe of Judah, and that the genealogy of Jesus presented in Luke from Nathan, third son of David and Bathsheba, is in fact the genealogy of Mary, while the genealogy from Solomon given in Matthew is that of Joseph.[14] (Aaron's wife Elisheba was of the tribe of Judah, so all his descendents are from both Levi and Judah.)[Num.1:7 & Ex.6:23]






Add to Technorati Favorites

Shechem is the Holy City - not Jerusalem

The one time Jesus calls himself the messiah, is not when he is speaking to a Jew, but a Samaritan woman - hence he is saying he is the SAMARITAN MESSIAH not the Jewish Messiah.

Note that he also says that he has come to change the Samaritan worship, which was on Mount Gerizim and also Jewish worship which was in Jerusaalem.

Jesus says that a new place of worship is going to be established, not on the mountain or in Jerusalem - this also explains why he broke the laws of the Torah and hence broke the Samaritan and Jewish laws of the time - Jesus was truly a revolutionary seeking to create a new unified religion that united the Samaritans and the Jews into a new religion - which we call Christianity.



John 4:21-26

King James Version (KJV)


21Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

22Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

23But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

24God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

25The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

26Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.


So where was Jesus referring too when he said a new place would be found where the Jesus Jews would worship The Father - for that we need to look at the Samaritan teachings on the Samaritan Messiah - and here we find the answer - Shechem, the ancient seat of power.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/journals/oc/sm.htm

Another thing was asked of the High Priest, namely, what would be the attitude of the Messiah toward Christians and other nations. He answers:

"The Messiah will be a prophet, as I have told you, and will no doubt work signs to prove his mission. There will be unusual signs and wonders, which I described in the little book. But he is to be a king, and rule the earth from Shechem, the ancient seat of power, and from his holy mountain, Gerizim. He will call all the world to acknowledge him, and they will do so. He will bring blessings to all nations that acknowledge him."



So Jesus did not intend Jerusalem to be his seat where he would rule as king of the Jews - it would be Shechem.

Shechem is Nablus.


Nablus (Arabic: نابلس‎ Nāblus [næːblʊs] ( listen), Hebrew: שכם‎ Šəḵem, is Biblical Shechem (ISO 259-3 Škem).

It is a Palestinian city in the northern West Bank, approximately 63 kilometers (39 mi) north of Jerusalem, with a population of 126,132.[1] Located in a strategic position between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim, it is the capital of the Nablus Governorate and a Palestinian commercial and cultural center.

So the Holy city of the Jesus Jews would not have been Jeruslaem it would have been Shechem / Nablus.


Here is some information on Shechem -

http://bible.org/article/geographical-historical-spiritual-significance-shechem


The true Christians worship Christ in Nablus, not in Jerusalem.


What is so important about Shechem ?

Here are some excerpts from an article on the place ;


http://bible.org/article/geographical-historical-spiritual-significance-shechem


Located in the Hill Country of Ephraim, the city of Shechem played a vital role in the history of Israel. This location, in the middle of the nation, provided the most important crossroads in central Israel. The city lay along the northern end of “The Way of the Patriarchs.” This road, also called the “Ridge Route” (because it followed a key mountain ridge stretching 50 miles south), traveled from Shechem through Shiloh, Bethel/Ai, Ramah, Gibeah, Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Hebron. This route appears continuously in the Biblical text.


Shechem first steps on the pages of Scripture as Abram enters the land of Canaan. From Ur, across the Fertile Crescent and down into Canaan, the Bible mentions Shechem as the first city to which Abram came (Gen. 12:6). Here Abram built an altar to the Lord, and here God confirmed His promise to give the land to Abram. The old man could have easily seen much of the Promised Land if he scaled Mount Ebal and scanned the horizon.

The areas in Canaan which Abram spent most of his life were along the Route of the Patriarchs, namely in Shechem (Gen 12:6), Bethel and Ai (12:8; 13:2), Hebron (13:18; 14:13), and in the Negev (13:1; 20:1, notably Gerar).


Abram’s grandson, Jacob, came to Shechem after he returned from Padan-Aram, undoubtedly tracing the traditional same steps of his grandfather. He and his family traveled through the Jabbok Valley, crossed the Jordan, camped at Succoth, and ascended through the Wadis Faria and Beidan to Shechem.



Here Jacob (re-named “Israel”) built an altar and named it “El-elohe-israel,” meaning “God, the God of Israel” (Gen. 33:17-20).


After the reigns of Saul, David, and Solomon, Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, “went to Shechem, for all Israel had come to Shechem to make him king” (1 Kings 12:1). But because Rehoboam followed the foolish and harsh advice of the youths with whom he grew up, the nation divided at Shechem. Jeroboam shouted: “To your tents, O Israel” and separated the ten northern tribes from the southern kingdom of Judah (1 Kings 12:1,16).


Samaria became significant in Shechem’s history because the people who later worshipped on Mount Gerizim came to be known as “Samaritans” (named after the capital Omri had chosen). After the Assyrians dragged the Northern Kingdom into exile in 722 BC, the Assyrians repopulated the area with a mixed breed—partly Jewish, partly Assyrian. These people did not know the Lord (2 Kings 17:24-41) and thus they continually struggled with idolatry.

When Judah returned from exile to the southern portion of the nation, the Samaritans requested to help rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. However Zerubbabel refused, and the Samaritans developed almost a cult—devoted only to the Pentateuch. They built their own temple on Mount Gerizim, which was immediately by Shechem. In 107 BC, John Hyrcanus further widened the rift between the Jews and Samaritans by destroying the Samaritan’s temple on Mount Gerizim.

By the time Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well, near Shechem, the racial hatred between Jews and Samaritans was paramount. And the ensuing argument about the true place of worship—Gerizim or Jerusalem—was in full force (John 4:20).

For a spiritual lesson from Shechem’s history, we look back at Joshua’s challenge to the nation in Joshua 24. “Then Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem, and called for the elders of Israel and for their heads and their judges and their officers; and they presented themselves before God” (Josh. 24:1).

Joshua called the nation to Shechem because significant things occurred there before. As mentioned before, it was here that Abram, the father of the Jewish nation, first came when he came to the land. And here God promised him the land was to be his. It was also here that Abram’s grandson, Jacob, settled, and here he buried all his idols—which will be significant we will see later. Moreover, Joshua called all Israel to Shechem at the end of the conquest, because Joshua and the same group came to Shechem at the beginning of the conquest to shout the blessings and curses.

Joshua called them together again to this historically significant site, because what he had to tell them preached louder in Shechem that it could anywhere else: “And Joshua said to all the people, ‘Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, from ancient times your fathers lived beyond the River, namely, Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, and they served other gods’“ (v 2). He starts to review their history by reminding them that Abram, the father of the Jewish nation, was an idolater prior to becoming the father of the Jewish nation. That is a pretty humble beginning.

Twice in this verse Joshua gives the command: “serve the LORD.” In fact it is the main command of the whole chapter. “Therefore,” he says, in light of the fact that every inch of success has been God’s grace to you, “fear the LORD and serve Him in sincerity.” The Hebrew word for sincerity suggests “fullness or completeness;” it is the idea that one is on the inside what he is on the outside. Joshua says to serve the Lord in sincerity, not in hypocrisy. Joshua also says to serve the Lord in “truth;” the Hebrew word for truth is `Emet, which refers to a truth that has proven itself reliable. You could translate it “faithfulness” or even “reliability.” `Emet is a word that describes God; He is a God of truth, so our relationship to God must be according to truth.

Interestingly, Jesus said the same thing in this same spot when He told the woman at Jacob’s well that the worshippers God seeks are those who worship Him in “spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24)—worship with one’s inside, the spirit, not just the outside. Jesus said: “in spirit and in truth;” Joshua said: “in sincerity and truth.” I cannot help but wonder if Jesus had Joshua’s words in mind as Jesus sat near Shechem where Joshua spoke.

Joshua also tells them to “put away the gods which your fathers served.” He calls them together at Shechem as if to say: “Remember how Abram put away his idols and came here, and remember God’s promise to Abram in this spot? Remember how Jacob put away his idols in this spot? Remember how you yourselves shouted the blessings and the curses in this spot? Do you want God’s blessing in the land? Then you too put away your idols in this spot.” We should put away what is wrong and embrace what is right—or better, who is right, because Joshua says again at the end of v 14: “serve the LORD.”

Then comes the most famous verse in the whole book of Joshua: “And if it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD” (24:15).

Almost every plaque I have seen which quotes this verse says: “Choose for yourselves today whom you will serve... but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” It always leaves off the part about: “whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living.” I think omitting the lines lessens the punch and the point of the statement.

First Joshua says: “the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River.” You can choose to follow the perhaps bad example of your parents and make the same mistakes they have made by being loyal to the things they were loyal to. Then he says: “or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living.” You can choose to follow the culture you live in and be loyal to their priorities.

But Joshua’s point is choose for yourselves; in fact, those are his very words. Do not do something just because mommy and daddy did it; mommy and daddy could have been wrong. Do not take as your own the values of our entertainers or actors just because they are good performers; think for yourself. Choose for yourself.

And I think the principle should also apply even to those who grew up under parents who did a good job—parents who taught about Jesus and how He died for our sins. We still need to choose for ourselves. We still need to come to a place where Jesus is our God, not just the God of our parents. The Bible speaks of the importance of having a personal relationship with Christ, not a surrogate relationship through our parents, peers, or pastor. God wants to know us personally. We have to take a personal ownership and responsibility with our relationship with God.

We should not think that because Joshua speaks of idols, and because we do not have wooden statues in our culture, that this text does not apply. I think that is the mistake made when the plaques quote this verse. Augustine once said: “Idolatry is worshipping anything that ought to be used, or using anything that is meant to be worshiped.”

Jonathan Edwards resolved: “that all men should live for the glory of God. Resolved second: That whether others do or not, I will.” Joshua says that regardless of what they chose, “as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.”

Look at the people’s response:

And the people answered and said, “Far be it from us that we should forsake the LORD to serve other gods; for the LORD our God is He who brought us and our fathers up out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and who did these great signs in our sight and preserved us through all the way in which we went and among all the peoples through whose midst we passed. And the LORD drove out from before us all the peoples, even the Amorites who lived in the land. We also will serve the LORD, for He is our God” (vv. 16-18).

The people say that not only will Joshua and his house serve the Lord but “we also will serve the LORD.” Not because He was the God of their parents, but because He is, they say, “our God.”

“So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day, and made for them a statute and an ordinance in Shechem... Then Joshua dismissed the people, each to his inheritance” (vv. 25, 28).

As they left Shechem they were to remember the past and live in light of it. We too, as we live the lives God has given us, should remember from where God, in His grace, took us—from a down-hill slide to destruction into a relationship with His Son. We should remember how God, in His grace, has taken care of us since then in spite of our continued disobedience. And in light of God’s faithful past in our own lives, we should personally renew a whole-hearted commitment to the Lord today. That was Joshua’s challenge to Israel at Shechem, and it is a good one for us to heed as well.



So here we see why Jesus chose Shechem for his seat as King of the Samaritans.

Jesus aimed to unite the Samaritans and Jews and chose his seat as king of both (not a messiah of the Jews) in Shechem.

The Lion of the Samaritans - Jesus - would lay down with the 'lost sheep of Israel' - the Jews.

Under his reign the schism that occured when the Judaens were taken into capitivity by the Assyrians would end.

The place he chose to rule from, Shechem, was deeply symbolic for here the Abram was given the land by God and also Joshua gathered all the Jews to Shechem to present them to God.

There also Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, split the Israelites into two camps - and so in this place Jesus would reunite them.

Here also Joshua said ' put away the gods your father served' and so Jesus was saying the same thing to them - put away your differences, unite with me to form a new Jewish religion - Christianity which united Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles.


This is why Jesus was crucified, for his new religion would have removed the power of the Pharisees and formed a new united Jewish religion under Jesus Christ.

For this Jesus had to die.

The Romans and the Pharisees did not want a united Jewish people under a new king Jesus, so each wanted him dead.

The Romans to stop them uniting and kicking the Romans out of the region and the Pharisses to retain their power over the Jews.

For this reason, the Pharisees and Romans killed Jesus.
























Add to Technorati Favorites

Jesus Was Not Jewish - He Was A Samaritan

I think I may have discovered something very important.

Jesus was not a Jew, he was a Samaritan from the House of Levi and the tribe of Levites via his mother Mary.

The Jews and Samaritans despised each other.

This explains why Jesus said the Jews were of 'the synagogue of Satan' as they worshipped the false religion of the Judeans, which the Samaritans said was not the real religion Judaic religion.

Revelation 3 : 9

and

Revelation 2 : 9


Jesus called the Jewish religion 'the synagogue of satan' as only the Samaritans followed the true Hebrew religion, according to the Samaritans.


This also explains why Jesus called the Jews 'of the devil' in John 8 : 44


New International Version (©1984)

You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.


New Living Translation (©2007)

For you are the children of your father the devil, and you love to do the evil things he does. He was a murderer from the beginning. He has always hated the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies.

English Standard Version (©2001)

You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.


New American Standard Bible (©1995)

"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.


This was because the Samaritans at the time of Jesus believed the Jewish religion was a false religion.

Therefore the TRUE SYNAGOGUE was the Samaritan one, whilst the 'synagogue of satan' was the fake Jewish one according to the Samaritans.

This is also important as the Jews at the time of Christ, according to the Samaritans, did not believe in the Devil, they believed in Satan.

For Jesus to refer to the devil means he was referring to them in a way that only a Samaritan would, not a Jew.


http://www.whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation7.html

Now, of course, Judaism and the Bible tell of a character called, "The Satan." Every time the term is used in the Hebrew Scriptures, it reads, "HaSaTaN," which means "THE Satan." However, the concept of The Satan is radically different from the idea of the Devil. For Christians, the devil has power and authority in and of himself. However, in the Bible, The Satan only has power granted by God, and has no authority in and of himself. For the devil, or satan, to have power and authority is to have more than one god, as we saw above concerning the Greeks and the Romans.

The Satan is described in only a few places in the Hebrew Scriptures. In every instance, he is an angel who works FOR God, not against God, and must get permission from God for everything that he does. Chronicles, Job, Psalms, and Zechariah are the only places where The Satan is mentioned. In each instance, the job description of The Satan is to act like what we now call a Prosecuting Attorney, or District Attorney, and accuse and show evidence against the defendant. Furthermore, like a D.A., The Satan must obtain permission from God, The Judge, to begin a sting operation.





By calling the Jews 'of the devil' he is therefore distinguishing himself from the Jews and saying that he is not Jewish, for if he had been a Jew - he would have called them ' off Satan' not the devil.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritan

The Samaritans (Hebrew: שומרונים‎ Shomronim, Arabic: السامريون‎ as-Sāmariyyūn) are an ethnoreligious group of the Levant. Religiously, they are the adherents to Samaritanism, an Abrahamic religion closely related to Judaism. Based on the Samaritan Torah, Samaritans claim their worship is the true religion of the ancient Israelites prior to the Babylonian Exile, preserved by those who remained in the Land of Israel, as opposed to Judaism, which they assert is a related but altered and amended religion brought back by those returning from exile.

Ancestrally, they claim descent from a group of Israelite inhabitants from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (the two sons of Joseph) as well as some descendants from the priestly tribe of Levi,[3] who have connections to ancient Samaria from the period of their entry into the land of Canaan, while some suggest that it was from the beginning of the Babylonian Exile up to the Samaritan Kingdom of Baba Rabba. The Samaritans, however, derive their name not from this geographical designation, but rather from the Hebrew term Shamerim שַמֶרִים, "Keepers [of the Law]".[4]


http://www.truthbook.com/index.cfm?linkID=1245

For more than six hundred years the Jews of Judea, and later on those of Galilee also, had been at enmity with the Samaritans. This ill feeling between the Jews and the Samaritans came about in this way: About seven hundred years B.C., Sargon, king of Assyria, in subduing a revolt in central Palestine, carried away and into captivity over twenty-five thousand Jews of the northern kingdom of Israel and installed in their place an almost equal number of the descendants of the Cuthites, Sepharvites, and the Hamathites. Later on, Ashurbanipal sent still other colonies to dwell in Samaria.

143:4.2 The religious enmity between the Jews and the Samaritans dated from the return of the former from the Babylonian captivity, when the Samaritans worked to prevent the rebuilding of Jerusalem. Later they offended the Jews by extending friendly assistance to the armies of Alexander. In return for their friendship Alexander gave the Samaritans permission to build a temple on Mount Gerizim, where they worshiped Yahweh and their tribal gods and offered sacrifices much after the order of the temple services at Jerusalem. At least they continued this worship up to the time of the Maccabees, when John Hyrcanus destroyed their temple on Mount Gerizim. The Apostle Philip in his labors for the Samaritans after the death of Jesus, held many meetings on the site of this old Samaritan temple.

143:4.3 The antagonisms between the Jews and the Samaritans were time-honored and historic; increasingly since the days of Alexander they had had no dealings with each other. The twelve apostles were not averse to preaching in the Greek and other gentile cities of the Decapolis and Syria, but it was a severe test of their loyalty to the Master when he said, "Let us go into Samaria." But in the year and more they had been with Jesus, they had developed a form of personal loyalty which transcended even their faith in his teachings and their prejudices against the Samaritans.


This explains why Jesus attacked the Pharisees and the Jewish hierarchy.


It also explains why the Jews tried to kill Jesus ;


"And after these things Jesus was walking in Galilee; for He was unwilling to walk in JUDAEA, because the JEWS were seeking to kill Him."

(John 7:1)



Why were Jews trying to kill Jesus - as they regarded him as a Samaritan preacher, not a Jewish preacher.

Note that Jesus was never called a Jew until the 18th century when the Bible was re-translated ;

http://www.overlordsofchaos.com/html/origin_of_the_word_jew.html


Many people suffer under the misapprehension that Jesus was a "Jew," moreover, that he was "King of the Jews." Thus, by inference, that the "Jews" were the "Chosen People" of the Holy Bible and so ancient possessors and modern inheritors of the Bible Covenants gifted by Yahweh to their forebears Abraham, Jacob and Judah. However, this is not the case. In fact, during Christ's Mission and Passion no such people existed called "Jews" nor indeed did the word "Jew." In short: Jesus was NOT a "Jew" nor was he "King of the Jews."

In fact, Jesus is referred as a "Jew" for the first time in the New Testament in the 18th century; in the revised 18th century English language editions of the 14th century first English translations of the New Testament. The etymology of the word "Jew" is quit clear. Although "Jew" is a modern conception its roots lie in the 3rd and 4th centuries AD. That is, the modern English word "Jew" is the 18th century contraction and corruption of the 4th century Latin "Iudaeus" found in St. Jerome's Vulgate Edition and derived from the Greek word "Ioudaios." The evolution of this can easily be seen in the extant manuscripts from the 4th century to the 18th century, which illustrate not only the origin of the word "Jew" found in the Latin word "Iudaeus" but also its current use in the English language. Littered throughout these manuscripts are the many earlier English equivalents used by various chroniclers between the 4th and the 18th century. Thus, from the Latin "Iudaeus" to the English "Jew" the evolution of these English forms is: "Gyu," "Giu," "Iu," "Iuu," "Iuw," "Ieuu," "Ieuy," "Iwe," "Iow," "Iewe," "Ieue," "Iue," "Ive," "Iew," and then, finally, the 18th century, "Jew." Similarly, the evolution of the English equivalents for "Jews" is: "Giwis," "Giws," "Gyues," "Gywes," "Giwes," "Geus," "Iuys," "Iows," "Iouis," "Iews," and then, finally, in the 18th century, "Jews."

For example: two of the best known 18th century editions of the New Testament in English are the Rheims (Douai) Edition and the King James Authorized Edition and both contain the word word "Jew." Yet, when the English language version of the Rheims (Douai) New Testament was first printed in 1582 the word "Jew" did NOT appear in it. Similarly the King James Authorized translation of the New Testament into English (begun in 1604) and first published in 1611, here too the word "Jew" did NOT appear. That is, the word "Jew" first appeared in both these well known editions in their 18th century revised versions. The combination of the Protestant Reformation, the publication of the revised English language 18th century editions and the printing press (allowing unlimited quantities of the New Testament to be printed) meant the wide distribution of these English language Bibles throughout the English speaking world. That is, among people who had never possessed a copy of the New Testament in any language but who were now in possession of one in their native tongue. And, although these 18th century editions first introduced the word "Jew" to the English language the word as it was used in these has since continued in use in all the editions of the New Testament in the English language.

Numerous copies of these revised 18th century English editions ( especially the Rheims (Douai) and the King James translations of the New Testament) were distributed to the clergy and the laity throughout the English speaking world. And so, the new readers of these 18th century editions were introduced to a new word both to them and the English language, the word "Jew." For, these readers did not know the history of the origin of the English word "Jew" and accepted it as the legitimate modern form of the ancient Greek "Ioudaios" and the Latin "Iudaeus." Thus, these new readers did not understand or care to question the meaning and use of the word "Jew" since it was a new English word to them. Consequently, the use of the word "Jew" was not only stabilised by these 18th century editions but also its anachronistic application to people and places fully established.

The original chroniclers used the Greek "Ioudaios" to denote people who lived in Judaea, that is, in English, for "Judaeans." Thus: "Ioudaia" in Greek is, in English, "Judaea" ( or "Judea") while "Ioudaios" in Greek is, in English, "Judaeans" (or "Judeans") Moreover, when the word "Jew" was first introduced by the redactors into the English language in the 18th century they intended its one and only application was to denote "Judaeans" (or "Judeans"). That is, they deemed them cognates (conveying identical implications, inferences and innuendoes) and so interchangeable. Thus, they meant that it makes no difference which of these two words is used when referring to the inhabitants of Judaea during the time of Christ's Mission. However, since this time the implications, inferences, and innuendoes conveyed by these two words have radically changed and are now as different as black is from white. In short: today, the word "Jew" is never regarded as a synonym for "Judaean" (or "Judean") nor is "Judaean" regarded as a synonym for "Jew." The word has taken on a far different meaning, one wholly divorced from the original conception of the 18th century redactors.

This is its "secondary meaning" that has been carefully nurtured among the English speaking peoples of the world by a secret power intent upon exploiting its ancient power of association. This so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" has been assiduously cultivated during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries and bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word "Jew." It has succeeded to such a degree, that now most people in the English-speaking world can not comprehend the true nature of the word "Jew," its literal sense, and do not regard a "Jew" as a "Judaean." That is, understand the correct and only meaning of the word known to the 18th century redactors of the New Testament. In short: the word "Jew" in modern usage is a misrepresentation. The etymology of the word "Jew," first used in the revised 18th century English language editions of the New Testament, is uncomplicated: the original Greek word "Ioudaios" was derived from the Aramaic "Jehudhai," which referred to Judaeans, the residents of the Babylonian province of Judaea, and not as a reference to members of the tribe of Judah. That is, the modern English word "Jew" is a transliteration of an abbreviation or slang word coined by Babylonian conquerors for the enslaved Judaeans without any due regard to the race or religion of the captives. This indiscriminate use of the word "Jew" to refer to the diverse mass of races and religions then resident in Judaea is the application of an incorrect, modern colloquial idiom without regard or recognition of the true and Biblical meaning of the original words.

"The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto Him shall the gathering of the people be." (Gen. 49:10)

The meaning of the word "Jew" in the Bible is not the same as the commonly held modern view. In the Bible the word "Jew" is meant to refer to a resident of the land of Judaea. Moreover, it is a reference regardless of tribe, race or religion. Anyone who was an inhabitant of Judaea was a "Jew" and need not be a member of the tribe of Judah (Judahite) or one who followed the Judaic religion. Thus, "Jews" and "Jewry" in the Bible not only refer Judah (i.e. Jehudah or Juttah) but also a part of (or place in) Palestine and any other peoples who dwelt there. In the modern, colloquial idiom "Jews" are descendants of Judah while in the Bible it means anyone dwelling in Judaea regardless of lineage or ethnicity. Now, Judah was the largest and the most influential of the Twelve Tribes of Israel with the governing right whose sons where to provide the rightful kings of Israel. That is, they were the inheritors of the Bible Covenants but especially the Davidic Covenant. In short; the Chosen People of Yahweh. However, Jacob prophesied (Gen. 49:10) the tribe would only maintain its pre-eminence until "Shiloh," came who would then assume headship and receive the allegiance of true spiritual Israel as Isaiah 9:6-7 foretold. That is, when the Messiah arrived. This is why Jesus' lineage was established in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 to David, Judah, Jacob and Abraham. So that when He took the sceptre from Judah all who receive Him as Messiah give Him their allegiance.

At the time of Christ's Mission, in the days of His flesh, few of the citizens of Judaea were Judahites, that is, direct descendants of Judah and so the "Chosen People"; the true recipients of the Bible Covenants. Following the destruction of David's Kingdom (its dismemberment first by Babylonians and then by Assyrian's) the forced depopulation of Israel and its people in Exile and bondage, their release by Cyrus the Great and their return and restoration of the Temple, the population of Palestine was very mixed. Although some did indeed belonged to the tribe of Judah and others to one of the other tribes of Israel, many others were descendants of other patriarchs, but, especially, of Esau. These were the Edomites who had been conquered and now assimilated and become co-religionists with the Judahites and remnants of the other tribes of Israel. Moreover, this mixed race were melded together by a hybrid religion developed during the captivity in Babylon. This is the religion of the Pharisee .... Pharisaism ... the man-made religion of the Talmud that is today called Judaism. This man-centred, man-made religion was the religion vehemently condemned by Christ since it is the antithesis of the Mosaic Law and the prophets and makes the Word of God of no effect (Matt. 15:1-9).

"After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for He would not walk in JEWRY, because the JEWS sought to kill Him."(John 7:1)
Here, the English word "Jewry" was translated from the Greek word "Ioudaia", which denoted the land of Judaea. This was acknowledged by modern redactors who chose not to use the word "Jewry" but the correct translation "Judaea." For example, in the New American Standard Bible:

"And after these things Jesus was walking in Galilee; for He was unwilling to walk in JUDAEA, because the JEWS were seeking to kill Him."(John 7:1)

Thus, Christ was unwilling to walk in Judaea – Jewry - because the Jews - the Judaeans - were seeking to kill Him. That is: Judaea = Jewry and Jews = Judaeans. A Jew is properly a Judaean and Jewry properly Judaea.



The fact that Mary was not killed by stoning for being pregnant out of wedlock, which was Jewish law, was because she was not regarded as Jewish by the Jews - they regarded her as a Levite Samaritan.

Mary was a Levite from the House of Levi and hence this reinforces the connection with the Samaritan Levites.

This also why Jesus said he was not the Messiah, as the Messiah was a Jewish concept - and the Samaritans were not Jewish.

The Samaritans (Hebrew: שומרונים‎ Shomronim, Arabic: السامريون‎ as-Sāmariyyūn) are an ethnoreligious group of the Levant. Religiously, they are the adherents to Samaritanism, an Abrahamic religion closely related to Judaism. Based on the Samaritan Torah, Samaritans claim their worship is the true religion of the ancient Israelites prior to the Babylonian Exile, preserved by those who remained in the Land of Israel, as opposed to Judaism, which they assert is a related but altered and amended religion brought back by those returning from exile.

Ancestrally, they claim descent from a group of Israelite inhabitants from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (the two sons of Joseph) as well as some descendants from the priestly tribe of Levi,[3] who have connections to ancient Samaria from the period of their entry into the land of Canaan, while some suggest that it was from the beginning of the Babylonian Exile up to the Samaritan Kingdom of Baba Rabba. The Samaritans, however, derive their name not from this geographical designation, but rather from the Hebrew term Shamerim שַמֶרִים, "Keepers [of the Law]".[4]

In the Talmud, a central post-exilic religious text of Judaism, their claim of ancestral origin is disputed, and in those texts they are called Cutheans (Hebrew: כותים‎, Kuthim), allegedly from the ancient city of Cuthah (Kutha), geographically located in what is today Iraq. Modern genetics has suggested some truth to both the claims of the Samaritans and Jewish accounts in the Talmud.

Tension between the Samaritans and the Jews.

The narratives in Genesis about the rivalries among the twelve sons of Jacob describe tensions between north and south. Those were temporarily united under the strong kingship of David and Solomon, but at the death of Solomon, the kingdom split into two: northern Israel with its capital Samaria and southern Judea with its capital Jerusalem.

The Deuteronomistic Historians, writing in Judah, saw northern Israel as a sinful kingdom, divinely punished for its idolatry and iniquity by being destroyed by the Assyrians in 720 BC. (Ironically, the Chronicler is very generous to the south Judah and considers it God's will to recover the chosen people that they were destroyed by Babylon and exiled to Babylon.)

The tensions continued in the postexilic period. According to the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, Ezra-Nehemiah is hostile toward its northern neighbors and considers the northern Israel except for the "true Israel"[clarification needed]. Chronicles is more inclusive than Ezra-Nehemiah since for the Chronicler the ideal is of one Israel with twelve tribes; the Chronicler concentrates on Judah and ignores northern Israel.[12]

Unlike the Chronicler, the Samaritans claimed that they were the true Israel who were descendants of the "lost" tribes taken into Assyrian captivity. They had their own temple on Mount Gerizim and claimed that it was the original sanctuary. Moreover, they claimed that their version of the Pentateuch was the original and that the Jews had a falsified text produced by Ezra during the Babylonian exile.

Both Jewish and Samaritan religious leaders taught that it was wrong to have any contact with the opposite group, and neither was to enter each other's territories or even to speak to one another. During the New Testament period, although the tensions went unrecognized by Roman authorities, Josephus reports numerous violent confrontations between Jews and Samaritans throughout the first half of the first century.[13]

Rejection by Judeans

Ancient inscription in Samaritan Hebrew. From a photo c.1900 by the Palestine Exploration Fund.According to the Jewish version of events, when the Judean exile ended in 538 BC and the exiles began returning home from Babylon, they found their former homeland populated by other people who claimed the land as their own and Jerusalem, their former glorious capital, in ruins.

According to 2 Chronicles 36:22–23, the Persian emperor, Cyrus the Great (reigned 559 BC – 530 BC), permitted the return of the exiles to their homeland and ordered the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem (Zion). The prophet Isaiah identified Cyrus as "the Lord's Messiah" (Meshiach; see Isaiah 45:1). The word "Messiah" refers to an anointed one, such as a king or priest.

Ezra 4 says that the local inhabitants of the land offered to assist with the building of the new temple during the time of Zerubbabel, but their offer was rejected. According to Ezra, this rejection precipitated a further interference not only with the rebuilding of the temple but also with the reconstruction of Jerusalem.

The text is not clear on this matter, but one possibility is that these "people of the land" were thought of as Samaritans. We do know that Samaritan and Jewish alienation increased, and that the Samaritans eventually built their own temple on Mount Gerizim, near Shechem.

(The rebuilding of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem took several decades. The project was first led by Sheshbazzar (about 538 BC), later by Zerubbabel and Jeshua, and later still by Haggai and Zechariah (520–515 BC). Work was completed in 515 BC.)

The term "Cuthim" applied by Jews to the Samaritans had clear pejorative connotations, implying that they were interlopers brought in from Kutha in Mesopotamia and rejecting their claim of descent from the ancient Tribes of Israel. This claim, however, that the northern tribes of Israel were all exiled by the Assyrians and therefore those who occupied the land were of a non-Israelite origin is rejected by the Bible, 2 Chronicles 30:1-31:6, which states that not all of the people from the northern kingdom were exiled by the Assyrians and some still remained even after the Assyrian conquest of the land in the 8th century BC.


Note that recent DNA evidence shows the Levites, from whom Jesus's mother descended, were 50 % European by DNA ;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levite


A 2003 study of the Y-chromosome by Behar et al. points to multiple origins for Ashkenazi Levites, a priestly class who comprise approximately 4% of Ashkenazi Jews. It found that Haplogroup R1a1a (R-M17), uncommon in the Middle East or among Sephardi Jews, originating in Central Asia and dominant in Eastern Europe, is present in over 50% of Ashkenazi Levites, while the rest of Ashkenazi Levites' paternal lineage is of Middle Eastern origin. Behar suggests a founding event, probably involving one or very few European men, occurring at a time close to the initial formation and settlement of the Ashkenazi community as a possible explanation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritan


Genetic and demographic investigations of the Samaritan community were carried out in the 1960s. Detailed pedigrees of the last 13 generations show that the Samaritans comprise four lineages:

The Tsedakah lineage, claiming descent from the tribe of Manasseh

The Joshua-Marhiv lineage, claiming descent from the tribe of Ephraim

The Danfi lineage, claiming descent from the tribe of Ephraim

The priestly Cohen lineage from the tribe of Levi.


Of the 12 Samaritan males used in the analysis, 10 (83%) had Y chromosones belonging to haplogroup J, which includes three of the four Samaritan families. The Joshua-Marhiv family belongs to haplogroup J1, while the Danfi and Tsedakah families belong to haplogroup J2, and can be further distinguished by M67, the derived allele of which has been found in the Danfi family. The only Samaritan family not found in haplogroup J was the Cohen family (Tradition: Tribe of Levi) which was found in haplogroup E3b1a M78.[27] This article predated the change of the classification of haplogroup E3b1-M78 to E3b1a-M78 and the further subdivision of E3b1a-M78 into 6 subclades based on the research of Cruciani, et al.[28]

In a 2004 article on the genetic ancestry of the Samaritans, Shen, et al. concluded from a sample comparing Samaritans to several Jewish populations, all currently living in Israel — representing Ethiopian Jews, Ashkenazi Jews, Iraqi Jews, Libyan Jews, Moroccan Jews, and Yemenite Jews, as well as Druze and non-Druze Palestinian Arabs — that the principal components analysis suggested a common ancestry of Samaritan and Jewish patrilineages. Most of the former may be traced back to a common ancestor in what is today identified as the paternally inherited Israelite high priesthood (Cohanim) with a common ancestor projected to the time of the Assyrian conquest of the kingdom of Israel.[29] Archaeologists Aharoni, et al., estimated that this "exile of peoples to and from Israel under the Assyrians" took place during ca. 734 BC to 712 BC.[30] The authors speculated that when the Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, resulting in the exile of many of the Israelites, a subgroup of the Israelites that remained in the Land of Israel "married Assyrian and female exiles relocated from other conquered lands, which was a typical Assyrian policy to obliterate national identities."[29] The study goes on to say that "Such a scenario could explain why Samaritan Y chromosome lineages cluster tightly with Jewish Y lineages, while their mitochondrial lineages are closest to Iraqi Jewish and Palestinian mtDNA sequences." Non-Jewish Iraqis were not sampled in this study; however, mitochondrial lineages of Jewish communities tend to correlate with their non-Jewish host populations, unlike paternal lineages which almost always correspond to Israelite lineages.

Genetic differences between the Samaritans and neighboring Jewish and non-Jewish populations are corroborated in that study of 7,280 bp of non-recombining Y-chromosome and 5,622 bp of coding and hypervariable segment (HVS-I) mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences. Comparative sequence analysis was carried out on 12 Samaritan Y-chromosome, and mtDNA samples from 9 male and 7 female Samaritans separated by at least two generations. The four Samaritan families clustered to four distinct Y-chromosome haplogroups according to their patrilineal identity. Of the 16 Samaritan mtDNA samples, 14 carry either of two mitochondrial haplotypes that are rare or absent among other worldwide ethnic groups.





So Jesus was probably neither Jewish by blood or religion.

In John 3 : 28 this is why Jesus denies he is the Messiah - as the Messiah relates to Judaism and not his own Samaritan religion.

Jesus could not be the Jewish Messiah, as he admits, as he was not Jewish - he was a Samaritan.


He refused to be their Messiah, choosing instead to be the Savior of the world.


New International Version (©1984)

You yourselves can testify that I said, 'I am not the Christ but am sent ahead of him.'


New Living Translation (©2007

You yourselves know how plainly I told you, 'I am not the Messiah. I am only here to prepare the way for him.'

English Standard Version (©2001)

You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, ‘I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him.’

New American Standard Bible (©1995)

"You yourselves are my witnesses that I said, 'I am not the Christ,' but, 'I have been sent ahead of Him.'

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him.



That Jesus was a Samaritan is is also further confirmed in John 8:48-59 ;

New International Version (NIV)


Jesus’ Claims About Himself

48 The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”

49 “I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me.

50 I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge.

51 Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”

52 At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that whoever obeys your word will never taste death. 53 Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?”

54 Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. 55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”

57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”

58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” 59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.



Here we see the hatred of the Jews for Jesus is based on them believing he is a Samaritan, not a Jew.

Note that Jesus does not deny this.


This also explains why Jesus asked his disciples to preach to the Samaritans and also why the Samaritans were mentioned by Jesus in his teachings and parables.


Jesus was not Jewish.

He was a Samaritan from the line of Levite via his mother Mary who was also a Samaritan.

If Jesus had been Jewish then he would have been killed before being born as his mother was pregnant out of wedlock.

He wasnt killed.

This is also why Jesus refused to say he was the messiah, as the messiah was a JEWISH MESSIAH and Jesus came not to be the messiah of the Jews, but the SAVIOUR of all mankind not just the Jews.

This is why he chose to preach to the Samaritans and why the Samaritans were respected by him.

The lie that Jesus was a Jew is the dominant Big Lie of the last 2,000 years.


The Christian Gospels mention Samaritans on six occasions:

A Samaritan village rejects a request from Jesus for hospitality because the villagers did not want to facilitate a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, a practice which they saw as a violation of the Law of Moses. Luke 9:51-53 [2].

The Parable of the Good Samaritan. Luke 10:30-37.

Jesus healed ten lepers, of whom only one returned to praise God, and he was a Samaritan. Luke 17:11-19, esp. 17:16

Jesus asks a Samaritan woman of Sychar for water from Jacob's Well. Thereafter many of the Samaritans from her town become followers of Jesus.This woman considered herself and her people to be Israelites, descendants of Jacob. John 4:7-42

Jesus is accused of being a Samaritan and being demon-possessed. He denies having a demon, but makes no comment on the Samaritan accusation. John 8:48

Philip preached the Gospel in the city of Samaria and found many new followers including Simon, a sorcerer. The Apostles Peter and John were sent for and when the Holy Spirit fell upon them Simon attempted to buy this power. Simon was rebuked and he repented. Acts 8:25

Another interesting issue in Matthew 10 : 5-6

When instructing his disciples as to how they should spread the word, Jesus tells them not to visit any Gentile or Samaritan city, but instead go to the "lost sheep of Israel". Matthew 10:5-6


Now why would Jesus tell his apostles not to go to any gentile or Samaritan city ?

Because the Samaritans were already found - it was the Israelites, the Jews, who were the lost ones who needed saving.

The fact he calls the Jews - the lost sheep of Israel - shows he did not regard the Jews as of his faith.

If he had been a Jew he would have asked his followers to go and save the Samaritans, not the Jews.




The one time Jesus calls himself the messiah, is not when he is speaking to a Jew, but a Samaritan woman - hence he is saying he is the SAMARITAN MESSIAH not the Jewish Messiah.

Note that he also says that he has come to change the Samaritan worship, which was on Mount Gerizim and also Jewish worship which was in Jerusaalem.

Jesus says that a new place of worship is going to be established, not on the mountain or in Jerusalem - this also explains why he broke the laws of the Torah and hence broke the Samaritan and Jewish laws of the time - Jesus was truly a revolutionary seeking to create a new unified religion that united the Samaritans and the Jews into a new religion - which we call Christianity.



John 4:21-26

King James Version (KJV)


21Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

22Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

23But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

24God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

25The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

26Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.


So where was Jesus referring too when he said a new place would be found where the Jesus Jews would worship The Father - for that we need to look at the Samaritan teachings on the Samaritan Messiah - and here we find the answer - Shechem, the ancient seat of power.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/journals/oc/sm.htm

Another thing was asked of the High Priest, namely, what would be the attitude of the Messiah toward Christians and other nations. He answers:

"The Messiah will be a prophet, as I have told you, and will no doubt work signs to prove his mission. There will be unusual signs and wonders, which I described in the little book. But he is to be a king, and rule the earth from Shechem, the ancient seat of power, and from his holy mountain, Gerizim. He will call all the world to acknowledge him, and they will do so. He will bring blessings to all nations that acknowledge him."



So Jesus did not intend Jerusalem to be his seat where he would rule as king of the Jews - it would be Shechem.

Shechem is Nablus.


Nablus (Arabic: نابلس‎ Nāblus [næːblʊs] ( listen), Hebrew: שכם‎ Šəḵem, is Biblical Shechem (ISO 259-3 Škem).

It is a Palestinian city in the northern West Bank, approximately 63 kilometers (39 mi) north of Jerusalem, with a population of 126,132.[1] Located in a strategic position between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim, it is the capital of the Nablus Governorate and a Palestinian commercial and cultural center.

So the Holy city of the Jesus Jews would not have been Jeruslaem it would have been Shechem / Nablus.


Here is some information on Shechem -

http://bible.org/article/geographical-historical-spiritual-significance-shechem


The true Christians worship Christ in Nablus, not in Jerusalem.



Add to Technorati Favorites

The US Civil War and Central Banking

http://www.activistpost.com/2011/10/g-edward-griffin-greenbacks-and-other.html



It is now time to leave this tragic episode and move along. So let us summarize. America's bloodiest and most devastating war was fought, not over the issue of freedom versus slavery, but because of clashing economic interests. At the heart of this conflict were questions of legalized plunder, banking monopolies, and even European territorial expansion into Latin America. The boot print of the Rothschild formula is unmistakable across the graves of American soldiers on both sides.

In the North, neither greenbacks, taxes nor war bonds were enough to finance the war. So a national banking system was created to convert government bonds into fiat money, and the people lost over half of their monetary assets to the hidden tax of inflation. In the South, printing presses accomplished the same effect, and the monetary loss was total.

The issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation by Lincoln and the naval asistance offered by Tsar Alexander, II were largely responsible for keeping England and France from intervening in the war on the side of the Confederacy. Linconln was assassinated by a member of the Knights of teh Golden Circle, a secret society with rumored ties to American politicians and British financiers. Tsar Alexander was assassinated a few years later by a member of the People's Will, a Nihilist secret society in Russia with rumored ties to financiers in New York City, specifically, Jacob Schiff and the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company.

As for the Creature of central banking, there had been some victories and some defeats. The greenbacks had for a while deprived the bankers of their override on a small portion of government debt, but the National Banking Act quickly put a stop to that. Furthermore, by using government bonds as backing for the money supply, it locked the nation into perpetual debt. The foundation was firmly in place, but the ultimate structure still needed to be erected. The monetary system was yet to be concentrated into one central-bank mechanism, and the control was yet to be taken away from the politicians and placed into the hands of the bankers themselves.

It was time for the Creature to visit Congress







Add to Technorati Favorites

Israel Caught Spying on America - AGAIN

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/motherofallscandals.php



Once again, Israel has been caught with spies at the highest levels of the US Government.

At the heart of the investigation are two people who work at The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful pro-Israel lobby in Washington. The FBI investigation, headed up by Dave Szady, has involved wiretaps, undercover surveillance and photography that CBS News was told document the passing of classified information from the mole, to the men at AIPAC, and on to the Israelis.

CBS sources say that last year the suspected spy, described as a trusted analyst at the Pentagon, turned over a presidential directive on U.S. policy toward Iran while it was, "in the draft phase when U.S. policy-makers were still debating the policy." This put the Israelis, according to one source, "inside the decision-making loop" so they could "try to influence the outcome." [CBS News]

Once again Israel denies wrongdoing, or faced with incontrovertible evidence (in this case one of the spies has reportedly cooperated with the FBI) dismisses the spying with the claim that such spying is harmless, because Israel and the United States are such good friends.

Well, let us take a closer look at that idea of “harmless espionage” by recalling Israel’s most famous failed spy, Jonathan Pollard.

Jonathan Pollard is an American of Jewish descent, born in Galveston Texas, who established a career as an intelligence analyst for the US Navy. There have been many theories offered as to why Pollard decided to betray his country of birth to the Jewish state, but that Pollard did betray his country of birth to Israel is beyond all doubt. Pollard’s defense was that he did not spy so much against the United States, only that he spied for Israel, sending them documents that in his opinion the US should have shared with Israel anyway.

That it was never Pollards job to decide what documents Israel should have was apparently irrelevant. Pollard arrogated that authority to himself. From his position of trust within the US Navy, Pollard delivered over 1000 classified documents to Israel for which he was well paid. Included in those documents were the names of over 150 US agents in the Mideast, who were eventually “turned” into agents for Israel.

But by far the most egregious damage done by Pollard was to steal classified documents relating to the US Nuclear Deterrent relative to the USSR and send them to Israel. According to sources in the US State Department, Israel then turned around and traded those stolen nuclear secrets to the USSR in exchange for increased emigration quotas from the USSR to Israel. Other information that found its way from the US to Israel to the USSR resulted in the loss of American agents operating inside the USSR. Casper Weinberger, in his affidavit opposing a reduced sentence for Pollard, described the damage done to the United States thus, "[It is] difficult to conceive of a greater harm to national security than that caused by... Pollard's treasonous behavior."

This should end the suggestion that Israel’s spies are harmless. They are not. The United States’ nuclear deterrent cost an estimated five trillion taxpayer dollars during the 50s and 60s to build and maintain, and less than $100,000 for Pollard to undermine. Israel waited 13 years to admit Pollard had been spying for them, and now lobbies for his release, having granted him Israeli citizenship.

Pollard is hardly the only Israeli spy operating in the United States. He just had the misfortune to get caught. Here are just a few examples of the Israeli spy operations that have been detected.

1947. Information collected by the ADL in its spy operations on US citizens is used by the House Select Committee on Unamerican Activities. Subcommittee Chair Clare Hoffman dismisses the ADL’s reports on suspected communists as “hearsay."

1950 John Davitt, former chief of the Justice Department's internal security section notes that the Israeli intelligence service is the second most active in the United States after the Soviets.

1954 A hidden microphone planted by the Israelis is discovered in the Office of the US Ambassador in Tel Aviv.

1956 Telephone taps are found connected to two telephones in the residence of the US military attach� in Tel Aviv.

1954 "The Lavon Affair". Israeli agents recruit Egyptian citizens of Jewish descent to bomb Western targets in Egypt, and plant evidence to frame Arabs, in an apparent attempt to upset US-Egyptian relations. Israeli defense minister Pinchas Lavon is eventually removed from office, though many think real responsibility lay with David Ben-Gurion.

1965 Israel apparently illegally obtains enriched uranium from NUMEC Corporation. (Washington Post, 6/5/86, Charles R. Babcock, "US an Intelligence Target of the Israelis, Officials Say.")

1967 Israel attacks the USS Liberty, an intelligence gathering vessel flying a US flag, killing 34 crew members. See "Assault on the Liberty," by James M. Ennes, Jr. (Random House). In 2004, Captain Ward Boston, Senior Legal Counsel for the Navy’s Court of Inquiry into the attack swears under oath that President Lyndon Johnson ordered the investigation to conclude accident, even though the evidence indicates the attack was deliberate. Given the use by Israel of unmarked boats and planes, and the machine-gunning of USS Liberty’s lifeboats, the most likely explanation is that USS Liberty was to be sunk with all hands, with evidence left to frame Egypt for the sinking. This would have dragged the US into the war on Israel’s side.

1970 While working for Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson, Richard Perle is caught by the FBI giving classified information to Israel. Nothing is done.

1978, Stephen Bryen, then a Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer, is overheard in a DC hotel offering confidential documents to top Israeli military officials. Bryen obtains a lawyer, Nathan Lewin, and the case heads for the grand jury, but is mysteriously dropped. Bryen later goes to work for Richard Perle.

1979 Shin Beth [the Israeli internal security agency] tries to penetrate the US Consulate General in Jerusalem through a “Honey Trap”, using a clerical employee who was having an affair with a Jerusalem girl.

1985 The New York Times reports the FBI is aware of at least a dozen incidents in which American officials transferred classified information to the Israelis, quoting [former Assistant Director of the F.B.I.] Mr. [Raymond] Wannal. The Justice Department does not prosecute.

1985 Richard Smyth, the owner of MILCO, is indicted on charges of smuggling nuclear timing devices to Israel (Washington Post, 10/31/86).

1987 April 24 Wall Street Journal headline: "Role of Israel in Iran-Contra Scandal Won't be Explored in Detail by Panels"

1992 The Wall Street Journal reports that Israeli agents apparently tried to steal Recon Optical Inc's top-secret airborne spy-camera system.

1992 Stephen Bryen, caught offering confidential documents to Israel in 1978, is serving on board of the pro-Israeli Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs while continuing as a paid consultant -- with security clearance -- on exports of sensitive US technology.

1992 "The Samson Option," by Seymour M. Hersh reports, “Illicitly obtained intelligence was flying so voluminously from LAKAM into Israeli intelligence that a special code name, JUMBO, was added to the security markings already on the documents. There were strict orders, Ari Ben-Menashe recalled: "Anything marked JUMBO was not supposed to be discussed with your American counterparts."

1993. The ADL is caught operating a massive spying operation on critics of Israel, Arab-Americans, the San Francisco Labor Council, ILWU Local 10, Oakland Educational Association, NAACP, Irish Northern Aid, International Indian Treaty Council, the Asian Law Caucus and the San Francisco police. Data collected was sent to Israel and in some cases to South Africa. Pressure from Jewish organizations forces the city to drop the criminal case, but the ADL settles a civil lawsuit for an undisclosed sum of cash.

1995 The Defense Investigative Service circulates a memo warning US military contractors that "Israel aggressively collects [US] military and industrial technology." The report stated that Israel obtains information using "ethnic targeting, financial aggrandizement, and identification and exploitation of individual frailties" of US citizens.

1996 A General Accounting Office report "Defense Industrial Security: Weaknesses in US Security Arrangements With Foreign-Owned Defense Contractors" found that according to intelligence sources "Country A" (identified by intelligence sources as Israel, Washington Times, 2/22/96) "conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the United States of any US ally." The Jerusalem Post (8/30/96) quoted the report, "Classified military information and sensitive military technologies are high-priority targets for the intelligence agencies of this country." The report described "An espionage operation run by the intelligence organization responsible for collecting scientific and technologic information for [Israel] paid a US government employee to obtain US classified military intelligence documents." The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (Shawn L. Twing, April 1996) noted that this was "a reference to the 1985 arrest of Jonathan Pollard, a civilian US naval intelligence analyst who provided Israel's LAKAM [Office of Special Tasks] espionage agency an estimated 800,000 pages of classified US intelligence information."

The GAO report also noted that "Several citizens of [Israel] were caught in the United States stealing sensitive technology used in manufacturing artillery gun tubes."

1996 An Office of Naval Intelligence document, "Worldwide Challenges to Naval Strike Warfare" reported that "US technology has been acquired [by China] through Israel in the form of the Lavi fighter and possibly SAM [surface-to-air] missile technology." Jane's Defense Weekly (2/28/96) noted that "until now, the intelligence community has not openly confirmed the transfer of US technology [via Israel] to China." The report noted that this "represents a dramatic step forward for Chinese military aviation." (Flight International, 3/13/96)

1997 An Army mechanical engineer, David A. Tenenbaum, "inadvertently" gives classified military information on missile systems and armored vehicles to Israeli officials (New York Times, 2/20/97).

1997 The Washington Post reports US intelligence has intercepted a conversation in which two Israeli officials had discussed the possibility of getting a confidential letter that then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher had written to Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat. One of the Israelis, identified only as “Dov”, had commented that they may get the letter from "Mega”, the code name for Israel’s top agent inside the United States.

1997 US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, complains privately to the Israeli government about heavy-handed surveillance by Israeli intelligence agents.

1997 Israeli agents place a tap on Monica Lewinsky’s phone at the Watergate and record phone sex sessions between her and President Bill Clinton. The Ken Starr report confirms that Clinton warned Lewinsky their conversations were being taped and ended the affair. At the same time, the FBI’s hunt for “Mega” is called off.

2001 It is discovered that US drug agents’ communications have been penetrated. Suspicion falls on two companies, AMDOCS and Comverse Infosys, both owned by Israelis. AMDOCS generates billing data for most US phone companies and is able to provide detailed logs of who is talking to whom. Comverse Infosys builds the tapping equipment used by law enforcement to eavesdrop on all American telephone calls, but suspicion forms that Comverse, which gets half of its research and development budget from the Israeli government, has built a back door into the system that is being exploited by Israeli intelligence and that the information gleaned on US drug interdiction efforts is finding its way to drug smugglers. The investigation by the FBI leads to the exposure of the largest foreign spy ring ever uncovered inside the United States, operated by Israel. Half of the suspected spies have been arrested when 9-11 happens. On 9-11, 5 Israelis are arrested for dancing and cheering while the World Trade Towers collapse. Supposedly employed by Urban Moving Systems, the Israelis are caught with multiple passports and a lot of cash. Two of them are later revealed to be Mossad. As witness reports track the activity of the Israelis, it emerges that they were seen at Liberty Park at the time of the first impact, suggesting a foreknowledge of what was to come. The Israelis are interrogated, and then eventually sent back to Israel. The owner of the moving company used as a cover by the Mossad agents abandons his business and flees to Israel. The United States Government then classifies all of the evidence related to the Israeli agents and their connections to 9-11. All of this is reported to the public via a four part story on Fox News by Carl Cameron. Pressure from Jewish groups, primarily AIPAC, forces Fox News to remove the story from their website. Two hours prior to the 9-11 attacks, Odigo, an Israeli company with offices just a few blocks from the World Trade Towers, receives an advance warning via the internet. The manager of the New York Office provides the FBI with the IP address of the sender of the message, but the FBI does not follow up.

2001 The FBI is investigating 5 Israeli moving companies as possible fronts for Israeli intelligence.

2001 JDL’s Irv Rubin arrested for planning to bomb a US Congressman. He dies before he can be brought to trial.

2002 The DEA issues a report that Israeli spies, posing as art students, have been trying to penetrate US Government offices.

2002 police near the Whidbey Island Naval Air Station in southern Washington State stop a suspicious truck and detain two Israelis, one of whom is illegally in the United States. The two men were driving at high speed in a Ryder rental truck, which they claimed had been used to "deliver furniture." The next day, police discovered traces of TNT and RDX military-grade plastic explosives inside the passenger cabin and on the steering wheel of the vehicle. The FBI then announces that the tests that showed explosives were “false positived” by cigarette smoke, a claim test experts say is ridiculous. Based on an alibi provided by a woman, the case is closed and the Israelis are handed over to INS to be sent back to Israel. One week later, the woman who provided the alibi vanishes.

2003 The Police Chief of Cloudcroft stops a truck speeding through a school zone. The drivers turn out to be Israelis with expired passports. Claiming to be movers, the truck contains junk furniture and several boxes. The Israelis are handed over to immigration. The contents of the boxers are not revealed to the public.

2003 Israel deploys assassination squads into other countries, including the United States. The US Government does not protest.

2004 Police near the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in Tennessee stop a truck after a three mile chase, during which the driver throws a bottle containing a strange liquid from the cab. The drivers turn out to be Israelis using fake Ids. The FBI refuses to investigate and the Israelis are released.

2004 Two Israelis try to enter Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base, home to eight Trident submarines. The truck tests positive for explosives.

This brings us to the present scandal. Two years into an investigation of AIPAC’s possible role as a spy front for Israel, Larry Franklin, a mid-level Pentagon Analyst is observed by the FBI giving classified information to two officials of AIPAC suspected of being Israeli spies. AIPAC hires lawyer Nathan Lewin to handle their legal defense, the same lawyer who defended suspected Israeli spy Stephen Bryen in 1978.

Larry Franklin worked in the Pentagon Office of Special Plans, run by Richard Perle, at the time Perle (who was caught giving classified information to Israel back in 1970) was insisting that Iraq was crawling with weapons of mass destruction requiring the United States to invade and conquer Iraq. There were no WMDs, of course, and Perle has dumped the blame for the “bad intelligence” on George Tenet. But what is known is that the Pentagon Office of Special Plans was coordinating with a similar group in Israel, in Ariel Sharon’s office.

With two suspected Israeli spies (at least) inside the office from which the lies that launched the war in Iraq originated, it appears that the people of the United States are the victims of a deadly hoax, a hoax that started a war.

The leaking of the investigation of AIPAC to the media on August 28th, 2004 gave advance warning to other spies working with Franklin. The damage to the FBI’s investigation was completed when United States Attorney General John Ashcroft ordered the FBI to stop all arrests in the case. Like the Stephen Bryen case and the hunt for “Mega”, this latest spy scandal seems destined to be buried by officials who have their own secret allegiances to protect, barring a massive public outcry.

The organization at the heart of the latest spy investigation, AIPAC, wields tremendous influence over the US Congress. Through its members and affiliated PACs, AIPAC directs a huge flow of campaign cash in favor of, and occasionally against, Senators and Representatives solely on the basis of their willingness to support Israel. As an example, in 2002, U.S. Rep. Artur Davis, D-Birmingham received so much help from pro-Israeli pacs that 76% of his campaign budget came from OUTSIDE the state of Alabama, mostly from New York.

Let me repeat that. A Congressman AIPAC wanted elected received more money from pro-Israel groups outside his state than from his own constituents inside his state. Who is that Congressman going to be thinking of when he votes in Congress?

So here is the mother of all scandals.

For two years, the FBI has suspected AIPAC of spying for a foreign country, and for those two years (and for decades before) that group suspected of spying for Israel has been reshaping the US Congress for the benefit of a foreign government.

And THAT is the mother of all scandals.

Think about that as billions of your tax dollars flow to Israel while your roads and schools crumble and decay and services are cut.

Think about that as the coffins come home with your loved ones inside.

Think about that when you and a million of your fellow citizens march down the streets of America opposing wars built on lies and deceptions and wonder why the government just doesn’t want to listen to you any more.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------









Add to Technorati Favorites

Why Greece is having a Referendum

For those who are wondering why the Greek government are having a referendum on their bail out package, its because the Greek Army have threatened to overthrow the government if they try and sell the Greek Nation and People out to the Globalists.

Unlike in Britain, where the army generals boot lick NATO and the globalists and bomb and murder innocent people like in Libya, the Greek Army still serve the interests of the Greek Nation and People.

Their military top brass dont put their careers, pensions and desire for shiny medals before the interests of the Greek people.

Hence the army have forced the government to go to the people and ask for a referendum.


http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/11/01/greece-facing-military-coup-civil-war-imminent-government-collapse-happen-tonight-79831/
















Add to Technorati Favorites

Tuesday, 1 November 2011

The Race Myths Fall Apart

All humans are cousins - but we are also seperate speciations.

A speciation is the process whereby evolution is moving towards the creation of a new species, which is what racial differences are.

They are evolutions towards new species.

Race is just the halfway stage to the new species.

Each race is evolving towards becoming a new species.

The entire ideology of race - from the Far Right to the Liberals and the Far Left - is wrong.

None of them have ideologically accepted the reality of the new facts that DNA is telling us.

The Far Right never stated that we White Northern Europeans are direct descendants of the Neanderthals.

I have been saying that race is the process of speciation for years.

Hopefully one day the right, left and liberals will face reality and accept it.






http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8861602/Siberians-share-DNA-with-extinct-human-species.html#disqus_thread


Researchers have found that people in East Asia share genetic material with Denisovans, who got the name from the cave in Siberia where they were first found.

The new study covers a larger part of the world than earlier research, and it is clear that it is not as simple as previously thought.

Professor Mattias Jakobsson, of Uppsala University in Sweden who conducted the study together with graduate student Pontus Skoglund, said hybridisation took place at several points in evolution and the genetic traces of this can be found in several places in the world.

He said: "We'll probably be uncovering more events like these.

"Previous studies have found two separate hybridisation events between so-called archaic humans - different from modern humans in both genetics and morphology - and the ancestors of modern humans after their emergence from Africa.

"There was hybridisation between Neanderthals and the ancestors of modern humans outside of Africa and hybridisation between Denisovans and the ancestors of indigenous Oceanians.

"The genetic difference between Neanderthals and Denisovans is roughly as great as the maximal level of variation among us modern humans."

The Uppsala scientists' study demonstrates that hybridisation also occurred on the East Asian mainland.

The connection was discovered by using genotype data in order to obtain a larger data set.

Complete genomes of modern humans are only available from some dozen individuals today, whereas genotype data is available from thousands of individuals.

These genetic data can be compared with genome sequences from Neanderthals and a Denisovan which have been determined from archeological material.

Only a pinky finger and a tooth have been described from the latter.

Genotype data stems from genetic research where hundreds of thousands of genetic variants from test panels are gathered on a chip.

However, this process leads to unusual variants not being included, which can lead to biases if the material is treated as if it consisted of complete genomes.

Prof Jakobsson and Skoglund used advanced computer simulations to determine what this source of error means for comparisons with archaic genes and have thereby been able to use genetic data from more than 1,500 modern humans from all over the world.

Prof Jakobsson said: "We found that individuals from mainly Southeast Asia have a higher proportion of Denisova-related genetic variants than people from other parts of the world, such as Europe, America, West and Central Asia, and Africa.

"The findings show that gene flow from archaic human groups also occurred on the Asian mainland."

Skoglund added: "While we can see that genetic material of archaic humans lives on to a greater extent than what was previously thought, we still know very little about the history of these groups and when their contacts with modern humans occurred."

Because they find Denisova-related gene variants in south east Asia and Oceania, but not in Europe and America, the researchers suggest that hybridisation with Denisova man took place about 20 million years ago, but could also have occurred earlier.

This is long after the branch that became modern humans split off from the branch that led to Neanderthals and Denisovans some 300,000 to 500,000 years ago.

Prof Jakobsson said: "With more complete genomes from modern humans and more analyses of fossil material, it will be possible to describe our prehistory with considerably greater accuracy and richer detail."

The findings were published in the online edition of the journal PNAS.









Add to Technorati Favorites