Chapter 4

War: What Is It Good For?

Bond: I need a passport and matching credit cards.

Mathis: Why?  MI6 run out of plastic?

Bond: Well, oddly, right now, you’re the only person I think I can trust.

Mathis: That is odd.  But I guess when one is young, it seems very easy to distinguish between right and wrong.  As one gets older, it becomes more difficult.  The villains and the heroes get all mixed up.

~ Quantum of Solace (2008)

Modern warfare between nation states is an enterprise wholly manufactured by the Luciferian Elite for three general purposes:

I. To make obscene amounts of money.

II. To slaughter the commoners and cull the “useless eaters²⁸³”.

III. To punish the enemies of Rome.

Enemies have been created and crises have been contrived in order to motivate populations to give up rights and make drastic sacrifices for the Elite that they would not normally make.

Good Americans thank a soldier with no legs for endless deployments in the “War on Terror” to “protect our freedoms” as they hold their hands up in surrender to be humiliated by a naked body scanner at the airport.

—And it’s all by design.

~ Illuminati Unmasked ¹

Let’s start with what should be an easy multiple choice question.

Which country created, and was dedicated to beyond any rational measure, the concept of mass-slaughtering innocent civilians via indiscriminate “carpet” bombing?

A. Nazi Germany?

B. Soviet Russia?

C. Imperial Japan?

D. Great Britain?

HINT: Prime Minister Winston Churchill (Brother Freemason, Studholme Lodge, 1591) rewarded the “Godfather” of “strategic bombing” with Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath.

Perhaps that’s not a good hint because President Franklin Roosevelt (Brother Freemason, Holland Lodge No. 8) rewarded him with the Legion of Merit and Joseph Stalin (an ordained Jesuit priest) awarded him the Order of Suvorov, First Class.

Sir Arthur Travers Harris, 1st Baronet, GCB, OBE, AFC spent his formative years being raised by a Kent Rector of Henry’s “Church of England”, the English version of Catholicism that Henry VIII created when Clement VII denied him an annulment to Catherine of Aragon (a devoted daughter of the Church).

Henry was careful to maintain all of the cardinalates and bishoprics of Romanism as these clerical positions helped keep order and authority in the hands of the elite.  This would become a point of contention for Reformers on the north of the island.

Scotsmen like John Knox weren’t fooled.  Henry’s “reforms” simply transferred the Papacy from Rome to London.

England presented the readiest and most natural sanctuary to those who were persecuted by the Scottish prelates.  But, though they usually fled to that kingdom in the first instance, they did not find their situation comfortable, and the greater part, after a short residence there, proceeded to the Continent.

Henry VIII., from motives which, to say the least, were highly suspicious, had renounced subjection to the Roman see, and compelled his subjects to follow his example.  He invested himself with the ecclesiastical supremacy, within his own dominions, which he had wrested from the Bishop of Rome; and in the arrogant and violent exercise of that power, the English pope was scarcely exceeded by any of the pretended successors of St. Peter.  Having signalized himself at a former period as a literary champion against Luther, he was anxious to demonstrate that his breach with the court of Rome, had not alienated him from the Catholic faith; and he would suffer none to proceed a step beyond the narrow and capricious line of reform which he was pleased to prescribe.  Hence, the motley system of religion which he established, and the contradictory measures by which it was supported.  Statutes against the authority of the pope, and against the tenets of Luther, were enacted in the same parliament; and Papists and Protestants were alternately brought to the same stake.  The Protestants in Scotland were universally dissatisfied with this bastard reformation, a circumstance which had contributed not a little to cool their zeal for the lately proposed alliance with England. ~ M´Crie ³³⁸

As a result, Reformers in the Kingdom coined a phrase that echoed into the American Revolution which was meant to deny the authority of either the Pope or the King of England in Christendom: “No king but King Jesus!”³³⁹

 ~ Secret History ²

To the media and those who re-write history, he’s known as “Bomber Harris”.

But to those on the receiving end of his bloodthirst, it was “Butcher Harris”.

According to legend, the 1^st Baronet told his father that he wished to be judged by his deeds, not by his title, so he ran off to the Kingdom colony of Rhodesia where he eventually came under the care of a good Catholic Irishman, Thomas Crofton Croker “CC” Townsend.³

With the advent of World War I, Harris joined the British colonial military in Rhodesia and participated in a brief African campaign.  His unit was then quickly disbanded in 1915.  But the war still went on, so Harris returned to his wealthy family in London and was given a choice position as a pilot in the new Royal Air Force.  By the end of the war he was a Squadron Commander and a Major.

With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Western Europe quickly divided up the spoils.

“Mesopotamia” (modern Iraq) went to the United Kingdom.

But there was a problem: when the Mesopotamians realized that they had simply swapped Turkish oppressors for British ones, they weren’t pleased.  Prime Minister David Lloyd George dispatched his Secretary of War⁴, Winston Churchill, and gave him the impossible task of controlling 30 million Iraqis across 160,000 miles with only 120,000 soldiers.

Churchill had both the solution and the man to carry it out: indiscriminate bombing from the air of mass populations, carried out by Arthur Harris.

Not only did the results please them both, it set a precedent they would carry with them two decades later.

The lessons of Iraq were to be applied to Germany.

One of the RAF squadron leaders in Iraq was Arthur Harris — who in 1942 assumed the leadership of RAF Bomber Command.  Several of his senior officers in Bomber Command had served in the same squadron.

For Harris, what was true of Iraq was true of Germany.  As AJP Taylor said of him: “He genuinely believed that the German people could be cowed from the air as he had once cowed the tribesmen of Irak (sic).”

The destruction of Hamburg, Dresden and scores of other German cities and towns followed.  Around 600,000 Germans, mostly civilians, perished.  But although the crews of Bomber Command fought with great gallantry — more than 55,000 crewmen were killed and 19 Victoria Crosses won — the RAF’s strategic bombing campaign alone could not force Germany’s surrender. ~ BBC

Although “journalists” and “historians” have tried to claim since then that the terror bombing campaign against Germany by Britain was all Butcher Harris’ idea, he was just being a good soldier.  Above him was Brother Churchill and above Brother Churchill was the same Holy Father who had helped create the 3^rd Reich in the first place; Eugenio Pacelli, Pope Pius XII.

Pacelli had been the Papal Nuncio (Ambassador) to both Germany and Prussia in the critical formative years of 1917 thru 1930 before he became Pope.  Along with Jesuit Superior General Wlodimir Ledóchowski operating out of his masterpiece—the newly Communist Soviet Union—Martin Luther’s homeland was being set up for a bloodletting of Biblical proportions.

Hitler was the perfect incompetent patsy.  He was carefully coddled by Jesuits like Father Bernhard Stempfle who ghost-wrote Mein Kampf for him.

Adolf Hitler’s “tour de force”, Mein Kampf was so heavily edited by a vehemently anti-Semitic Jesuit priest it was practically ghost-written by him.

Otto Strasser was a key figure in the Nazi Party of the 1930’s.  During Adolf Hitler’s brief stint in prison, Strasser’s brother Gregor shared rulership of the party with Gottfried Feder.  It was an unhappy partnership with the Strasser brothers emphasizing the socialist part of the National Socialist Party inasmuch as they pushed for urbanization of the commoners and state control of land³¹⁵.  They were true Luciferian visionaries and their efforts would later be renewed under United Nations “Agenda 21”.

Strasser would write an exposé on his time with Adolf Hitler titled Hitler and I.³¹⁶

In it, he made the astounding statement that Mein Kampf was a chaotic mess of rants that was completely reorganized by a Jesuit priest.

In its original form Mein Kampf was a veritable hotch-potch of commonplaces, schoolboy reminiscences, personal opinions, expressions of personal animosity. …

The whole was written in the style of a fifth-form schoolboy, and a not very intelligent one at that.  Only a single chapter, if I am to believe Father Staempfle, who twice revised the entire manuscript, was really original.  This was the chapter on propaganda.

Good Father Staempfle, a priest of great learning, editor of a paper at Miessbach, spent months rewriting and editing Mein Kampf.  He eliminated the more flagrant inaccuracies and the excessively childish platitudes.  Hitler never forgave Father Staempfle for getting to know his weaknesses so well.  He had him murdered by a “special death squad” on the night of June 30, 1934.³¹⁷

Wikipedia Deutsch confirms this.

~ Illuminati Unmasked ⁵

Rome had thorough control of the Nazi Party from beginning to end; carefully crafting and enacting atrocities and then blaming the German people with them (just like she does today with Inquisition outrages such as Abu Ghraib).

Inside Germany, Rome had double agents like “Lutheran” Martin Bormann.  Bormann was one of the most powerful men in the regime.  He was head of the Nazi Party Chancellery (the Parteikanzlei) and Adolf Hitler’s private secretary who personally controlled the flow of information and access to Hitler.⁴⁵⁵

He was also an active participant in “Red Orchestra” (Die Rote Kapelle) — a cell of traitors who gave German intelligence to the Soviet Union.  It was further evidence that Bormann worked for Rome.  Between the Allies and the Communists, the Allies were a far more lucrative recipient of important intelligence.  One could easily negotiate their way into a very posh retirement by pulling the right strings (as many Nazis did).

But Communism was and is a debilitating disease.  It crushes creativity, loyalty and even love and rules by fear.  This makes for an ineffective state which constantly needs propping up and Rome would do that for Russia, China and Korea then through to today.

Not working directly with the Allies forced Rome to intervene to provide for Bormann’s “retirement” and he was put into the Vatican rat lines disguised as a Jesuit priest and he ended up safely in Argentina⁴⁵⁶ where he died peacefully and unmolested.

His wife, Gerda, was carefully screened from harassment by any intelligence agencies^cxxv and she appointed a Roman Catholic priest as executor of her will.  Bormann’s eldest son, Adolf, (named after his godfather, Adolf Hitler) became a Jesuit and was given special deference and consideration because of his father’s contribution to Rome.⁴⁵⁷

 ~ Secret History ⁶

Germany should have won the war several times over.  On land, Heinz Guderian and Erwin Rommel blazed a trail of conquest with a revolutionary new tactic called Blitzkrieg (“Lightning War”).  It traded the bloody stand-stills of trench warfare for movement at high speeds.  At the front of these movements were the best tanks of the age, the Panzer Mark VI and Mark V “Panther”.  When the slopping armor and 76mm gun of Russia’s T-34 threatened, it was answered with the behemoth Mark VI and VII, the Tiger I and II, with 120mm of glacial armor to the front and the technological terror of Germany’s deadly 88mm Flak gun mounted in the turret.  The Tigers weighed in at an astounding 70 tons: a size that wouldn’t be rivaled until modern tanks like the Abrams appeared with depleted uranium armor.

At sea, Grand Admiral Karl Dönitz all but choked England to death with his devastating U-Boats.

Even Reichsminister of Aviation Hermann Göring had wonder weapons at his disposal such as the world’s first operational jet interceptor, the Messerschmitt ME-262.  Her twin axial-flow turbojets and swept wings pushed her over 150 miles per hour faster than anything else in the skies.  Even after safely moving Nazi scientists to America (those that Rome didn’t retire to South America), the United States still took two generations of jets just to catch up.

Other “wonder weapons” ran from the first “assault rifle”, the Sturmgewehr 44, to the first guided ballistic missile, the V2.

Yet, Adolf Hitler squandered it all and, instead, insured his military had more than it could handle by invading his ally, Soviet Russia, in 1941 via “Operation: Barbarossa”, named after Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa.

How could this happen?

Perhaps we should look to who was really in charge of Nazi Germany at the time, Father Heinrich Himmler, S.J.

J. Cofer Black

Joseph Cofer Black was Erik Prince’s Heinrich Himmler.

They even look alike.

While either with the State Department or the Central Intelligence Agency, J. Cofer Black was the man who made black-bag “rendition” and torture operations possible against “Enemies of the State”. …

Like Himmler, Black’s Catholic affiliation has been wiped from almost all sources save his attendance of the Canterbury School in Connecticut — a Roman Catholic all-boys college prep school.⁹⁵⁵

Himmler is just as nebulous a Catholic but his secret ties are much more powerful.

Mainstream sources grudgingly admit he was “raised” Catholic. …

But at least one source makes the astounding claim that Himmler was an ordained Jesuit priest. …

After graduating as a full Jesuit Priest no later than 1925, there is no precise evidence as to exactly the activities of Himmler until his arrival on the scene in 1929 as deputy of Erhard Heiden.

The Arrival of Fr. Himmler S.J. and the Nazis

One of (several) absurd mythologies accepted by eminent historians and academics is the proposition that the Schutzstaffel (German for “Squadron” and the same concept as the Italian “Blackshirt Squadrons” of Catholic Mussolini) was formed in 1925 as the personal bodyguard of Hitler following his release from prison.

Some audacious writers have even “revised history” to claim the Schutzstaffel (frequently cut in half to try and get two S’s out of the single word for squadron) had already started to use the SS and skull and bones symbols, including calling their head the Reichführer-SS and the Roman Salute (straight arm) to their allegiance to the Vatican, Rome.

The ridiculous nature of these lies are easily exposed when the facts are considered that Hitler’s main claim to fame in 1925 was as a book writer and budding political philosopher.

In fact, the first election of the reformed NDSAP [Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, The National Socialist German Workers’ Party] in May 1928 was a complete humiliation and disaster.  It was during this period of recrimination and failure that Fr. Heinrich Himmler S.J. entered to be immediately appointed the deputy of Erhard Heiden, Kommandant of the Schutzstaffel (Obergruppenführer).  Within a matter of a few months, Erhard Heiden resigned and Fr. Himmler S.J. was appointed as commander of the Schutzstaffel.

It is a remarkable and rarely considered event occurred — in 1929, a 29 year old rank outsider with dubious military experience, but impeccable Catholic and Jesuit connections is suddenly appointed Reichführer-SS — the 280 most elite security personnel and bodyguards of Hitler himself.

There can be absolutely no question that Himmler was a direct Vatican appointment via the support of Jesuits as there is no way Hitler would have accepted such an appointment of such a person into a critical role unless it came from the very highest authority.

Again, it is important to emphasize that the Schutzstaffel (only one “S”) wore brown shirts until the Reich Concordat was signed between Cardinal Pacelli and Franz von Papen (for Germany) in 1933 bestowing exclusive spiritual powers on the Schutzstaffel of Fr. Himmler S.J. by the Vatican.  The Jesuit Skull and Bones was incorporated by Fr. Himmler into the military insignia of the Schutzstaffel but not the infamous SS until after the 1933 Concordat.

The political fortunes of the NDSAP appeared to suddenly turn around thanks to the swelling ranks of disciplined recruits to the Schutzstaffel.  In September 1930, the NSDAP won 18.3% of the vote and 107 seats in the Reichstag (Parliament).  By the July 1932 national elections, this vote had swelled to 37.8% and 230 of the 608 seats of Parliament.  However, in the November 1932 elections, their lead had dropped to 33.1% and 196 seats in a 584 seat Parliament.

By 1933 National Elections, the Schutzstaffel under the control of Fr. Himmler S.J. numbered at least 52,000 highly trained and absolutely loyal members – a far cry from the early incompetence in Munich ten years earlier.

It was March 1933 that the world saw the word “Nazi” unleashed as a political religious force in the elections following the destruction of the Reichstag (Parliament) by Schutzstaffel agents and blamed on communists.

Red Herrings Abound

To distract as much as possible from the Jesuit connections, soft history was created in the form of allegations he married or was in a defacto relationship with an already pregnant Protestant woman seven years his senior called Margarete.  A convenient window dressing rarely challenged in spite of the fact Himmler was famously known for being a devout Catholic from a devout and powerful Catholic family.

In another brilliant misdirection, some rare claims exist stating that Himmler had an “uncle” who was a Jesuit priest and that any reference to Fr. Himmler S.J. is the uncle, not Heinrich.

The Birth of the Nazi SS

There is a parallel and quite extraordinary change within the power structure of the NSDAP as Fr. Himmler rose to Reichführer (also Reichführer Nazi SS) or Superior General of the Knights of the Holy See — “SS” standing for Sedes Sacrorum or “Holy See” in Latin.

Many historians deliberately mask the first beginnings of the use of the title Reichführer by dropping off the word “Nazi”, or removing “SS” to somehow claim this position was the official title of the commander of the Schutzstaffel as early as 1925.  The reason for this forgery is twofold — one to mask the true date of 1933 as the historic shift in the introduction of the initials SS and secondly to mask the true arrival of Himmler in 1929 and the title Reichführer-Nazi SS in 1933.

But what is more incredible is the fabricated history that continues to hid the absolute fact that in 1933 after the Reich Concordat was signed with the Vatican, Fr. Himmler was elevated in power, name and status above Hitler.  Fr. Himmler S.J. as the Reichführer had superior title (as opposed to plain old Führer for Hitler).  Fr. Himmler had complete independent control over all police, paramilitary, intelligence, scientific research and weapons development and the dreaded elite units of over 50,000 just in 1933 — and Hitler had absolutely no authority over him.  In fact the proof of the distaste each man had for one another is demonstrated in countless war archive movies showing in clear detail the body language of both men. ~ One-Evil⁹⁵⁷

 ~ Eaters of Children ⁷

With Jesuits on the inside, insuring that the incompetent homeland of Martin Luther committed crimes worthy of Inquisition-style “justice”, all that remained were Jesuits on the outside seeing it done.

That’s just what “Anglican” Britain did with the bombers of Butcher Harris.

On May 31^st, 1942, Harris sent a thousand bombers to flatten six hundred acres of the city of Cologne.  Hundreds of innocent Germans were slaughtered and tens of thousands were wounded, maimed and made homeless thanks to Butcher Harris ordering the use of special incendiary bombs—devastation by fire in the best Inquisition fashion.

Butcher Harris and his American allies would revisit destruction upon Cologne over two hundred and sixty more times before the war’s end.

What earned that city such evil ire?

—She was a focal-point of Luther’s Reformation and her rebellion led to war against Catholic authorities in the 1580’s now known as the Cologne War.

Next, Butcher Harris set his carpeting sites on Hamburg (where Reformationstag is a city-wide holiday).

Appropriately called “Operation Gomorrah”—

The attack during the last week of July 1943, Operation Gomorrah, created one of the largest firestorms raised by the Royal Air Force and United States Army Air Forces in World War II,^[2] killing 42,600 civilians and wounding 37,000 in Hamburg and virtually destroying most of the city.^[3]  Before the development of the firestorm in Hamburg there had been no rain for some time and everything was very dry.^[4]  The unusually warm weather and good conditions meant that the bombing was highly concentrated around the intended targets and also created a vortex and whirling updraft of super-heated air which created a 460 meter high tornado of fire. Various other previously used techniques and devices were instrumental as well, such as area bombing, Pathfinders, and H2S radar, which came together to work with particular effectiveness. An early form of chaff, code named “Window”, was successfully used for the first time by the RAF – clouds of tinfoil strips dropped by Pathfinders as well as the initial bomber stream – in order to completely cloud German radar. ~ Wikipedia

Perhaps Rome and Britain were able to convince their minions that the Protestants of Hamburg were the sinners of Gomorrah but years later, many are starting to ask questions.

Not long ago, The Dam Busters most famous of all the British war films, was shown on television.  Seeing it again after 40 years, I thought I detected two changes.

Group Captain Guy Gibson’s black labrador is run over just before the raid on the Ruhr dams, in which his name is used as a code-word.  In the original (and in real life) the dog’s name was “Nigger”; in the latest version, it is dubbed as “Trigger”.  An acceptable piece of political correction, one might say, an example of how our attitudes have improved.  The other change was more interesting.  A passage had been removed from the original, which exultantly showed the effects of the breached dams: torrential water poured over farmland, through factories, and into mines, drowning terrified workers.

This excision suggests that our view of the wartime bombing campaign has altered, but not necessarily that we have become more honest.  We still can’t make up our minds about Bomber Command and Air Chief Marshall Sir Arthur “Bomber” Harris, its commander.

Two years ago a statue of Harris was unveiled in the Strand by the Queen Mother despite the protests of the Mayor of Dresden among others.  The Queen Mother is said to have objected also to Death by Moonlight, a Canadian drama-documentary to be shown tonight on Channel 4.  The programme has already aroused vehement criticism, and even a lawsuit, in Canada, a country which made a disproportionately large contribution to Bomber Command and suffered disproportionately large losses, almost 10,000 killed.

The Queen Mother’s loyalty to the old air crew is admirable, and the insistence of some, though not all, of the airmen that what they did was necessary and right is understandable.  Nevertheless, I believe they are wrong, and that it is still important to say so 50 years on.

Bomber Command made the most distinctive single British contribution to the Second World War, perhaps even to the history of warfare.  For the first time a fleet of aircraft was built for the purpose of bombing another country.  From 1942-5, a campaign of “strategic” — or “area”, or “terror” — bombing destroyed most of the cities of Germany and killed 600,000 people, most of them women and children.

If television coverage of war had been then what it is now, a Rwandan who saw what was done to those cities might have wondered about the claims made for the superiority of European civilisation.  The destruction of the German cities by fire-bombing was no different in degree from the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  It was the direct progenitor of subsequent bombing of civilians, from Vietnam to Afghanistan; the precursor, indeed, of the “mutual assured destruction” implied by the contest between nuclear super-powers. ~ The Independent

As to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I’ve already told you that this same story was being played out in horror for Japanese “heretics” but with America as the Sword Arm of Rome.

Rome brags about the “miracle” of the Jesuits who survived Hiroshima.  [Author Eric Jon] Phelps outs the “miracle” as an unspeakable crime against humanity committed by traitors in the American military; agents for the Vatican.

From their inception, the Jesuit order has been an insurgency in every country they infiltrate.  When this was realized in Japan, Daimyō Toyotomi Hideyoshi began placing restrictions upon them.  His successor, Tokugawa Ieyasu (Japan’s first Shogun) expelled all “Christian” missionaries in 1614.  The last of Japan the Jesuits saw was the port city of Nagasaki and they marked it well.

The American Army Air Force firebombed the island and totally destroyed Nagasaki and Hiroshima.  The future Jesuit General, Pedro Arrupe was near Hiroshima at the time of its destruction.  Could he and his Jesuits have been involved in a … detonation on the ground, as no tested atomic device had ever been detonated in the air while in motion?

“At 8:15½ that August morning, every window in Arrupe’s residence at Nagatsuka was shattered by a roaring shockwave, and the sky was filled with a light he later described as [“a gigantic flare, like a magnesium flash” {118} being] ‘overwhelming and baleful’!  By the time he and his community of Jesuits ventured out some thirty minutes later, a firestorm driven by a scorching 40 mph wind had enveloped Hiroshima … That evening, one of the first survivors to reach his house in Nagatsuka was a theological student sent by a fellow priest, Father Wilhelm Kleinsorge, who had somehow survived the blast in the middle of Hiroshima.  From him, Arrupe got his first eyewitness accounts.” {119}

Whether the atomic bomb detonated in mid-air—a technical feat unknown to human history as of August 1945—or secretly on the ground (the device having been carefully constructed inside a closed building), the future Jesuit General knew all about it.  … Pedro Arrupe greatly contributed in creating the “Nuclear War Hoax” — it being the foundation for that greatest of Jesuit Inquisitions called “the Cold War” — for which genocidal reason he became the Jesuit General in 1965… ~ Vatican Assassins, Phelps, Lowvehm, Inc. (2001), p. 1153 [digital]*

 ~ Holly and Laurel: The Weaponized Lies of the Entertainment Industry ⁸

As to The Dam Busters and their follow on propaganda movie white-wash—

The famous Dambusters Raid of May 1943 was trumpeted as a precision bombing triumph. It was an exception within the British bombing strategy.  In fact, it was a great failure in its military objective as the most important dam was not breached. Its actual effect was to drown 5 towns in 160 million tons of water, killing thousands of farm animals, 1000 German civilians and 700 female Ukrainian fieldworkers.  Damage was mostly repaired in a month. (Jorg Friedrich, The Fire, pp. 86-7)

But despite heavy casualties suffered among German civilians in the RAF Terror Bombing their morale did not crack.  Furthermore, the British concentration on outright civilian bombing enabled German war production to increase its output, which bolstered the German defences and inflicted such losses on the RAF that by the Winter of 1943/44 the RAF campaign was unsustainable. ~ British-Values

That’s because the goal wasn’t to end the war (the longer the war, the more “heretics” could be slaughtered, the more money could be made); the goal was to punish the enemies of Rome.

We would be remiss if we didn’t explore the horrors of Dresden.

From 13 to 15 February 1945, British (and some American) heavy bombers dropped 2,400 tons of high explosives and 1,500 tons of incendiary bombs onto the ancient cathedral city of Dresden.  In just a few hours, around 25,000 to 35,000 civilians were blown up or incinerated.

Victor Gregg, a British para captured at Arnhem, was a prisoner of war in Dresden that night who was ordered to help with the clear up.  In a 2014 BBC interview he recalled the hunt for survivors after the apocalyptic firestorm.  In one incident, it took his team seven hours to get into a 1,000-person air-raid shelter in the Altstadt.  Once inside, they found no survivors or corpses: just a green-brown liquid with bones sticking out of it.  The cowering people had all melted.  In areas further from the town centre there were legions of adults shrivelled to three feet in length.  Children under the age of three had simply been vaporised.

It was not the first time a German city had been firebombed.  “Operation Gomorrah” had seen Hamburg torched on 25 July the previous year.  Nine thousand tons of explosives and incendiaries had flattened eight square miles of the city centre, and the resulting inferno had created an oxygen vacuum that whipped up a 150-mile-an-hour wind burning at 800 Celsius.  The death toll was 37,000 people.  (By comparison, the atom bomb in Nagasaki killed 40,000 on day one.)

Chief of the Air Staff Charles Portal had calculated that bombing civilians could kill 900,000 in 18 months, seriously injure a million more, destroy six million homes, and “de-house” 25 million, creating a humanitarian crisis that, he believed, would speed up the war.

This thinking was not trumpeted from the rooftops.  But in November 1941 the Commander-in-Chief of Bomber Command said he had been intentionally bombing civilians for a year.  “I mention this because, for a long time, the Government, for excellent reasons, has preferred the world to think that we still held some scruples and attacked only what the humanitarians are pleased to call Military Targets.  I can assure you, gentlemen, that we tolerate no scruples.” ~ The Telegraph

Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony

The headline for Dominic Selwood’s 2015 Telegraph article was Dresden was a civilian town with no military significance.  Why did we burn its people?

In the 16^th century, no one was hated by Rome more than her own Augustinian monk, Martin Luther, a Professor at the University of Wittenburg.

She would’ve liked nothing better than to see him burned at the stake but, unfortunately, Luther had a knack for skewering Rome over her crimes such as “Indulgences” (bilking Catholics into paying to have their sins forgiven, and the sins of dead loved ones, to line the coffers of the Pope—then Giovanni de Medici, Leo X).  As a result, the Inquisition couldn’t risk open revolt.  The Bundschuh peasants were already threatening warfare upon their feudal oppressors.  When Luther was “examined” in Worms, he asked for a day to think on his answer.  The next morning, an etching of a tied shoe, the Bundschuh, was left upon the town hall doors as a warning.

Perhaps the one man who did more to protect Luther than any other was the Elector of Saxony, Frederick III, also known as Frederick the Wise.  It was right after Worms that Luther was “kidnapped” by Frederick and secreted away to the fortress of Wartburg.  It was reputed that literal “Vatican assassins” were waiting along the wooded trail from Worms back to Wittenburg and Frederick was taking no chances.

Dresden is the capital of Saxony.

Seeing Red

As a sociological experiment, Communism was a disaster for Rome…which, if anything, worked in its favor in the eyes of the Papacy as a plague to inflict upon “heretics” from China to Russia.

But when a vicious, paranoid Jesuit priest like Joseph Stalin was in power, it was a useful instrument of terror.

Therefore, from Protestant Eastern Germany through to Moscow was turned over to the Soviet scourge.  In 1944, Brother Masons Roosevelt and Churchill ceded millions of human beings to steel maws of Stalin at the secret Yalta Conference in 1944 (one source claims a direct Jesuit hand).

As the years after the war wore on and the anti-German hatred waned from lack of propaganda, questions started to get put to Sir Butcher as he relaxed at his posh estate at Goring-on-Thames.  Finally, the BBC was able to worm from the Baronet—

“Harris clarified Dresden was one of three cities he was ordered to destroy to help the Russian assault on Germany.”

In other words, powerful people had decided that the Red Army was going to rape and pillage its way to East Berlin no matter how long it took them, and Butcher Harris was going to grease their path with the blood of German civilians.

Perhaps it’s fitting that Brother Winston Churchill is credited with coining the phrase, “History is written by the victors.”

At the conclusion of World War II, his Air Chief Marshall at Bomber Command should have stood trial at Nuremburg along with Father Himmler (carefully refereed and presided over by Father Edmund Walsh, S.J.).

Oh…wait—Father Himmler “committed suicide” after being captured by the British (even though he laughed and swore he would never do so).

Perhaps, one day soon, history will get a re-write.

• Johnny talks starting his own Wiki and how it would give you all the research he looks for and finds.
• Johnny’s Wiki examples: globe Earth gate-keepers.

• Johnny does what no-one else in the “Truth Community” does: gives you the “Who?” and the “Why?” behind globes, Darwin and dinosaurs.
• From Jesus Christ, through Constantine to Martin Luther.
• Was Constantine the real deal?
• Will we ever see a “Sunday Law”?
• “Baptist Pastor” James David Manning says the office of the Papacy (what Martin Luther rightly called “Anti-Christ”) is Biblical…which is why he doesn’t agree with the “Protestant Referration”.
• Was Martin Luther a Rosicrucian?

• Freemasons and Templars in space! (Traitors to humanity, each and every one.)
• Where do “Jesuit breadcrumbs” lead? Take actor Tom Hanks, admitted by Wikipedia to have grown up in a “Catholic and Mormon” household but later described himself as “Bible-toting Evangelical”.  Which religion won out?  Hanks’ son Colin got his education from the Jesuits at Loyola Marymount in Los Angeles.
• Alfred Hitchcock knows what the Jesuits say when prepping for an Inquisition, “Come rack, come rope.”
• What do Jimmy Stewart and James Cagney have in common?
• What was Benjamin Franklin’s connection to the Hellfire Club?
• Red Star Amazonian Fighter Squadron? The media blows up how one of their own saved the day (except for one poor woman).
• “WOMAN ‘FIGHTER PILOT’ SAVES THE DAY!!!” (Except for one unlucky passenger.) Is that what really happened?  If not, why is the media pushing this narrative…?

• SOVIET RED STARS: Was/is there something really weird going on with this all-female “fighter” squadron?
• Did you know that the first female “Navy fighter pilot” killed herself in a routine carrier landing because she was unqualified to fly but graduated from Pensacola anyway?

• “Women in Combat” the secret “front lines” of the trans-gender agenda of perversion!
• “Who’s in charge here?”

• The Boston Globe vs. Johnny’s team: who are the more trusted “journalists”?
• How the Luciferians target on or around April 19^th to do their evil such as Waco.
• The arm of St. Francis Xavier is traveling across Canada!
  • Was Xavier’s birthday celebrated with a child sacrifice?
• Heat: 1995, Robert Deniro, Al Pacino.
  • Johnny and his team make another startling connection: is Hollywood again responsible for encouraging real life tragedy and trauma?
• “S.W.A.T.!”: the pre-Police State, it’s Roman roots and it’s repeated reinforcement by “Jewish” Hollywood.
• Austin, Texas, from the Texas Tower sniper to Alex Jones to almost pedophile whistleblower Elijah Wood (also Roman Catholic).

Elijah Wood Clarifies Comments on Hollywood Pedophilia

• Was Barbara Bush the satanic ritual child of Aleistair Crowley? We go beyond physical resemblance and give facts: names, places and dates!
• What was the key to “Hollywood Marine” R. Lee Ermey’s success?
• Can you guess what connects R. Lee Ermey to Art Bell?

The history of “religion”, more specifically, Christianity, is powerful, surprising and even shocking.

“Shocking” because so much of it has been erased by a hidden hand.

Biblical Christianity teaches that Judaism was given by God to prove the fallen state of mankind and its need for a Savior.  As a religion, it is impossible to follow perfectly and, therefore, showed that no one can be right before God, or earn their way into Heaven.

Romans 3:10-12
¹⁰ as it is written:

“None is righteous, no, not one;
¹¹  no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
¹² All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”

English Standard Version (ESV)

The Bible teaches that the perfect Son of God became imperfection so that, through Him, those that loved Him could attain the perfection necessary to stand in the Presence of God.

II Corinthians 5:21
He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the Righteousness¹ of God in Him.

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Jewish leadership betrayed their nation and colluded with their Roman tyrants to put one of their own to death.

Astoundingly, it is a relationship that remains to this day: traitor Jews in positions of prominence who turn their backs on the people in order to be empowered by their Roman masters.  Rome is only too eager to have her Jewish minions grovel to receive both the limelight and the blame for her tyranny and corruption.

As the military empire of Rome declined, a religious empire took its place.

In 313 A.D., Emperor Constantine (along with his temporary rival, Licinius) signed the Edict of Milan ending the persecution of Christians.

In 380 A.D., Emperor Theodosius I made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire with his Edict of Thessalonica.  This caused a great many pagans to intermingle their practices with Christianity such as prayer to the dead, holy pilgrimages, and reliance upon “religious experts” (clergy).

Justinian I reigned as Byzantine Emperor from 527 to 565 A.D.  In 534 A.D., he instituted what has become known as “Justinian’s Decree” or “Justinian’s Code” which firmly cemented the Bishop of Rome as, “Pope”, “Bishop of Bishops” and “Corrector of Heresies”.

In 538 A.D., Justinian broke the siege of the Goths around Rome, deposed their Pope—Silverius—and emplaced his own—Vigilius—via military escort, as Pontifex Maximus.

As the power of the Roman religion grew under the guise of “Christianity”, Christians who still had access to the Scriptures decried it as heretical with the reinstitution of a priesthood (now required to be celibate), prayer to angels, the supplanting of Messiah Jesus with His mother and “indulgences” (release from certain sins by payment).

The Sword Arm of the Whore of Babylon: U.S. Military Burns Bibles In Afghanistan

Christians like the Albigensians, the Waldensians and the Vaudois were, in turn, horribly persecuted by Rome.  The target of Rome’s original Crusades, they were chased into the Alps and, when caught, brutally tortured and murdered; men, women and children.  Any Bibles found were immediately burned.

The Papacy outlawed the Word of God, only allowing it to be kept by clergy in Latin.  Christianity remained in darkened ignorance of its own Scriptures for a thousand years until the Protest of Augustinian monk, Martin Luther in 1517 A.D.

Prior to this, when Christians were found with Bibles, they were eradicated in flames.  Such was the end of men like Jan Hus, Jerome of Prague and many of John Wycliffe’s dedicated Lollards.

However, what made Luther’s protest infinitely more powerful than those of Wycliffe or Hus was an invention that occurred just a few years before and a few days ride southwest of him: that of Johannes Gutenberg’s movable type printing press.

It was caused by Pope Leo X (Giovanni de Medici) exploiting the ignorance of the people and bilking them out of wealth they didn’t have, under the guise of saving their souls!  He sent his most dedicated servants (at that time), the Dominicans, to frighten the masses with hellfire, then tell them they could pay their way out of it for themselves and even their dead loved ones via an “indulgence” that went to fund the Medici Pope’s lascivious and licentious parties.  While peasant parents, devastated by sickness and disease that claimed the life of their little boy gave Dominicans their last ducats thinking Leo would accept them as Vicar of Christ and release their boy from Purgatory, he was actually releasing naked little boys from the deserts of his parties to be enjoyed by his guests.

In response to this, an outraged Father Martin Luther posted a referendum on such “indulgences” with 95 pointed paragraphs.

When he submitted his 95 Theses, which he had nailed to the doors of All Saints Cathedral in Wittenberg on All Saints Day (November 1^st, 1517), to his leadership in Rome, copies had arrived well before his original!

Luther’s benefactor, Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, knew his favorite monk was in danger of mercenaries paid by the Vatican to murder him.  Frederick shut Luther up in Wartburg Castle for his own protection, and Luther was forced to pass the time using the manuscripts of his friend Desiderius Erasmus to translate the Bible into colloquial German in order to give the Word of God back to the people.

But much to the consternation of the Inquisition (at the time led by the Dominicans, but turned over to the Jesuits a few years hence), these Bibles could not be burned faster than the Gutenberg press was able to print them.

To make matters worse, Luther’s example was being followed by other upstart priests such as William Tyndale, who wrote his translation in his native English.  Although Tyndale was betrayed and executed by Henry VIII for his “crimes” against a Church Henry eventually broke from, Tyndale’s dying exclamation, “Lord, open the King of England’s eyes!” would be shown by how Henry later ordered the Tyndale Bible to be chained to the altars of every church in England.

Now, to the Papacy, the Bible was more dangerous than ever.

A new tactic was arrived at and coined by Henry’s Lord Chancellor, Archbishop of York and Primate of England, Thomas Wolsey, as “learning against learning”.  This new approach sought to discredit the Bible and all who revered it.

It was an agenda to re-write our very reality and it has had nothing less than fiendish success.

“Science” mocks Christianity and the Bible by indoctrinating students everywhere with that which doesn’t even qualify as “science”.

An entire spectrum from Darwinian evolution to astronomy overtly defies the Scientific Method—

* make an observation
* compose an hypothesis about the observation
* isolate the variables and conduct an experiment in a sterile environment to replicate the observation
* have a trusted peer replicate the experiment to prove or disprove

Humanity has turned over both its past and its cosmology—its very reality—to “experts” who refuse to adhere to their own disciplines.  As a result we are all oblivious slaves with the key to our freedom sitting right in front of us, yet no one reaches for it.  It is an invisible key which only reappears through the power of skepticism: refusal to trust anyone in “authority”.

Within 15 years of Martin Luther’s revolution to reform Christianity, a “Counter-Reformation” was born to undo and discredit the effort.

It was spear-headed by a Spanish Basque nobleman and Templar² mystic called Íñigo López de Loyola who would later become known as Ignatius Loyola.

Loyola’s fanaticism shocked even the most dedicated Catholics and he was twice imprisoned by the Inquisition but Alessandro Farnese (Pope Paul III) shrewdly saw Loyola’s usefulness.  By 1540, Loyola (along with fellow Spaniard Francisco de Jasso y Azpilicueta—later “Francis Xavier”—and Frenchman Pierre Lefevre—“Peter Faber”) had organized the Knights of the Virgin Mary which Farnese cunningly ordained as the “Society of Jesus”.

They were and are unrivaled in their dedication to the Papacy and, in fact, have put many a Pope to death for failing to maintain their ruthless standards.  Manipulation, murder, extortion, sexual deviancy, toppling governments, instigating or betraying revolutions, exploitation of the confessional—the ends justify the means for Pope Paul’s shock troops.  They were soon given the sarcastic nickname “Jesuits” for jesuita or “Are you Jesus-like?”

Disguise and infiltration are their specialty, as is shown by the re-branding of Guy “Guido” Fawkes as the embodiment of rebellion against tyranny, illustrates.  A Jesuit plot to blow up the House of Lords on the 5^th of November, 1605, in order to murder Protestant King James I, his queen and his son, was betrayed (some suggest by the Jesuits, themselves, in a Machiavellian move for sympathy).  Under the instruction of Jesuit Provincial Henry Garnett, Fawkes was found guarding the entrance to the basement where the gunpowder had been stockpiled.

The use of Fawkes’ visage as the representation of resistance also shows just how much the Jesuits manipulate the very fabric of our existence.

But the examples of Jesuit control don’t end there.

Jesuit-trained Roman Catholics hold the key positions of power all over the world from the U.K. to the E.U. to the U.S.  The list is so expansive and extensive it staggers the mind and makes examples hard to sift through.  Here are just a very few—

* Donald John Trump, current U.S. President, trained by the Jesuits at Fordham before he transferred to the clandestine “public” Jesuit college, the University of Pennsylvania.
* Trump’s predecessor, President Barack Obama, was trained in Chicago to be a “community organizer” by Jesuit Father Greg Galluzzo.
* Emmanuel Macron, President of France, is Catholic; he ran against “far Right xenophobe” Marine le Pen who was taught by her father Jean-Marie le Pen to blame all of Roman Catholic France’s woes on the Jews.  Jean-Marie learned this while at Saint Francis Xavier boarding school in Vannes.
* Macron was sexualized by his 6^th grade teacher while attending La Providence Jesuit high school in Amiens.  He would go on to marry her.
* Speaking of deviant sex and corrupt control, the current Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, is the far-Left Catholic son of a previous far-Left Jesuit-trained Catholic Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau.  There’s an excellent chance that he’s actually the biological son of thrice-Jesuit-trained Communist Catholic, Fidel Castro.
* José Manuel Barroso; 11^th President of the European Commission, was trained by the Jesuits at Georgetown as was former President Bill Clinton.
* Former President of the European Council (plans European policy), staunch Dutch Leftist Roman Catholic Herman Van Rompuy, was raised from his youth at Jesuit Sint-Jan Berchmanscollege (Grammar School) in Brussels.
* In fact, the entire European Unification movement is an overt attempt to reinstitute the medieval “Holy Roman Empire” and was founded by Jesuit Seminarian (as was the secret Bilderberg power meetings) Jozef Retinger.
* America wields her terrible military might through Jesuit-trained Roman agents from Secretaries of State like Alexander Haig through Leftist Roman Catholics like Leon Panetta who held both Secretary of Defense and Director of the CIA.
* The Pentagon is a mirror image of the Farnese family castle in Caprarola, Italy and its foundation was laid on September 11^th, 1941—just a few months prior to the “surprise attack” of Pearl Harbor.

* When truth-seekers ask Google “Which families secretly control the world?” Google answers, “DuPont, Astor, Kennedy³, Rockefeller and Rothschild”.  Carefully omitted from any search are the names Farnese, Orsini, Borgia, Aldobrandini, Breakspeare, Colonna and Medici.  Each have held positions in Rome as Bishops, Cardinals and Popes.  This becomes less of a surprise when you find out that Google was “ordained” the same day Alessandro Farnese ordained the Jesuits: September 27^th.
* Donald Trump was put into office by Jesuit-trained Goldman Sachs strategist Stephen K. Bannon who got his marching orders directly via a Vatican visit in 2014.
* Trump has installed even more Jesuit-trained Roman Catholics than his Jesuit-trained predecessor (no mean feat); from his Chief of Staff and former Secretary of “Homeland Security”, Marine Corps General John Francis Kelly (Georgetown) to the current Secretary of “Defense”, Roman Catholic Marine Corps General James Mattis.  Mattis is known as the “warrior monk” because he’s gone his entire life without getting married.  Normally, this is just a personal oddity but, given the role of sexual deviancy in the halls of power, quite disconcerting.
* The Central Intelligence Agency was founded by a Roman Catholic Knight of Malta, William Donovan, and often run overtly by Catholics from Walter Bedell Smith to William Casey to William Colby to the “Drone Executioner”, John O. Brennan.
* The same is true of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; founded by devout Roman Catholic Charles Joseph Bonaparte (great grand-nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte) and its many Catholic Directors from Opus Dei member Louis Freeh to James Comey, infamous for giving both Hillary Clinton and suspected pedophile John Podesta a clean bill of health.
* The Pentagon is dominated by Roman Catholics (many of them Jesuit-trained) from former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army General Martin Dempsey to the current Chairman, chosen by “Democrat” Barack Obama and maintained by “Republican” Donald Trump, Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford (Georgetown).
* Even the Texas (Connecticut) Bush ruling dynasty has its Jesuits in the woodpile, despite claiming to be Protestants—from Knight of Columbus and former Governor of Florida, John Ellis “JEB” Bush to maternal patriarch George Herbert Walker (namesake for both Bush Presidents), who lived with the Jesuits at Stonyhurst in England.
* Whether Democrat or Republican, the Jesuits rule behind the scenes and few choke-holds evidence this better than Speaker of the House of Representatives.  Far-Left Jesuit-mentored Catholic Nancy Pelosi resided over the ram-rodding of socialized medicine and her successor, Jesuit-trained (Xavier) “Conservative” John Boehner did nothing to jeopardize it.  His Roman Catholic successor, former altar boy Paul Ryan has also stayed the course.
* When plausible deniability is needed by Rome, her agents wait until they step down from office to “convert” to Catholicism; from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
* Although Newt’s “conversion” may be presented as a “surprise” the Catholicism of his third wife, Callista, isn’t.  She’s such a stalwart Catholic she was made Ambassador to the sovereign city-state of the Vatican.

In 2012, “converted” Catholic Newt Gingrich was filmed receiving the very rare honor of a Papal Mass.

The man sitting right next to him (conveniently edited so that only his back was shown in the above video) was none other than “Evangelical” Televangelist Benny Hinn.

Few have done more harm to “Protestant” Christianity than Hinn.  Consequently, both the news media and Congress are proud to out him.

Only after they have done great harm to Christians do these Roman insurgents make headlines, such as frequent guest of conspiracy host Alex Jones, “Baptist” preacher Steven Anderson.

Given Anderson’s pull to put Christians to shame, it’s not a huge leap to call him an incognito Jesuit priest (and likely homosexual).

Equally, Benny Hinn and Rome go way back, as well.

Hinn has turned in his signature white suit for a high-collar black jacket, with a window for his white shirt underneath at the center.  He is also a very vociferous supporter of Jesuit-trained President Donald Trump.

Trump’s “Spiritual Advisor” is another Prosperity Gospel Preacher and Televangelist, Paula White (who lists her name as “Paula White-Cain”).

White was chosen to give Trump’s inaugural prayer, over which the Washington Post lamented—

White is known for embracing the prosperity gospel — the theology that God will bless true believers not just with eternal salvation but with material wealth here on Earth.  To many believers, the prosperity gospel offers hope and promise.  But to other Christians, it’s heretical; and to some, prosperity gospel preachers’ motives are suspect, especially when they seem to be enriching themselves by asking for money from their followers.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) launched an investigation in 2007 into spending by White and several other televangelists, but ended it three years later without reaching any conclusions.

Given how both Congress and these Televangelist charlatans answer to the same authority, we shouldn’t be surprised that Senator Grassley’s “investigation” ended “without reaching any conclusions”.

As I’ve chronicled for you in my latest book, the surest sign of corruption is when police, prosecutors and judges all refuse to do their jobs and politicians then provide smokescreens with “Commissions” and “Committees”.  If even Sherlock Holmes, himself, (the creation of Roman Catholic Freemason Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle) were to conduct a “Congressional Investigation” the end result would still be the same: nothing.  Legislatures write legislation.  They are bodies that have nothing to do with law enforcement.

From the very beginning, the seat of American power was owned by Catholics and named after Catholics.  The “Capitol” (named after Capitoline, one of the infamous seven hills of Rome) isn’t called “White House” for its color but in honor of Father Andrew White of the Society of Jesus.  Before it was “Washington, D.C.” it was known as “Little Rome on the Potomac” given that it’s gnostic architecture came from Catholic Freemason Pierre Charles L´Enfante.

Tying it all together in depravity, Hinn and Paula White were spotted in Rome holding hands, despite their respective marriages to other people.

Unfortunately, neither Charles Grassley nor the Washington Post were available so the reporting fell to the National Enquirer where it was sure to get it’s due respect.

No major news outlet thought the story was worth carrying but California’s Orange County Weekly did.

Perhaps, the reason media founded and run by Papal Knights like Henry Luce, William Randolph Hearst, John Paul Getty and Rupert Murdoch wasn’t interested in the explosive story was because of the even bigger story beneath it—

They found themselves in Italy because both were meeting independently with Vatican officials, according to White, who reportedly added, “We were never alone and were in the constant company of staff and other associates.” ~ OC Weekly

In an effort to cover up the very “un-Christian” adultery, two of Christianity’s most embarrassing and harmful “Protestants” admitted they go to Rome to receive instruction from the Jesuit Pope!

When invited to sit with another embarrassment to Christianity, Jim Bakker⁴ Paula White said that opposition to Donald Trump was opposition to God.

This is quite a statement from a Christian woman preacher given that Donald Trump is a pedophile who enables other pedophiles and has likely gone as far as to have sexually abused his daughter Ivanka (who is now a foundational part of American government).

Does Paula White believe in what she does?  Is she oblivious to the great harm she is being used to commit?

It’s certainly possible.  She, herself, is a victim of child sex abuse, apparently by her father, who committed suicide.

This report was initiated by the outstanding research of “Doc” Felipe Robles.

UPDATE FROM DOC, 31 December 2019:

Pentecostal Benny Hinn Says Catholics Have More Miracles, Credits Eucharist

Editor’s notes: Martin Luther was an exceptional man for his age, perhaps in all of the history of Christendom.  He is often slandered as being an anti-Semite when, in truth, he responded with his usual energy and emotion to Jewish theological attacks upon the Gospel.  This treatise is clear proof of that, as is Luther’s human flaws.  He maintained some Catholic doctrines until very late in life (such as transubstantiation) and others he held to his death (such as the perpetual virginity of Mary).  These are easily forgiven in light of his critical role as a unique and learned Doctor of Theology.

Biblical Passages are linked in the New Living Translation which, although a flawed “paraphrase” renders the most readable English.  All students are required to dig deeper, use multiple translations and do original language word studies as often as possible.

“Therefore, I will cite from Scripture the reasons that move me to believe that Christ was a Jew born of a virgin, that I might perhaps also win some Jews to the Christian faith.  Our fools, the popes, bishops, sophists, and monks — the crude asses’ heads — have hitherto so treated the Jews that anyone who wished to be a good Christian would almost have had to become a Jew.  If I had been a Jew and had seen such dolts and blockheads govern and teach the Christian faith, I would sooner have become a hog than a Christian.”

“They have dealt with the Jews as if they were dogs rather than human beings; they have done little else than deride them and seize their property.  When they baptize them they show them nothing of Christian doctrine or life, but only subject them to popishness and monkery.  When the Jews then see that Judaism has such strong support in Scripture, and that Christianity has become a mere babble without reliance on Scripture, how can they possibly compose themselves and become right good Christians?  I have myself heard from pious baptized Jews that if they had not in our day heard the Gospel they would have remained Jews under the cloak of Christianity for the rest of their days.  For they acknowledge that they have never yet heard anything about Christ from those who baptized and taught them.”

A new lie about me is being circulated.  I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ, but that she conceived Christ through Joseph, and had more children after that.  Above and beyond all this, I am supposed to have preached a new heresy, namely, that Christ was [through Joseph, the physical] the seed of Abraham [again, to imply Christ’s conception was a mundane joining of Joseph and Mary].  How these lies tickle my good friends, the papists!  Indeed, because they condemn the Gospel it serves them right that they should have to satisfy and feed their heart’s delight and joy with lies.  I would venture to wager my neck that none of those very liars who allege such great things in honor of the mother of God believes in his heart a single one of these articles.  Yet with their lies they pretend that they are greatly concerned about the Christian faith.

But after all, it is such a poor miserable lie that I despise it and would rather not reply to it.  In these past three years I have grown quite accustomed to hearing lies, even from our nearest neighbors.  And they in turn have grown accustomed to the noble virtue of neither blushing nor feeling ashamed when they are publicly convicted of lying.  They let themselves be chided as liars, yet continue their lying.  Still they are best Christians, striving with all that they have and are to devour the Turk and to extirpate all heresy.

Since for the sake of others, however, I am compelled to answer these lies, I thought I would also write something useful in addition, so that I do not vainly steal the reader’s time with [200] such dirty rotten business.  Therefore, I will cite from Scripture the reasons that move me to believe that Christ was a Jew born of a virgin, that I might perhaps also win some Jews to the Christian faith.  Our fools, the popes, bishops, sophists, and monks — the crude asses’ heads — have hitherto so treated the Jews that anyone who wished to be a good Christian would almost have had to become a Jew.  If I had been a Jew and had seen such dolts and blockheads govern and teach the Christian faith, I would sooner have become a hog than a Christian.

They have dealt with the Jews as if they were dogs rather than human beings; they have done little else than deride them and seize their property.  When they baptize them they show them nothing of Christian doctrine or life, but only subject them to popishness and monkery.  When the Jews then see that Judaism has such strong support in Scripture, and that Christianity has become a mere babble without reliance on Scripture, how can they possibly compose themselves and become right good Christians?  I have myself heard from pious baptized Jews that if they had not in our day heard the Gospel they would have remained Jews under the cloak of Christianity for the rest of their days.  For they acknowledge that they have never yet heard anything about Christ from those who baptized and taught them.

I hope that if one deals in a kindly way with the Jews and instructs them carefully from Holy Scripture, many of them will become genuine Christians and turn again to the faith of their fathers, the prophets and patriarchs.  They will only be frightened further away from it if their Judaism is so utterly rejected that nothing is allowed to remain, and they are treated only with arrogance and scorn.  If the apostles, who also were Jews, had dealt with us Gentiles as we Gentiles deal with the Jews, there would never have been a Christian among the Gentiles.  Since they dealt with us Gentiles in such brotherly fashion, we in our turn ought to treat the Jews in a brotherly manner in order that [201] we might convert some of them.  For even we ourselves are not yet all very far along, not to speak of having arrived.

When we are inclined to boast of our position we should remember that we are but Gentiles, while the Jews are of the lineage of Christ.  We are aliens and in-laws; they are blood relatives, cousins, and brothers of our Lord.  Therefore, if one is to boast of flesh and blood, the Jews are actually nearer to Christ than we are, as St. Paul says in Romans 9[:5].  God has also demonstrated this by His Acts, for to no nation among the Gentiles has He granted so high an honor as He has to the Jews.  For from among the Gentiles there have been raised up no patriarchs, no apostles, no prophets, indeed, very few genuine Christians either.  And although the Gospel has been proclaimed to all the world, yet He committed the Holy Scriptures, that is, the law and the prophets, to no nation except the Jews, as Paul says in Romans 3[:2] and Psalm 147[:19-20], “He declares His Word to Jacob, His Statutes and Ordinances to Israel.  He has not dealt thus with any other nation; nor revealed his ordinances to them.”

Accordingly, I beg my dear papists, should they be growing weary of denouncing me as a heretic, to seize the opportunity of denouncing me as a Jew.  Perhaps I may yet turn out to be also a Turk, or whatever else my fine gentlemen may wish.

Christ is promised for the first time soon after Adam’s fall, when God said to the serpent, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall crush your head, and you shall bruise His Heel” [Genesis 3:15].  Here I defer demonstrating that the serpent spoke possessed of the devil, for no dumb beast is so clever that it can utter or comprehend human speech, much less speak or inquire about such exalted matters as the commandment of God, as the serpent does here.  Therefore, it must certainly have been a rational, highly intelligent, and mighty spirit which was able to utter human speech, deal so masterfully with God’s commandments, and seize and employ human reason.

Since it is certain that a spirit is something higher than a [202] man, it is also certain that this is an evil spirit and an enemy of God, for it breaks God’s Commandment and acts contrary to His Will.  Therefore, it is undoubtedly the devil.  And so the Word of God which speaks of crushing the head must refer also to the devil’s head; though not to the exclusion of the natural head of the serpent, for with a single word he speaks of both devil and serpent as of one thing.  Therefore, he means both heads.  But the devil’s head is that power by which the devil rules, that is, sin and death, by means of which he has brought Adam and all Adam’s descendants under his control.

This Seed of the woman therefore, because He is to crush the devil’s power, that is, sin and death, must not be an ordinary man, since all men have been brought under the devil through sin and death.  So He must certainly be without sin.  Now human nature does not produce such seed or fruit, as has been said, for with their sin they are all under the devil.  How, then, can this be?  The Seed must be the natural child of a woman; otherwise, it could not be or be called the seed of the woman.  On the other hand, as has been pointed out, human nature and birth does not produce such seed.  Therefore, the solution must ultimately be that this Seed is a true natural son of the woman; derived from the woman, however, not in the normal way but through a special act of God, in order that the Scripture might stand, that He is the Seed only of a woman and not of a man.  For the text [Genesis 3:15] clearly states that he will be the Seed of woman.

This is thus the first Passage in which the mother of this child is described as a virgin.  She is his true natural mother; yet she is to conceive and bear supernaturally, by God, without a man, in order that her Child may be a distinctive man, without sin, yet having ordinary flesh and blood like other men.  This could not have been the case had he been begotten by a man like other men because the flesh is consumed and corrupted by evil lust, so that its natural act of procreation cannot occur without sin.  Whatever conceives and bears through an act of the flesh produces also a carnal and sinful fruit.  This is why St. Paul says in Ephesians 1 [Ephesians 2:3] that we are all by nature children of wrath. [203]

Now this Passage [Genesis 3:15] was the very first Gospel message on Earth.  For when Adam and Eve, seduced by the devil, had fallen and were summoned for judgment before God, Genesis 3 [:9], they were in peril of death and the anguish of hell, for they saw that God was against them and condemned them; they would gladly have fled from him, but could not.  Had God let them remain in their anguish, they would soon have despaired and perished.  But when, after their terrible punishment, He let them hear his comforting promise to raise up from the woman’s Seed one who would tread upon the serpent’s head, their spirits were quickened again.  From that promise they drew comfort, believing firmly in that blessed seed of the woman which would come and crush the serpent’s head, that is, sin and death, by which they had been crushed and corrupted.

The fathers, from Adam, on, preached and inculcated this Gospel, through which they acknowledge the promised Seed of this woman and believed in Him.  And so they were sustained through faith in Christ just as we are; they were true Christians like ourselves.  Only, in their day this Gospel was not proclaimed publicly throughout the world, as it would be after the coming of Christ, but remained solely in the possession of the holy fathers and their descendants down to the time of Abraham.

The second promise of Christ was to Abraham, Genesis 22 [:18], where God said, “In your Seed shall all the Gentiles be blessed.”  If all the Gentiles are to be blessed, then it is certain that otherwise, apart from this Seed of Abraham, they were all unblessed and under a curse.  From this it follows that human nature has nothing but cursed seed and bears nothing but unblessed fruit; otherwise, there would be no need for all of them to be blessed through this Seed of Abraham.  Whoever says “all” excludes no one; therefore, apart from Christ, all who are born of man must be under the devil, cursed in sin and death.

Here again the mother of God is proven to be a pure virgin.  For since God cannot lie, it was inevitable that Christ should be the Seed of Abraham, that is, his natural flesh and blood, like all of Abraham’s descendants.  On the other hand, because He was to be the blessed Seed which should bless all others, He could not be begotten by man, since such children, as has been said, [204] cannot be conceived without sin because of the corrupt and tainted flesh, which cannot perform its function without taint and sin.

Thus the Word, by which God promises that Christ will be the seed of Abraham, requires that Christ be born of a woman and be her natural child.  He does not come from the earth like Adam [Genesis 2:7]; neither is He from Adam’s rib like Eve [Genesis 2:21-22].  He comes rather like any woman’s child, from her seed.  The Earth was not the natural seed for Adam’s body; neither was Adam’s rib the natural seed for Eve’s body.  But the virgin’s flesh and blood, from which children come in the case of all other women, was the natural seed of Christ’s body.  And she too was of the seed of Abraham.

On the other hand, this Word by which God promises his blessing upon all Gentiles in Christ requires that Christ may not come from a man, or by the act of a man; for work of the flesh (which is cursed) is incompatible with that which is blessed and is pure blessing.  Therefore, this Blessed Fruit had to be the fruit of a woman’s body only, not of a man, even though that very woman’s body came from man, indeed, even from Abraham and Adam.  So this mother is a virgin, and yet a true natural mother; not, however, by natural capacity or power, but solely through the Holy Spirit and Divine Power.

Now this Passage [Genesis 22:18] was the Gospel from the time of Abraham down to the time of David, event to the time of Christ.  It is a short saying, to be sure, but a rich Gospel, subsequently inculcated and used in marvelous fashion by the fathers both in writing and in preaching.  Many thousands of sermons have been preached from this Passage, and countless souls saved.  For it is the Living Word of God, in which Abraham and his descendants believed, and by which they were redeemed and preserved from sin and death and the power of the devil.  However, it too was not yet proclaimed publicly to all the world, as happened after the coming of Christ, but remained solely in the possession of the fathers and their descendants.

The Spirit extols this virginity, however, because it was needful for the conceiving and bearing of this Blessed Fruit.  Because of the corruption of our flesh, such blessed fruit could not come, except through a virgin.  Thus this tender virginity existed in the service of others to the Glory of God, not to its own glory.  If it had been possible for him to have come from a woman, he would not have selected a virgin for this, since virginity is contrary to the physical nature within us, was condemned of old in the Law, and is extolled here solely because the flesh is tainted and its built-in physical nature cannot bestow her fruit except by means of an accursed act.

Hence we see that St. Paul nowhere calls the mother of God a virgin, but only a woman, as he says in Galatians 3 [Galatians 4:4], “The Son of God was born of a woman.”  He did not mean to say she was not a virgin, but to extol her virginity to the highest with the praise that is proper to it, as much as to say: In this birth none but a woman was involved, no man participated; that is, everything connected with it was reserved to the woman, the conceiving, bearing, suckling, and nourishing of the child were functions no man can perform.  It is therefore the child of a woman only; hence, she must certainly be a virgin.  But a virgin may also be a man; a mother can be none other than a woman.

For this reason, too, Scripture does not quibble or speak about the virginity of Mary after the birth of Christ, a matter about which the hypocrites are greatly concerned, as if it were something of the utmost importance on which our whole salvation [206] depended.  Actually, we should be satisfied simply to hold that she remained a virgin after the birth of Christ because Scripture does not state or indicate that she later lost her virginity.  We certainly need not be so terribly afraid that someone will demonstrate, out of his own head apart from Scripture, that she did not remain a virgin.  But the Scripture stops with this, that she was a virgin before and at the birth of Christ; for up to this point God had need of her virginity in order to give us the promised blessed seed without sin.

The third Passage is addressed to David, II Samuel 7[:12-14], “When your days are fulfilled, and you sleep with your fathers, I will raise up your Seed after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish His Kingdom forever.  He shall build a House for My Name, and I will establish the Throne of His Kingdom forever.  I will be His Father, and He shall be My Son.”  These words cannot have been spoken of Solomon, for Solomon was not a posthumous son of David raised up after his death.  Neither did God after Solomon (who during David’s lifetime was born and became king) ever designate anyone as His son, give him an everlasting kingdom, or have him build such a house.  Consequently, the whole Passage must refer to Christ.  We will let this Passage go for the present because it is too broad and requires so much in the way of exegesis; for one would have to show here that Christ accordingly had to be the son of a woman only in order to be called here God’s Child, who neither should nor could come out of an accursed act.

The fourth Passage is Isaiah 7[:14], “God himself will give you a sign.  Behold, a virgin is with child, and shall bear a son.”  This could not have been said of a virgin who was about to be married.  For what sort of a marvelous sign would that be if someone who is presently a virgin should bear a child within a year?  Such is the ordinary course of nature, occurring daily before our eyes.  If it is to be a Sign from God, therefore, it must be something remarkable and marvelous not given by the [207] ordinary course of nature, as is commonly the case with all God’s Signs.

It is of no help for the Jews either to try to evade the issue here and come up with this way of getting around it, namely: the Sign consists in the fact that Isaiah says flatly that the child shall be a son and not a daughter.  By such an interpretation the Sign would have nothing to do with the virgin but only with the prophet Isaiah, as the one who had divined so precisely that it would not be a daughter.  The text would then have to speak of Isaiah thus, “Behold, God Himself will give you a Sign, namely, that I, Isaiah, will divine that a young woman is carrying a son, and not a daughter.”  Such an interpretation is disgraceful and childish.

Now the text forcefully refers the sign to the woman, and states clearly that it shall be a sign when a woman bears a son.  Now it certainly is no sign when a woman who is no longer virgin bears a child, be it the mother of Hezekiah or whatever woman the Jews may point to.  The Sign must be something new and different, a marvelous and unique work of God, that this woman is with child; her pregnancy is to be the Sign.  Now I do not deem any Jew so dense that he would not grant God sufficient power to create a child from a virgin, since they are compelled to acknowledge that he created Adam from the earth [Genesis 2:7] and Eve from Adam [Genesis 2:21-22], acts which require no less power.

But then they contend that the Hebrew text does not read, “A virgin is with child,” but, “Behold, an almah is with child. [208]  Almah, they say, does not denote a virgin; the word for virgin is bethulah, while almah is the term for young damsel.  Presumably, a young damsel might very well have had intercourse and be the mother of a child.

Christians can readily answer this from St. Matthew and St. Luke, both of whom apply the Passage from Isaiah [7:14] to Mary, and translate the word almah as “virgin.”  They are more to be believed than the whole world, let alone the Jews.  Even though an angel from heaven [Galatians 1:8] were to say that almah, does not mean virgin, we should not believe it.  For God the Holy Spirit speaks through St. Matthew and St. Luke; we can be sure that He understands Hebrew speech and expressions perfectly well.

But because the Jews do not accept the Evangelists, we must confront them with other evidence.  In the first place, we can say, as above, that there is no marvel or sign in the fact that a young woman conceives, otherwise, we would have a perfect right to sneer at the prophet Isaiah, and say, “What women would you expect to conceive if not the young ones?  Are you drunk?  Or is it in your experience a rare event for a young woman to bear a son?”  For this reason that strained and farfetched answer of the Jews is just a vain and feeble excuse for not keeping silent altogether.

In the second place, grant that bethulah means virgin and not almah, and the Isaiah here uses almah, not bethulah.  All this too is still nothing but a poor excuse.  For they act as if they did not know that in all of Scripture almah nowhere designates a woman who has had intercourse (a fact of which they are perfectly well aware).  On the contrary, in every instance almah signifies a young damsel who has never known a man carnally or had intercourse.  Such a person is always called a virgin, just as St. Matthew and St. Luke here translate Isaiah.

Very well; to please the Jews we will not translate Isaiah thus: “Behold, a virgin is with child,” lest they be confused by the word “virgin,” but rather, “Behold, a maiden is with child.”  Now in German the word “maiden” denotes a woman who is still young, carries her crown with honor, and wears her hair loose, so that it is said of her: She is still a maiden, not a wife (although “maiden” is not the same word as “virgin”).  In like manner also, the Hebrew elem is a stripling who does not yet have a woman; and almah is a maiden who does not yet have a man, not a servant girl but one who still carries a crown.  Thus the sister of Moses is called an almah in Exodus 3 [Exodus 2:8] as is Rebekah in Genesis 24[:16, 43], when they were still virgins.

Suppose I say in German, “Hans is engaged to a maiden,” and someone should comment, “Well, then he is not engaged to a virgin.”  Why, everyone would laugh at him for vainly disputing about words if he thinks that virgin and maiden are not the same thing because they are different words.  This is true also in the Hebrew, when the Jews argue with respect to this Passage in Isaiah [7:14] and say, “Isaiah does not say bethulah, but almah.  I submit that among themselves their own conscience tells them this is so.  Therefore, let them say what they please, bethulah [210] or almah; Isaiah means a damsel who is nubile but still wears her crown, whom in the truest German we call a maiden.  Hence, the mother of God is properly called the pure maiden, that is, the pure almah.

And if I should have had to tell Isaiah what to speak, I would have had him say exactly what he did say, not bethulah, but almah, for almah is even more appropriate here than bethulah.  It is also more precise to say, “Behold, a maiden is with child,” than to say, “A virgin is with child.”  For “virgin” is an all-embracing term which might also be applied to a woman of fifty or sixty who is no longer capable of childbearing.  But “maiden” denotes specifically a young woman, nubile, capable of childbearing, but still a virgin; it includes not only the virginity, but also the youthfulness and the potential for childbearing.  Hence, in German too we commonly refer to young people as maidens or maidenfolk, not virginfolk.

Therefore, the text of Isaiah [7:14] is certainly most accurately translated, “Behold, a maiden is with child.”  No Jew who understands both German and Hebrew can deny that this is what is said in the Hebrew, for we Germans do not say “concepit, the woman has conceived”; the preachers have so rendered the Latin into German.  Rather, the German would say in his mother tongue, “The woman is with child,” or, “is heavy with child,” or, “is pregnant.”

But here in the Hebrew it does not say, “Behold, a maiden shall be with child,” as though she were not as yet.  It says rather, “Behold, a maiden is with child,” as though she has the fruit already in her womb and nevertheless is still a maiden, in order that you will have to notice how the prophet himself is amazed that there stands before him a maiden who is with child even before she knows a man carnally.  She was of course going to have a husband, she was physically fit and mature enough for it; but even before she gets to that she is already a mother.  This is indeed a rare and marvelous thing.

This is the way St. Matthew [1:18] construes this Passage when he says, “When Mary the mother of Jesus had been [211] betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with Child of the Holy Spirit,” etc.  What does this mean other than that she was a young maiden who had not yet known a man although she was capable of it, but before she knew the man she was with child, and that this was an amazing thing since no maiden becomes pregnant prior to intercourse with a man?  Thus, the Evangelist regarded her in the same light as did the prophet, and set her forth as the sign and wonder.

Now this refutes also the false interpretation which some have drawn from the words of Matthew, where he says, “Before they came together she was found to be with Child.”  They interpret this as though the Evangelist meant to say, “Later she came together with Joseph like any other wife and lay with him, but before this occurred she was with child apart from Joseph,” etc.  Again, when he says, “And Joseph knew her not until she brought forth her first-born son” [Matthew 1:25], they interpret it as though the Evangelist meant to say that he knew her, but not before she had brought forth her first-born son.  This was the view of Helvidius which was refuted by Jerome.

Such carnal interpretations miss the meaning and purpose of the Evangelist.  As we have said, the Evangelist, like the prophet Isaiah, wishes to set before our eyes this mighty wonder, and point out what an unheard-of thing it is for a maiden to be with child before her husband brings her home and lies with her; and further, that he does not know her carnally until she first has a son, which she should have had after first having been known [212] by him.  Thus, the words of the Evangelist do not refer to anything that occurred after the birth, but only to what took place before it.  For the Prophet and the Evangelist, and St. Paul as well, do not treat of this virgin beyond the point where they have from her that Fruit for whose sake she is a virgin and everything else.  After the Child is born they dismiss the mother and speak not about her, what became of her, but only about her Offspring.  Therefore, one cannot from these words [Matthew 1:18, 25] conclude that Mary, after the birth of Christ, became a wife in the usual sense; it is therefore neither to be asserted nor believed.  All the words are merely indicative of the marvelous fact that she was with child and gave birth before she had lain with a man.

The form of expression used by Matthew is the common idiom, as if I were to say, “Pharaoh believed not Moses, until he was drowned in the Red Sea.”  Here it does not follow that Pharaoh believed later, after he had drowned; on the contrary, it means that he never did believe.  Similarly when Matthew [1:25] says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the contrary, it means that he never did know her.  Again, the Red Sea overwhelmed Pharaoh before he got across.  Here too it does not follow that Pharaoh got across later, after the Red Sea had overwhelmed him, but rather that he did not get across at all.  In like manner, when Matthew [1:18] says, “She was found to be with child before they came together,” it does not follow that Mary subsequently lay with Joseph, but rather that she did not lie with him.

Elsewhere in Scripture the same manner of speech is employed.  Psalm 110[:1] reads, “God says to my Lord: ‘Sit at My Right Hand, till I make Your enemies Your Footstool.’” Here it does not follow that Christ does not continue to sit there after His enemies are placed beneath His Feet.  Again, in Genesis 28[:15], “I will not leave you until I have done all that of which I have spoken to you.”  Here God did not leave him after the fulfillment had taken place.  Again, in Isaiah 42[:4], “He shall not be sad, nor troublesome, till he has established justice in the earth.” [213]  There are many more similar expression, so that this babble of Helvidius is without justification; in addition, he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture or the common idiom.

This is enough for the present to have sufficiently proved that Mary was a pure maiden, and that Christ was a genuine Jew of Abraham’s seed.  Although more Scripture Passages might be cited, these are the clearest.  Moreover, if anyone does not believe a clear saying of His Divine Majesty, it is reasonable to assume that he would not believe either any other more obscure Passages.  So certainly no one can doubt that it is possible for God to cause a maiden to be with child apart from a man, since he has also created all things from nothing.  Therefore, the Jews have no ground for denying this, for they acknowledge God’s Omnipotence, and they have here the clear testimony of the Prophet Isaiah.

While we are on the subject, however, we wish not only to answer the futile liars who publicly malign me in these matters but we would also like to do a service to the Jews on the chance that we might bring some of them back to their own True Faith, the one which their fathers held.  To this end we will deal with them further, and suggest for the benefit of those who want to work with them a method and some Passages from Scripture which they should employ in dealing with them.  For many, even of the sophists, have also attempted this; but insofar as they have set about it in their own name, nothing has come of it.  For they were trying to cast out the devil by means of the devil, and not by the Finger of God [Luke 11:17-20].

In the first place, that the current belief of the Jews and their waiting upon the coming of the Messiah is erroneous is proved by the Passage in Genesis 49[:10-12] where the holy patriarch Jacob says: “The Scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a teacher from those at his feet, until the Siloh comes; and to him shall be the gathering of the nations.  He will bind his foal [214] to the vine, and his ass to the choice vine.  He will wash His Garments with wine, and His Mantle with the blood of grapes.  His Eyes are redder than wine, and His Teeth whiter than milk.”  This Passage is a divine promise, which cannot lie and must be fulfilled unless heaven and earth were first to pass away.  So the Jews cannot deny that for nearly fifteen hundred years now, since the fall of Jerusalem, they have had no scepter, that is, neither kingdom nor king.  Therefore, the Shiloh, or Messiah, must have come before this fifteen hundred year period, and before the destruction of Jerusalem.

If they try to say that the Scepter was also taken away from Judah at the time of the Babylonian captivity, when the Jews were transported to Babylon and remained captive for seventy years, and yet the Messiah did not come at that time, the answer is that this is not true.  For during the whole period of captivity the royal line continued in the person of King Jeconiah, thereafter Zerubbabel and other princes in turn until Herod became king.  For “scepter” signifies not only a kingdom, but also a hegemony, as the Jews are well aware.  Furthermore, they still always had prophets.  So the kingdom or hegemony never did disappear, even though for a time it existed outside of its territorial boundaries.  Also, never during the captivity were all the inhabitants driven out of the land, as has happened during these [215] past fifteen hundred years when the Jews have had neither princes nor prophets.

It was for this reason that God provided them at that time with the prophets Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Haggai, and Zechariah, who proclaimed to them that they would again be freed from Babylon, in order that they would not think that this word of Jacob was false, or that the Messiah had come.  But for these last fifteen hundred years they have had no prophet to proclaim that they should again be free.  God would not have permitted this state of affairs to continue for such a long time, since He did not on that occasion permit it for such a short time.  He thereby gives ample indication that this prophecy [Genesis 49:10-12] must have been fulfilled.

In addition, when Jacob says here that the scepter shall endure until the Messiah comes, it clearly follows that this scepter not only must not perish but also that it must become far more glorious than it ever was previously, before the Messiah’s coming.  For all the Jews know full well that the Messiah’s Kingdom will be the greatest and most glorious that has ever been on Earth, as we read in Psalms 2, 72, and 89.  For the promise is also made to David that his throne shall endure forever [Psalms 89:4, 29, 36-37].  Now the Jews will have to admit that today their Scepter has now been nonexistent for fifteen hundred years, not to speak of its having become more glorious.

This prophecy can therefore be understood to refer to none other than Jesus Christ our Lord, who is of the Tribe of Judah and of the Royal Lineage of David.  He came when the Scepter had fallen to Herold, the alien; He has been King these fifteen hundred years, and will remain King on into Eternity.  For His Kingdom has spread to the ends of the Earth, as the prophets foretold [Psalms 2:8, 72:8-11]; and the nations have been gathered to him, as Jacob says here [Genesis 49:10].  And there could not possibly be a greater King on Earth, whose Name would be exalted among more nations, than this Jesus Christ.

It is true that some Jews do indeed feel how persuasive and [216] conclusive this Passage really is.  This is why they hunt up all sorts of weird ways of getting around it.  But if you will notice, they only ensnare themselves.  For example, they say that in this instance Shiloh does not signify the Messiah or Christ, and that therefore this Passage does not carry any weight with them.  It matters not whether he is called Messiah or Shiloh; we are concerned not with the name, but with the person, with the fact that he shall appear when the scepter is taken away from Judah.  No such person can be found except Jesus Christ; otherwise, the Passage is false.  He will be no mere cobbler or tailor, but a lord to whom the nations will be gathered; that is, His Kingdom will be more glorious than the Scepter ever was before, as has been said.

Equally futile is another subterfuge, when they say: The nations which are gathered to Him may well be only the Jewish nation, and Shiloh means a lord.  Be that as it may; I will not quarrel over what Shiloh means, although it does seem to me that it signifies a man who is prosperous, well-to-do, has plenty, and is generous.  From this comes the little word salve, which means copia [riches], felicitas [good fortune], abundantia [prosperity], an ample sufficiency of all good things, as it says in Psalm 122[:7], “Et abundantia in turribus suis” [“and prosperity within your palaces”]; that is, everything is full and sufficient and prospering, so that in German I might call shiloh well-being.

Now whether it signifies lord or whether it signifies well-being, prosper [prosperous], or felix [fortunate], at any rate it cannot be said to mean one of the former kings, princes, or teachers.  For “the Scepter of Judah” certainly comprises all those of the Tribe of Judah who have been kings or princes with the exception of this Shiloh, who here is singled out and preferred above all those who have wielded the scepter of Judah as someone [217] special, because Jacob says [Genesis 49:10] the Scepter of Judah shall endure until Shiloh.  What kind of talk would that be for me, to try make of Shiloh one of them who have held the Scepter of Judah and the nations, when the Passage here means that the Shiloh will come after all those others as a greater and more glorious King, and that He will have no successor.  Why would he not otherwise have said, “The Scepter of Judah shall endure forever, and not wait upon Shiloh”?

Therefore, it is the Kingdom of Christ which is here described in masterly fashion, namely, that before him many should wield the Scepter of Judah until He should come Himself and take it in His Own Hands forever, and that He would have no successor, nor would there ever be another king of the Tribe of Judah.  Thereby it is made clear that His Kingdom would be a spiritual kingdom, following upon the temporal kingdom; for no person can have an eternal kingdom who is himself mortal and reigns temporally.  Therefore, the Scepter of Judah did indeed endure from David down to Shiloh as something temporal, having a succession of mortal kings.  But now that Shiloh is come, the Scepter remains forever in the Hands of one Person; no longer does it involve a succession of kings.

From this it necessarily that this Shiloh must first die, and thereafter rise again from the dead.  For since He is to come from the Tribe of Judah [Genesis 49:10], He must be a true, natural man, mortal like all the children of Judah.  On the other hand, because He is to be a special king, distinguished above all who have held the Scepter of Judah before Him, and He alone is to reign forever, he cannot be a mortal man, but must be an immortal man.  Therefore, He must through death put off this mortal life, and by His resurrection take on immortal life, in order that He may fulfil this prophecy and become a Shiloh to whom all the world shall be gathered.  He is to be a truly living man, a king of the Tribe of Judah, and yet immortal, eternal, and invisible, ruling spiritually in faith.  But such sweet speech is still too exalted and difficult for the Jews.

But if they say: Well this Jesus of yours has never done what Jacob later says of this Shiloh, namely, “He will bind his foal to the vine, and his ass to the choice vine; he will wash his garments [218] in wine, and his mantle in the blood of grapes” [Genesis  49:11], then answer: A simpleton might perhaps take this to mean that this Shiloh would be so rich a king that in his day wine would be as common as water, used for washing clothes, etc.  From the foregoing, however, we have observed that this Shiloh is to reign forever, a single person, and that He has no heirs to follow Him.  All the prophets too say this.  Therefore, His Kingdom cannot be a temporal one, consisting essentially of mortal and perishable goods.

And if this does not compel the interpretation that the wine and vine must be spiritual, then the very manner and nature of the words and language must compel it.  For what sort of praise would it be to laud such a glorious kingdom above all kingdoms on these four grounds, namely, that its ruler binds his foal to the vine, his ass to the choice vine, and washes his garments with wine, and his mantle with the blood of grapes?  Could Jacob find no other praise than that which has to do with drinking?  Must such a king have nothing else than wine?  Again, is there nothing else praiseworthy in him but the fact that his eyes are redder than wine and his teeth whiter than milk? [Genesis 49:12].  What does it benefit a kingdom that its ruler has white teeth, red eyes, and binds a foal to a vine?

Assuming for a moment that these things are said concerning superfluous riches, why doesn’t Jacob say much more, such as: He will wash His Garments in balsam and myrrh?  That would be even more luxurious.  Who ever heard of anyone longing to wash his clothes in wine?  Again, why doesn’t he say: He will pasture his horses in the wheat?  Who ever heard of anyone wanting to tether his ass to a vine?  What is the point of an ass at the vine, and clothes in the wine?  The whole thing is sheer nonsense.  Wine ruins clothes, and the ass is better off with thistles than with a vine.  A vine would be better suited to a sheep; it could eat the leaves.  This seemingly ridiculous talk therefore forcibly compels a spiritual interpretation.

Then too, why does he praise him for his red eyes and white teeth?  Is there nothing else beautiful about his body than red eyes and white teeth?  What kind of praise is that for so glorious and great a king?  We usually praise great kings for their strong [219] and splendid physique, and above all for their great spirit, wisdom, graciousness, fortitude, power, and glorious deeds and virtues.  But in this case, only his eyes and teeth are praised; this sounds more like praise of a woman than of a man, let alone of such a king.

There can be no doubt that in these words the Spirit through Moses portrayed this person for us in the setting of a spiritual kingdom as it was to come into being and be governed.  This is not the time, however, to discuss this at length.  We have enough to do for the present in forcefully asserting against the Jews that the true Shiloh or Christ must have come long ago, because they been long since bereft of the kingdom and hegemony, and of prophets as well.  Here the clear text stands firm and testifies that the Scepter shall remain with the Tribe of Judah until the True King comes, when for the first time it shall really hold sway.

Thus, the Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ squares perfectly with this prophecy.  For there was a hegemony among the Jews until He came.  After His coming, however, it was destroyed, and at the same time He began the Eternal Kingdom in which He still reigns forever.  That he was of the Tribe of Judah is unquestionable.  Because as regards His Person He was to be an Eternal King, it could not be that He should govern in a temporal and secular sense, because what is temporal will pass away.  Conversely, because He had to be David’s natural seed, it could not be otherwise than that He should be a natural, mortal, temporal, perishable man.

Now to be temporal and to reign eternally are two mutually contradictory concepts.  Therefore, it had to turn out that He died temporally and departed this life, and again that He arose from the dead and became alive in order that He might become an Eternal King.  For He had to be alive if He were to reign, because one who is dead cannot reign; and He had to die too if He were to shift from this mortal life, into which He necessarily had to enter to fulfil the Scripture which promised He would be the natural blood of David and Abraham.

So now He lives and reigns, and holds the exalted office of binding His Foal to the vine and washing His Garments in the red wine; that is, He governs our consciences with the Holy Gospel, [220] which is a most gracious preachment of God’s loving-kindness, the forgiveness of sins, and redemption from death and Hell, by which all who from the heart believe it will be comforted, joyous, and, as it were, drowned in God with the overwhelming comfort of His Mercy.  The Jews, however, will not listen to this interpretation until they first accept and acknowledge the fact that Christ must have come in accordance with this prophecy.  Therefore, we will let the matter rest until its own good time.

On the basis and testimony of this Passage [Genesis  49:10-12], another sensible argument is also to be proved, namely, that this Shiloh must have come at the time our Jesus Christ came, and that He can be none other than that selfsame Jesus.  The prophecy says that nations shall be gathered to or be subject to this Shiloh.  Now I ask the Jews: When was there ever such a man of Jewish ancestry to whom so many nations were subject as this Jesus Christ?  David was a great king, and so was Solomon; but their kingdom never extended beyond a small portion of the land of Syria.  This Jesus, on the contrary, is accepted as a Lord and King throughout the world, so that one may consider as fulfilled in him the prophecy from the second Psalm [v. 8], where God says to the Messiah, “I will give You the Gentiles for Your Possession, and the uttermost parts of the Earth for Your Inheritance.”  This had indeed come true in the person of our Jesus since the time when the Scepter was taken from the Jews; this is quite apparent and has never yet happened in the case of any other Jew.  Because Shiloh was to come when Judah’s Scepter was ended, and since that time no other has fulfilled these prophecies, this Jesus must certainly be the real Shiloh whom Jacob intended.

The Jews will have to admit further that the Gentiles have never once yielded themselves so willingly to a Jew for their lord and king, as to this Jesus.  For although Joseph was certainly a great man in Egypt, he was neither its lord nor its king [Genesis 41:40].  And even if he had been, Egypt was a mighty small thing compared to this kingdom which everybody ascribes to this Jesus.

Again, neither in Babylon nor in Persia was either Daniel [Daniel 5:29; 6:1-3] or Mordecai [Esther 10:3] a king, although they were men of power in the government.

It is amazing that the Jews are not moved to believe in this [221] Jesus, their own flesh and blood, with whom the prophecies of Scripture actually square so powerfully and exactly, when they see that we Gentiles cling to Him so hard and fast and in such numbers that many thousands have shed their blood for His Sake.  They know perfectly well that the Gentiles have always shown greater hostility toward the Jews than toward any other nation, and have been unwilling to tolerate their dominion, laws, or government.  How is it then that the Gentiles should now so reverse themselves as to willingly and steadfastly surrender themselves to this Jew, and with heart and soul confess Him King of kings and Lord of lords, unless it be that here is the true Messiah, to whom God by a great miracle has made the Gentiles friendly and submissive in accordance with this and numerous other prophecies?

The second Passage is Daniel 9[:24-27], where the angel Gabriel speaks to Daniel in the plainest terms about Christ, saying, “Seventy weeks are determined concerning your people and your holy city, that transgression may be finished, forgiveness sealed, iniquity atoned for, and everlasting righteousness brought in, and vision and prophecy fulfilled, and the most holy anointed.  Take notice therefore and know: from the going forth of the word to rebuild Jerusalem are seven weeks and sixty-two weeks until Messiah the Prince; the streets and the wall shall be built again in a troubled time.  And after sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, and they shall not be His.  But the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.  Its end shall come with violence.  And after the end of the war there shall remain the appointed desolation.  And He shall confirm the Covenant with many in one week; and in the middle of the week sacrifice and offering shall cease,” etc.

God help us!  This Passage has been dealt with so variously by both Jews and Christians that one might doubt whether anything certain can be derived from it!  Well this much at least we [222] will derive from it, namely, that the true Messiah must have come over one thousand and five hundred years ago, just as we hold that our Jesus Christ did.  The computation and exegesis we will postpone to the last, and for the first simply say: Neither Jew nor anyone else can deny that the angel Gabriel is speaking here of the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity; this took place under Nehemiah.

In the second place, Gabriel can surely be referring only to that destruction of Jerusalem which subsequently took place under the Roman emperor Titus about the thirtieth year after the ascension of our Lord.  For after Jerusalem was rebuilt there was no other destruction of the city, although it had been captured at the time of the Maccabees.  From this we draw the assured and incontrovertible conclusion that the Messiah of whom Gabriel here speaks must have come before the destruction [by Titus].  That, I think, is quite certain and sufficiently clear.

It is true that the Jews long ago began to feel the pressure of this mighty flood of evidence, and have anxiously defended their position with all manner of preposterous glosses.  They make of this Messiah something other than the true Messiah, as for example King Cyrus of Persia, whom Isaiah in chapter 45 [Isaiah 45:1] calls a Messiah, and who was slain by Tomyris, the Scythian queen. [223]  This and similar efforts are worthless excuses, capricious and unwarranted evasions, and therefore quickly disposed of as follows: These seventy weeks (says Gabriel) are to extend to the time of a Messiah of such a sort that in his time, when the weeks have elapsed, sin and iniquity shall be finished, forgiveness and everlasting righteousness brought in, and vision and prophecy fulfilled.

Now I ask them both, Jews and everyone else: Did such things come to pass in the days if Cyrus?  In the time of Cyrus and after him no more special righteousness was brought upon Earth than what existed before and since under other kings.  Moreover, in the days of David and Solomon the level of righteousness was much higher than at the time of Cyrus, but Scripture does not designate this as everlasting righteousness.  The righteousness of which Gabriel speaks must therefore be far superior to that which prevailed in the time of David, the most holy king, let alone to such righteousness as the pagan Cyrus had in his day.

And further, when Gabriel says here that the city of Jerusalem shall be rebuilt in seven weeks, and that afterward the Messiah shall be cut off after sixty-two weeks, how can that apply to King Cyrus, who was slain before the seven weeks began, or — if their calculation is correct — at any rate before Jerusalem was rebuilt?  How can the Messiah be someone who was slain before the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and then was cut off sixty-two weeks later after Jerusalem was rebuilt?

So now we have it; their defense is fallacious, and the Passage cannot be interpreted in terms of Cyrus.  Since Scripture designates no one as Messiah after Cyrus except the only One, and since such great and exalted qualities cannot be attributed to any temporal king, we conclude — and thus mightily overcome the error of the Jews — that the true Messiah came after the rebuilding of Jerusalem and prior to its destruction.  For no Messiah was put to death before the destruction of Jerusalem except our Lord Jesus Christ, whom we call Messiah, that is, Christ, or the Anointed One.  For this reason we will now examine the text, and see how exactly it conforms to our Lord Jesus Christ.

Now among those who are well versed in Scripture there is no doubt whatever that Gabriel is speaking here not of the normal week of seven days, but of year-weeks, in which seven years comprise one week.  Scripture commonly employs such terminology.  Therefore, the seventy weeks [Daniel 9:24] amount altogether to four hundred and ninety years.

If we now reckon from Christ’s thirtieth year [Luke 3:23] backward through the Greek and Persian kingdoms for four hundred [225] and ninety years, we arrive exactly at the twentieth [Nehemiah 2:1] and last year of Cambyses, the third king or the second king in Persia after Cyrus, that Cyrus who permitted the building of the Temple at Jerusalem, II Chronicles 36[:22-23], and Ezra 1[:1-3].  However, more than forty-six years later Cambyses, and after him Darius Longimanus (who had previously vowed to do so [I Esdras 4:43]), permitted the building of the city of Jerusalem, which was done under Nehemiah.  All this is set forth in the books of Nehemiah and Ezra.  Thus, if we take the seventy weeks as beginning with Nehemiah’s departure from Persia [Nehemiah 2:1-11], that is, about the seventh year of Darius Longimanus, it corresponds exactly with our Christ.

Now Gabriel says [Daniel 9:24], “Seventy weeks (that is, four hundred and ninety years) are determined concerning your people [226] and your Holy City.”  This is as if we were to say: Your Nation of the Jews and the Holy City of Jerusalem have yet four hundred and ninety years to go; then they will both come to an end.  As to what shall actually transpire, he says that transgression will be finished and forgiveness sealed and iniquity atoned for and everlasting righteousness brought in, and vision and prophecy fulfilled, that is, that satisfaction will be made for all sins, forgiveness of sins proclaimed, and the righteousness of faith preached, that righteousness which is eternally valid before God.  This it is to which all the prophets and the whole of Scripture bear witness, as Paul in Romans 1[:17] and Peter in Acts 2[:38-39] testify.  For before it there has been nothing but sin and work-righteousness, which is temporal and invalid in the Sight of God.  I know of course that some invariably interpret the little Hebrew word “Hathuth” here as “sins”; I have taken it to mean “forgiveness” — as Moses sometimes does, and as it is used in Psalm 51[:7] — not without reason.

Next he shows when the period of seventy weeks begins, saying [Daniel 9:25], “From the going forth of the word to rebuild Jerusalem (that is, at the time of Nehemiah, in the twentieth year of Cambyses), until Messiah the Prince (that is, until the baptism of Christ in the Jordan), are seven weeks (that is, forty-nine years, during which Jerusalem was rebuilt in a troubled time, as the book of Nehemiah [2-6] teaches) and sixty-two weeks” (that is, 411 years after Jerusalem was rebuilt).  This makes altogether [227] sixty-nine weeks, that is 483 years.  There is still lacking one week, that is, seven years, to make the total of seventy weeks, or 490 years.  He then shows what is to happen in that selfsame week, saying [Daniel 9:26]: “And after sixty-two weeks (note that this if after the first seven weeks of troubled rebuilding) Messiah shall be cut off (this did not happen at the beginning of the last week, but right in the middle of it, for Christ preached for three and one-half years, and Gabriel uses the term ‘cut off’, that is, taken from this life into the immortal life through death and His resurrection).  And they shall not be His” (that is, those who crucify Him and drive Him from this world will no more belong to Him and be His People, but He will make unto Himself another people).  Gabriel explains this and tells how they will not go unpunished for it, saying [Daniel 9:26]: “And the people of a prince who is to come (that is, Titus, the Roman emperor) shall destroy the city and that which is holy, and its end shall come with violence (that is, it shall be destroyed with force and fury, as by a flood).  And after the end of the war there shall remain the appointed desolation.”  (All of this happened just that way.  Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed with frightful severity, and to this time have never come into the hands of the Jews or been restored to the former position of power despite the earnest efforts made in that direction.  The [228] city today is still the ruin it was before, so that no one can deny that this prophecy and the actual situation before our eyes coincide perfectly.)

“And He shall confirm the Covenant with many in the one week” [Daniel 9:27].  (This is the period of three and one-half years during which Christ himself preached, plus the succeeding three and one-half years of apostolic activity).  During these seven years the Gospel (which is God’s covenant with us, that through Christ he will be merciful toward us) received its greatest impetus.  Since that time it has never been so pure and mighty, for shortly thereafter heresy and error came to be mingled with it.  “And in the middle of the week the sacrifice and offering shall cease” [Daniel 9:27] (that is, the law of Moses will no longer prevail), because Christ, after preaching for three and one-half years, will fulfill all things through his suffering, and thereafter provide for the preaching of a new sacrifice, etc.

Now let someone tell me: Where will one find a prince, or Messiah, or king, with whom all this accords so perfectly, as with our Lord Jesus Christ?  Scripture and history agree so perfectly with one another that the Jews have nothing they can say to the contrary.  They certainly are painfully conscious of their destruction, which is immeasurably greater than any they have ever endured.  They cannot point to any transgression so great that they would have merited such punishment (because they feel it is not a sin that they crucified Jesus, and that they committed greater sins before that but suffered less punishment).  It would be unthinkable that God would leave them so long without prophets unless they were finished and all Scripture fulfilled.

But there are still more prophecies, as for example in Haggai 2[:9], where God says of the rebuilt Temple, “The splendor of this latter house shall be greater than that of the former,” which is also very conclusive; and Zechariah 8[:23], “In those [229] days ten men of all languages of the Gentiles shall take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying: We want to go with you; for we have heard that the Lord is with you,” etc.  There are many more, but it would take too long to discuss them all clearly and at length.  For the present the two prophecies just cited are enough for a beginning.

If the Jews should take offense because we confess our Jesus to be a man, and yet true God, we will deal forcefully with that from Scripture in due time.  But this is too harsh for a beginning.  Let them first be suckled with milk, and begin by recognizing this man Jesus as the true Messiah; after that they may drink wine, and learn also that he is true God.  For they have been led astray so long and so far that one must deal gently with them, as people who have been all too strongly indoctrinated to believe that God cannot be man.

Therefore, I would request and advise that one deal gently with them and instruct them from Scripture; then some of them may come along.  Instead of this we are trying only to drive them by force, slandering them, accusing them of having Christian blood if they don’t stink, and I know not what other foolishness.  So long as we thus treat them like dogs, how can we expect to work any good among them?  Again, when we forbid them to labor and do business and have any human fellowship with us, thereby forcing them into usury, how is that supposed to do them any good?

If we really want to help them, we must be guided in our dealings with them not by papal law but by the law of Christian love.  We must receive them cordially, and permit them to trade and work with us, that they may have occasion and opportunity to associate with us, hear our Christian teaching, and witness our Christian life.  If some of them should prove stiff-necked, what of it?  After all, we ourselves are not all good Christians either.

Here I will let the matter rest for the present, until I see what I have accomplished.  God grant us all his mercy.  Amen!

In that time, the number of connections I’ve made that have proved to be worthwhile are so small as to be negligible.  Allies have turned out to be enemies and enemies have turned out to have some damn smart things to say.

In their desire to disseminate disinformation and to pit “learning against learning” (the Counter-Reformation tactic of sowing truth with lies) it was actually an incognito Jesuit priest who alerted me to the Jesuit World Order.  It took me a while to sniff him out but his pushing of Jesuit doctrines like Zionism, Dispensationalism, Futurism and the Pre-Tribulation Rapture helped me to know that his inexplicable racism wasn’t just a personal dysfunction but confirmation of his true agenda.

While Papal insurgents like Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily and Walid Shoebat, the reformed “terrorist”, pushed Barack Obama’s birth certificate and supposed muslim background, the reality of his past is that he is a CIA fabrication ¹ who learned to be a black Communist from the best; the Jesuits in Chicago like Greg Galluzzo.

The “Jewish-run” New York Times very carefully screens Galluzzo as a “former” Jesuit (no such thing) who learned activism from Jewish Communist Saul Alinsky.

The Romans have slithered a long way down from putting out their own legions and now never make a stand unless there’s a patsy Jew standing in front of them—and if there isn’t enough anti-Semitism slamming their target they make sure to have their trolls, operatives and coadjutors stir it up.

Galluzzo ran the so-called “Gamaliel Foundation” that taught disenfranchised blacks in Chicago how to be malcontent Communist “community organizers”.  When it comes to “who?” founded Gamaliel, no one seems to know, (not Wikipedia nor anyone else) they simply state “when” (1968) and move on, pretending that they’ve answered your question.

We can answer that question at the same time that we answer “Who really runs Chicago?” — with the location of the Gamaliel offices on La Salle Street.

La Salle Street is named after Jean-Baptiste de La Salle, the Roman Catholic patron saint of rabble-rousers — I’m sorry … “teachers” (same thing). [quote: “The Church played a central if not exclusive role in the establishment and encouragement of the university.”]

Not to go down a rabbithole but while in Chicago Obama met the man that would eventually pen his “autobiography” for him; Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers.  This was uncovered by an outstanding investigative journalist named Jack Cashill.  One wonders how Jack is able to get his work published regularly by sites like Joseph Farah’s WorldNetDaily until one learns that Jack is a good Franciscan-trained Catholic.

One also wonders how William Ayers can go from an unpunished true “domestic terrorist” to teaching your college student how to be like him until one learns how Rome and her Jesuits own “higher education” and always have.

But the Good Lord has a sense of humor and the good news is that, by “coincidence”, I just happened to live right down the street from that very same incognito Jesuit — “Eric Jon Phelps”.  I would not have been able to sniff him out had I not broken bread with him, and his family, on several occasions.

—That’s right; his family.  The man is an incognito Jesuit with a wife and children.

I know what the Lord did for me with this “coincidence” of location, I wonder what He was doing for Eric and the Jesuits.

Someone’s Knockin’ At The Door, Somebody’s Ringin’ The Bell…²

I have something akin to a love/hate relationship with the Seventh Day Adventist Church (more like “love/intense annoyance”).

After the Jesuits woke me up to the Jesuit World Order (I really enjoy writing that), I latched on to the teachings of Seventh Day Adventists like Bill Hughes, Steve Wohlberg, Doug Batchelor and Professor Walter Julius Veith.

Professor Walt, by far, has the most to offer as a dedicated instructor on the topic of “Who rules the world from behind the scenes?”  The other men are good teachers but also pastors so they aren’t dedicated to their craft (sorry!³) the way Professor Walt is.

You know you’ve arrived when you get your own Wikipedia entry!

What I’ve found deeply frustrating, however, is that Walter Veith will zero right in on the Luciferian agenda in religion and reality and completely miss the fire in his own house due his blind sectarian zeal.

This is actually true of all the men I’ve mentioned; particularly Pastor Bill Hughes—again, solid men of Christ but fiercely sectarian and just as fiercely blind in that regard.

As a result of how they cling to the doctrines of men along with an honest examination of Scripture (who can really say they have the one true interpretation of all doctrines?!), they get ensnared in traps laid by the very Luciferians they are aware of and preach against.

Perhaps this is why I’ve not gotten a particularly warm reception from those ministries, this despite having taken the money and trouble to send copies of my book out to them.

I proceed with the desire to take the solid teachings of this sect and showing Adventists how to make them much, much better through freeing them from the chains of organized religion via an open examination of their own Luciferian origin.

Reformed

Counter-reformation: noun; coun·ter·ref·or·ma·tion \ˌkau̇n-tə(r)-ˌre-fər-ˈmā-shən\

1:  usually Counter–Reformation :  the reform movement in the Roman Catholic Church following the Reformation

2:  a reformation designed to counter the effects of a previous reformation

~ Merriam-Webster

All of the top major sources of information have a completely inadequate and even deceptive definition of the Counter-Reformation.  The above is the closest and it’s still deceptive.

Britannica puts so much effort into re-writing reality it’s embarrassing; “the Counter-Reformation was a ‘Catholic Revival’ attempt to ‘reform’ Catholic ‘criticisms’ even before the Reformation.”

This should come as no surprise given that all forms of popular media, both mainstream and “alternative” are completely controlled by Rome.

Nearly 140 years ago, James Aitken Wylie wrote—

When it is a Church or a nation that is to be overthrown, the battle is ordered in the same manner.  The first blow is levelled at that one great principle—for there is such in every society—which is its mainstay, and this cannot be better done than by sowing the seeds of diverse and strange doctrines.  The Sons of Loyola, now flocking to our shores, will not spare to sow such seeds.  We may not see that seed as it falls; its sowers will pass through the land at the dead hour of night; but such seed does not usually lie long under the clod, and the work of these sowers will speedily notify itself by the din—music how sweet to them—of our dissentions and wranglings, which will break out on all sides.

There are two institutions in especial to which the Jesuits will lay siege.  These are the Press and the Pulpit.  They will strain every nerve to possess themselves of both, and work them for their own ends.  The press of Great Britain is already manipulated by them to an extent of which the public but little dream.  Not a few newspapers have a Jesuit on their staff as editor, or “contributor,” or “reporter.”  The reporting force of the kingdom is, to a considerable extent, made up of Romanists; and the esprit de corps is such that a newspaper may, unaware to itself often, be influenced against a cause, or an individual obnoxious to Rome, although it may have no Romanist in its service.  There are names the Times dare not mention; there are causes, true and noble, it dare not advocate.  There are British authors as well as Irish farmers who are “Boycotted.”  The author speaks from documentary evidence when he. says, that the identical Jesuit has been traced through successive disguises in the journalism of the metropolis: now assailing violently in his own proper character of Papist; and now in the guise of a pious Methodist, whispering into the editorial ear, in oily phrase, how much he was pained by such and such an article in his columns, it was so lacking in the sweet grace of charity.  The whole English press of the world is supervised, and the word is passed round how writers, speakers, and causes are to be handled, so that everywhere its verdict may be the same, and applause or condemnation dealt out just as it may accord with the interests and wishes of Rome.⁴

So allow me to give you an unbiased definition of the Roman Catholic “Counter-Reformation”: a military agenda of subversion, deception, lies, insurgency, assassination and coups designed to destroy the Protestant Reformation by discrediting the Holy Bible and bring all humanity back under the autocratic and tyrannical authority of Rome.  It is spearheaded by the Vatican’s most diabolical and fanatical order; the Jesuits.

How successful has it been?

—In September of last year, a Jesuit Pope addressed the American people via a joint session of Congress for the first time in United States history.  He did so in a rotunda that mimics St. Peter’s basilica, which stands opposite a massive phallic obelisk just as the one outside St. Peter’s does.

The first part of this agenda took place immediately; a Spanish Basque noble named Ignacio López volunteered to be the Special Forces of this effort and “Ignatius of Loyola” founded the Knights of the Virgin Mary in 1534.  Six years later, Loyola would have his order sanctioned by a Farnese Pope—Paul III—but under the more deceptive name of “the Society of Jesus”.

As Jesuits rose in the ranks and proved their trustworthiness in the service of the Whore of Babylon, they would eventually take the Oath of Induction, also known as the 4^th Oath, the Blood Oath or the Oath of Extreme Unction and his Superior would preface the oath by acknowledging his mission thus far—

My son, heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to be a spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man.  Among the Reformers, to be a reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among other Protestants, generally to be a Protestant, and obtaining their confidence, to seek even to preach from their pulpits, and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and even to descend so low as to become a Jew among Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for the benefit of your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope.

You have been taught to insidiously plant the seeds of jealousy and hatred between communities, provinces, states that were at peace, and incite them to deeds of blood, involving them in war with each other, and to create revolutions and civil wars in countries that were independent and prosperous, cultivating the arts and the sciences and enjoying the blessings of peace.  To take sides with the combatants and to act secretly with your brother Jesuit, who might be engaged on the other side, but openly opposed to that with which you might be connected, only that the Church might be the gainer in the end, in the conditions fixed in the treaties for peace and that the end justifies the means.

You have been taught your duty as a spy, to gather all statistics, facts and information in your power from every source; to ingratiate yourself into the confidence of the family circle of Protestants and heretics of every class and character, as well as that of the merchant, the banker, the lawyer, among the schools and universities, in parliaments and legislatures, and the judiciaries and councils of state, and to be all things to all men, for the Pope’s sake, whose servants we are unto death.

The neophyte would confirm this and, with a dagger to his heart, held by the blade and a black crucifix in his off hand the crescendo of his oath promises—

…that I will, when opportunity present, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition; and that I will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants’ heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race.  That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of the poniard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agent of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of Jesus.

Jesuits were then sent to the 4 corners of our flat Earth to enact this agenda of deception and subversion.

The Reformers had been doing all they could to put the Word of God into the hands of common men.  A full 150 years before Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the doors of All Saints Cathedral in Wittenberg, John Wycliffe—the Morning Star of the Reformation—had translated the Scriptures into English.  His Lollard followers did all they could to transcribe the Wycliffe Bible and pass them out and many Lollards paid for it by having the Wycliffe Bible tied around their necks to be burned together at the stake.

These efforts were slow and easily thwarted by the viciousness of Rome.

All of that would change in 1439 when Johannes Guttenberg invented a printing press that used “movable type” metal inserts which dramatically sped up the printing process.  Less than 100 years later and less than 500 kilometers from Guttenberg’s home of Mainz, a young Augustinian monk named Martin Luther would fire the shot heard ‘round the world.

Luther’s Protest was taken by Rome the same way she took the protests of the Waldenses, John Wycliffe’s Lollards, Jan Huss, Jerome of Prague and many others; she sought to kill Luther and obliterate his following.

In 1521, Luther was called to stand before the Roman authorities lead by Johann Eck at the Diet of Worms.  It was demanded of the monk that he recant his charges of corruption against Rome, or else!  Knowing what lay before him, Luther stood firm; “Here I stand.  I can do no other.”

The Elector of Saxony, Frederick III, was aghast at Luther’s disobedience … publicly.

Privately, he adored the upstart priest and, on the pretense of dispensing “justice” kidnapped Luther and interred him in Wartburg castle for safe keeping.

They didn’t call him “Frederick the Wise” for nothing.

“Junker Jörg”

While at Wartburg, Luther (as “Junker Jörg” — a Knight named George) had a lot of time on his hands.  He put it to good use by having the new Greek and Latin translations of the Bible done by Desiderius Erasmus brought to him so that he could translate the New Testament into German, which he soon did.

When it was safe for him to return home, Luther then translated the Old Testament as well.

His followers quickly put these documents to the Guttenberg movable-type press and soon flooded the German countryside with the Word of God.

For the first time in her founding, Rome was hit with a threat she couldn’t stamp out or crush.  She was forced to take up a different tactic—one that was nothing less than satanic; to discredit the Bible even if it meant altering the very fabric of reality.

Sound incredible?  I’ll be writing more on this in the near future (Lord willing).

Forgotten Failures of Freemasonic Frauds

Another tactic of the Dragon and her satanic Special Forces—the Jesuits—was to seed Protestantism with apostate and heretical sects whose doctrines and leaders would be used to humiliate and discredit the movement.

This effort was particularly effective in the 19^th century when several movements were started by Jesuits’ faux-Protestant footsoldiers; the Freemasons.

The connection of Freemasonry to Mormonism is so profound, Wikipedia has an entry on it.  Joseph Smith, his brother Hyrum and perhaps even their father were all Freemasons.  Mormonism differs so strongly from Protestant Christianity it’s considered by many to be a non-Christian cult; the “Jesus” of Mormonism not being the Jesus of Protestantism.

I contend these doctrinal differences are a purposeful agenda.

As I noted to you previously—

All of the early Mormon leaders were Freemasons and they were guided behind the scenes by Jesuits like Pierre-Jean de Smet ⁵

The Jesuit/Mason connection is always good for murder and mayhem and it’s not a stretch to imagine Brigham Young’s friend Pierre-Jean whispering in his ear before he urged fellow Mormons to massacre an innocent wagon train full of men, women and children at Mountain Meadows, Utah.

When you realize that the Jesuits were behind the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, it’s not so surprising to find that the Mountain Meadows massacre occurred on September 11^th, 1857.

In his teaching titled “The New Age Agenda” Professor Walter Veith notes that all of the early astronauts were either Mormons or Masons (given the connection between Mormonism and Freemasonry it’s basically the same thing).

This is one of Professor Veith’s best teachings.

What Professor Walt fails to follow with is why the early astronauts were either Mormons or Masons: because space travel is impossible.  It is part of the elaborate Roman re-write of our reality designed to discredit Scripture.

Professor Walt is blind to some other connections even more devastating to Adventism but we’ll get to that in a moment.

Another offshoot of “Protestant Christianity” are the Jehovah’s Witnesses—they’re actually an offshoot of the founder of the Adventists!

There is much controversy over whether founder Charles Taze Russell was a Freemason (they buried the connections deep under a pyramid).  But with the help of author Fritz Springmeier we see connections to Russell’s beliefs, family and even repeated close geographic proximity to Freemasonry and Freemasonic “Temples”.

Too bad we also see that Fritz Springmeier is actually Victor Earl Schoof, government-trained domestic terrorist for Rome and one that used the nefarious origins of the Jehovah’s Witnesses to slander all of Protestantism—just like the Counter-Reformation wanted him to.

It is fascinating to note that, just before his death, Russell exhibited some extremely unusual behavior as was noted by his future replacement, Joseph Franklin Rutherford—

A few weeks ago he started on a trip to the Pacific Coast, preaching every evening, and traveling throughout the remainder of the night and of the day.  His last sermon he preached to the Congregation at Los Angeles; and being too weak to stand, he sat throughout the discourse.  He left Los Angeles Sunday evening on his return to Brooklyn, and rapidly grew weaker.  Seven hours before his death, addressing his traveling companion, Brother Menta Sturgeon, he said, “Make me a Roman toga.”

Using the bed sheets, Brother Sturgeon made a toga, which Brother Russell put on himself.  He stood erect for a moment, and then lying down on the couch in his Pullman drawing room, closed his eyes, thus in symbolic language speaking of death.  A great deal of the Bible is written in symbolic language, and it was quite appropriate that he should speak his last message in symbols.  It is interesting here to know what a Roman toga symbolizes: Augustus’ Poet Laureate, said, “It is by the toga that the royal nation is recognized.”

It is absolutely “appropriate” for the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses to die “in symbols”—particularly the symbols of Rome.

Let me agree again; it is “by the toga” that the power who rules behind the scenes “is recognized.”

Buh-Bahá’í

The Bahá’í religion was founded by Báb Ali Muhammad Shirāzi via a declaration he made in 1844—an important date and smack in the middle of this era of creating off-shoot cults.

Bahá’í is an Iranian monotheistic religion that prizes “unity” above all and seeks to unify all religions and peoples.  Does that sound like the agenda of another religion?

‘Pope Francis’ Calls for Collaboration With World’s Religions, Those Who ‘Meet God in Different Ways’ ~ Christian News.net

Shaykhism is an apocalyptic/messianic offshoot of Shi’a Islam that is considered to be the forerunner to Bahá’í.  There is an interesting note regarding the successor of “Mahdi” Sayyid Kazim:

Successorship

On the death of Sayyid Kazim on 31 December 1843, some Shaykhis went on to become Babis, some of whom later became Bahais, and the rest split into three factions. It is reported that before dying, instead of appointing a successor, he sent his disciples out to find the Promised One. One of his most noted followers, Mullá Husayn said:

“Our departed teacher insistently exhorted us to forsake our homes, to scatter far and wide, in quest of the promised Beloved…  Regarding the features of the Promised One, he told us that He is of a pure lineage, is of illustrious descent, and of the seed of Fatimah.  As to His age, He is more than twenty and less than thirty.  He is endowed with innate knowledge.  He is of medium height, abstains from smoking, and is free from bodily deficiency.”⁶

In 1844 Mullá Husayn, after meeting the Siyyid `Alí-Muhammad (the Báb) in Shiraz accepted him as the Mahdi. ~ Wikipedia

Fatimah plays a key role in Shi’a Islam:

According to Shi’a and non-Muslim scholars, Fatima Zahra was Muhammad’s only daughter.^[1]  The Sunni belief that he had other daughters by Khadijah denies Ali ibn Abu Talib the distinction of being Muhammad’s only son-in-law.  She is held in highest of esteem, as being the single most ideal example for all women; in terms of her purity and the eventual martyrdom of her son, she is considered to be the Muslim counterpart to the Christian Mary, mother of Jesus; indeed, one of her names is Maryam al-Kubrá, or “the greater Mary”.^[2] ~ Wikipedia

If you’ve seen the name before in Catholic circles, here’s why:

Apparition Apprehensions

In 1916, three Portuguese children were herding sheep when an angel appeared to them on multiple occasions at Cova da Iria (“Irene’s Cove”) just outside of Fátima.  Lucia dos Santos was 9 and her cousin Francisco Marto was 8.  Francisco’s sister, Jacinta Marto, was 6.  The angel taught them how to pray1722 and “sacrifice” on behalf of sinners.1723 …

Despite their claims, they were ridiculed by some and the apparition they saw promised to give them powerful prophecies on the 13th of the month, in October of 1917.

Between May and October of 1917, always on the 13th of the month, the children received three secrets.  Lucia eventually disclosed them from the Convent where she became a nun.  Francisco and Jacinta died just a few short years later in the Spanish Flu Epidemic of 1918-20.

It is important to note that October 13th 1307 is established by the Luciferian Elite as the day Pope Clement V collaborated with France’s King Philip IV and suppressed the Vatican Treasury guardians—the Knights Templar.1725

There are many questions surrounding the apparition at Fátima.  Why would it choose a location so easily identified by muslims?

Is the apparition of Fátima a cunningly-divined hoax for the political power of uniting Catholicism with Islam?

Only the children saw “Mary”, even during the October event in 1917.  Two of them died shortly thereafter and the third was controlled from a convent.  She even admits she was directed to reveal what she saw by Catholic authorities. ~ Illuminati Unmasked ⁷

Ex-Jesuit priest Alberto Rivera contended that both Islam and Fátima/Fatimah were heavily manipulated from the very beginning for Rome to wield the Scimtar of Islam, which makes it even more disturbing to see how she does this while hiding behind the “Shield of David”.

There are other indicators of a Freemasonic founding of Bahá’í such as the Luciferian/gnostic symbolism like Bahai’s 9-pointed star. [Trying to make “Bahá’í” possessive was just a bridge too far.]

Nine-Pointed Star

According to the Abjad system of Isopsephy, the word Bahá’ has a numerical equivalence of 9, and thus there is frequent use of the number 9 in Bahá’í symbols.^[8]  The most commonly used symbol connected to the number 9 is the nine-pointed star…  While the star is not a part of the teachings of the Bahá’í Faith, it is commonly used as an emblem representing “9”, because of the association of number 9 with perfection, unity and Bahá’.

The number 9 also comes up several times in Bahá’í history and teachings. On the significance of the number 9, Shoghi Effendi wrote:

“Concerning the number nine: the Bahá’ís reverence this for two reasons, first because it is considered by those interested in numbers as the sign of perfection. The second consideration, which is the more important one, is that it is the numerical value of the word “Bahá’”…
“Besides these two significances the number nine has no other meaning. It is, however, enough to make the Bahá’ís use it when an arbitrary number is to be chosen.”^[12]

Its use on gravestone markers was approved by Shoghi Effendi, then head of the religion, in 1944.^[13] ~ Wikipedia

Nine is, indeed, a number of “completion” … to Freemasons [WARNING: clicking on that link then clicking on “Home” put me in a pop-up spam loop.]—

NINE: Nine is a number representing wholeness and completion as expressed in the Royal Arch, one of whose meanings is the Vault of Heaven, and therefore is especially significant.

Possible references include: Three times three; three plus three plus three.

Sayings: Q. How shall I know you to be a Royal Arch Mason?
A:  By three times three.

Three Times Three, Under a Living Arch.
(note the three T’s in this expression, as also expressed visually in the Triple Tau sign)

In Royal Arch Masonry:

nine officers
nine raps
nine arches in the secret vault of Solomon under Temple Mount.
the nine-branched menorah
An association with the secret name of God

In the Thirty-Second Degree ( =  Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret)

the nonagon (nine-sided figure).  This is a primary figure of ritual in this degree. It contains within it, successively, a pentagon, a triangle and a circle.

Other connotations include: the High Priest (First of Nine); Joshua.

If the above 9-pointed star looks a lot like the so-called “Star of David” just with an extra triangle jammed in, that’s because it is.

The 6-pointed star is a gnostic, pagan/demonic symbol used to invoke sex magick (joining two pubic areas) as well as to symbolize the Luciferian mocking desire for “as above, so below”.

In Freemasonry, the intersecting of the compass and square are meant to call to mind the Luciferian desire to create a “paradise on Earth” and to “be like unto God” [Isaiah 14:14] with their mantra “as above, so below”. ~ Illuminati Unmasked ⁸

It was raised to prominence as part of the psychological operation that was the “refounding” of the modern state of Israel.

The Star (Shield) of David, also called Magen David, is a relatively new Jewish symbol.  Supposedly, it represents the shape of King David’s shield (but there is no rabbinic support for that claim).  The symbol is very rare in early Jewish literature. ~ Shamash: The Jewish Network

Prior to 1948, the national symbol for Judaism was the menorah.

The 8-pointed square-within-a-square has similar gnostic significance and, as a result, has been adopted in Islam.

The Freemason-founded Mormons call it “the seal of Melchizedek”.

Perhaps the best rendition of the Bahá’í star is this one which includes a flat Earth map.

Wikipedia used to contain a sanitized section on Bahá’í ties to Freemasonry under the entry Political objections to the Baha’i Faith.

It has since been expunged (I’m not sure how a Freemasonic founding of Bahá’í is a “political objection”).  Not even a sanitized account that mentions the ties but then “debunks” them is allowed.  Fortunately I found it archived here.

Bahá’í Ties To Freemasonry

Iranian critics of this faith have also accused the Bahá’í Faith of having ties to Freemasonry.  As Freemasonry was a secretive society originating from the West, many in Iran connected the movement with the introduction of foreign ideas into the country in order to undermine Iranian values. Claims were made that many of the earliest Freemason lodges, such as Malkom Khan’s faramush-khanih, which were founded in 1858, were linked to European lodges.  However, Freemasonry was brought to Iran by Iranians who had seen the movement in other parts of the world.

Specific accusations connecting the Bahá’í Faith to Freemasonry often include an assertion that Dr. Dhabih Qurban, who was a well-known Bahá’í, was also a freemason.  This assertion is based on an Iranian book publishing documents related to Freemasonry in the country; that book states that in specific pages of Fazel Mazandarani’s book on the Bahá’í Faith there are statements that Dr. Dhabih Qurban is a Freemason, but in fact Freemasony is not mentioned in the pages of the referenced Bahá’í book.  Furthermore, the Iranian book that is the source of the accusation includes a discussion between the Grand Master of the Great Lodge in Iran, and the Grand Master notes that “no Bahá’ís have become masons and this is repeated by others present with no-one disagreeing.”

The teachings of the Baha’i Faith expressly forbid membership in secret societies.  Shoghi Effendi, the guardian of the Bahá’í Faith, asked all Bahá’ís to remove their memberships from all secret societies, including the Freemasons, so that they can serve the teachings of the Bahá’í Faith without compromising their independence.

The Bahá’í prohibition against joining Freemasonry sounds suspiciously like the supposed war against the Masons waged by Rome—something I prove to the contrary in my book.

The Bahai Insider blog seems to have a little bit more to go on than the erased section from Wikipedia’s Political objections to the Baha’i Faith.

Dr. Dhabih Qurban, was a well-known Iranian Bahá’í and also a Freemason.  Moojan Momen tried to refute that no Baha’is were linked to the Freemasonry but his refutation with poor references has no value as the prominent Iranian Historian Abdollah Shahbazi has given numerous references that not only Dhabih Qurban but many other Baha’is were also active Freemasons. ~ Abdul Baha asks Manchester Baha’is to conceal their beliefs and act like Freemasons! Bahai Insider

If your browser has a translation capability I highly recommend you peruse Professor Shahbazi’s work on Freemasonry in Iran.

A Warning To My Adventist Brethren

I’ve saved the best for last.

On “the first Sabbath in August, 1833”, a Baptist preacher named William Miller began to speak out on how he had calculated the near-return of Jesus Christ based upon a shockingly flawed and deceptive interpretation of Daniel 8:14.

Daniel Chapter 8 is a vision that the Prophet Daniel was given regarding the kingdoms of Medo/Persia and Greece—we don’t have to wonder about this because the latter half of the chapter is the Archangel Gabriel explaining this to Daniel!

It is a difficult passage that states the span of time between the ceasing of sacrifices and the cleansing of the Temple would be two thousand, three hundred “days”—but, more accurately, “evenings and mornings” which is the Hebrew reckoning for a “day” that may not mean exact days.

One possible interpretation is that, due to the Mosaic practice of conducting a morning and evening sacrifice, the actual days should be half the prediction.  If that were the case, the span between Antiochus Epiphanes’ desecration of the Temple and its restoration under the Maccabees of 167 to 164 B.C. does work.

Even here there are problems because other passages connect the “little horn” with the office of the Papacy while Daniel 8:10-11 states that the little horn trampled under a number of the stars of Heaven (angels?) and magnified himself to the level of the Prince of Heaven (the Son of God?).  In verse 13 he tramples truth, itself!  That verse speaks to us today in ways that will rock your world.

There is no easy way to understand this passage, even with Gabriel’s help but that’s another rub; Gabriel is the herald of Jesus Christ yet there doesn’t seem to be an obvious connection to Christ in this prophecy—perhaps there actually is and it remains to be brought out.

One thing is sure; William Miller’s interpretation was way off:

Basing his calculations principally on Daniel 8:14: “Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed”, Miller assumed that the cleansing of the sanctuary represented the Earth’s purification by fire at Christ’s Second Coming.  Then, using the interpretive principle of the “day-year principle”, Miller (and others) interpreted a day in prophecy to read not as a 24-hour period, but rather as a calendar year.  Further, Miller became convinced that the 2,300 day period started in 457 BC with the decree to rebuild Jerusalem by Artaxerxes I of Persia.  Simple calculation then revealed that this period would end in 1843.  Miller records, “I was thus brought… to the solemn conclusion, that in about twenty-five years from that time 1818 all the affairs of our present state would be wound up.”^[8] ~ Wikipedia

Although use of the day/year principle of prophecy interpretation is sound (and is actually critical in understanding Daniel 7:25 to speak of the Papacy rolling into her control of the United States—the Beast of the Land in Revelation 13) it simply doesn’t work under these parameters.

As the expected time of Christ’s Return came about, Millerites (early Adventists) went to all extremes in preparation for seeing their Savior; many sold all they had.  They were devastated when Jesus failed to appear.

This dashed hope came to be known as “The Great Disappointment.”  In his book When Time Shall Be No More, historian Paul Boyer offers an example of the deep despondency suffered by the Millerites.  In the words of one tragically disappointed believer: “Our fondest hopes and expectations were blasted, and such a spirit of weeping came over us as I never experienced before….  We wept, and wept, till the day dawned” (page 81).

When Jesus did not return as expected, many who had hopefully waited for the return of their Savior threw off their faith completely.  Some refused to give up their hope and eventually replaced one delusion with another.  They would claim that Christ must have come invisibly in 1844, moving into the Holy of Holies in heaven to begin his “investigative judgment” of Christian lives.

Many simply returned to the churches out of which they had come, no doubt confused, distraught and embarrassed to have accepted something that was revealed to have been an empty fantasy.  Miller, having renounced his prophecy studies after the Great Disappointment, died in 1849.  Any remaining followers split up over differences of belief and doctrine.  Ultimately, a variety of groups arose from the ashes of the Millerite camp, including the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh-day Adventists.

Actually, the October 1844 debacle was the second great disappointment for followers of Miller’s chronology and prophecy blueprint.  He had previously announced that the coming of Jesus Christ would occur in about the year 1843.  The year came and went without Christ’s return.  Miller’s prophetic claim had failed and disappointed many people.

Then someone pointed out that he had neglected to take into account the transition from B.C. to A.D., so that his calculations were one year off.  Miller then moved the expected return of Jesus forward by one year, this time to Oct.  22, 1844.  But the great disappointment happened once again to the thousands of followers who had given away their possessions and waited in expectant belief — for nothing.  ~ The Great Disappointment, Grace Communion International

The disappointment of 1843 wasn’t devastating enough, it was contrived that computing the carry over from B.C. to A.D. required one add a year to humiliate Christians again?!  A true reckoning of the cross over from B.C. to A.D. subtracts a year because there is no “year 0”.

Not only are Jehovah’s Witnesses connected to this debacle, but Baháis is as well!

When it was clear that Miller was wrong, key Baháis ran to claim that the Báb was Christ returned in 1844.

Members of the Bahá’í Faith believe that Miller’s interpretation of signs and dates of the coming of Jesus were, for the most part, correct.^[15]  They believe that the fulfillment of biblical prophecies of the coming of Christ came through a forerunner of their own religion, the Báb, who declared that he was the “Promised One” on May 23, 1844, and began openly teaching in Persia in October 1844.^[16][17]  Several Bahá’í books and pamphlets make mention of the Millerites, the prophecies used by Miller and the Great Disappointment, most notably William Sears’ Thief in the Night.^[18][19][20] ~ Wikipedia

There are entire books written on validating this embarrassment from muslim and Bahá’í authors trying to cover for William Miller…why?

—Because William Miller was a Freemason.

Miller “resigned” in 1831 but this was long after he, himself, admits he received the interpretive “vision” of Daniel 8:14.

Looking for hints of Freemasonry (such as using the term “Brother” as a title) in William Miller’s biography, I came across the attempt to excuse his humiliating failure as something he was just tortured to do—

Mr. Miller succeeded in the accomplishment of his wishes, assisting according to his ability and known liberality.

He continued to make the Bible his daily study, and became more and more convinced that he had a personal duty to perform respecting what he conceived the Bible to teach of the nearness of the Advent [the Return of Jesus Christ].  These impressions he thus describes:

“When I was about my business, it was continually ringing in my ears, ‘Go and tell the world of their danger.’” …

“I prayed that some minister might see the truth, and devote himself to its promulgation; but still it was impressed upon me, ‘Go and tell it to the world: their blood will I require at thy hand.’”

[I find it odd that the Lord would communicate in Old English.]

“‘The more I presented it in conversation, the more dissatisfied I felt with myself for withholding it from the public.  I tried to excuse myself to the Lord for not going out and proclaiming it to the world.  I told the Lord that I was not used to public speaking; that I had not the necessary qualifications to gain the attention of an audience; that I was very diffident, and feared to go before the world; that they would ‘not believe me nor hearken to my voice;’ that I was ‘slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.’  But I could get no relief.”

In this way he struggled on for nine years longer, pursuing the study of the Bible, doing all he could to present the nearness of Christ’s coming to those whom circumstances threw in his way; but resisting the impressions of duty to go out as a public teacher.  He was then fifty years old, and it seemed impossible for him to surmount the obstacle which lay in his path, to successfully present it in a public manner.

Interestingly, this inability to speak powerfully in public (likened, not for lack of cheek, to Moses, himself) didn’t slow him from gaining power and prestige…exactly what one would expect from a Luciferian Freemason favorite.

His freedom to convene on the subject, and the ability with which he was able to defend his own views, and oppose those differing from him, had given him no little celebrity in his denomination in all that region; and some were rather shy in approaching him.  Elder T. [Truman⁹] Hendryx, a Baptist clergyman now in the State of Pennsylvania, who has kindly furnished the biographer with many original letters from Mr. Miller, thus speaks of his first acquaintance with him:

“My first acquaintance with Brother Miller was in the summer of 1881.  I had been requested to visit the Baptist church in Hampton, and concluded to go.” ~ Memoirs of William Miller by Sylvester Bliss, published by Joshua V. Himes, 1853, Boston, pp. 92-93

—And then there’s “Brother Miller”, titled as such like the good Freemason he was.  Of course we’re to take, “Brother” Hendryx in 19^th century Adventist speak but, sadly, it’s actually the same.

Here are important things to take into consideration regarding what could have been going on behind the scenes:

* the Jesuits are experts in Bible prophecy and even more adept at warping it to cover their tracks
* the day/year principle outs Rome as the Whore of Babylon the very Chapter before; the misapplication casts doubt on all applications
* Miller claimed to be a Baptist; a sect very high on the Jesuit hit-list

One would’ve thought that this humiliation would’ve been the death nell for the Millerites but with strange contortions of 1844 being “Investigative Judgment”, they carried on.  Again we must ask, “Why?”  Was there so much of value in what was left of the Millerite movement or was it a vehicle that the Puppet Masters wanted to continue to ride out?

One man who stayed after “The Great Disappointment” was James Springer White.

White met and married a young woman a year later, in 1845, and built the rest of the Seventh Day Adventist movement on her writings and visions—Ellen Gould Harmon, who then became Ellen G. White.

Ellen G. White is so highly venerated by Adventists it approaches the same Semiramis / Isis / “Mary” cult of Babylon / Egypt / Rome that they so effectively preach against.  The Banner at the top of the official web site of the Ellen White Estate is shocking.

It could easily have come from any Roman Catholic domain.

Un-real

The Jesuits and their Freemasonic henchmen have been busy from the beginning discrediting the Word of God with a literal re-write of our reality; just as Gabriel predicted to Daniel, “truth has been trampled upon”!

Darwin, dinosaurs, space travel, spinning globe Earth—all have been shockingly woven from the Reformation to this day and, sadly, the writings and “visions” of Ellen White contribute to it—despite her excellent warnings about Rome (perhaps because of them).

Do Adventists have such clear vision regarding the Fourth and Final Beast because the Beast gave that information to them to sweeten their Luciferian founding and resulting disinformation like the ability to visit other planets?

In the same way that NASA “astronaut” Mark Kelly handles his wife, Gabrielle Giffords, after the brain injury she received during the false flag of the Tucson mass shooting, it appears James Springer White “handled” Ellen to insure the best and worst information was circulated starting with a coverup of “the Great Disappointment” and rolling into space travel.

It is well known that many were expecting the Lord to come at the 7^th month, 1845.  That Christ would then come we firmly believed.  A few days before the time passed, I was at Fairhaven, and Dartmouth Mass., with a message on this point of time.  At this time, Ellen was with the band at Carver, Mass., where she saw in vision, that we should be disappointed, and that the saints must pass through the “time of Jacob’s trouble,” which was future.  Her view of Jacob’s trouble was entirely new to us, as well as herself.  At our conference in Topsham, Maine, last Nov., Ellen had a vision of the handy works of God.  She was guided to the planets Jupiter, Saturn, and I think one more.  After she came out of vision, she could give a clear description of their Moons, etc.  It is well known, that she knew nothing of astronomy, and could not answer one question in relation to the planets, before she had this vision. {1847 JW, WLF 22.6} ~ A Word to the Little Flock, James White¹⁰

A more controversial example (but one catalogued by the Ellen White Estate) was that of Miss Marion Concordia Stowell Truesdail (whose married name was Crawford).  After being a present during a vision Ellen states she had, Miss Truesdail later recounted it—

“Sister White was in very feeble health, and while prayers were offered in her behalf, the Spirit of God rested upon us.  We soon noticed that she was insensible to earthly things.  This was her first view of the planetary world.  After counting aloud the moons of Jupiter, and soon after those of Saturn, she gave a beautiful description of the rings of the latter.  She then said, ‘The inhabitants are a tall, majestic people, so unlike the inhabitants of earth.  Sin has never entered here.’  It was evident from Brother Bates’s smiling face that his past doubts in regard to the source of her visions were fast leaving him.  We all knew that Captain Bates was a great lover of astronomy, as he would often locate many of the heavenly bodies for our instruction.  When Sister White replied to his questions, after the vision, saying that she had never studied or otherwise received knowledge in this direction, he was filled with joy and happiness.  He praised God, and expressed his belief that this vision concerning the planets was given that he might never again doubt.” {EGWC 93.4} ~ Ellen G. White And Her Critics, p. 93

Jehovah’s Whitenesses: The Eye And The Obelisk

Jehovah’s Witnesses, after having been birthed by the Millerite movement, managed to put out their own failed prophecies to humiliate Christians with (their reputation for being a cult, notwithstanding).

Another odd, disturbing, parallel between Adventists and Witnesses is the idea that the Archangel Michael is a theophany ¹¹ of Jesus Christ.  This doctrine is ridiculous in light of Michael’s mention in the New Testament [Jude 9, Revelation 12:7], after the Incarnation of Christ yet both sects still cling to this belief.  Knowing what I know of the Luciferians, I trace this heresy to the idea that Lucifer is too powerful to be handled by anything less than the Son of God, Himself.  This is most assuredly not the case and not Scriptural.

In her writings, Ellen White made mention of the “all-seeing eye” of God which has no place in the Word of God but is quite prominent in Luciferian, gnostic and Freemasonic writing as Lucifer is the great voyeur who secretly watches.

There is need of each one in every school and in every institution to be as was Daniel—in such close connection with the Source of all wisdom that his powers will enable him to reach the highest standard of his duties in every line, that he may be able to fulfill his scholastic requirements, not only under able teachers, but also under the supervision of heavenly intelligences, knowing that the all-seeing, the ever sleepless Eye is upon him. {SpM 75.2} ~ Spalding and Magan Collection, p. 75

“Ever seek to exert a good influence, that God may approve of your works.  Remember you are forming a character for heaven or for destruction.  Oh, that you may form a good Christian character!  You are daily stamping a record of your life by your course of action here.  Let all your acts be such that you would not be ashamed to meet them in the judgment.  God’s eye never slumbers or sleeps.  This all-seeing eye is ever upon you.” {3MR 52.1} ~ Manuscript Releases, Vol. 3 [Nos. 162-209], p. 52

I saw that before the work of God can make any decided progress, the ministers must be converted. … A faithful record of all their works is daily made by the recording angels.  All their acts, and even the intents and purposes of the heart, stand faithfully revealed.  Nothing is hid from the all-seeing eye of Him with whom we have to do. {1T 468.1} ~ Testimonies For The Church, Vol. 1, p. 468

The grave of Charles Taze Russell is marked by a massive pyramid decorated with the Templar cross-in-crown surrounded by Roman laurels on each side.

Similarly, it has been noted that James Springer White had an obelisk mark his grave and that another marks Ellen’s.

As I note in my book, these obelisks are the phallus of Osiris—not very appropriate on the grave of a Christian prophetess and her husband.

The Creator Gets A Vote

As I told you before, military tacticians are taught “the enemy gets a vote” before plans are acted upon.

Despite these troubling aspects regarding the Seventh Day Adventist sect, I do not consider them a cult.  In fact, I consider Adventists—their Luciferian founding and bad doctrines included—to have been chosen by YHWH to carry the vessel of His Truth through this very Counter-Reformation PSYOP to today!

The Adventists are the last true Protestants and their teaching on Rome, Futurism, Preterism, the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, Dispensationalism and Zionism are peerlessly accurate.  That’s why Jesuit-trained and managed Bill Clinton targeted the Branch Davidians for slaughter.

In the way that the gallows Haman built for Mordechai eventually executed him and his entire family, the Roman Luciferians were too smart by half when they created the Milleriate movement to humiliate Christians with.