Thursday, September 04, 2008

Squeakbox and Company still busy erasing Solana's family tree -- Why? OUR 'RUDI' HAS SOME ANSWERS!

I'm working on Part V of the series I have been doing, "The Hi-Jacking of Evangelicalism." In the meantime, I decided to see what Javier Solana had been up to as of late and noted his Wikipedia article had distinctive "Squeakbox" historical revisionism touches. Nieves Mathews', Salvador de Madariaga's oldest daughter who is Javier Solana's mother was rewritten as well.

Amusingly quoted as authority is a CIDOB article. The original CIDOB articles on Solana which I shall display in picture form in the next day or two clearly stated that Javier Solana was the NIETO of Javier Solana, not the "sobrino-nieto" which would be the Spanish word for grandson. The revised article up on the CIDOB site was obviously a Squeakbox creation! I have written about this in past blogspot articles. Perhaps it is time for a NewswithViews story!

Javier Solana wears the de Madariaga banner proudly when it suits him. When aspects of the family tree such as his mother's "Osho/Rajneesh" and Sufism embarrass him, he downplays it. Few things done by his mother and grandfather should be quite as embarrassing to him and his family as his 1983 display of the Marxist salute at an obvious Marxist Leninist gathering.

Why the historical revisionism and why now? I suspect it may have something to do with the newest New Age target year for global governance, 2009, of which Javier Solana yearns to play a more visible role. He knows we are watching -- like hawks -- and although he knows he cannot fool all of the people all of the time, he knows he can fool many of them all the time. Since so many people go to Wikipedia for information, that is where he -- or his groupie, Richard Weiss, aka SQUEAKBOX, are working -- to confuse, not inform.

Again, the question must be asked: what kind of a man would erase or cooperate in the denial of his own mother? Interestingly, Luis Solana once wrote, "did you know that Javier Solana has a sister." I refer you to Nieves Mathews' "necrologico" referring to her "due figli" (two sons) and her Osho testimony referring to her daughter. That is the daughter who is Javier Solana's sister. If this is not so, I challenge Javier Solana to publicly tell us:

1. Exactly who he claims his mother to be?
2. Why his grandfather cum "great uncle" would dote on him to the exclusion of Nieves' two sons who would be his biological grandchildren?

Anybody aspiring to global leadership, such as Javier Solana obviously is, should not keep such secrets from the world, especially when he demands such transparency from the rest of us!


Hi Constance-

Sorry, there isn’t much I found to add to what you’ve already written about Richard Weiss aka Squeakbox . I’ve read your past blogs referencing him and his distinctive revisionism touches on Solana/ Madariaga/Nieves Mathews’ info. Recently I went back to listen again to the speech given by Dr. Priscilla Elworthy (founder of Oxford Research Group) at the first Coalition for the Global Commons meeting held in Berlin, March 5, 2008. The subject of her particular segment of the meeting was, “Empowering World Citizens “. The reason I went back to listen was because I remembered her giving special mention to Jimmy Wales the founder of Wikipedia. She says,“There are plenty of other New Media Organizations emerging to serve and connect this global social revolution that we’re talking about. The Global Commons.

JIMMY WALES the founder of WIKIPEDIA, who joined us in helping to get the Elders off the ground, recently said at a private meeting, “Communications are now “point to point” not broadcast. We don’t need to just call governments. We can call each other.” And he has demonstrated through WIKIPEDIA, that with only four paid staff, a de-centralized mobilization of talent worldwide, could produce a global on-line encyclopedia, and constantly revise it.” She goes on to talk more about the “Emergence of the Elders, and how fascinating it’s been to bring together a group of twelve of the world’s wisest and most experienced people and take guidance from them, and cross-reference it with what this upsurge of world opinion wants and needs to do.

There’s also the World Future Council which you are well aware of. “Anyway, I mention this because she clearly (according to Dr. Elworthy) points to Wikipedia/the Internet/ directly as part of the New Age Networking.The very reason that many of us DON'T recommend Wikipedia as a reliable resource for serious documentation; (because of the potential for individuals like Squeakbox to revise and edit with personal opinions, and mis-information) is the very reason Jimmy Wales and Wiki are PRAISED by those who view the gathering of “collective” intelligence from all corners of society, where all can contribute and participate, as such a success. Wikipedia is an internet based global central meeting place (a “commons”) Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales rubs shoulders with many of the big name “newagers”. Ervin Laszlo gives Wales special mention on page 208 of his new book, “Cosmos: A Co-Creator's Guide to the Whole World". (September 2008 release date) So... I wouldn’t be surprised to find out someday, the altered information on Wikipedia has its origin with someone other than a person who has gone by the name of “Squeakbox”, Richard Weiss and multiple other alias. The link below lists 8 accountsfor Richard Weiss aka Squeakbox.-Rudi

Laszlo’s new book:

Excerpt page 208 of “Cosmos: A Co-creator’s Guide to the Whole World":
2:38 AM


Hi Constance-
Sorry, there isn’t much I found to add to what you’ve already
written about Richard Weiss aka Squeakbox . I’ve read your past blogs referencing him and his distinctive revisionism touches on Solana/ Madariaga/Nieves Mathews’ info.
Recently I went back to listen again to the speech given by Dr. Priscilla Elworthy (founder of Oxford Research Group) at the first Coalition for the Global Commons meeting held in Berlin, March 5, 2008. The subject of her particular segment of the meeting was, “Empowering World Citizens “.
The reason I went back to listen was because I remembered her giving special mention to Jimmy Wales the founder of Wikipedia. She says,

“There are plenty of other New Media Organizations emerging to serve and connect this global social revolution that we’re talking about. The Global Commons. JIMMY WALES the founder of WIKIPEDIA, who joined us in helping to get the Elders off the ground, recently said at a private meeting, “Communications are now “point to point” not broadcast. We don’t need to just call governments. We can call each other.” And he has demonstrated through WIKIPEDIA, that with only four paid staff, a de- centralized mobilization of talent worldwide, could produce a global on-line encyclopedia, and constantly revise it.”
She goes on to talk more about the “Emergence of the Elders, and how fascinating it’s been to bring together a group of twelve of the world’s wisest and most experienced people and take guidance from them, and cross-reference it with what this up-serge of world opinion wants and needs to do. There’s also the World Future Council which you are well aware of. “

Anyway, I mention this because she clearly (according to Dr. Elworthy) points to Wikipedia/the Internet/ directly as part of the New Age Networking.
The very reason that many of us DON'T recommend Wikipedia as a reliable resource for serious documentation; (because of the potential for individuals like Squeakbox to revise and edit with personal opinions, and mis-information) is the very reason Jimmy Wales and Wiki are PRAISED by those who view the gathering of “collective” intelligence from all corners of society, where all can contribute and participate, as such a success. Wikipedia is an internet based global central meeting place (a “commons”)
Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales rubs shoulders with many of the big name “newagers”. Ervin Laszlo gives Wales special mention on page 208 of his new book, “Cosmos: A Co-Creator's Guide to the Whole World". (September 2008 release date)
So... I wouldn’t be surprised to find out someday, the altered information on Wikipedia has its origin with someone other than a person who has gone by the name of “Squeakbox”, Richard Weiss and multiple other alias. The link below lists 8 accounts
for Richard Weiss aka Squeakbox.

Laszlo’s new book:

Excerpt page 208 of “Cosmos: A Co-creator’s Guide to the Whole World":,M1

Thanks, Rudi! I'm making your comment part of the article.

Everybody should refresh to view.


Waiting to see what will happen. Maybe Palin will refuse...

Anyone who uses Google knows by now the top search results are locked (ranked) with a heavy empahsis on Wikipedia. It takes some manuevering (manuering) to get past the initial layers, which are designed much like a funnel web.

I’ve posted this link before under “Google watch". Of interest is the “Can you sue Wikipedia” article, i.e. ( just in case some lawyer type wants to sue someone for posting erroneous information, i.e. misleading biographies, etc.)

The answer is, apparently not. What Jimmy Wales and Google says is true, is true. If not, tough.

Google and Wikipedia are obviously in bed, both publicly stating that they are seeking the “sum of all knowledge”. The internet sure makes a handy tool for all the bloggers and researchers here, eh?

Yet it should give everyone pause to think how a handful of people can be in charge of what the definition of "good" is, or what kind of information passes for "knowledge".

The strings are pulling tighter.
Give Eric Schmidt credit, he's admitted the threat to conservative bloggers at the Republican Convention...probably because Microsoft making inroads...

And has anyone noticed the new tiny url page that allows link tracking?
The classic fiction book "1984" by George Orwell was written in 1949. Many of the things predicted about living in a totalitarian state have come about. In the year 1984 when the book received much publicity most people couldn't recognize it as the world they lived in. No surprise because in the book 85% of the population is covered in a one and a half pages. In the book they have no clue about what is going on around them, just as now.

I am bringing up the book now because of the comparison between the "Memory Hole" described in the book and Wikipedia. Winston, the chief character in the book, works in the Records Department. Every day news and history is rewritten there. Inconvenient information is put into the memory hole.
"...Winston Smith, Orwell's protagonist, is a sort of copy editor for the London Times. The stories he works on, however, are old ones that contradict the party's ever-changing version of history. His job is to submit revisions. The archived issues are then presumably destroyed and reprinted.." More on the memory hole in the story.

Wikipedia is the currently acceptable version of the memory hole. Information is rewritten to comply with whatever the new accepted truth is. Because it is so convenient Wiki is used a lot. I would guess very few people bother to see what the older versions of the information are.

For instance in the case of Solana's bio at Wiki, it is dependent on whoever will put in the time to monitor it. Since it's not a paid job, it is dependent on volunteers to keep it accurate. This leaves it wide open for manipulation by those with their own agendas, planting or supressing information as needed.

While supposedly there are only a few paid staff members, behind the scenes there is much activity. Many involved volunteers appear to know each other. There are many mirror sites. Discussions take place behind the scenes determining how revisionists are to be handled. What is presented to the public as a user friendly website is in reality a very controlled operation where rules dealing with changes to articles are ruthlessly used against interlopers.

I am suggesting you put the information you've just learned about the Solana bio at Wiki in this category.

Posted by TMZ on 9/5/08:

Oprah to Palin: I Can Pencil You In Later

Oprah has issued a statement to TMZ -- she won't put Sarah Palin on her show until after the election.

Here's the statement: "The item in today's Drudge Report is categorically untrue. There has been absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show. At the beginning of this Presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over."

For the record, Barack Obama has been on "Oprah" twice -- in January, 2005 and again in October, 2006 -- before he announced his run for Prez.
While you do get directed to a few odds and ends newswithviews articles, there are far more links that come up that are entirely new age in which she is blasted.
I have personally noticed this with many search engines such as google too. Its not just Constance either, its anyone that speaks negative of new age, europe, Javier Solana,they are systematically trying to muffle our testimony.
What is this Constance? Is this Jimmy Wales personal “user talk page” where is wrote about you and ‘SqueakBox’ ??? -Rudi

User talk:Jimbo Wales/CASBJSF

CASBJSF = Cumbey and SqueakBox Javier Solana Feud
As you probably noticed on the history page but which others may not catch, all of the activity goes back to 2005 when Constance made contact with Wales. She came out ahead. She has since made some revisions on the Solana bio page but has not had the time necessary to monitor the site day to day.

Yes, I did notice the dates of the activity. I was more interested in the "personal" attention given to the topic by Jimmy Wales. Rudi
Dear Constance,

With reference to recent your statement "Anybody aspiring to global leadership, such as Javier Solana obviously is, should not keep such secrets from the world, especially when he demands such transparency from the rest of us!"

Yesterday, at the European Defence Agency (EDA) website (Dr. Solana is head of the agency, as well as its steering committee) found the following posted:


New EDA interactive application on Defence Data
Brussels, 28 August 2008, News

EDA has produced a new application which provides increased transparency on defence spending in its participating Member States, highlighting in particular defence expenditure trends. The new application can be accessed by clicking on Defence Data.



First thought was, "You demand transparency from others, but how about yourself."



Shocking trend: U.S. courts citing Wikipedia
Department of Homeland Security, immigration judge consult 'free encyclopedia'
Posted: September 05, 2008

"An immigration judge is under fire after he cited Wikipedia in his ruling, and some say it is just the newest example of a disturbing trend.

"The online "free encyclopedia," written and edited by its users, has been considered an unreliable source by teachers, authors, editors, patent examiners, librarians and researchers. But now a judge has based part of his ruling on a Wikipedia entry, Bender's Immigration Bulletin reported.

"Homeland Security cites Wikipedia....

"In "Courting Wikipedia," the American Association for Justice recently revealed an alarming trend toward courts referencing the website in more than 100 published opinions...."

NEW AGE, GOV.AND MEDICINE,0,2313464.story OR

U.S. Looks At New Age, Holistic Therapies For Veterans
Alternative Therapies In Play As Government Tackles Damaged Psyches Of Vets
By ANN MARIE SOMMA | Courant Staff Writer
August 25, 2008
The U.S. military is spending $4 million to figure out whether New Age practices and holistic therapies can mend the wounded psyches of its troops.

Concerned with the high number of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and brain injuries, the government is handing out grants to conduct clinical studies on everything from yoga, to Reiki, to animal assisted therapy, to transcendental meditation.
(more at link)


Hi Dorothy, this comes as no surprise to me. I recently posted a link to the Global Coherence Project which is tied up in some way with HeartMath. HeartMath have been getting their 'em-wave' product into hospitals and schools and also have a special "HeartMath Military Warrior Initiative" (link below).

Dean Radin from IONS is on the advisory board of the GCP. Plenty more names on the boards too, they may mean more to you than they do to me, a casual observer;

In and of itself the 'em-wave' electronic product seems fairly innocent and kinda medical and maybe quite useful to some people but it's the meditation and thought teaching that 'goes with it' plus their 'mission' and target audience that I find disturbing.

Both HeartMath and GCP sites are large and meandering sites. If you get the time it's worth looking at their stores and resources pages too for an idea of where they're leading.

Hope this/I make some sense. It all sets my alarm bells ringing as they look quite influential companies/charities but maybe they're just 'all fur coat and no knickers' ... I don't know!


My apologies for not replying to you sooner Re:Lakeland. Whilst I totally understand that you want get the word out locally and through your blog, I don't feel comfortable releasing any further details than I already supplied. This was not a decision I took lightly but slowly came to the conclusion that there is so much evidence 'out there' now that those who want to go on believing will. Sadly, it is a true account of events that I have borne witness to.

I was reading that Lakeland, Brownsville & Toronto are connected in some way with IHOP - International House of Prayer. Do you know if this is correct information? Also I have heard vaguely from afar about the Kansas City Prophets ... do you know if they are they connected with these as well?

Thanks for any help you can offer.


Frankly ,if you want information about Kansas City prophets and how I feel about all the charismatic bashing that has been going on thanks to nutcases like Todd Bentley, just go read my latest blog post. Nowadays if someone is into apostolic ministries or the charismatic movement, they are automatically labeled as heretics. Bentley was an aberation and as a result, a witch hunt is gaining momentum in the online blogging community against decent, Christ-loving charismatic and evangelical churches. Frankly, I think that Brownsville has been unfairly maligned. I know of many wonderful things that came out of Brownsville, in spite of its faults. Guilt by association is reaching epidemic proportions on some Christian websites,and it only adds fuel to an already burning anti-Christian cauldron taking place in the world today. As I predicted a week ago, the fact that Palin is now on the GOP ticket has only incensed the radical leftists further, and I doubt that the McCain-Palin ticket is viable against the Obama-worshipping Move-On coalition, whose mail I get on a daily basis. (Good to know what they're up to.)

Unfortunately, in addition to the rising momentum and Christian church infiltration of the New Age movement, there are also decent Christians stoking the coals against other decent Christians as well. Seems the devil is working overtime on Christian turf in more ways than one. Discernment is one thing, but it amounts to nothing when certain Christians refuse to acknowledge that human interpretation of the bible is fallible, and judge other Christians who may or not agree with their own interpretations. It's obvious here, on this blog, that different people have different interpretations, as arguments, albeit civil, break out regularly. Does God want us all squabbling like Pharisees? I'm frankly tired of it.

I for one think more good has been done by small churches like the one I belong to, and which has associations with apostolic outreaches, then bad. But go tell that to the people who label any church that wants a revival as dominionists.

In answer to your question, Bentley was evidently a fan of William Branham, founder of the Kansas City/latter rain movement. That's all I know about the association. On a lighter note, I know nothing about the Pancake House you mentioned,lol.

Read the Miriam Franklin blogs- I'm sure you'll find the answers to your questions there.
Transcript from Larry King interview with Mario Cuomo:

CUOMO: He's many things, McCain. But he is not change. Obama is. He's a new kind of intelligence.

KING: Mumph!

CUOMO: He's young. He's bright. He has a different attitude toward the world, a more cosmopolitan attitude. He's all the things we need. Most of all, those 80% of the American people are right. We need change. These people are not change.

I heard this and I couldn't get Constance's book out of my head. Senator Obama is homo noeticus. It reminded me of the article (linked here some time ago) regarding the Senator being a "lightworker". He is a NEW KIND OF INTELLIGENCE. Yikes.


I agree, far too many people miss the effect that even the Lord does miracles in strange places for those who believe. It is by faith we are healed, not by the hand of the thief or coward.
Thank You Young Grasshopper for all the information you have supplied. I'm afraid I've gotten lost along the way in the politics though as I don't even know what a GOP ticket is and I'm guessing that Pancake House is slang for something?

I live on a remote Scottish island (population approx 2700) and our nine small churches have varying numbers of regular Sunday worshippers ranging from under ten to about thirty active members. I think we only have one ordained Minister resident here now, who is due to retire in a few years time. Nine of us from three different churches are able to meet for the Bible Study that I attend so we don't experience very many denominational difficulties here. My apologies if my question appeared insensitive and offensive.

Interesting always find them.

Young Grasshopper,
In response to your comment about differences of opinion...As someone whose family was killed in the Shoah( the Holocaust ) had my roots hidden for many years because of anti-Semitism and who believes in Yeshua, I personally feel like there is a need to set the record straight. It really bothers me that when I make a remark from a Hebraic perspective on the blog, someone feels the need to say some like "you are putting people under the law". I'm not personally offended as much as upset that this wrong interpretation has been going on for a long time. God has walked me through a lot of things that helped me to understand the whys of what has happened in history to my people and the schism between the Jews and the Church. I really had to wrestle with these things in profound ways.

Jewish people love Torah..They don't look at it as a bunch of legalistic obligations as God's instructions to His people.(not talking about those who are into hair-splitting legalistic observance) For 1900 years Christianity has been putting Torah practices down, but personally I don't believe it started that way.. Another words..I think that Paul is misinterpreted most of the time. This is not the place to settle these theological disputes, but then if I make a remark and someone jumps on me...I will respond, hopefully in a manner that is respectful.

As a Jew, I can love my Jewish Messiah and remain a Jew...That was the point of my last discussion with Dispzdrejected ( I presume that might be what you're referring to). Torah is not a burden, but a blessing...although it never saved anyone, not even Moses. When the children of Israel crossed the Red Sea on dry land, they were not obeying Torah. God delivered them with His "strong right hand".

Yeshua literally means that God is our Salvation. He always was and always will be. After He saves us, our response should be to walk in obedience to His Word.. Since Torah literally means "instructions" "goal" "teachings", the way we know His Word is by hearing and obeying it..

This has nothing whatsoever to do with the New Age, but if more of the churches out there, knew and obeyed God's instructions, they would not be falling into New Age occult much for having the Holy Spirit...

Yeshua, the living Torah, came to live out with the proper interpretation the Torah...He should know, since He is the Word. Here's what the Bible says about the last days:

Is. 2:2 Now it will come about that
In the last days
The mountain of the house of the LORD
Will be established as the chief of the mountains,
And will be raised above the hills;
And call the nations will stream to it.
Is. 2:3 And many peoples will come and say,
“Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
That He may teach us concerning His ways
And that we may walk in His paths.”
For the Torah will go forth afrom Zion
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

Guess what, we are all going to be going to Jerusalem to learn Torah. You might as well start now.


I truly appreciate your knowledge, and I wish I did know Torah. I also agree with what you said here:

"This has nothing whatsoever to do with the New Age, but if more of the churches out there, knew and obeyed God's instructions, they would not be falling into New Age occult much for having the Holy Spirit..."

However, it has really begun to get me down that evangelical Christians like myself (who totally support Israel, as you know) are being ripped to shreds for everything under the sun. The Sarah Palin convocation speech at the Assembly of God church is an example. I believe that Dorothy left the link for it:

All one needs to do is read the comment section there to see how much evangelical Christians are hated. Her words were distorted, when all she really said was that we need to pray for our leaders, that by sending these soldiers forward, they (the leaders)are doing God's will.

That's exactly how I pray, but I suppose some will argue that there's something wrong with praying "God's will be done".

I did not bring Judaism into my argument at all, if you read my blog post. I respect Judaism totally, even though I don't understand it.

I am frustrated more than angry because my worship system is constantly being denigrated by other Christians. This frustration originated from comments left on my blog by people I don't know, telling me that I need to pray for discernment regarding Palin, as a result of the dangerous teachings of her church.

Part of this frustration is that I feel like I have no where to go anymore- either in the voting booth or in choosing a place of worship- without encountering those who are certain that I am wrong and have made a bad decision, and that they are right and have all the perfect answers. I am already confused by the political choices, but when my worship system upon which I depend for spiritual nourishment, is also brought into question, I feel increasingly without hope. You've just increased that apprehension, by the way, since
I guess you are telling me I should convert to Judaism. Trust me, I almost had a nervous breakdown from the guilt I felt after leaving the Catholic church 15 years ago. If I were to deny Jesus' divinity at this point in my life it would kill me. I do not know if you are an orthodox Jew or a messianic Jew, but I do know that I am not capable of denying Jesus at this point in my life.

Can someone give me some insight into who these people are : PJMiller and Miriam Franklin?

They seem to have all the answers about everything, but I have no idea who they are, and why or why not I should listen to them. Links to their blogs were used to show me I was wrong in supporting Palin.


Sorry if I sounded angry. I just happened to come here to Constance's blog and read your comment directed to me, at a point in time where I was feeling extremely frustrated. You mentioned the Kansas City prophets who are connected to the Latter Rain movement. The pastor of my own church believes in revival and apostolic ministries and has had some associations with some of these very same people. However, I feel my pastor is a very good man filled with love for Jesus,and the word he preaches is pure,(to me), so it has hit a chord in me that charismatic churches like the one I attend are being ripped apart for believing that the supernatural events of Pentecost were not intended for just those times and those apostles. Todd Bentley has managed to add fuel to the fire, I'm afraid. I over-reacted and I apologize.

Don't worry about American politics- I didn't realize you were from Scotland. The pancake house remark was intended to be a joke, since you mentioned IHOP. IHOP here in America is commonly known as The International House of pancakes- a chain of restaurants.
Young grasshopper,
I hear your frustration....First I want to be VERY, VERY clear about one thing. I would NEVER tell you or anyone else to deny Yeshua or convert Judaism. Yeshua is your salvation, so that's the starting point. As far as how to live out your faith...God is faithful to show you if you read His Word and pray and ask for wisdom.

James 1:5 says that if anyone is lacking wisdom they can ask and God will give it to them, if they ask with believing faith. He delights in helping us.

I didn't read your blog yet, so I'm not sure what happened there, but I actually think Sarah Palin might be okay too, for whatever my two cents are worth.

There's so much confusion out there and so many politicians who throw around the words "Christian" that none of us really know what's in someone's heart. Without reading your blog or Dorothy's comments I can say that my initial impression of her is favorable. My problem is with McCain, but that's another story.. Don't like Obama either, but no one asked my opinion before they selected the candidates...Let's just say it takes a lot of money to run for President, so the ones are running are undoubtedly hand-picked by very powerful people with an agenda that will go forth regardless. Call me cynical.

As for the labels, which we wear, they get really tricky too. By blood I am a Jew. I was raised Catholic, but accepted Jesus, who I now call Yeshua. Personally, I don't exactly fit into the Messianic Jew box 100% but I do believe that Torah God's holy what does that make me? I consider myself a Jew who found her Messiah...I refuse to accept the idea that I am any different from my family who died for being Jews...since I would have died too had I lived in Europe at that time.

I am not hostile towards people who call themselves Christians. Many of my dearest friends do.. My journey has caused me to study the roots of my faith and the history of the schism between Jews and Christians. The God I serve is a God of reconciliation, but in order for us to be reconciled it needs to be around truth. None of us see perfectly now, but one day we will.. Personally, I think the missing ingredient is Torah. From all I read and see in the Bible, it's been given a bum rap.

Mind you, I am not talking about Judaism...but Torah. The Torah existed before Judaism ever came into being. Because the Jews are the ones who preserved Torah, we think of Torah and Judaism as synonymous, but they are really not. Judaism is based on Torah, but also on Oral Tradition. Since the destruction of the Second Temple there has been quite a bit of transformation. There can be a lot of wisdom in Judaism because it is based on Torah, but it is not based on Yeshua and this is where I would differ.

Since Yeshua is the Word who became flesh, He is the Living Torah. My big gripe is that I believe Paul has been credited with tearing down Torah, which I think is a misunderstanding of his writings. I'm not the only one who believes this. Since 1967 many Jews have come to faith in Yeshua. This and the discovery of things like Dead Sea Scrolls has brought a fresh perspective to the scholarly work of analyzing the Scriptures. When Jews read, what you call the New Testament, they see it as a great commentary on Torah. Another words, it's very Jewish in it's character, even the Greek that is used which is not typical Greek.

If we are indeed in the Last Days, then we might expect that God is at work doing things that might not meet with our expectations. I suspect every generation had a different ideas about how things would unfold, and we can be sure that not everyone is right, but we do have the Scriptures and this should be our main focus.

Not sure if that addressed your comments or not..

I do hope that everyone who reads here understands that Joyce is a Jew who converted to a branch of Christianity. She does not teach Judaism, but adulterated Christianity.

Christianity has its own 2,000 year history separate and apart from Judaism. Judaism has a much longer history which continued after Christianity branched off.

For a brief period of time 2,000 years ago there was a merging of Judaism and Christianity. Look at it as children leaving home. Childrn take the experiences of their parents, add their own and form something new. The parents do not change. The children become adults and form something new. Children cannot force parents to become offsprings of the children.

Joyce, face it. You've left home. You cannot claim to know all there is to know about your parent religion as well as interpret it. You cannot do this any more than you can claim to know all there is to know about your parents as well as psychoanalyze them. You only end up stretching and distorting information to meet your needs.

You teach a whole new thing called Messianic Judaism. Live with it. Don't try to be all things to all people.

I write this because there is no one else who will tell others that you do not speak for Judaism. You may physically be a Jew, but you are not spritually one.

"Investors Business Daily had an editorial yesterday that you need to pass around and get wide reading for. It unmasks Obama's true agenda, and is absolutely jaw-dropping. Here's the link. OR

If you understand Marxism, you'll see that's exactly what he has planned for our Republic.

In case the link is moved or taken down, I've taken a screenshot and posted it here:"
Thanks for taking the time to pass this valuable information on Dawn.


Thursday, September 04, 2008
Blogs away!
In June last my co-editor posted a piece on an EU parliament debate about controlling bloggers.

This immediately brought a response from arch europhiliac Jon Worth - who also published the pic (left) that we have nicked … clearly another example of irresponsible bloggers.

Even though the story was picked up by the stalwart Bruno Waterfield, Worth was having none of it, proclaiming that this was just an EU parliament resolution, with no legislative effect. We could all go back to sleep.

However, the story has resurfaced in Dan Hannan's blog, partly reproduced by Iain Dale, drawing attention to the full report from the EU parliament on its ideas for controlling bloggers.

As before, it proposes "clarifying the status, legal or otherwise, of weblogs". It also want to "encourage" their voluntary labelling according to the professional and financial responsibilities and interests of their authors and publishers, effectively ruling out the idea of the anonymous blog.

What particularly worries the report author, Estonian Socialist MEP Marianne Mikko, is the "undetermined and unindicated status of authors and publishers of weblogs" as this causes "uncertainties regarding impartiality, reliability, source protection, applicability of ethical codes and the assignment of liability in the event of lawsuits."

But there is also more to this report. Buried in the obscure language is a concern "the commercial media has expressed" over "unfair competition" from user-generated content, with a recommendation that the commission and member states "safeguard media pluralism, to ensure that all EU citizens can access free and diversified media in all member states."

Thus sounds suspiciously like a bid to subsidise the ailing MSM which is more willing to carry the EU’s messages, with the commission taking advantage of this to "recommend improvements when needed." The report also "stresses the need to institute monitoring and implementation systems for media pluralism based on reliable and impartial indicators", which stinks of Big Brother - the Orwellian version.

Of course, Jon Worth can still dismiss this as an "own initiative" report with no legislative significance. But it is the case that the commission uses its stooges in the EU parliament to fly kites, and if they get friendly receptions – which they so often do – it then uses them as the justification for proposing legislation.

Certainly, as both we and Bruno Waterfield have reported, the commission hates blogs, holding them – and the internet in general – partly responsible for the success of the "no" campaign in Ireland. The net was also a powerful force in the Dutch and French referendums, and those lessons will not have been lost on the commission.

This report, therefore, can be taken as a ranging shot. Clearly, there is concern within the EU about the power of the internet and the fact that it is beyond the control of the eurocrats. Part of the fight-back, it would seem, will be to subsidise the MSM, in an attempt to level the playing field, but one cannot rule out some attempt at regulation in the fullness of time.

It should go without saying that any such attempt would be fraught with difficulty but that will not deter the commission. Having tried the old adage, "if you can't beat them, join them" – with the fragrant commissioner's tedious blog - it is reverting to type with its own version of the adage: "if you can't join them, beat them".

All we can say is, "Blogs away! – Let battle commence!"
I posted the entire thing because at EU posts tend to disappear as they move down the page, and this one is already 2/3 down.


This story appeared in the comments section after the item at EU. While some laugh at the idea that the internet can be controlled, this is how China is working at it.

The post about the Chinese government's use of a citizen army to block bloggers reminds me of the OBAMA BABIES, the internet system organized by Obama people which now amounts to several million people for Obama connected by the internet. They are used to target opposition to Obama, but if he wins they may target other things.
Dorothy Dorothy,
So you're Joyces judge now. That's a pretty lofty postion to be in: saying that someone is not spiritually what they say and feel that they are.
Good luck with that.
Personally I think that Joyce is a real Jew: completed by the Son of God.
She's just not in the majority.

It's a free country. You can call a biscuit a loaf of bread if you want to. I am also free to give my opinion, or judge, someone who does so.

Communication depends on mutual acceptance of the definition of words. That's why we have dictionaries.

Do remember Humpty Dumpty had a great fall...
"`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all.' ..."


You hit the nail on the head. Redefining terms on the fly is common in many spheres today, and it makes any kind of meaningful communication impossible.

I also do not believe you were passing judgment on anyone's salvation. Just as in Orwell's Animal Farm, where "some are more equal than others", it does seem to depend upon who is doing the judging as to whether they are criticized for it. Correctly assessing someone's public claims is not improper judging, or poor Constance would be the most guilty party of us all!
You are right in saying I am not part of Judaism. I am a Jew, not because I practice rabbinic Judaism but because I am a physical descendant of the House of Judah, or Yehudah.. Judaism is something that developed post-Babylon and after the destruction of the Second Temple was really transformed, because there was no more Temple...i.e. no more animal sacrifices.

I don't identify with rabbinic Judaism strongly, because I wasn't raised in it and I don't see it as exactly what was given to Moses at Mt. Sinai, in spite of what rabbis might try to convince you of, although there are parts of it that do come from Torah.

The Torah, was not called "Judaism" at the time of Moses, nor at the time of King David. We don't really find Judaism until the period of the Second Temple, by which time it was fairly divided with Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, etc, etc.

When Yeshua comes the Torah will go out from Zion, not Judaism. I'm not being hard on Judaism, but making a distinction in what Scripture says versus what was added by rabbis later on to compensate for the fact that there is no Temple. Without the Temple it is hard for Jews to live out Torah, unless they know Yeshua and understand the transaction that took place when He spilled His blood for our sins. i.e. our Passover Lamb, our Yom Kippur offering...Judaism says that with prayer we can atone, but the Scriptures say without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. I will chose the Scriptures over any man-made religion, be it Christianity or Judaism, etc. God never called us to create religions anyway. He called us into relationship with Him. Religion is all of man's attempts to justify himself. Yeshua has justified us, so need for religion.

I stand for Yeshua, for Torah, for Yeshua the Living Torah..

Remember, Dorothy, without the Temple, without the shedding of blood there is NO remission of sin. Only in Yeshua, the Cohen HaGadol, who entered into the heavenly places makes intercession for me.

Flinging a chicken around your head on Yom Kippur does not satisfy the Torah requirements and you should know that as well as I. So my question to you Dorothy, is what will justify you? Do you believe the rabbis who say good works will justify you or do you believe the Torah that say only blood will justify you? Listen to what the Torah says:

Lev. 17:11 ‘For the 1life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for bit is the blood by reason of the 1life that makes atonement.’

or the Jewish Publication Society Translation if you prefer:

Lev. 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have assigned it to you for making expiation for your lives upon the altar; it is the blood, as life, that effects expiation.

Without Yeshua, Jews have a problem...only through the shedding of blood is there expiation for sin. No Temple, no korban, no korban, no forgiveness..

The only thing I can say to you Dorothy is that our Abba would not leave us without a means of atonement because He is full of mercy, and being true to Himself, He cannot violate His own Word, so He did leave us a means of's in Yeshua, the spotless Lamb who was slain at the same time as the Passover lambs at the Temple. He is our scapegoat. He is the one who was slain before the foundations of the earth...You believe it, you have life. You don't .....I leave you to reflect.

There is only ONE way to the Father and that is through Yeshua, just like there was only one door on the Ark of Noah, just like there was only the High Priest who made atonement once a year on Yom Kippur....Abba has been telling our people this for thousands of years in His Torah.. The question is will you chose it and find life or continue to mock me? I didn't make this up. It's all in the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings. Our people have killed the prophets, have been dispersed around the world because we are a "stiff-necked" people. All that was foretold through the prophets has happened to our people. I'll leave you one more thought, but I promise you your rabbi will not read this passage of Isaiah in the synagogue.. It's way too convicting...700+ years before Yeshua, Isaiah wrote this about Him. Maybe you have another explanation for this passage, but....if you're honest with yourself, the prophet Isaiah foretold the coming of Yeshua. A famous rabbi died in Jerusalem and left a letter stating that Yeshua is Mashiach ben Joseph and Maschiach ben David..the suffering servant and the victorious king. He was 106 at his death. He studied the Scriptures for many years, but God revealed this to him before he died....have a look if you dare:

. 53:1 ¶ aWho has believed our message?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
Is. 53:2 For He grew up before Him like a atender 1shoot,
And like a root out of parched ground;
He has bno stately form or majesty
That we should look upon Him,
Nor appearance that we should 2be attracted to Him.
Is. 53:3 He was adespised and forsaken of men,
A man of 1sorrows and bacquainted with 2grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was cdespised, and we did not desteem Him.
Is. 53:4 ¶ Surely our 1griefs He Himself abore,
And our 2sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
3Smitten of bGod, and afflicted.
Is. 53:5 But He was 1pierced through for aour transgressions,
He was crushed for bour iniquities;
The cchastening for our 2well-being fell upon Him,
And by dHis scourging we are healed.
Is. 53:6 All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all
To 1fall on Him.
Is. 53:7 ¶ He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He did not aopen His mouth;
bLike a lamb that is led to slaughter,
And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,
So He did not open His mouth.
Is. 53:8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away;
And as for His generation, who considered
That He was cut off out of the land of the 1living
aFor the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due?
Is. 53:9 His grave was assigned with wicked men,
Yet He was with a arich man in His death,
bBecause He had cdone no violence,
Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.
Is. 53:10 ¶ But the LORD was pleased
To acrush Him, 1bputting Him to grief;
If 2He would render Himself as a guilt coffering,
He will see dHis 3offspring,
He will prolong His days,
And the 4good epleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.
Is. 53:11 As a result of the 1anguish of His soul,
He will asee 2it and be satisfied;
By His bknowledge the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will cbear their iniquities.
Is. 53:12 Therefore, I will allot Him a aportion with the great,
And He will divide the booty with the strong;
Because He poured out 1bHimself to death,
And was cnumbered with the transgressors;
Yet He Himself dbore the sin of many,
And interceded for the transgressors.

Thanks for passing on the link to that story I emailed you. I went to do that last night and the computer froze up.

The radio show that I heard it on was Glenn Beck. If you are interested, you can read the transcript of what he said on the show here:


I know some may have issues with Mr. Beck because he is Mormon. But this is absolutely vital information. First, this is the first time I had even heard of it. Second, no one else is talking about it.

I heard Mr. Beck describing this (as you can read in the transcript above). It really sounded like something that you might see in one of those hokey end times movies on TBN or something.
Thanks.. I'm not taking that too personally. It's not an intellectual issue, but a spiritual one. My IQ didn't go up when I accepted Yeshua. My eyes were opened...Once I was blind and now I see. It's not thanks to me...but only by the grace of God...
"I'll leave you one more thought, ..." or do you only mean in the minute you wrote it. LOL

There's another group that believed the Torah has nothing to do with Judaism.

Nothing anyone says is going to stop you from loading up the comments section with your brand of Christianity. You're on a roll. You have your followers here. You've found a good place to vent.

Regarding blood, I call everyone attention to David Biale's book
Blood and Belief
The Circulation of a Symbol between Jews and Christians
"Blood contains extraordinary symbolic power in both Judaism and Christianity—as the blood of sacrifice, of Jesus, of the Jewish martyrs, of menstruation, and more. Yet, though they share the same literary, cultural, and religious origins, on the question of blood the two religions have followed quite different trajectories. For instance, while Judaism rejects the eating or drinking of blood, Christianity mandates its symbolic consumption as a central sacrament. How did these two traditions, both originating in the Hebrew Bible's cult of blood sacrifices, veer off in such different directions? With his characteristic wit and erudition, David Biale traces the continuing, changing, and often clashing roles of blood as both symbol and substance through the entire sweep of Jewish and Christian history from Biblical times to the present."

Get it? Blood is symbolic. Your claim to have Jewish blood in you, whatever you think that is, means whatever your religion wants to make it symbolic of. Your religious leaders can make up whatever symbolism they want to teach about blood. And they do. It doesn't make it truth. It makes it opinion which you take on faith.

I just wanted to remind readers here that you are biased against Judaism and what you write should not be seen in any way as coming from the religion known as Judaism for thousands of years.

As for me, by now you should know that I can't be hypnotized, I've never been to Starbucks and for very obvious reasons I am not impressed by and so ignore attempts at information overload.

Young Grasshopper,

You wrote:

I am frustrated more than angry because my worship system is constantly being denigrated by other Christians. This frustration originated from comments left on my blog by people I don't know, telling me that I need to pray for discernment regarding Palin, as a result of the dangerous teachings of her church."

What I am curious to know is this. By what standards are these other "Christian" people telling you that you are "right" or "wrong?"

Who died and made any one of them "the Pope?"

LOL If you left the Catholic Church to get away from "popery," why would you want to settle for a mere "change of masters?"

How can you be sure that these critters aren't merely shills for Obama disguising themselves as "Christians" just to pull your chain???

I am kidding, of course, but I am doing so in order to make a point.

You already know that I am a strict Roman Catholic, and yet I have never told you that you were automatically going to hell in a hand basket because you left the Catholic Church. For all I know, you may have left what you THOUGHT was the Catholic Church...i.e. "Catholic in name only."

At the end of the day, your reasons for leaving are between you and God. At least you are not like the hypocrites who remain in the Catholic Church in spite of their refusal to believe and put into practice what the Catholic Church teaches in matters of faith and morals.

These people who try to make you see the "error of your ways"....who are they trying to or themselves???

Here is something to think about, Young Grasshopper.

As a practicing Roman Catholic, I cannot in good conscience vote for any of the so-called "Roman Catholics" running for public office on account of their "un-Catholic" positions on abortion, gay marriage, etc.

Even my bishop and other Roman Catholic Bishops have said that Catholics should not be supporting pro-abortion politicians - implying that in terms of the moral issues at stake, a good pro-life Protestant political candidate is to be preferred above a bad pro-abortion "Catholic" political candidate - Pentacostal or not!

I hope this helps you in your "discernment" process. :-)
Just some general thoughts:

Ya know, the thing about the blood is real simple. Hebrews 9 says,

16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood.

Simple. Not allegorical, mystical, complicated or esoteric. It's legal talk. Wow. And as my grandpa used to say, "Where there's a will, there's a relative."

Now Rom. 7:4 makes sense too:

So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

Because Jesus died to the law, so did we who are "in" Him. Dead people aren't liable. A widow or widower is free to marry another. It's all very simple. We're free!

Because we are in Christ, we are his brothers and sisters, and adopted children of God. God is our Father for that reason, and we are no longer slaves.

So anything that would put distance in the Relationship in any way is not Christianity. Anything that would complicate the simple Word is static. Jesus rose from the dead, and God went out of his way to provide witnesses, who wrote it all down. That's good enough for me.

Peter only sank when he took his eyes off Jesus. Let the storms of hairsplitting theories and allegories fly all around; as long as you're focused on Jesus, you won't sink.

That is Christianity to me. Everything else is either icing on the cake or dross to be skimmed off and discarded.
Dear Despized and Rejected,

Well said and thank you!

Dear Susanna,

I appreciated your last post.

You're quite welcome, Constance! It especially means a lot coming from you.
The book you site would be appropriate if you were talking to a Catholic on the blog because they believe in transubstantiation. i.e. the host and wine are turned into the body and blood of Jesus....I don't believe that. I believe there is a direct link between Yeshua and Passover.. The blood of the lamb on the doorposts forming the letter "Hey" in Hebrew, signifying YHWH who brings life. The blood of the Lamb, on the doorposts of our heart signifying YHVH who brings life..

I quote from Moses and Leviticus. You should not have a problem with that. As for Judaism being in existence thousands of years, I guess it depends what you mean. Yeshua was part of Second Temple Judaism, but there was a Temple.. That Judaism was based on Torah, but He did not accept the corrupt system of religious leaders that was in cahoots with Rome. His criticisms of some of the people from His own sect, the Pharisees was the fact that they put put their traditions over the Word of God or they taught the Word of God, but did not practice it.

Instead of looking at "Christianity" since you are such an avid reader, why don't you try reading the Apostolic Scriptures and see what they say. One thing I have learned after many years of studying the Bible...there is Scripture and then there is men's interpretation of it.

By the way, I'm not anti-Judaism per say, but I just question that the oral traditions have been handed down from Sinai. You can't prove that they have been either. If they were, in any case you would have the old problem of 2 rabbis and 5 opinions. They would be in agreement. If Judaism is 100% accurate, which Judaism: the Hasidics, the Lubavitchers, the Reform movement, the Conservative branch, Orthodox, etc. You see Judaism has the same problem as Christianity. It's a religion where men try to codify what they think the Bible says. When they disagree, they form another branch...hmmmm, who is right?

I submit to you that Moses and King David did not have "a religion"...they were in relationship with YHVH, and heard His voice. This is very different from making " a system". Ancient Israel lived in community as one, not a bunch of divided sects. When God brought them out of Egypt they were one community around the mishkan...Judaism does not have this kind of unity today. As I said before Judaism is a post-Babylon thing. It is interesting to note that it developed when there was no more ark of the covenant and no more king and Israel was under occupation. This is the context Yeshua is born you think that's an accident?

I think where Judaism went way off is in 135 AD with the Simon Bar Kokhba rebellion. The believers in Yeshua would not follow this false messiah and join in the rebellion against the Romans.. From that time on the schism between the Jewish believers in Yeshua and the Jews who didn't believe in Yeshua grew. Here's one account of the schism, which seems to be pretty accurate( although I am not familiar personally with this fellow's writing but he is consistent on the account of Bar Kokhba) for you Dorothy, or anyone else who would like to learn a little of the history... I'm think of you too Maryanne, if you're reading this.

There wasn't just some little connection between Yeshua and the Jews a few centuries ago. He was a Jew, born under Torah, circumcised the eighth day, from the line of David, etc, etc. He fulfilled all the expectations of Messiah, by healing someone bling from birth, healing lepors, raising the dead and finally was raised from the dead Himself which only God can do.

Col. 1:15-17 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, aboth in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — call things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

There is error on both sides. Jews have Torah, but not Yeshua. Christians have Yeshua but not Torah. Jews have added traditions, which can be very nice but are at times extra-biblical and the same with Christians, but ultimately it's spiritual blindness that keeps us all to from "seeing". God blessed Israel so that they could be "a light to the nations" and bring Torah...when we failed miserably, which we did or we wouldn't have been exiled, Yeshua came to redeem us.

You see God already knew we would fail, but like Abraham said when he realized he didn't have to slay Isaac, look what he says:

Gen. 22:8 Abraham said, “God will provide for Himself the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” So the two of them walked on together.

That provision would be many years later in His Son, Yeshua. Abraham is the picture of the father and Isaac the picture of the son. God foreshadowed exactly what would take place when Yeshua was taken as an offering for our sins. He bore our iniquities as Isaiah said.

By the way, it's not only Jews who Yeshua came, but for ALL Israel. All Israel are not Judaism tries to make it seem as though the other tribes were Jews, but that's simply not true. There were 10 other tribes and Yeshua came for them too. They disappeared after the Assyrian exile.

You see Yeshua was like Joseph..His brothers may not have recognized Him, but He came to reunite the whole family. If you remember the story, Joseph was sold for 20 pieces of silver. Yeshua was sold for 30. Joseph forgave his brothers, so did Yeshua. Joseph the favorite son, foreshadows Yeshua. Torah gives us illustration after illustration of the relationship between YHVH and Yeshua, who are echad. There are many more "signs of Messiah" in this story, but not enough space to get into it.

Part of hebraic thinking is being able to recognize the patterns in Scripture, so you should be able to see this, if you look for it..

As far as just saying "one more thing".....did you ever watch the show Colombo? I used to love that show because just when you thought he was done, he would irritate you by coming up with "one more thing" one more thing:

Look at Ezekiel's description of Yeshua and Revelations.. it's the same!

Ezek. 1:27 Then I noticed from the appearance of His loins and upward something alike glowing metal that looked like fire all around within it, and from the appearance of His loins and downward I saw something like fire; and there was a radiance around Him.

Ezekiel was seeing pre-incarnate image of Yeshua, and Yohanan ( John) was seeing something pretty similar from his prison cell on the Isle of Patmos.

Rev. 1:13-15 and ain the middle of the lampstands I saw one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across His chest with a golden sash. His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and His eyes were like a flame of fire. His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been made to glow in a furnace, and His bvoice was like the sound of many waters.

I guess the ultimate question is Dorothy, can God not reveal Himself to us any way He so choses? If He can, then why does the idea of God revealing Himself in the person of Yeshua, seem so far-fetched.

Oh, and one more thing Dorothy..If you want to be a "light to the nations" since you are Israel, instead of criticizing me, you could do it by spreading the light of Torah...I have never heard you speak about Torah, but maybe you do in other circles? Torah would do a lot to restrain the evil of the New Age movement, since it speaks explicitly against all forms of spiritual adultery. As a Jew, I really do understand my share the light of Torah and the living Torah, before anything else.

One more picture of who Yeshua is:

Gen. 1:1-3 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God dwas moving over the surface of the waters. Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.

This is a direct reference to Bereshit ( Genesis)

John 1:1-5 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and dthe Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

John 3:14-15 “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;so that whoever believes will ain Him have eternal life.

A lot of times, God does things that don't make sense in our human way of looking at things. This is why it is so difficult to understand Yeshua, but imagine those Israelites who would not look at the snake and died in the wilderness. They probably experienced the kind of doubt...


The verse you quote from, in the original Greek source text does not contain the word "covenant" so again, we are being referred back to the fact that Yeshua's ministry is superior to the ministry of the high priest. This reflects a bias of the translators which the Young's literal version does not contain:

Heb. 8:13 in the saying ‘new,’ He hath made the first old, and what doth become obsolete and is old [is] nigh disappearing.

Again this would contradict Yeshua's words.

Matt. 5:17-19“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.( to fill up to the full measure until it's overflowing or to establish) “For truly I say to you, auntil heaven and earth pass away, not 1the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. “Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches 1others to do the same, shall be called least ain the kingdom of heaven; but whoever 2keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Hebrews 8 is talking about the change in priesthood and is very clear if you read the chapter carefully. The "better covenant" is through Yeshua's blood which gives us access to the throne room and in which death is swallowed up.

If the writer in Hebrews is contradicting Yeshua, I would be very surprised. Seems to me, the change of priesthood is being confirmed prior to the destruction of the Second Temple, which is most likely the context in which Hebrews was written.

By the way, if you are going to quote from Hebrews, you should also remember whose heart this New Covenant was put on ( I prefer newer improved covenant in the blood of Messiah)

The author of Hebrews is speaking about a Newer Covenant with Israel, not with the Church...and he's quoting from the Prophet Jeremiah, who was also talking to Israel, ( the whole house of Israel, the house of Judah and the House of Israel/Ephraim)

Heb. 8:8-9 For finding fault with them, He says,

D&R ( this is easier than Despzdrejected) if you are going to quote Scripture, you need to do it in context or you risk to distort the meaning of the text. The context of Hebrews 8 is clearly the Priesthood and Yeshua's superior Priesthood, which I don't think we have any disagreement on...

Constance, if you are agreeing with D&R you would be saying Torah is abolished too..Interesting that you believe that as a lawyer, because most of the US laws are based on the Torah...including laws about property.

I still kind of like the ones that talk about "Thou shall not steal, thou shall not murder, thou shall not commit adultery etc....

I have another question. Do you think Christians always obey Torah, or do they need reminders, even though it is "written on their hearts" ....

Personally, every time I read the Bible, I am still convicted of the areas where I fall short of God's glory, and I do believe Yeshua paid for my sins in full....The good news is that I am not longer going to be put to death for my failures to obey..

That is because of the superior Priesthood of Yeshua and that's what He came to do away with....

When you examine Hebrews in light of the pending destruction of the Temple, what is "fading away" was the ministry of the High Priest who performed the sacrifices in the Temple.

Hebrews was meant to be a letter to assure the new believers, Jews, that Yeshua's priesthood was superior so they could rest in that.

I was out of town for 1 day and I can barely catch up as Joyce writes enough for a small book!;-)
Have mercy!

Dorothy- Thanks for the links re: Obama's true intentions and the blogging control links. Very interesting info.

Despizdnrejectd- Great post re: the blood of Christ.

YG- I'm praying for you. Try not to be discouraged, dear sister. "And you will be hated by all for My names's sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved."-Matt 10:22

Constance- Very compelling posts. Scary, creepy, and sad (as the digging up of evil would naturally be), but compelling. Praying for you too.

My spare time is filled. I have no wish to study another religion. Thank you for your concern.

As far as doing Jewish missionary work, I don't feel this is the appropriate place to teach Jewish beliefs. Those who wish to know more need to go to places on the internet set up to answer questions or make the appropriate telephone calls.

I'm just happy for you that you've found an outlet for your need to write. I'm sure it would be very frustrating to keep all of that inside yourself.

It reminds me of a very famous story between Yeshua, Mary and Martha:

Luke 10:38 ¶ Now as they were traveling along, He entered a village; and a woman named aMartha welcomed Him into her home.
Luke 10:39 She had a sister called aMary, who was bseated at the Lord’s feet, listening to His word.
Luke 10:40 But aMartha was distracted with 1all her preparations; and she came up to Him and said, “Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to do all the serving alone? Then tell her to help me.”
Luke 10:41 But the Lord answered and said to her, “aMartha, Martha, you are bworried and bothered about so many things;
Luke 10:42 abut only one thing is necessary, for bMary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

You are worried about so many things in the New Age movement, and perhaps other things too...In the end choosing correctly is what really matters.


Feel free to skip the posts that don't apply to you...

One more little know me...I always think of something else ( is that a yiddisha kup?)

In all seriousness...if you do study the don't have to study another "religion". Yeshua's name is literally written all over the pages of the Torah in Hebrew, if you speak Hebrew...if not.. He is there in every story...You can find Him, if you look..

I'm not talking to you about another religion. I'm talking Torah. If you believe the five books that were given to Moses, and if you believe the Prophets and the Writings, there is prophetic verse after verse pointing us to Yeshua. Now if you are too busy to read Torah, then maybe the New Age research is getting in the way.

There is nothing new under the sun. Since the garden the devil has been trying to get us "to be gods" that not the New Age religion? Being an expert on the New Age has never saved anyone.

Knowing the God of salvation, is what can help us, and the only way to know Him is through His Word.
Don't study another religion...just read the portion of Isaiah I sent you. That says it all:

s. 53:5 But He was pierced through for aour transgressions,
He was crushed for bour iniquities;
The cchastening for our 2well-being fell upon Him, And by dHis scourging we are healed.

The rabbis won't talk about this or they'll say it means Israel, but that doesn't work. The verse is talking about Yeshua.

6:25 AM

“Now if you are too busy to read Torah, then maybe the New Age research is getting in the way.”

In 1969 I met a regional head of a NA group from India, she had those piercing eyes and made existential connections to seekers; I asked her if Jesus was a master? “Oh yes” was her reply. “Why would Jesus lie and say He was ‘the Way the Truth and the Life’ if He wasn’t?” I asked, and she refused to answer. Stupid me understood the ramifications of that silence. Simplicity can reach a long distance to a huge segment of the people that Jesus died for. In John’s gospel he writes of the woman at a well. Jesus says words of insight, tenderness, and truth; this simple woman instantly becomes an evangelist. That same simplicity resides in John’s epistles: “This is His commandment, that we believe on the name of His Son, Jesus Christ and love one another.”

You are wondering where I am going with this? Many of us have taken the kind of shots at Dorothy that your comment above reflects. Dorothy has “thick skin”, but the above quote is not true and is a provocation. Maybe you hope to prod her into receiving the truth of Isaiah 53, but a non-truth may in fact be viewed as another flaw in our message. I trust you will take this as meant and not be easily oftened.
Can't just let it go, can you Joyce?

And this is just ridiculous: "The verse you quote from, in the original Greek source text does not contain the word "covenant"...".

Where is "the former" or "the first" identified, Joyce? Back in verse 10, and the word is diatheke which is "covenant". And what is the immediate context? The Temple and its rituals and sacred objects, and the priesthood that goes with it. This is elementary reading comprehension, Joyce. And you still can't grasp what it means to FULFILL a contract or a law. No, the writer of Hebrews is not contradicting God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit, only concocted theories that try to keep that which Jesus nailed to the cross.

And when you say things like "Constance, if you are agreeing with D&R...", you're making an attempt to threaten her with guilt by association. What have I said, Joyce, that is so repulsive? I quoted scripture that clearly shows the whole crux of Christianity being Jesus and His accomplishments, not ours. Is the cross an offense to you? Was Jesus sacrifice inadequate? Then what further need is there for the "shadow of things to come"?

You can stop trying to lecture me on context or anything else, Joyce. It is you who pay no attention to it. Give it up already!

SV: tanx. :-)
With all my respect to you, my comment was simply a reply to several of Dorothy's previous comments.. not a provocation as you say...

It also happens to be the truth...being an expert in the New Age will not help any of us to see the kingdom or lead sanctified lives.. Being in the Scriptures will. I would say the same to anyone on the blog, not only Dorothy..

I appreciate your insight and your thoughts but I don't necessarily see it the same way as you.


I will repeat what I said earlier, the writer of Hebrews is not talking about Torah being abolished, but about a change in the Priesthood. It is talking about Yeshua's heavenly service as opposed to the earthly service, which is repeated year after year. If you can't see that in the text, then I would ask you the question...when did Thou shalt not Murder get done away with..That is part of Torah.

What Yeshua mediated is a covenant in His blood, instead of with the blood of bulls and goats...that's the change and the whole chapter discusses it.. The mishkan is a reflection of the heavenlies, where Yeshua performs His service as our High Priest.

The Torah and commandments are not being made obsolete, but the the priesthood of Yeshua is superior, therefore ....again preparing the Jews for the pending destruction of the Temple...

As for my comments to Constance, they were comments to someone in a profession who understands the necessity for society running in an orderly fashion. The Torah has had great impact on the laws of US. Don't read bad motives where there aren't.

The meaning of don't murder can also mean murdering someone with your calling them some unkind names. Yeshua talks about this in Matthew:

Matt. 5:22 “But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be 1guilty before athe court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘2You good-for-nothing,’ shall be 1guilty before 3bthe supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be 1guilty enough to go into the 4cfiery hell.

This, according to Yeshua is also a form of murder and some people do it every day.. So glad that Yeshua intercedes at the right hand of the Father or many of us would be in big trouble.

;o) :o) :o) ;o):o)
Are you using that goofy little smiley face so that you can write twice as much without people knowing it is you?

Explains a lot. Frankly I see you as hijacking this blog so as to keep others from learning about the dangers of the New Age movement. Your long posts cotinuously work to get others off topic.

Sometimes I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and just think you have some kind of personality disorder that makes you want to be the center of attention at all times. That you can't help.

At other times I think you are more dangerous than that. You are using Christianity as the bludgeon to hijack the thread because you put on the shield of Christianity and you make it seem not listening to you is going against Christianity. A rather sophisticated disinformation technique.

I will not engage you in the topic of your choice because it hijacks the blog.

To Joyce,

"The Gospels, 101--an Introductory Course"

All this talk and debate about the "law" blah blah blah is tiresome and scandalizing. You people who say you are Christians: there IS a law that was laid down by Jesus Christ and it is summed up in one word: CHARITY (aka LOVE).

Go back and read the scriptures again. And then, for a change, try APPLYING them.

Here is a good place to start:

1 Corinthians 13
1 Corinthians 8:1
Of course you'll repeat what you said, Joyce. That's all you do, that and live in denial of the plain meanings of words.

Dorothy, I agree. And if I want to know anything about Judaism or what Torah is, I'll go to someplace like . Of course, that site (and anything else we'd reference) would be branded as biased, inaccurate, etc., but what can you do.
All I have to say to all of you is ;o) Yeshua loves you!!!


p.s. not hiding my identity ;o) is a shortcut for I am ...

Joy ous.....;o) so I'm smiling at you. Lucky my joy is not dependent on this's pretty rough crowd out there...

p.p.s D&R...I am pretty good at reading...and I don't agree with you...

As for the anonymous poster:

Couldn't agree with you more. The Bible speaks about love, not only in Corinthians, but in Torah:

Lev. 19:18 ‘aYou shall not take vengeance, bnor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but cyou shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the LORD.

My whole point is that all the concepts discussed by Paul and the other apostles and of course Yeshua since He is the Living Torah, were already spoken of in the Tanach. ALL I am saying is that God is consistent.. He doesn't change. If you believe like I do, that Yeshua is God ( sorry Dorothy...) then you would agree that who He is in Genesis is the same as who He is in Revelations. He doesn't change. He said, "I am the same yesterday, today and forever".

If you think quoting the Bible is knowledge, I would have to disagree...The Bible is wisdom because it does not come from me. It comes from God. If I follow your application of that verse, I would never quote from or discuss Scripture. Now if all of you want to go on and continue to break God's ordinances after He sent His Son to die for you...that's your business...If Yeshua hung on a tree to pay for all of your sins, wouldn't you want to stop sinning ( missing the mark...the Torah definition of sin).

Can I follow Torah perfectly to the, only Yeshua could.. With His Word now written on my heart can I desire to obey... I hope so otherwise His death is in vain.

As for highjacking the blog....I utterly disagree. I watch all of you talk about all the awful things going on in the world, the churches, the synagogues, etc....What is the solution?

There is nothing new under the sun.. Satan, the Father of lies has been working from the beginning.. Our only defense is the Word of God. If any of you have a problem with that, you need to get off this blog and go read your Bibles!!

;o) still smiling.
I’m sure Orwell, Huxley, Wells, were all very familiar with the end times scenarios played out in the Bible. Perhaps their real talent lay in rendering the mechanics of evil down to recognizable, and as we are seeing today, increasingly socially acceptable levels.

Like television, movies, and our tightly controlled education system, the internet does not represent freedom, but rather it’s opposite. Google of course, is playing no small role in building this trap by “organizing” (read filtering) content in an obvious attempt to shape the minds of men. (This fact is readily apparent in their agreements with the Chi-coms.)

Surely all you savey bloggers must have noticed by now the fact that Wikipedia ranks extremely high in your Google searches. Maybe you’ve even noticed that domain names have been bought and sold, web content from one day to the next has been changed, fiction is marketed as fact, and vice versa. Lately, weblogs like this one and alternative media sites have come under increasing scrutiny from the “powers that be”, criticized relentlessly for their “uncontrolled content”. Fairness Doctrine anyone?

Remember a few years back when the media joked about people who innocently went looking for a way to email Bill Clinton but made the mistake of typing in “” instead of “” ? Those well meaning folks were directed to a porn site, not the President’s mansion. The irony of such a turn, coming as it were during the Monica Lewinsky and Lincoln bedroom chronicles, was not lost, even on CNN. Nor was it lost on environmental organizations and the global political power brokers.

I recently checked in on some of the non PC environmental websites I used to use for references. One web link in particular, ( used to lead to an organization founded by longtime wolf reintroduction opponent Ron Gillette. It now leads to a pro-wolf animal rights organization, the exact opposite of what the domain name implies. In fact, if you are using Google for your searches, one would have to be quite savey if one wanted to find anything critical of the established politically correct environmental suppositions. Google ranks such “anti-green” websites (organizations) very low, while putting websites critical of such organizations right at the top.

Like the critics say, “Google ist das Opium des Volkes”.
Was just wondering if this might be a first century form letter that current postmodern Christians might be using today:
Paul the Apostle

c\o Aquila the Tentmaker

Corinth, Greece

Dear Paul:

We recently received a copy of your letter to the Galatians. The committee has directed me to inform you of a number of things, which deeply concern us. First, we find your language to be somewhat intemperate. In your letter, after a brief greeting to the Galatians, you immediately attack your opponents by claiming they "want to pervert the gospel of Christ." You then say that such men should be regarded as "accursed"; and, in another place, you make reference to "false brethren." Wouldn’t it be more charitable to give them the benefit of the doubt—at least until the General Assembly has investigated and adjudicated the matter?

To make the situation worse, you later say, "I could wish those who trouble you would even cut them selves off!" Is such a statement really fitting for a Christian minister? The remark seems quite harsh and unloving.

Paul, we really feel the need to caution you about the tone of your epistles. You come across in an abrasive manner to many people. In some of your letters you’ve even mentioned names; and this practice has, no doubt, upset the friends of Hymenaeus, Alexander, and others. After all, many persons were first introduced to the Christian faith under the ministries of these men.

Although some of our missionaries have manifest regrettable shortcomings, nevertheless, it can only stir up bad feelings when you speak of these men in a derogatory manner. In other words, Paul, I believe you should strive for a more moderate posture in your ministry. Shouldn’t you try to win those who are in error by displaying a sweeter spirit? By now, you've probably alienated the Judaizers to the point that they will no longer listen to you.

By your outspokenness, you have also diminished your opportunities for future influence throughout the church as a whole. Rather, if you had worked more quietly, you might have been asked to serve on a presbytery committee appointed to study the issue. You could then have contributed your insights by helping to draft a good committee paper on the theological position of the Judaizers, without having to drag personalities into the dispute.

Besides, Paul, we need to maintain unity among those who profess a belief in Christ. The Judaizers at least stand with us as we confront the surrounding paganism and humanism, which prevail within the culture of the contemporary Roman Empire. The Judaizers are our allies in our struggles. We cannot afford to allow differences over doctrinal minutiae to obscure this important fact.

I also must mention that questions have been raised about the contents of your letter, as well as your style. The committee questions the propriety of the doctrinaire structure of your letter. Is it wise to plague young Christians, like the Galatians, with such heavy theological issues?

For example, in a couple of places, you allude to the doctrine of election. You also enter into a lengthy discussion of the law. Perhaps you could have proved your case in some other ways, without mentioning these complex and controverted points of Christianity. Your letter is so doctrinaire, it will probably serve only to polarize the differing factions within the churches. Again, we need to stress unity, instead of broaching issues, which will accent divisions among us.

In one place, you wrote, "Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing." Paul, you have a tendency to describe things strictly in black and white terms, as if there are no gray areas. You need to temper your expressions, lest you become too exclusive. Otherwise, your outlook will drive away many people, and make visitors feel unwelcome. Church growth is not promoted by taking such a hard line and remaining inflexible.

Remember, Paul, there is no such thing as a perfect church. We have to tolerate many imperfections in the church, since we cannot expect to have everything at once. If you will simply think back over your own experience, you will recall how you formerly harassed the church in your times of ignorance. By reflecting on your own past, you might acquire a more sympathetic attitude toward the Judaizers. Be patient, and give them some time to come around to a better understanding. In the meantime, rejoice that we all share a common profession of faith in Christ, since we have all been baptized in his name.


Charles Phinney [fictional]

Coordinator, Committee on Missions

Context and syntax are very helpful companions in the search to understand the truth. A Bible that can't be understood clearly is of no mare value than to make a good doorstop. The challenge is to let it speak for itself and leave the presuppositions we would bring to it in a scrap heep.

There is no substitute for a good hermeneutic, and intellectual honesty.May God grant us all a better dedication to remember that.

HK-91, excellent piece, on many levels! Well done.

I've used similar arguments before in my defense, only to be told "Well, that's Paul (or Peter, or Jesus), and they could do that. But not anyone else." To which I respond, "Didn't all those people tell us to follow their examples?" There is usually no response after that.

If disagreement, satire, sarcasm, naming names, confrontation, etc. are examples of unloving behavior, then let those who believe so exhibit "true love" by never criticizing anyone or expressing disagreement. I'll never understand why it's okay to criticize people for being critical.

And, FWIW, re. another post about off-topic things, that post itself is off-topic. Kinda like people who cannot tolerate intolerant people.


(See? A smiley. It makes everything ok.)
"(See? A smiley. It makes everything ok.)"

:) [test]
Just to clarify, I didn't write that piece, I just agree with it wholeheartedly.

"Just to clarify, I didn't write that piece, I just agree with it wholeheartedly."

Oh, sorry. Any idea who wrote it?

So, how'd the magical smiley work? :-P

So far so good on the test...[adjusting hockey mask]

The article link is:

It was on Crossroad website.

I find that when any information stream starts to overwhelm my 2 braincells, I find rest and comfort just bathing in the the basics for a rest. When I find something basic and humorous it's always a treat for me.

Thanks HK!

"King of the South"?

"King of the North"?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]