So what?

In a rather strange post at Taki’s Magazine, Jim Goad asks, somewhat truculently, it seems, “So what if Jesus was Jewish?” It seems as though the piece is a response to somebody, I am guessing it’s a response (pre-emptive, maybe?) to those who defend Christianity, while disassociating it from its purported Jewish roots.

Why I so often feel drawn to responding to statements like this, given how thorny and complicated the subject is, I don’t know. Maybe I am just greedy for punishment, and fond of batting my head against a brick wall. Those who insist on making sweeping statements about Christianity, or about Christianity and its supposed ‘Jewish’ roots are determined not to be troubled by facts or truths. It seems most people have made up their minds in advance and are not open to thinking about this, or about questioning the established ‘facts’ or dogma on the subject. So the chances of persuading any given person that the received truths may be in gross error are slim to none. Yet I try, knowing how futile it is 99 percent of the time.

But here we go. Some time ago I posted about this vexed issue, asking questions about some of the widespread beliefs which remain unexamined by most people, some which are more accurately myths which are never scrutinized because of political correctness and what I call the ultimate PC taboo: the question of Jewish identity.

Are the terms ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’ exact synonyms? Does the term ‘Jewish’ apply to anyone who originates (supposedly) from one of the twelve (12, count ’em) tribes of Israel? Really? Are we sure? Absolutely — or even reasonably sure?

Does anyone today have solid proof of descent from any of these descendants of Jacob, that is, Jacob who was later named Israel? Or proof of descent from Abraham, who was the grandfather of Jacob/Israel? How would, how could such proof be established, some millennia after the fact?

People often scoff at how some of us of, say, English descent, can ‘prove‘ that our lines of descent from our English forebears are valid, even though that descent is far more recent than the lineage going back to Abraham’s or Jacob’s day.  Why so little scrutiny of much more remote claims?

Multiple DNA tests have been done on modern-day Jews, virtually all of which show distinctly mixed lineages, including half or more European descent, plus some Middle Eastern genetics. (I won’t link this yet again; I’ve done so. It’s easily looked up online. I invite doubters to check for themselves). Needless to say Middle Eastern does not = Jewish, and again, much of the DNA has shown European genetics.

Yet pretty much all the DNA tests concerning today’s Jews are roundly ignored by most people, including modern Christians who have grown up in churches which consider it tantamount to blasphemy to question Jewish origins or identity.

Why should this be so?

Why do the non-Christian, Judeo-skeptical pro-Whites also ignore the results of the DNA tests? I can only guess that they prefer to lump Christianity and Judaism together (incorrectly) and condemn both together. Jim Goad clearly does not think favorably of Christianity, parroting Nietzsche’s reference to ”slave morality”, and the usual ‘alien desert religion’ canard. So if he thinks Christianity is an alien, semitic religion, not suited to Europeans, then by association he seems also to be judging Judaism the same way.

In a way Goad is seeming to defend Judaism and to accuse some Christians of being anti-Jewish, so this is a strange tack.

Judaism has always been in opposition to Christianity. The oxymoronic ”Judeo-Christian’ tradition’ is a myth. May Jews say as much themselves; look it up.

The core principles of the two religions are at odds. The God of Christianity is a triune God, for most Christians, and Judaism rejects this view, along with the very person of Jesus Christ, believing that he was a false Messiah. Judaism as we know it is Talmudically-based, not based on what Christians call the Old Testament. The two traditions are very divergent, not the same, not even close.

Goad evidently has accepted the glib half-truths of the uninformed Christian ‘mainstream’, rather than investigating thoroughly, and he is not alone in this; most Christians take this approach because they choose to accept what their misled Judeo-Christian teachers have fed them.  I used to be such a Christian before being led towards a deeper investigation.

This subject is important enough to demand some examination.

Does it tell us anything at all to know that our Christian forebears were not believers in a ‘Judeo-Christian’ tradition, or in any kind of Jewish-Christian ecumenism or unity? That this is a recent (post-WWII) phenomenon? Were all our Christian forefathers, up to the era of our grandparents, wrong? Are we so sure that they were wrong?

One blog post isn’t enough to even begin to address this question, but it’s worth trying to provoke some thought, even if I step on some toes or make someone angry by raising these questions.

Truth matters. Question popular ‘wisdom’. Use Biblical discernment. That’s basic Christianity when it comes to trying to ascertain truth.

I’ll just quote from a letter-writer to a British magazine, Picture Post, dated 1947.

“The Bible never mentions Jews until II Kings XVI, v. 6, and then refers only to members of the House of Judah.” This era was after the people of Israel were divided into two houses, that of Israel in the North and Judah or Judea in the South. The people referred to as Jews were those of the Southern Kingdom, Judah or Judea.

Until the tribes of Israel (of which Judah, or the Jews, were just one part) were separated by exile and political division, there were no ‘Jews’ mentioned in the Bible. Abraham was not a Jew; Jacob was not a ‘Jew.’ Jacob’s son, Judah, was the father of those later called ‘Jews.’ Not all Israel were ‘Jews’, just as not all ‘British’ people are English (or Welsh, or Scottish). But most people, to make an analogy, insist on conflating the term ‘English’ with the term ‘British.’ One term is inclusive, while one is limited to a constituent people. ‘Jew’ is a category within the umbrella term ‘Israel’, which includes other descendants of Jacob.

Too complicated? Well, then, I can’t help. In any case, DNA tests do not positively prove the present-day Jews to be descendants of Abraham or his sons. Yet we gullibly accept them to be such. Elizabeth Warren is about as likely to be proven Cherokee, maybe more so, than the present-day Jews are to be Israelitish, maybe more so, because her claims are of more recent provenance. (And P.S.: I don’t believe Warren’s ‘family lore.’)

Some readers may wonder if I am a member of some cult, because I raise these issues. Am I? If it matters, the answer is no; I am a Christian, and I am a truth-seeker; I don’t want to be found to have failed in my duty to ”prove all things“, as Christians are charged to do.

And it is tiresome to read so many less-than-informed half-truths about my faith from those who have clearly not delved into the facts and the history, especially when it appears that their efforts are meant to discredit or disparage the Christian faith, not to get to the bottom of things, to thoroughly examine known facts.

2 thoughts on “So what?

  1. I’ve noticed a lot of theological ignorance from what I call the pagan right. They’re usually part of the group of young white men that grew up in divorced households and lacked a competent male figure in their lives. They mention a “god” or creator in the same manner Hitler does in Mein Kampf—to pay lip service to a higher authority that may as well be Satan because they typically deny Christ because he was Jewish.

    When they talk Christianity I cringe because to what extent they praise it, it’s just to claim its “cultural” relevance. Goad obviously doesn’t see the distinction between the Talmud, Old Testament and New Testament as you do because like most of his ilk he hasn’t done his homework. He must’ve missed Ephesians 3:2-3, 5-6 where it’s made clear that because of their denial of the Messiah, Jews must now share with the Gentiles (coheirs). Breaking the Gospels down as a sort of mythological study is Gnosticism and to be avoided. Jordan Peterson does this dangerously well, which scandalizes sinners who otherwise might see that it’s the true Word of God and repent instead of writing an essay for a 12 part lecture series on why Jesus is a “revolutionary figure” (He wasn’t, but the killer Barrabas was).


  2. Hi VA, I hope you are doing great. It’s been quite a while since I’ve commented, though I come by to read when I can. Your articles remain excellent.

    “You may be interested in this viewpoint, which has some very good material explaining this, if I’m remembering correctly. I’ll try to make it back with more on the subject when I have more time.

    “Jesus Was Not A Jew”

    “Therefore: Since only true Judahites can be the legitimate descendants of Judah, and since the Sephardic Jews are in fact Edomites from Idumea, the modern-day Jews fudge the definition of ‘Jew’ so that these two unrelated and antagonistic groups will be equated in the minds of modern Christians. This is what I am trying to get you to see. You really need to think about these historical facts, dear Christian. What I am showing you is absolutely critical to the understanding of who or what the Great Deception is!!! The impersonator is pretending to be from Judah. This is a lie. His true origins are not Judahite at all, but Idumean. And, to the extent that we buy into this lie, we are allowing the anti-Christ to have dominion over us.

    Jesus was a Judahite, NOT a Jew. The reason why the Jews want the intertestamental period to be flushed down the memory hole is to hide their Edomite origins.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s