Tuesday, November 17, 2015


There are four possible remedies for stopping illegal and/or refugee based immigration.
1. Build a border fence and deport illegal immigrants. - This maintains national sovereignty. But let's face it... Those who are fleeing wind up being sent back to from where they came to endure the persecution and dangers from which they'd sought to flee.
2. Those who were making life miserable for the fleeing "immigrants" turn over a new leaf. They become kind, benevolent and make their country a better place for the immigrants to live.
3. The United States goes in and bombs the sh*(t our of the country from which the "immigrants" are fleeing so that those from whom they are fleeing are no longer around to make life miserable for the otherwise would be immigrants.
4. Homeostasis - The United States just lets the illegal immigrants in. By virtue of their presence and lack of cultural adaptation, they bring the U.S. standard of living down to the point that life in the U.S. is at the same level as the country from which they're fleeing, dare I say 3rd world in nature and there's no longer anything appealing about the U.S. to attract immigrants.
The 4th alternative will certainly put an end to illegal immigration but it is an admission that the fat cats and oppressors who control the country from which the illegal immigrants are fleeing will have won.
Building a fence and deportation seems to be the other most rational alternative but it is not the most humane. Understandably that's probably why it's opposed by liberals.
I like the second alternative. That would require the proclamation of the Gospel and lots of prayer. And it would require repentance on the part of people who, in the case of Syria, are not going to repent and see the truth. But, in reality, it is the "Christian" way.
The third alternative is the most rational alternative. At the risk of being labeled "imperialistic" and the "cause of all problems in the world" the U.S, goes in and kills all those folks who make life miserable for those "fleeing" their homeland.
It seems that the politicians up to and including Mr. Obama have chosen the fourth alternative... that of homeostasis. It's the easiest alternative to implement and in the end it benefits only the fat cats at the top of governments. The middle class dies and only a vast "proletariat" remains.
In the case of what's going on now, 'though, we're seeing a Muslim twist to this fourth scenario in which the "proletariat" is being forced to "coexist" (seen that word on bumper stickers lately?) with a group of people having a world view filled with animus. Those who are aware of this reality are labeled as "intolerant" and "Nazis". They oppose multiculturalism. But multiculturalism will not work when it is integrated with what I like to call "multi-world-view-ism" particularly when the world views of the different cultures clash.
This, I believe, is what we're up against. And this, I believe, is all the more reason why we need to be looking to Jesus.

Friday, November 13, 2015

The Muslim Invasion of Europe as an Appeal to the "Virtue" of Multiculturalism

Europeans greet the new immigrants from south of the Mediterranean with open arms. "Welcome to your new home". And they welcome their own death. Their great declaration of what is virtuous in this day and age is multiculturalism. "If you can't accept this new influx of immigrants from another land, you are just like the Nazis of the 1930s". And so those who deem themselves righteous by virtue of their spirit of acceptance, condemn those who are "intolerant"... the Jews and the genuine Christians.

The Bible reminds us that "unless two are in agreement they cannot walk together."

Multiculturalism sounds fine but it must be accompanied by a unanimity, a singularity of world view. Without this singularity or agreement, there will invariably be conflict. And so, Europe greets it's new masters and it welcomes it's own demise. Islam and Judaism are incompatible. Islam and Christianity are incompatible. Islam and secularism are incompatible. Islam and atheism are incompatible. The wishes of those who put "tolerance" bumper stickers on their cars are vain. They are a reflection of a desire which is the product of wishful thinking which may seem idealistic but which, nevertheless, is untenable.

Multiculturalism plus multi-"worldview-ism" are a recipe for disaster! Multiculturalism in the light of a single uniting worldview can be a beautiful thing. In fact it is gloriously destined for the future. But which worldview is the right one? Shall we just cast lots? Shall we close our eyes and point our finger? It seems that the politicians of the world are making the decisions for the people of the world on the behalf of the masses. They are like the "blind leading the blind" and, as Jesus put it, "they will both fall into the pit".

Ought this uniting worldview be Islam? Without venturing into the theological aspects of the debate, as Jesus put it, "you shall know them by their fruits". I suppose that Islam is fine if Parents don't mind their daughters getting raped and turned into sex objects without privilege or dignity. Remember? "You shall know them by their fruit?.

Back in the garden after the man sinned, he placed the woman between himself and God and used her as a shield, metaphorically, to protect himself from the wrath of God. He said to God "This woman which you have given to me gave the fruit to me to eat". Rather than being her protector he used her." Islam condones that attitude... the fallen attitude of fallen man. The man's unbridled lust is blamed on the woman who allows her ankles to be seen. "She should have been accompanied by a man. Otherwise she's fair game and it's all her fault". God knows who's fault it is and all the pleadings by men of their innocence will be of no avail before the one who knows all and knows the heart of man.

Jesus forgives. Islam condemns. Jesus demands that dignity be given to the woman. Islam requires nothing from the man but self indulgence and the subsequent subjugation of your daughter.
It is Jesus, the Messiah of the Jews, who will provide the "one uniting worldview" around which multiculturalism can succeed.

This invasion of Europe is like an experiment which was released into the world without first having been tested in a laboratory. It will set the whole world ablaze! And yet I look beyond this grand experiment which is doomed to failure. I look to the time of which Isaiah wrote in his second chapter:
"It shall come to pass in the end of days that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be exalted above the hills and all nations shall flow unto it. And many peoples (multiculturalism) shall go and say "Come let us to go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob for He will teach us of His ways and we will walk in His paths, for out of Zion shall go forth the Law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem."

All of human history has been marked by the existence of nations each possessing its own culture and it's own form of governance (constitution as it were). Never has human history ever experienced a time when all the nations have one constitution in common. That day shall come just as Isaiah foretold. And the constitution will have been written by the one who knows best about human nature and therefore governance of humans because He manifested Himself to the world as the perfect human. But until then, the world must endure this experiment that we're seeing in Europe in the present, which will probably get even worse in the near future, and which is doomed to failure from the start. The world travails like a woman in labor.

In the meantime we have the blessed hope in the midst of all of this, that, Jesus is coming back to usher in a time of not just peace but joy unimaginable because this joy is beyond our present realm of experience. And this future is available to anyone who genuinely and humbly calls upon Jesus to make it available to him.

Tuesday, October 13, 2015

Pinocchio - A Metaphor of Something Much Bigger

The story of Pinocchio was first written by Carlo Collodi in the 19th century as a children’s book to encourage conduct that would ensure Italian unity. Pinocchio, like many epic heroes, descends into hell and is revived by metamorphosis.  In the story’s original version, Pinocchio suffers a tragic death in which his enemies, a fox and a cat, hang him by a noose and a tempestuous wind comes and repeatedly knocks him against various structures until the life is knocked out of him.

Since its genesis, the story of Pinocchio has gone through many metamorphoses.  Some have tragic endings.  Some have happy endings.  Logically speaking, I suppose the ending is simply a function of the one telling the tale.  Interestingly enough, the story teller has the free will to end the story any way he likes.  I’m most familiar with the Disney version, but I presume that all versions have certain elements in common… a marionette capable of exercising free will and in the process, displaying character flaws which get him into all sorts of difficulties.  I posit that it is as good a metaphor as any to attempt to explain the relationship between God and man.

According to the Disney version, Pinocchio was a marionette skillfully carved by the hands of an elderly craftsman by the name of Gepetto.   I ask, rhetorically, what is it that characterizes marionettes?  Marionettes are lifeless, pieces of wood having some semblance, in appearance, of the conceptualizations of their creator.  Their movements are orchestrated and completely under the control of the puppeteer who pulls their strings.

Such was Pinocchio, a lifeless puppet who hung in a closet until Gepetto saw fit to take him out, dust him off and pull his strings.  But Gepetto longed for a real boy… a boy whom he could raise and call “son” and teach and talk to and with whom he could share the world.  And so a fairy comes, and with the help of special magic converts a lifeless pile of wood into a living being capable of thought, speech and self-animation. 

Gepetto loves Pinocchio, but the new, living Pinocchio has other ideas.  Rather than living in loving repose with his creator, he disdains the warm, fatherly Gepetto and chooses to explore the world on his own.   Collodi’s as well as Disney’s version of the story reveal a loveable puppet with, nevertheless, serious character flaws.  Pinocchio yields to all sorts of temptations and finds himself in the midst of myriads of misadventures which place his very survival in peril.  Having made a plethora of wrong choices he finds himself in predicaments that tempt him to lie in order to extricate himself.   Obligingly, he does lie and with each lie, his nose grows longer.

I don’t recall the entire Disney rendition of this tale, but if I remember correctly, unlike the Collodi account, in true Disney fashion, our hero winds up back in the loving arms of Gepetto and the two live happily ever after.

I write this essay because a question was presented to me on twitter... in so many words, “How can you say that a loving God created man with original sin?”  My response is “God did not create man with original sin. He created man with free will”.  Like Gepetto, creating Pinocchio out of a block of wood, God created man out of dust.  Like the fairy, through magic, giving life to that block of wood, God, through His “magic” as it were, took about 50 cents worth of apparently random chemicals (most of which is simply good ole' fashioned water) and gave them life. 

This life possessing creature that we call “man” is amazing.  He’s able to explore the intricacies of the ribosomes and mitochondria and glycoproteins and all the other intricacies that comprise amazing mechanisms within each cell that make up living organisms but he still can’t get to the essence of the source of this animation.  All of those structures could just as likely be intact but remain lifeless. Like Pinocchio man has sought to exercise his free will and, rather than enjoy the loving relationship available to him with his creator, venture out on his own in search of pleasures that he assumes will fulfill his desires.  Like Pinocchio, man’s spiritual nose grows long as he accumulates over the course of his life the lies and deceptions in which he indulges himself as he, in pursuit of happiness, spurns the love of the God who both, fashioned him and gave him life. 

Like Gepetto, God chose to free this puppet that we call “man” from his strings so that the man could willfully and independently make the choice to love his creator.  After all, how loving is it to demand of someone “love me”?  The first inclination is for that someone to pursue the opposite of the desired result.  Hence, the “strings” of man were removed.  He was given the free will to choose to love God and make the right choices. 

History has shown us that man has, with little exception, made wrong choices.  He chooses to love himself, or his creations or achievements or his desires more than his creator.  And so, we live in a world permeated by hate, distrust, self-indulgence, self-centeredness and confusion.  Even the motives of a man’s altruistic tendencies are suspect.

But God made a “puppet” that was unique.  This puppet had the very same will and desires that God had.  This “puppet” exercised His free will to wholeheartedly love the one from whom he’d come.  This puppets nose never grew because he never had to hide secrets.  This puppet served as an example to show how all the other “puppets” ought to be and this “puppet” died so as to draw all of the other “puppets” back into the loving arms of their creator.

The creator gives you the free will to read my story.  He gives you the free will to consider my words.  He gives you the free will to accept or reject my words.  He gives you the free will to love your creator, but above all, he gives you free will to choose.  The choice is entirely yours.

In the words of the guardian of the holy grail in an Indiana Jones movie (hopefully you're familiar with it) "choose wisely".

I wish you the best my friend.

Friday, September 25, 2015

An Open Letter to Pope Francis

Dear Sir:
Your comments on the global warming delusion were predictable, although somewhat misplaced. America spends billions of dollars trying to find a solution to a problem that does not exist. Why not speak to China or India. Their pollution levels are off the charts.
However it was your comments on wealth redistribution that produced my greatest anxiety. America is singularly the most generous nation on the planet. We give more money to more countries then all other countries combined. We are always first or second on the scene of every disaster anywhere in the world. Guess who comes in second. Israel!
As far as redistributing the money from the wealthy to its poor, this country outshines all communist countries. Our welfare system is truly immense. The top 10% of wage earners pay the overwhelming percentage of taxes. Almost one half of the country pays no tax at all. They are unproductive and collect a check every month. This is the definition of a parasitic relationship.
I find one thing quite curious about you statement. No, that is too nice—allow me to rephrase. I find your statements about wealth redistribution to be utterly hypocritical. A hypocrisy possessed of no boundaries. The Catholic Church is the single richest organization on the planet. Your wealth is beyond counting. There is not enough money on the planet to purchase the art, gold and land you own (and that does not count the buildings on that land). In stark contrast, the majority of Catholics around the world are dirt poor. Most of the people south of our border live in a stifling poverty that crushes the soul. Catholics in Africa and Asia have not found great prosperity either.
Here is my proposal. Sir, if this idea of wealth redistribution is something you truly believe in, then lead by example. With the sale of Michael Angelo’s David and perhaps a few of his and Rembrandt's other art pieces you could redistribute a great deal of wealth from your coffers to the poor God has entrusted to your care. In fact, if you sold that staff of yours you could buy a lot of meals for a lot of starving children in Africa. Further, there are a number of very old churches in Rome that are not being used for services. Perhaps they might be sold to some developers who could turn them into condos. Win-win! The Catholic Church gets a bunch of money to redistribute to the poor masses and the Italian people get some nice living quarters.
The present crop of thieves and liars that govern this nation are all ready, willing and able to take the money of its citizens. They call it taxes, we call it theft. They need no encouragement from the likes of you.
In the love of our Messiah Yeshua,
Burt Yellin

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

How Does God See the Israeli Palestinian Conflict?

He could barely breathe. He panted with short labored gasps to grasp at whatever meager volume of air His starving, craving lungs could receive. And He couldn't even get any respite from dreaded suffocation unless He would muster up whatever strength He had in his legs to support all of the weight of His torso in ever increasingly futile efforts to expand His chest wide enough to receive the life preserving vapor. I'm sure He gladly would have made His legs straight so as to enhance His breathing but the resulting increased weight of His body would only magnify the intensity of the sharp, searing, inexplicable pain that resulted from the cruel iron peg that impaled his feet and pressed against the naked, exposed nerve that communicated nothing but agony to His wretched body. The intense pain was unrelenting but it shot through His entire person with even greater intensity, if it were possible, when He made His pathetic attempts to capture only a wisp of the life preserving gaseous elixir.

Like a living butterfly whose wings had been pinned to the display case of a collector, He was affixed helplessly to a wooden shaft with His arms outstretched and bones out of joint. His hands were skewered by rods of iron, in like manner as his feet. They seared with s hot excruciating agony that was rivaled only by that of His feet. The welts and torn flesh on His back and on the backs of His legs, the result of whips whose injury was augmented by the addition of sharp bones or shards of metal so as to mercilessly tear open His flesh, rubbed excruciatingly against the wooden "pegboard" upon which He was matter-of-factly mounted.

His loss of blood made Him woefully thirsty. His lips were parched and His tongue almost stuck to the roof of His mouth. He could barely speak. Naked, defenseless and exposed, He'd been beaten and nailed to a wooden execution stake by tormentors who callously taunted Him as He endured His last moments of life. There was nothing and no one to give Him comfort. The only thing that could rescue Him would be death.

But how did He wind up in this predicament? He was a good man. He'd taught people how to be good people and He was not only their supreme example of what goodness was but He was perfect in everything He ever said or did. He was the ultimate Tsadik as we like to say in Hebrew, or righteous one.  So how could such a man ever find Himself in these circumstances? He certainly didn't deserve this! Yet He accepted His death and the agony that came with it willingly. In spite of His circumstances and the intense pain of His last moments, there was not one ounce of panic or apprehension in His soul.

Even in the midst of this torment, aside from His relationship with God, not once did He give thought to Himself. He thought only of the needs of others even to the end. His best friend and His mother stood by helplessly and with great sorrow, apprehension and an overwhelming sense of hopelessness.  He gestured to His friend to see to His mother's needs while He was gone. Even those who taunted Him, He was quick to forgive desiring only their eternal well-being as of paramount importance. He looked beyond His present state with its unbearable agony with a different sort of eyes into the millenniums that would follow that fraction of a moment in time.  His mind dwelt upon every soul destined to live and to die... Billions upon billions of souls... each one of infinite importance, He knew each one by name.

He saw 21st Century Gaza with the little Kaddan boy and his Palestinian family under the siege of an Israeli army bombardment. He envisioned the shell from a tank hitting the home in which he'd lived his regrettably short life, snuffing him out and strewing his body into a million inanimate pieces.

He saw Daniel Tregerman, a young Jewish tot with a promising future blown to bits by a Palestinian mortar, leaving an emotionally scarred family in his wake. The man on that cross knew that all of this would happen. He was the way that God would be if He should ever choose to become a man. And He knew that mankind, in its foolishness, would try to make God to be something that He's not.  They would pin God to a cross so as to reshape Him into their own depraved image.

He knew that the Kaddan family would fall victim to a belief system fomented by a false, power hungry prophet who said that God was aloof, stern and demanding. Furthermore, their god would use the poor Kaddan family simply as disposable pawns by which their false prophet could posthumously further his perverted doctrines. But God is not aloof, stern and demanding. He is more like that man on the cross... good, kind, gentle, not enabling evil and yet willing to forgive. Many who hold to the belief system enjoined by the Kaddans also hold to the notion that the Middle East is no place where a Jew may live.  They have a sign engraved in their hearts... "Jews not welcome".

He knew that the Tregermans were among a people who held to the notion that their identities as Jews depended upon their refusal to accept the possibility that the Man on the cross could be the Messiah. Yet those people also held tenaciously to the notion that they needed their own place to live because a 2000 year history of persecution showed that they definitely needed a place they could call their own... where they would be free to live in safety.   Furthermore, the very book that describes the nature of the Man on the cross declares that their own land, contrary to the view of the people of the Kaddan family, is specifically located in the Middle East.  They have a sign engraved in their hearts... "The land is ours but Jesus is not welcome".

In essence...

The people of the Tregerman family believe the part of their holy book that talks about the land but rejects the part that tells about their Messiah.

The people of the Kaddan family reject the Tregermans holy book altogether, give token allegiance to the man on the cross, and replace it with a different (and dare I say false) holy book.

Furthermore, both families are confused by a group of people who claim to believe in the Messiah part of the holy book but refuse to believe the land part of the holy book and actually refuse, as well, to believe that the Tregermans have any place in God's plan either (but the holy book says that they do). They've spent two millenniums persecuting the people with whom the Tregermans identify.  So, every ones understanding of the holy book and the man on the cross is skewed.  And as the holy book says "There is none righteous.  No... not one."

Each of those groups of people is dominated by what we call “religions”. They are led by people who claim to be experts.  But how can "experts" disagree with one another in the way in which they do?  Actually religions with their dogmas and rituals only lead people astray.  The only expert is that man on the cross and the holy book that gives an accurate account of who He is.  Oh, perhaps you may doubt the veracity of that book but it has endured the test of the most intensive scrutiny of science, archaeology, scholarship and time and still survived.  Interestingly, if an individual is to be faithful to that holy book, he or she will likely experience some level of ostracism from his family of origin.  It's not easy pursuing the truth.   But such a person can be credited as the type of person who thinks for him or herself and is bold enough to endure the consequences of his or her faith decision. He is not part of a religion but has a vital and living personal relationship with that man on the wooden cross... the man who would be the kind of man that God would be if He would ever choose to reveal Himself as a man.

This man loves both the Tregermans and the Kaddans and all the people that they symbolize. But His love demands that each individual among them has the free will to choose to love Him back. Unfortunately thus far the Jews and the Muslims have, for the most part, chosen not to love Him in return. And their free wills have led to what we see today... the deaths of two innocent children among myriads upon myriads fallen victim to a history of war and human misery.

I regret to say that absolutely nothing will get the human race out of this quagmire of death except that man who died on that cross long ago. The world is not intended to be the way that it is. We were not made to hate and kill one another. Death itself was not ever intended to be normative. Our problem is that we've gotten used to death and war and the general condition of the world as it exists. We cannot imagine our present state, uncomfortable and foreboding as it is, as being anything other than normative. Certainly politics won't help us. And, to be honest, religion won't either because it gives us a false understanding of God. Furthermore religion divides. We blame one another rather than blaming ourselves. We say “it's the other guys fault... never mine”. We refuse to say “Hey, I could be responsible for some of this mess”.  We are enamored with ourselves and how good we are.  But the man on the cross sees otherwise.  He sees us for whom we are, loves us anyway and is quick to forgive us if we simply ask Him.  

Most of we humans have big egos.  We think we're God in a strange sort of way.  We might say that we're not, but don't we respond with anger when we get insulted?  The man on the cross didn't. There, dying, in the midst of His agony, He knew who He was.  He was the way God would be if He should ever choose to be a man.  And if we would ever want to be like God, we should want to be like Him.

By the way, that man? He rose from the dead. He's alive! One day He's going to make the world into the kind of place that it was intended to be.  And inhabiting that world will be people who've asked God to make them into the kind of people He wants them to be without being “religious”... sort of like that man on the cross. They will all come from extremely diverse backgrounds but by being the type of person that that man on the cross is, they'll be the only types of people who will be able to get along with one another.

And there will be no more wars, or sickness, or death or, most importantly, guilt or tears... only good stuff.

I don't care if you're Jewish, Palestinian, or ISIS for that matter. I want that for you and especially that man on the cross wants it for you.

Wednesday, July 22, 2015

Planned Parenthood and "Astroturfing"

When was the last time that the issue of “fetal tissue” hit the news really big? As I recall, George W. Bush was in office and he was taking a stand against fetal stem cell research. All the “big guns” were thrown against him attacking his character and his prudish attitude towards using only stem cells that had not been the product of conception. They say that he “wanted people to die”, “A lot of lives could be saved from the research conducted on embryonically derived stem cells”.

As I recall, one of the arguments from the political “right” was that, aside from the fact that embryonic stem cells were derived from “dead babies”, they had shown little promise in curing those ills at which they were directed. Furthermore, their insertion into damaged tissue had resulted in a high prevalence of cancer.

I think those findings were correct. I don't know for sure, but be that as it may, all hell broke loose in an effort to attack Bush so as to allow for the free usage of embryonic stem cells. The chief argument in favor of the pro-abortionist perspective was that “it would add to the arsenal of research and ultimately save lives”.

Whatever the case may be, the argument was heated... dare I say vitriolic! The pro-abortion lobby, it seemed, had made a contract with death. It was pounding on the doors of restraint and it was using as it's battering ram, lemmings made up of women who'd had abortions and/or knew what it was like to have unwanted pregnancies, liberals who felt that a “woman's right to choose” deserved priority as a concern (forget about the baby's right to live), and people who'd never seen the inside of an abortion clinic nor the inside of a womb with a baby bathed in amniotic fluid, screaming silently, desperately and in agony with its face contorted in pain as it's arm or leg is torn from the rest of its body in a matter-of-fact fashion by an enterprising abortionist.

And so we see in the news, finally, interviews of physicians and representatives of Planned Parenthood, talking about the harvesting and sale of human limbs and organs for profit as they, in a cavalier fashion, eat their vittles and swirl their chionti in their goblet before taking a gulp. One could call this behavior “disgusting”, but that truly is an inadequate adjective for describing it.

The olde adage, “Follow the money”.has truly proven itself! The lemming battering ram was spurred on by the one's who were truly to benefit from the abortion industry... the abortionists, Planned Parenthood, with it's mouth to the Federal Government's teat, medical researchers looking for Federal grants, you name it. And all the time you thought that the beneficiaries of abortion were the poor women who'd gotten themselves “knocked up” by irresponsible sex partners of the opposite gender. Oh, they're victims too, don't get me wrong, but why was it never told them that they had the alternative of giving up their baby for adoption, and why was it presumed that abstinence wouldn't work? Abstinence is still the only sure fire way of preventing unwanted pregnancies as well as STDs.

Enter David Axelrod... adviser to the illustrious Barack Hussein Obama. Mr. Axelrod owns or at one time owned a company called ASK Public Strategies which is a firm that “discreetly plots strategy and advertising campaigns for corporate clients to tilt public opinion their way”.1 Those who are in the business of advertizing and creating public perception call this “astroturfing”. In essence, it's the art of creating an artificial grass roots movement... hence, “astroturfing”.

I dare say that Mr. Axelrod's genius has transcended merely the corporate world and entered skillfully into the realm of politics. Not only has astroturfing created a groundswell of abortion advocates who will defend Planned Parenthood in spite of its contract with death, but you'll see the fingerprint of astroturfing in the global warming debate which has conjured up it's own population of lemmings who actually feel that Climate Change (they don't know what to call it because in summer it seems like it's warming and in winter it seems like it's cooling) is a greater threat to the survival of the human race than the false religion known as Islam which is responsible for the rape, slavery and murder of Christians by the 10s of thousands. Yes-siree... there's money to be made through “Climate Change Warming Cooling”. Paltry as the donations may have been by Federal standards, nevertheless, numerous contributors to the Obama campaign effort got quite generous Federal start-up grants for what turned out to be failed “green” businesses.

Another beneficiary of the phenomenon of astroturfing are the fascists who, contrary to the spirit of the First Amendment, want to impose the state upon religion in the name of “freedom” and “human rights”. Mr. Axelrod and his ilk have created a swarm of gay sympathizing lemmings by declaring that gay marriage is a right. The issue has never been about gay marriage. It's always been about the imposition of fascism. And what could be the greatest example of fascism than forcing a business out of business because they won't bake a cake that advertizes a point of view contrary to their religious and moral convictions (case in point the bakery in Oregon which was fined $130,000 for not making a cake for a gay wedding).

Astroturfing is a way of creating a mob of mindless lemmings who enjoy unanimity in thought. They form a cocoon for themselves, isolating themselves from opposing views. They are intolerant of those who present opposing views and, all the while, unwittingly display their own intolerance. They are dangerous, because, ultimately, rather than allowing their way of thinking to be challenged, they would prefer to eradicate the source of the opposing view. History has shown us where that leads. Astroturfing has and is bringing about folly, waste and death... the kind of sterile death that is not seen, like chicken breasts on a grocery shelf, the death is innocent, far away, sterile, not perceived. It's called abortion. How innocent sounding!

Most Germans, during world World War II were oblivious to the Jews dying in the concentration camps. The gold in the teeth of the victims was removed to make jewelry. Their skin was used for making lamp shades. Their flesh was turned into bars of soap. And German citizens matter-of-factly consumed these articles as if nothing was going on.

Josef Mengeleh was a physician who carried out sadistic “experiments” on victims of the concentration camps of Germany. He gleefully enjoyed torturing his victims. As the concentration camps were being liberated by American troops, Mengele fled to Argentina. He never did make it to North America but I can just envision him sharing that goblet of chianti with those doctors from Planned Parenthood. It seems that his spirit has come to North America.


In 1 Samuel 8, Israel rejected God as its King.  The reason being that they “wanted to be like all the other nations” (8:5).  They were in haEretz... the land.

Evidence has it that the Talmud, however, was written to make the Jewish people distinct from all the other nations.

The Oral Torah became the distinctive of Israel. "...said R. Avin, [God said] 'Had I written for you the bulk of my Torah, you would be considered like a foreigner.' [For] what [is the difference] between us and the Gentiles? They bring forth their books, and we bring forth  our books; they bring forth their national records, and we bring forth our national records.' [The only difference between Israel and the Gentile nations is that a portion of the Torah remains oral,and has a special claim upon the nation of Israel.]1

The Gentiles, by virtue of their access to the Taanach (Old Testament), now had access to all the Jewish writings.  To maintain the distinct identity of the Jewish     people, the Rabbis proposed that along with the written law, Moses transmitted the oral law on to Joshua who in turn, taught it to the Rabbis2. This was to be that   element that was to distinguish the Jewish people from all the other nations (goyim).  Only the Jews had access to this writing.

Now, instead of wanting to be “like the other nations” we wanted to be different than the other nations.  Oral rabbinic tradition from the time of the Babylonian exile already existed in the time of Y’shua.  Y’shua even gave prolific mention of it.  But there is little evidence that it had actually been codified until the 2nd century ACE primarily by R Akiva, who interestingly, ‘though lauded for his great wisdom and learning, championed Simon Bar Kochba as the Messiah.  History has     proven Akiva to have been wrong.

During the time period in which the Talmud was being codified, most of the Jewish people were in HaEretz.  However, our sovereignty over the land was lost.  By the time the compilation of the Talmud was completed, some time after the failed Bar Kochba rebellion which ended in 136 ACE, for the exception of a small   remnant, the vast majority of Jews were scattered to the four corners of the earth in what has been an 1800+ year long galute (diaspora or dispersion).

The Talmud has carried with it a “two-edged sword” as it were. On the one hand, God has used it to maintain a   uniquely  Jewish  culture  centered around a religion that has enabled the Jewish people to survive history and maintain its own unique identity.  On the other hand, even as Israel sought “sameness” by choosing a king over G-d, Israel now sought “uniqueness” by  choosing the Rabbi’s over Moses, by exchanging the Word  of G-d for their word, and hence, the great   RABBI whom I like to call THE TZADIK (the perfectly righteous one... Y’shua) the Messiah, was rejected.3

Rabbinic authority maintained continuity while the nation was scattered around the world.  But that time seems to be fast coming to an end!  Anti-Semitism in Europe and soon to grow in the Western Hemisphere will drive the nation “among the nations” back to it’s own land.

So who are the inhabitants of this land?  A new crop of “immigrants” has just arrived from India.  Previously Jews arrived in this contested bit of real estate from South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Lybia, Iraq, Iran, Germany, France, Ethiopia, The United Kingdom, Belgium, Russia, the United States... In fact, colloquially speaking, the United Nations is in Israel! (Maybe that’s why perhaps, the United Nations seems to be a clandestine enemy of Israel.  It’s jealous).

Consequently, modern day Israel is a veritable potpourri of variable cultures of people having a common  identity.  We are all Jews... descended, in one way or another through our father, Jacob.  Our survival and return to the land makes us a living breathing testimony to the veracity of Tanaach4.

So what does G-d what to achieve through all of this?  God wanted we, the Jewish people, to be a segullah... a unique, prized possession.5

In 1 Samuel we didn’t want to be unique.  We wanted to be the same.

The compilers of the Talmud wanted us to be unique.

But God’s intent was always for us to be not only unique but in HaEretz... the land.  It was national sin that extricated us from the land (Dt. 28)

Now we’re back in the land, but we’re still sort of like everyone else.  We have public displays that utterly defy the teachings of Moses.  For instance, in defiance of Moses’ teachings against sexual deviancy in Lev. 18, we have gay pride parades in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem!  At the other end of the pendulum of extremism, it’s hard to find a restaurant that doesn’t keep the Rabbinic version of Kashrut... namely, if you’re a family and you want to eat a meal together, all of you are going to  have to eat at either a milchekeh or fleshika restaurant because you won’t be able to get both mild and dairy at the same meal.

There are some things that remind us of influence from Taanach, however.  The Sabbath occurs on the seventh day of the  week.  Passover,  Shavuoth (the Feast of Weeks or “Pentacost”) and Sukkoth (The Feast of Booths) are observed as national holidays, and despite their hard exteriors, Sabras (native born Israelis) are probably among the most compassionate people on the planet.

Israel’s military has historically and continues to go out of its way in its efforts to spare the lives of innocents among the population of her enemies.  And the common Israeli Arab is far better off and has infinitely more freedom in Israel than in any Arab ruled country.

Now the Rabbis have passed down many wonderful traditions.  But they have chosen to reject, the most important teaching of all... that the Tzadek Y’shua is our Messiah.  Unfortunately that teaching seems to have been necessary for our unification because we were without the land which would be our means of unification.  Today we have the land.  The land will assure our uniqueness.  Eventually, the Messiah will assure our righteousness.  We will be the segulah (prized possession) of HaShem and the “survivors of the nations who attacked Jerusalem will assembly annually in Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Booths and learn from the Law of  God.”6

1 The Talmud of the Land of Israel, Vol. 2, Peah, Trans. by Roger Brooks, U.

of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1990, P.127 via Dan Gruber Elijahnet.com “Rabbi Akiba’s Messiah”.

3"The sayings of the elders have more weight than those of the prophets" (Berakoth 1:7); "An offense against the saying of the scribes is worse than one against those of Scripture" (Sanhedrin 11:3). 

4e.g. Ezekiel 20:34 - "I will bring you from the nations and gather you from the countries where you have been scattered -- with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm and with outpoured wrath." 

5 Dt 7:6
Zech. 14