Misconduct.org

Disclaimer

Anti-Christian Discrimination

At Indiana University

Footnote

to

A Few Comments On The Jewish Supremacist Organization

Known As The American Jewish Committee

The Sloppy Offensive Word “Antisemitism”

The word “antisemitism” is colossally misleading, inaccurate, confusing, and offensive.

The generally accepted meaning of “antisemitism” has finally mutated into its true meaning: “Any thought, opinion, belief, or action that a Jew doesn’t like.”

An “anti-semite” is thus a person disapproved of, disliked, or hated by one or more Jews.

“Anti-semite” is used as a smear and succeeds as a smear. Why? Because the dumbed-down, “lacking in knowledge” population that accepts and reacts to the term is deficient in the necessary historical and theological knowledge that’s needed to understand the term.

“Antisemitism” originally was a word selected in the 1870’s by Wilhelm Marr, who was born a Jew. Marr founded the Anti-Semitic League and published an anti-Jewish periodical. The word “Semite” was used variously to reflect real or imagined language, racial, and religious origins and characteristics. The actual word “Semite” derived from the presumption that persons speaking certain languages were descendants of Noah’s son Shem. The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, 1939, volume 1, p. 341.

The particular word Semite doesn’t really make a good fit for the Jews since the Jews were formed from many ethic and racial groups…and since there are true Israelite (presumably) and non-Israelite descendants of Shem who are not and were not Jews.

The Jews’ Disputed Heritage

Nearly all Jews today are Ashkenazim Jews who, according to some Jewish writers, don’t have any Judean ancestry at all, (other than as 20^th Century immigrants to Palestine/ “Judea”):

“In Part Two, Chapters V-VII, I have compiled the historical evidence which indicates that the bulk of Eastern Jewry—and hence of world Jewry—is of Khazar-Turkish, rather than Semitic [Biblical Shem], origin. In this last chapter I have tried to show that the evidence from anthropology concurs with history in refuting the popular belief in a Jewish race descended from the biblical tribe.” Arthur Koestler (Jewish), The Thirteenth Tribe, 1976, p. 199.

Although Koestler is not the only one sharing his conclusions, others reject Koestler’s conclusions, for example:

“A. E. Mourant [religion unknown], who specializes in blood group analysis, tested thousands of Jews in Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East and came to the conclusion that a strain of genetic homogeneity does run through Jewry, but not a Khazar strain. Even in Russia, Mourant found very little evidence of Khazar additions to the Jewish—or non-Jewish—gene pool. What Mourant and two associates did find was that Jews as a whole exhibit an admixture of 5-10 percent Negro genes, which they may have picked up in their stay in ancient Egypt…” Wilmot Robertson (religion unknown), The Dispossessed Majority, 1981, p. 31 referencing A. E. Mourant, The Genetics of Jews, 1978.

Robertson is slightly loose with the details regarding the mixed-race character that the Jews “may have picked up in their stay in Egypt.” First, there were never any “Jews” held in bondage in Egypt. The people held in bondage in Egypt were Israelites…a different group of people. The Holy Bible citation is Exodus 12: 37-38. “And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. And a mixed multitude went up also with them…” (The word Jew doesn’t appear anywhere in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, or Deuteronomy.) Thus, according to The Holy Bible, when the pureblooded Israelites left Egypt, a mixed race multitude, who also were not Jews, went with them. It’s from this mixed race multitude that Jews may have obtained their observed racial hybridity centuries later.

Stronger Biblical Explanations of the Jews’ Racial Hybridity

But, there are stronger Biblical explanations for the Jews’ observed racial hybridity than Robertson’s simplistic conjecture:

First, Jews have an Edomite heritage. The Edomites were descendants of Esau. Esau was Abraham’s son who rejected his birthright [just the way many modern day Christians are rejecting their birthright], married Canaanite females, and had mixed race offspring. Edom is another name for red…and Edomites have historically been known as “The Reds.” The Holy Bible, Genesis 25 and 28: 1-9 and 36.

Second, Judah was the son of Israel and was thus an Israelite. He procreated with a Canaanite female…and their mixed-race offspring were not considered Israelites even though they lived in Judea. The Holy Bible, Genesis 38: 1-5 and Numbers 26:20 and First Chronicles 2: 3 and First Chronicles 4: 21.

Third, Abraham had a son named Ishmael by the Egyptian servant Hagar. The Holy Bible, Genesis 16.

Thus, at the time of Jesus Christ, the Jews included pureblooded Israelites such as St. Paul, mixed-raced persons with some Israelite ancestry, and Canaanites (like Herod, the King of the Jews), Edomites, Moabites, and others of non-Israelite blood or mixed-race heritage. Jews made it clear that they were not Israelites by proclaiming that they were descendants of Abraham but had never been in bondage. This was a simple way of stating that they were descendants of Ishmael, Esau, or possibly Judah’s Canaanite mate. The Holy Bible, John 8: 31-33.

Since Jesus came only for the lost (put-away-in-separation) Israelites, and since he did not lose one that was given to him by God, the Father, the reasonable conclusion is that every pureblooded Israelite among the Jews (who is an elect of God) converted to Christianity. The Holy Bible, Matthew 15: 24 and John 18: 9.

The result was the Jews that have remained Jews were the Edomites, the Canaanites, and the others of mixed-racial heritage. It’s these non-Israelite Jews that produced the written Jewish Babylonian Talmud and who were the ancestors of the modern mixed-race known as the Jews…whose mixed-race heritage has been identified by Mourant (among others).

The Jews Have No Right to Use the Name ‘Israel’

After King Solomon’s death, God split the nation of Israel into two Kingdoms: the Northern Kingdom known as Israel and the Southern Kingdom know as Judah. The Holy Bible, First Kings 12: 1-24.

The Northern Kingdom was taken into slavery by Assyria and then dispersed. Many believe that these pureblooded Israelites became the Whites of Northern Europe.

[See Robert Alan Balaicius, Uncovering the Mysteries of Your Hidden Inheritance, 2001. This book has hundreds of amazing facts supporting the hypothesis that White Europeans are the true descendants of the Biblical Israelites. This hypothesis has a special internal consistency since The Holy Bible states that Jesus Christ came only for the lost (put-away-in-separation) Israelites and that these Israelites would come to be known by his name: Christians. This is a life-changing book and is highly recommended. (available here) (available here)]

The Southern Kingdom was called the House of Judah because it contained the family of Judah and was led by a descendant of Judah. God himself removed the right of this group of Israelites to go by the name of Israel; the right to the name Israel was given to the Northern Israelite families and belongs to those of the Northern Kingdom. The Southern Kingdom was to go by the name of Judah.

Not one member of the Northern Kingdom was ever a Jew.

Abraham, Isaac, Israel, Judah, and Moses weren’t Jews either.

Jesus Christ was a “Jew”…more correctly a “Judean”…only in the sense that he was a pureblooded descendant of Judah who lived in Judea…he certainly never was a Pharisee, which equates with the modern usage of the word “Jew.”

Even if modern Jewry has some pureblooded descendants of Judah, the Jews have absolutely no Biblical right to use the God-bestowed Title “Israel” or their strange derivative “Israelis.” It’s thus improper for an adherent of The Holy Bible or anyone else to use the name “Israel” for the Jews, despite what the Jews attempt to usurp. Instead, the Jews should be referred to by their common-usage name “Jews” and the name of their government in Palestine should be some derivative of their name Jew.

‘Anti-Semite’ Is a Smear Word Used By Jews and Christianity Detractors

“It is disgraceful to watch the Christian clergy take up the use of the word ‘anti-Semitism.’ They should know better. They know that ‘anti-Semitism’ is a meaningless word in the sense it is used today. They know the correct word is ‘Judaeophobe.’ ‘Anti-Semite’ was developed into the ‘smear-word’ it is today because “Semite” is associated with Jesus in the minds of Christians. Christians are accessories in the destruction of the Christian faith by tolerating the use of the smear-word ‘anti-Semite’ to silence by the most intolerable forms of persecution employing that smear-word Christians who [] oppose the evil conspirators.” Benjamin H. Freedman (Catholic, born Jewish), Facts Are Facts, 1954, p. 73. (available here) (available here) [No endorsement of this book or these Internet sites is intended. They are provided for academic research purposes only.]

Conclusion: Use ‘Anti-Jewism’

Because of all the confusion, controversy, and arguments, the use of the word “antisemitism’ to mean some form of anti-Jewism is very flaccid at best…similar to the Amish use of the word “English” to mean any non-Amish person.

In greater truth, the word “antisemitism” is simply a Jew-word used to smear people when a Jew can’t debate the facts. You’ve probably heard a motor-mouth Jew: “antisemite…antisemite…antisemite….”

“Antisemite” is simply an offensive word that no decent person should ever use.

The simple use of “anti-Jewism” is more accurate, simpler, more direct, and seems to be a much-to-be-preferred replacement for “antisemitism.” Likewise “anti-Jew” rather than “antisemite.”

Kenneth Stern, the American Jewish Committee’s expert on anti-Jewism likewise realizes the problem with “code words.” Stern states: “It is a sign of bigotry when people try to use code words to ‘explain’ away their defamation of a group. Whites opposed to the civil rights movement know it was ‘politically incorrect’ to say they were anti-black, so they used code words such as ‘anti-busing.’” (more)

It just makes more sense to throw out the “code words” and just speak clearly. The use of the code word “antisemitism” is simply a reflection of the user’s bigotry. Use “anti-Jewism” or “anti-Jew.”