“The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: “Let us differentiate.” Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of “let us differentiate” between totally different species.”
“This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world … The difference in the inner quality between Jews and non-Jews is “so great that the bodies should be considered as completely different species.”
“An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness.”
“As has been explained, an embryo is called a human being, because it has both body and soul. Thus, the difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish embryo can be understood.”
“…the general difference between Jews and non-Jews: A Jew was not created
as a means for some [other] purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all [divine] emanations was created only to serve the Jews.”
“The important things are the Jews, because they do not exist for any [other] aim; they themselves are [the divine] aim.”
“The entire creation [of a non-Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews.”
https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/07/why-is-the-us-honoring-a-racist-rabbi/ *
https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/07/why-is-the-us-honoring-a-racist-rabbi/ *
Be alert to this EWTN man's sly switch from Bible to Talmud. There is not one word- not one- in the Bible about the putative miracle of oil lasting eight days.
Supposed Origin.
In the Talmud it is principally known as the "Feast of Illumination," and it was usual either to display eight lamps on the first night of the festival, and to reduce the number on each successive night, or to begin with one lamp the first night, increasing the number till the eighth night. The Shammaites, usually representatives of the older traditions, favored the former custom; the Hillelites advocated the latter (Shab. 21b). Josephus thinks that the lights were symbolical of the liberty obtained by the Jews on the day of which Ḥanukkah is the celebration. The Talmudic sources (Meg. eodem; Meg. Ta'an. 23; comp. the different version Pes. R. 2) ascribe the origin of the eight days' festival, with its custom of illuminating the houses, to the miracle said to have occurred at the dedication of the purified Temple. This was that the one small cruse of consecrated oil found unpolluted by the Hasmonean priests when they entered the Temple, it having been sealed and hidden away, lasted for eight days until new oil could be prepared for the lamps of the holy candlestick. A legend similar in character, and obviously older in date, is that alluded to in II Macc. i. 18 et seq., according to which the relighting of the altar-fire by Nehemiah was due to a miracle which occurred on the twenty-fifth of Kislew, and which appears to be given as the reason for the selection of the same date for the rededication of the altar by Judas Maccabeus (comp. Ḥag. iii. 10, 18, 20; Num. R. xiii. 4).
Why does EWTN feature Brother Bob Fishman telling fishy stories to Christians about putative miracles that even the Jews/Jewish Encyclopedia concede are ahistorical?
And why is he dressed as he is and why does the photo of Jesus depict him as a Jewish Rabbi holding an item with the garish Star of David splashed on it?
And why the repeated references to the The Jews as a race?
If this is not indicative of the racial supremacism of the Jews then it will have to do until ABS sees another EWTN episode of Judiaising.
Did not Jesus Christ warn that such appeals to race are of no merit but, rather, an indication that such appeals reveal that Satan is their Father?
John 8 accrd to Cornelius a Lapide:
Jesus saith unto them, If ye are the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham.
It is so in the Vulgate. But some Greek MSS. read as in the English version. He does not deny their extraction, but condemns their doings. Says S. Augustine, “Your flesh may be from Abraham, but not so your life.”
Then said they unto Him, We be not born of fornication,
&c. Origen, Cyril, and Leontius think that in these words they implicitly reproached Him with His own birth. An atrocious statement, which the Pharisees studiously propagated, to detract from our Lord’s credit and authority. But it would have been atrocious blasphemy.
(2.) Euthymius and Rupertus suppose it to be only an assertion of their descent from Sarah, and not from Hagar, and thus not spurious, or in a secondary rank.
(3.) We are not born of spiritual fornication, i.e., idolatry. We are not Hagarenes, who were idolaters. Rupertus objects that to make out this meaning the word “but” should have been inserted. But Maldonatus maintains that such particles are often omitted, adding that fornication in the prophets means idolatry, as being spiritual fornication, drawing away the soul from its true Spouse (see Hos. i. 2).
Theophylact explains it to mean, “We are not born of mixed marriages of Jews and Gentiles, which were forbidden, and counted illegitimate by the Jews.”
(4.) The Jews reply in a straightforward manner, Abraham is our true earthly father; and one is our Father, even God in heaven. Your charge is therefore false. You unjustly claim the God of Abraham for thyself alone, and exclude us from sonship with Him, and hand us over to another father, the devil, making us spurious, and consequently infamous.
For I proceeded forth
(ε̉ξη̃λθον) and came (ήκω), I am here. S. Augustine, S. Hilary (de Trin. vi.), consider that the twofold generation of our Lord is here set forth. I came forth by eternal generation. I am come into the world by My Incarnation. “That the Word proceeded forth from God, is His eternal procession” (says S. Augustine), but He came to us, because He was made flesh; His advent was His being made man. But Jansen, Maldonatus, and others refer both the expressions to the Incarnation, but yet as implying, and presupposing His eternal generation. “I came forth from God, and came into the world, though I had before come forth from God, and was in heaven as God” (see chap. xvi. 27).
For I came not of Myself, but He sent Me.
He teaches that He was not self-originate, says S. Hilary (de Trin. vi.). Origen adds, He says this on account of some who came of themselves, and were not sent of the Father (see Jer. xxxiii. 21). A warning to such as Lutherans, Calvinists, and others, who have no true mission.
He was a murderer,
&c. For as soon as Adam was created, Lucifer, the very same day through envy destroyed both him and all his posterity, by persuading him to eat of the forbidden fruit. And in like manner does he endeavour through you, 0 Jews, to kill Me, by Whom all men are to be redeemed from death. For he ever persists in his eager desire to destroy men, as the leopard and wolf, which feed on human flesh. He urged on Cain to kill Abel, and Joseph’s brethren to destine him to death. And even now instigates all murderers to commit their murders. And much more does he thirst for the death and destruction of souls, though bodily death is here more properly meant, for this it was they plotted against Christ. Euthymius and S. Augustine (Contra Petib. ii. 13).
And abode not in the truth, i.e
., in the integrity and perfection, the grace, righteousness, and sanctity in which he was created. True means pure and unadulterated. As Nathaniel is called “a true Israelite, in whom is no guile.” Again “in truth” means in that which was his duty. In S. John, David, and Solomon “the truth” commonly means this (see John iii. 21). There is a threefold truth, in heart, word, and deed. The truth of the heart is opposed to error; the truth of word is opposed to a lie, the truth of deed is when a man acts in accordance with what is practically right, and this is opposed to iniquity and sin. Now the devil did not stand in the truth because he did not persevere in what he ought to have done. He refused to be under God. He claimed to be His equal, a kind of second god, and rose up against Him through pride. Hence he fell from his state of grace, and was cast down to hell (see Is. xiv. 12). And so S. Chrysostom (Hom. liv.; S. Leo, Ser. de Quadr., and others). Hence (1.) S. Augustine (contr. Adimantum iv. 4), understands by the “truth,” the law, meaning that the devil did not abide in the Law of God. Others by “truth” understand fidelity, or the obedience due to God as the Creator.
When he speaketh a lie,
&c. When he fell from his original beauty as an angel and became a hideous demon, it was innate in him to deceive; his special and proper business was to lie, and to this he entirely devotes himself.
And the father of it.
“His father,” says Nonnus. The Cainian heretics understood the devil to mean Cain. But the Manicheans on S. Augustine’s authority (in loco) said that the devil had a father, even the evil god, and that both he and his son were liars. But I maintain that “of it” refers to the word “lie,” which is understood in the term liar which occurs just before. And he is the father of a lie. (1.) Because he first invented the act of lying. (2.) Because he fashions and forms lies, as the potter moulds the clay. So S. Augustine and others.
It is a Hebraism. Origen says, “The devil begot a lie. He was seduced by himself, and in this respect was worse, because others are deceived by him, whereas he is the author of his own deception.” And S. Augustine, “Not every one that lies is a father of a lie, but he only who, like the devil, received it not from any other quarter.”
John 8 accrd to Cornelius a Lapide:
Jesus saith unto them, If ye are the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham.
It is so in the Vulgate. But some Greek MSS. read as in the English version. He does not deny their extraction, but condemns their doings. Says S. Augustine, “Your flesh may be from Abraham, but not so your life.”
Ver. 40.—But now ye seek, &c. Abraham did not injure any one, but saved Lot, and as many as he could. But the Jews were eager to kill Christ. The Jews (Perke. Avoth. cap. v.) draw the same contrast between a disciple of Abraham and of Balaam.
Ver. 41.—Ye do the works of your father. He persists in saying that they were not Abraham’s children, but does not say whose children they were.
&c. Origen, Cyril, and Leontius think that in these words they implicitly reproached Him with His own birth. An atrocious statement, which the Pharisees studiously propagated, to detract from our Lord’s credit and authority. But it would have been atrocious blasphemy.
(2.) Euthymius and Rupertus suppose it to be only an assertion of their descent from Sarah, and not from Hagar, and thus not spurious, or in a secondary rank.
(3.) We are not born of spiritual fornication, i.e., idolatry. We are not Hagarenes, who were idolaters. Rupertus objects that to make out this meaning the word “but” should have been inserted. But Maldonatus maintains that such particles are often omitted, adding that fornication in the prophets means idolatry, as being spiritual fornication, drawing away the soul from its true Spouse (see Hos. i. 2).
Theophylact explains it to mean, “We are not born of mixed marriages of Jews and Gentiles, which were forbidden, and counted illegitimate by the Jews.”
(4.) The Jews reply in a straightforward manner, Abraham is our true earthly father; and one is our Father, even God in heaven. Your charge is therefore false. You unjustly claim the God of Abraham for thyself alone, and exclude us from sonship with Him, and hand us over to another father, the devil, making us spurious, and consequently infamous.
Ver. 42.—Jesus said, &c. Put syllogistically, our Lord’s argument runs this, “He who loves God, loves also the Son of God. But ye do not love Me, who am the Son of God. Therefore ye love not God. Just as the Arians, who by denying Christ to be the Son of God, deny the Father also; for if He has not a Son, He cannot be called God the Father.
(ε̉ξη̃λθον) and came (ήκω), I am here. S. Augustine, S. Hilary (de Trin. vi.), consider that the twofold generation of our Lord is here set forth. I came forth by eternal generation. I am come into the world by My Incarnation. “That the Word proceeded forth from God, is His eternal procession” (says S. Augustine), but He came to us, because He was made flesh; His advent was His being made man. But Jansen, Maldonatus, and others refer both the expressions to the Incarnation, but yet as implying, and presupposing His eternal generation. “I came forth from God, and came into the world, though I had before come forth from God, and was in heaven as God” (see chap. xvi. 27).
For I came not of Myself, but He sent Me.
He teaches that He was not self-originate, says S. Hilary (de Trin. vi.). Origen adds, He says this on account of some who came of themselves, and were not sent of the Father (see Jer. xxxiii. 21). A warning to such as Lutherans, Calvinists, and others, who have no true mission.
Ver. 43.—Why do ye not understand, &c. Because cleaving to your pride, avarice, hatred, and enmity against Me, ye will not hear Me and understand. “They could not hear,” says S. Augustine, “because they refused to be corrected by what they heard;” but (as says the Gloss) ye are of the devil, and have elected to go on with him. S. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv., de Theol.) tells us that in Scripture “I cannot” sometimes means “I will not.” (See Matt. xix. 12.) But secondly, and more properly and forcibly, “Ye do not understand My words because ye cannot endure My teaching, and will not let My words enter your ears, so hateful am I to you, and so obstinately have you from hatred hardened your hearts against Me.” Thus Emmanuel Sa.
Ver. 44.—Ye are of your father the devil. “Not by descent but by imitation,” says S. Augustine, quoting Ezek. xvi. 4; and adding, “The Jews, by imitating their impieties, found for themselves parents, not of whom to be born, but with whom they would be lost, by following their evil ways.”
S. Epiphanius (Her. 38, 40) by the devil in this place understands Judas Iscariot, whom our Lord also calls a devil. But the author of “Questions on the Old and New Testament” (apud S. Augustine) understands Cain. But it is certain that it must be taken literally to mean Lucifer. For the Jews in persecuting Jesus followed him as their father; “not by succession in the flesh, but in sin,” says Ambrose (Lib. iv. in 1oc.)
Ye are of, &c. “In order to kill Me.” He explains that they are of the devil, by following his suggestion. S. Chrysostom says he speaks not of “works,” but of desires (or lusts), showing that both lie and they greatly delighted in murders. For the devil has an ardent desire to destroy all men, both because he grudges them the glory from which he himself fell, but also to injure God, whom he hates as his torturer, and wishes to tear away men from Him whom He created in His own image, and called and predestinated to His own eternal grace and glory.
&c. For as soon as Adam was created, Lucifer, the very same day through envy destroyed both him and all his posterity, by persuading him to eat of the forbidden fruit. And in like manner does he endeavour through you, 0 Jews, to kill Me, by Whom all men are to be redeemed from death. For he ever persists in his eager desire to destroy men, as the leopard and wolf, which feed on human flesh. He urged on Cain to kill Abel, and Joseph’s brethren to destine him to death. And even now instigates all murderers to commit their murders. And much more does he thirst for the death and destruction of souls, though bodily death is here more properly meant, for this it was they plotted against Christ. Euthymius and S. Augustine (Contra Petib. ii. 13).
And abode not in the truth, i.e
., in the integrity and perfection, the grace, righteousness, and sanctity in which he was created. True means pure and unadulterated. As Nathaniel is called “a true Israelite, in whom is no guile.” Again “in truth” means in that which was his duty. In S. John, David, and Solomon “the truth” commonly means this (see John iii. 21). There is a threefold truth, in heart, word, and deed. The truth of the heart is opposed to error; the truth of word is opposed to a lie, the truth of deed is when a man acts in accordance with what is practically right, and this is opposed to iniquity and sin. Now the devil did not stand in the truth because he did not persevere in what he ought to have done. He refused to be under God. He claimed to be His equal, a kind of second god, and rose up against Him through pride. Hence he fell from his state of grace, and was cast down to hell (see Is. xiv. 12). And so S. Chrysostom (Hom. liv.; S. Leo, Ser. de Quadr., and others). Hence (1.) S. Augustine (contr. Adimantum iv. 4), understands by the “truth,” the law, meaning that the devil did not abide in the Law of God. Others by “truth” understand fidelity, or the obedience due to God as the Creator.
(2.) S. Irenæus (v. 22, 23) understands it to mean “veracity,” as our Lord says below he is “a liar, and the father of it.” Christ seems to charge the Jews with two faults, which they had learned from the devil, murder, and mendacity, and calumny.
(3.) Origen (Tom. xxiv.) understands it to mean “truth in practical matters,” which Lucifer abandoned when he sinned by pride, which practically was a false step. This resulted from his not abiding in truth of act, and thus he departed from truth in heart and word, and thus by his lies deceived mankind.
Hence S. Augustine (de Civ. xi. 13) rightly infers that he was created in grace and righteousness, and that the Manichees were wrong in asserting that he was naturally wicked or created by an evil god. They inferred this wrongly from 1 John iii., “The devil sinneth from the beginning.” The true meaning of this passage is explained in loco.
Because there is no truth in him. Neither in thought, word, or deed, for those three kinds of truth have a sisterly relation to each other. But here “truth” rather signifies veracity.
&c. When he fell from his original beauty as an angel and became a hideous demon, it was innate in him to deceive; his special and proper business was to lie, and to this he entirely devotes himself.
(2.) “Of his own,” means of his own special invention. But men lie from imitating him, and by his suggestion.
(3.) “Of his own,” from his own inward delight in it He delights in it, as a thief in his thefts.
For he is a liar. From his constant habit of lying, he is altogether made up of lies. And if he ever speaks truth, it is by compulsion, or else by means of truth to persuade men to what is false.
“His father,” says Nonnus. The Cainian heretics understood the devil to mean Cain. But the Manicheans on S. Augustine’s authority (in loco) said that the devil had a father, even the evil god, and that both he and his son were liars. But I maintain that “of it” refers to the word “lie,” which is understood in the term liar which occurs just before. And he is the father of a lie. (1.) Because he first invented the act of lying. (2.) Because he fashions and forms lies, as the potter moulds the clay. So S. Augustine and others.
It is a Hebraism. Origen says, “The devil begot a lie. He was seduced by himself, and in this respect was worse, because others are deceived by him, whereas he is the author of his own deception.” And S. Augustine, “Not every one that lies is a father of a lie, but he only who, like the devil, received it not from any other quarter.”
And hence the devil is the father and author of heresies, and therefore heresiarchs have had a devil at their side who suggested their heresies, as well as arguments to uphold them. So Luther confessed of himself. Such a suggester had Arius, Eunomius, Calvin, &c. The Apostle (1 Tim. iv. 1) speaks of heresies as “doctrines of devils” (see notes in loco).
Being born off a Jewish Mother does nothing for one's righteousness.
Salvation is not from the Jews. Salvation is from Jesus Christ and Him alone.
*
*
Is Chanukah a Minor Holiday?
Question:
My friend told me that Chanukah is a minor holiday, unlike Rosh Hashanah and Passover, and so we
shouldn’t make such a big deal out of it. He said that the only reason it became so big was because
of the season.
Answer:
Unlike Rosh Hashanah, Passover and other “major” holidays, which are biblically prescribed days of
rest, we go to work on Chanukah. Even on Purim, going to work is not recommended. Also, on Jewish
holidays we wear special clothes. But the days of Chanukah are regular workdays in regular clothes.
Yet Chanukah is a hardly a “minor” holiday. Read what Maimonides writes in his Laws of Chanukah:
The mitzvah of kindling Chanukah lamps is a very precious mitzvah. A person should be
very careful in its observance, to publicize the miracle and thus increase our praise of G‑d and
our expression of thanks for the miracles which He wrought on our behalf. Even if a person
has no resources for food except what he receives from charity, he should pawn or sell his
garments and purchase oil and lamps to kindle them.
Maimonides continues by instructing that if one has only enough money to afford either a
cup of wine for Shabbat kiddush or oil for his Chanukah lamp, the mitzvah of Chanukah
takes precedence. Doesn’t sound too minor to me.
Truth be told, Chanukah did make a retreat for quite a few centuries. Originally, everyone lit their
Chanukah lights at the entrance to their homes. When Jews lived among people hostile to their faith, they
had to bring that light indoors, out of fear for their lives.
In the 1970s, however, the Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, of righteous memory,
began a campaign of lighting prominent, highly visible Chanukah menorahs in public places. Since
then, in shopping malls and town squares wherever there are Jews, Chanukah has once again become
a very open, public celebration.
This is really what Chanukah is all about: to “light up the darkness” (which is why we light it at night, at
the door or window). So, even though it’s a regular workday—well, that’s really the whole idea: to light
up the regular workday. And that takes a very special light.
At any rate, since when do we look for excuses not to celebrate? On the contrary, in the words of
wise King Solomon, “A good heart always celebrates.”