Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Oct 30, 2023·edited Oct 30, 2023Author

I wish you had clarified your point. I understand that it is not your intention, but advising people to read “Mein Kampf” and then my book “Judaism Discovered” could cause an inattentive reader to imagine you are suggesting my book is a sequel.

Hitler’s book is sui generis as a warrant for genocide and as such shouldn’t be compared with any other book.

The Talmud of Babylon ought to be understood as its own genre, without drawing analogies with Hitler.

If more people read my anti-Nazi book, “Adolf Hitler: Enemy of the German People” these facts would be better understood.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2023·edited Oct 30, 2023Author

When you condemn the Old Testament as a criminal book you will be condemning Jesus Christ as well because He and His disciples quoted it hundreds of times favorably.

Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2023Liked by Michael Hoffman

I love you and your work. Please continue for as long as you are able. Is there any other with your knowledge please. Tommy seufer

Expand full comment

Two points:

-Marcion is usually regarded as a heretic, and Masonic & New Age theology borrow heavily from him. He's not exactly a reputable authority.

-The Palestinians have a lot of Abrahamic genes, & many are descendants of the Jewish people. The rest of the bloodline, & the that of the Arabs, is from Abraham via Ishmael & the Keturahites (genealogy in Judges, I think). God promises both Hagar and Abraham that Ishmael will become a great nation. The Israelis can't exterminate them, since God's covenant cannot fail.

Expand full comment

Dear Mr Camp

You’re correct, the Israelis can’t literally exterminate every Arab man, woman and child. However, the horror is in the details – the attempt to liquidate the Palestinians of Gaza to such an extent that their aspiration for a homeland will be extinguished for decades to come, along with tens of thousands of their children.

Expand full comment

Amalek was one of Esau's grandsons (per Genesis 36:12 in the King James Version). Throughout the Old Testament the Lord referred to Esau as Edom. The kingdom of darkness overlords passed the spirit of Edom onto the tribe of Ashkenaz so that they exhibited the same characteristics as the Edomites, which had to do with attributes such as unbridled corruption, exploitation of everyone possible, unprovoked aggression toward other tribes and nations, and Satanism as the underlying religious force driving them and giving them power.

The tribe of Ashkenaz later became known as Khazars. They were Gentiles who wanted to be Jews, so they took on Judaism as their religion, and they took on Jewish names and customs, and they gave Hebrew names to their towns and cities. In 1948 they stole some Palestinian land and called it Israel.

Expand full comment

Dear Mr. Yost

You wrote: "The kingdom of darkness overlords passed the spirit of Edom onto the tribe of Ashkenaz so that they exhibited the same characteristics as the Edomites which had to do with attributes such as unbridled corruption, exploitation of everyone possible, unprovoked aggression toward other tribes and nations, and Satanism as the underlying religious force driving them and giving them power."

I caution you that the preceding negative racial and ethnic generalizations and mystifications of yours are decidedly not welcome here. Further postings of this nature will result in your comment being removed and your ability to comment further interdicted. There are many places on the Internet where you can make remarks of this kind. This is not one of them.

I will not allow my Substack column to be used for purposes of advancing racial bigotry of any kind, contra any ethnicity.

Expand full comment

Just FYI, because you didn't cover it in your article here, biblically speaking, the Amalekites were a clan of people descended in part from the biblical Nephilim ("giants").

Specifically, in Genesis 36:11-12, we have this:

"The sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, and Kenaz. (Timnah was a concubine of Eliphaz, Esau's son; she bore Amalek to Eliphaz.) These are the sons of Adah, Esau's wife."

So we learn that Timnah was a concubine of Eliphaz (who was Esau’s son) whose own mother was Adah. And if one goes back to Genesis 36:2, one also finds that Adah was the daughter of Elon the Hittite. [P.S. An Elon who wasn't Musk].

According to Genesis 36:20-22 (a few verses later), Timnah was a Horite, one of the native Canaanitic population of Edom. And from Deuteronomy 2:10-12 and 20-23, we also know that the Horites were defeated and displaced by the Edomites. And the Horites are listed in those passages in Deuteronomy with other people groups that were definitely "clans of giants". So Esau’s line has a child by one of these women, and that child is Amalek.

So this is what Bibi is attempting to use as motivation for his modern-day attempts at ethnic cleansing. What wonderful pseudoscholarship.

For a good handling of biblical Amalek (much of the above material being derived from it), see especially this podcast, starting at ~4:30 to skip the preliminaries:


And for more on the biblical-historical "conquest of Caanan" and its reasons, see this additional scholarly article from Heiser:


Expand full comment

That Netanyahu would equate Hamas and, by extension, the innocent Palestinians with the descendants of Amalek, is so far removed from the truth as to border on delusional. It truly boggles the mind! I can only compare it to as if during the Troubles in Northern Ireland the UK PM, professing belief in some fringe cult of the British-Israel variant identified the IRA and, thus, all the innocent Irish to be descendants of Canaan and co-opting God's orders in the Bible to Israel millennia ago marked them for annihilation all to serve his own political agenda.

Indeed as Christ said, "...all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword" (Matthew 26:52) for human nature is what it is that without the gospel of Christ and God's Holy Spirit to change hearts both individually and collectively war and death will never end.

Incidentally I believe this January 15, 2009 speech by the late UK politician Sir Gerald Kaufman speaks to us today (www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWe8gRolEJk).

Expand full comment

Can you address the substance of the argument instead of dismissing it? I've read Judiasim's Strange Gods. I do not understand how you fail to see the clear parallels of the OT with the Talmud. The Talmud is the logical outgrowth of the OT. The NT is a radical departure. Do you deny that Yahweah commissions genocide? Yes or no? Is genocide right or wrong?

Expand full comment

Therefore Jesus and his apostles, who favorably quoted the Old Testament hundreds of times were Talmudic?

The heresy of Marcion is the back door to the Antichrist nullification of the Word of God.

Yehoshua and Yahweh are one: etymologically and theologically. If you reject one you reject the other, which is the objective of the occult imperium.

The Talmud of Mystery Babylon inculcates self-worship. The Old Testament destroys that ruinously egotistical idolatry.

Expand full comment

This is an evasion of the argument, and furthermore, uncompelling to anyone who doesn't consider Jesus authoritative. Does Yahwesh comission genocide or not? Is genocide wrong? Why was it OK then and not now?

Expand full comment

Is Numbers 31 an application of just war theory or not? Is blowing up hospitals with innocent children analogous to putting children of the Midianites, Amelikites to death? Yes or no. I think Nentenyahoo has a point.

Expand full comment
Dec 13, 2023·edited Dec 13, 2023

Was Abraham's attempted murder of Hagar and Ishmael OK? Was his lie OK? Was it OK for Moses to murder? Yes or no? Is it OK to cheat your brother, lie about your identity as Jacob did? These three are the primary models Jews look to. They never reptented of these acts. Is it surprising that judiacs consider lying, murder, and cheating acceptable when their three heroes did such? Is it surprising they rejected Jesus, who taught the opposite? The Talmud was just a glimmer in the pharasitical eye when they put a man even recognized just by the pagan Romans to death. No Talmud necessary. All you need is the OT.

Expand full comment

Of course there was a "Talmud" which motivated the Judeans to reject their own Messiah.

It had not yet been committed to writing. It existed in oral form. Jesus referred to it and condemned it in Mark 7 and Matthew 15.

In the Old Testament Book of Isaiah the coming of Jesus is prophesied:

"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" ('God is with us'). -- Isaiah 7:14

Isaiah 8:14:

"And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem."

In the New Testament St. Peter uses this passage from Isaiah as an instruction for Christians. (Cf. I Peter 2:8).

Furthermore, you appear to be unaware that the New Testament in Acts 8:26-37 identifies the suffering servant in the Old Testament Book of Isaiah, chapter 53, as Jesus:

Then an angel of the Lord said to Philip,“Get up and go south on the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” (This is a desert road). So he got up and went. There he met an Ethiopian eunuch a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasury. He had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning home, sitting in his chariot, reading the prophet Isaiah.

Then the Spirit said to Philip, “Go over and join this chariot.” So Philip ran up to it and heard the man reading the prophet Isaiah. He asked him, “Do you understand what you’re reading?”

The man replied, “How in the world can I, unless someone guides me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. Now the passage of scripture the man was reading was this:

He was led like a sheep to slaughter, and like a lamb before its shearer is silent, so he did not open his mouth. In humiliation justice was taken from him. Who can describe his posterity? For his life was taken away from the earth.”

Then the eunuch said to Philip, “Please tell me who is the prophet saying this about—himself or someone else?”So Philip started speaking, and beginning with this scripture proclaimed the good news about Jesus to him."

There are dozens of other prophecies about Jesus in the Old Testament. In order to crucify their Messiah, the Chief Priests and the people had to reject the Old Testament.

You demonstrate no knowledge of these matters, not even of the most basic fact in this regard -- Jesus Christ's own words in John 5:39:

"Search the Scriptures [Old Testament]...they are they which testify of me."

Jesus further states in John 5: 46-47:

"Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words"?

I strongly suggest you study the Bible and gain a knowledge of the Scriptures rather than presume to judge God and His Divine Son from your ignorance. The Jews killed the Messiah of Israel out of their rebellion and disobedience to the Old Testament. Like you, the Talmud says otherwise.

I cannot continue this exchange with you without violating Proverbs 26:4.

Therefore, I bid you adieu and pray you will be granted the grace to gain true knowledge of the Word of God.

Expand full comment

The egotistical self worship is admittedly not as intense in the OT, but it's there as reflected in the kosher rules and demands of perfect endogamy as demonstrated by the story of Phinheas (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phinehas).

Expand full comment
Dec 13, 2023·edited Dec 13, 2023

Jesus and apostles quoted favorably parts of what would be called the OT, and what books are canonical and apocryphal remains controversial to this day. It's Christians centuries later that imposed a doctrine on the OT considering it entirely the "inspired word of God" even parts that appear to contradict the NT (for example the Sermon on the Mount and Israelite conquest).

Expand full comment