Category Archives: persecution of Christians

French rabbi Rav Touitou applauds Muslim invasion of Europe

I saw this meme on an Internet chat forum:

Rav David Touitou, a Haredi or ultra Orthodox Jew, lives in Ashdod, France. His Facebook page is here.

By “Messiah,” Rabbi Touitou means the long-awaited Jewish messiah, not Jesus Christ. (See “Prophet Zechariah foretold the coming of Jesus Christ” on why Jews don’t believe Jesus is Christ.)

Touitou’s belief is eerily similar to that of ISIS or the Islamic State, who maintain that we are in the end days and that the role of ISIS is to hasten the apocalypse and the arrival of the Muslim messiah, Mahdi, who will lead Muslims to victory before the end of the world.

Here’s the text of what Rabbi Touitou said in the above meme, and the Google Translation from English into French:

“The Messiah will come only when Edom, Europe, Christianity has totally fallen. So I ask you, is it good news that Muslims are invading Europe? It’s excellent news! It means the coming of the Messiah! Excellent news!”

“Le Messie ne viendra que lorsque Edom, l’Europe, le christianisme est totalement tombé. Je vous demande donc, est-ce une bonne nouvelle que les musulmans envahissent l’Europe? C’est une excellente nouvelle! Cela signifie l’arrivée du Messie! D’excellentes nouvelles!”

I don’t like secondary sources, and always strive to find the primary source for something.

So I went searching and found this video of Rabbi Touitou saying those words:

https://www.liveleak.com/ll_embed?f=4b2c56491272

Some comments on the above video from the video’s LiveLeak page:

“rare glimpse into the modern jew and how they see goyim. i tell ppl all the time they are no better than muslims, and they just stare at me like wtf”

“Zionism = Wahhabism = Salafism the same shithole. Israel make war by proxy in Iraq and Syria for making their satanic agenda.

“Again it is the Jews benefitting.”

“and some people ask themselves why so much nations persecuted or kicked the jews out in the last 5000 years.”

“See, people. I’ve told you this. You block me. You tell me I’m a ‘racist’ or ‘anti-Semitic’. Jews are the biggest racist there is. While keeping their culture safe in gated communities, they want to flood yours and mine with madness and then call you a racist when you say anything about it. These jews are hell-bent on destroying all other people.”

“Radical Judaism is not unlike radical Islam. The Jews who are Zionists instigate and perpetuate there long term plan to destroy the order of the world through there corruption of the global order. Chaos.”

“Why would god choose the people who murdered his son? Make any sense?”

Les Brigandes, an all-female French nationalist, anti-globalist pop group, quoted Rabbi Touitou at the beginning of their song, “The Great Replacement”.

In an interview with the blog European Civil War, Les Brigandes said their purpose is to defend French culture:

“We defend the freedom of peoples and communities to organize and live in accordance with their consciousness, their customs, and their beliefs. We thus defend diversity against the standardizations of globalism….

[T]the globalist oligarchy continues to advance by crushing all national, religious, familial, and natural obstacles. One thing particularly new that can be noted is the madness of the immigrant invasion: for the first time, governments organize the invasion of their own countries, and pay the invaders with their own peoples’ money!

There is a purpose to this, obviously. An economic purpose (lower salaries, a new class of rootless people more disposed to buy and consume in the West than in Zimbabwe or Libya), a cultural purpose (pauperizing the masses and destroying their identity), but also, which is never said, a messianic purpose. In truth, the oligarchy, in concert with the global religions, is getting ready to unify internationally the masses of the entire world, including their religious motivations, for the purpose of definitively consolidating the New World Order. We see this in the ecumenical politics conducted by personages like the Dalai Lama or Pope Francis. The migratory crisis accelerates the process. There are two possible solutions to the crisis:

1) A progressive fusion of these Muslim masses with the European peoples (both adopting the new American conformity). This would pertain to a syncretist evolution. In current conditions, this hypothesis is highly unlikely, given the orientation of conquering Islam, which is not participating in the dialogue.

2) A crisis that will never stop growing and which could culminate in a declared civil war. Such a crisis can only favor a yet louder cry for global unity, religious as well as political, just as the last two world wars favored the emergence of a world government to keep the peace. A crisis always calls for a solution, and the masses are always more disposed to accept the tyranny of peace and ‘love’ after a war that might have robbed them of life.

In either case, massive immigration will further the program of worldwide political and religious unification, which the Christian tradition names ‘the reign of Antichrist.’

See also:

~Eowyn

Advertisements

Christian leaders trash President Trump and his supporters

File this under “No good deed goes unpunished”.

On May 4, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order promoting free speech and religious liberty by enabling religious groups to speak freely on politics without losing their tax exempt status. In the words of the executive order:

“All executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the greatest extent practicable and to the extent permitted by law, respect and protect the freedom of persons and organizations to engage in religious and political speech. In particular, the Secretary of the Treasury shall ensure, to the extent permitted by law, that the Department of the Treasury does not take any adverse action against any individual, house of worship, or other religious organization on the basis that such individual or organization speaks or has spoken about moral or political issues from a religious perspective, where speech of similar character has, consistent with law, not ordinarily been treated as participation or intervention in a political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) a candidate for public office by the Department of the Treasury. As used in this section, the term “adverse action” means the imposition of any tax or tax penalty; the delay or denial of tax-exempt status; the disallowance of tax deductions for contributions made to entities exempted from taxation under section 501(c)(3) of title 26, United States Code; or any other action that makes unavailable or denies any tax deduction, exemption, credit, or benefit.

This is how Pope Francis’ close advisers and a Protestant minister reward President Trump for his religious liberty executive order.

(1) Pope Francis’ Advisers

In a recent article in the Jesuit journal Civilta Cattolica, the contents of which are vetted by the Vatican in advance of publication, two close advisers to Jesuit Pope Francis lashed out at American conservatives and the political alliance between conservative Catholics and Evangelical Protestants which elected Donald Trump to the White House.

As reported by Catholic World News on July 13, 2017, the article is co-authored by:

  1. Father Antonio Spadaro, the editor of Civilta Cattolica, who is a regular adviser to Pope Francis.
  2. Marcelo Figueroa, a Presbyterian pastor who was recruited by Pope Francis to launch an Argentinean edition of L’Osservatore Roman, the Vatican’s daily newspaper.

Spadaro and Figueroa maintain that American conservative leaders, including Presidents Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Donald Trump, have been heavily influenced by fundamentalist Protestant thought — an influence that shows itself in a noxious Manichean worldview that “divides reality between Good and absolute Evil” and encourages confrontation.

The two close advisers to Pope Francis write that many American Catholics have been drawn into that Manicheanism, and that their alliance with Evangelical Protestants as “values voters” is worrisome because these Catholics are a departure from Pope Francis’s “ecumenism”:

“Clearly there is an enormous difference between these concepts and the ecumenism employed by Pope Francis with various Christian bodies and other religious confessions. Francis wants to break the organic link between culture, politics, institution and Church.”

(2) Protestant Pastor William Barber

On July 10, 2017 in the White House, a group of evangelical leaders laid hands on and prayed over President Trump, asking God to give him guidance, wisdom and protection.

That sent Rev. William Barber II, the pastor of Greenleaf Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Goldsboro, NC, and president of North Carolina NAACP. into a spitting rage.

Rev. William Barber II

Abbie Bennett reports for The News & Observer that on MSNBC’s “AM Joy” on Saturday morning, July 15, Barber called the evangelicals’ prayer for the President “theological malpractice”:

“It is a form of theological malpractice that borders on heresy when you can p-r-a-y for a president and others when they are p-r-e-y, preying on the most vulnerable, you’re violating the most sacred principles of religion.”

Next day, in a news release, chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party (NCGOP) Robin Hayes said:

“In the strongest possible terms, the NCGOP condemns the hateful actions of Dr. Rev. Barber, who cast tens of millions of people, of all faiths, who pray for the president, as sinners in a nationally broadcasted interview. As a pastor in North Carolina, Rev. Dr. Barber has crossed the line this time. Using his role as a supposed faith-based leader to falsely drive citizens away from praying for the good of our nation and our nation’s president, is absolutely grotesque. The idea that it is a sin to pray for any individual, much less the commander-in-chief of our country, goes against any religious teaching that I have ever heard of. Rev. Dr. Barber is spreading a repulsive lie, and he should apologize immediately.”

During the 2016 presidential election, neither the Vatican nor Rev. William Barber had a problem with Hillary Clinton, who is so pro-abort that she favors the legalization of late-term or partial-birth abortion (i.e., up to the 9th month). In contrast, President Trump has been true to his campaign promise, having defunded International Planned Parenthood, as well as signed a law restoring states’ right to defund Planned Parenthood in the U.S.

“Reverend” Barber and Pope Francis’ close advisers “Father” Spadaro and “Pastor” Figueroa, are no more Christian than the devil himself.

~Eowyn

Belle Plaine, MN approves satanic monument for veterans park

Belle Plaine, Minnesota, is a small city of 6,661 residents in 2010, about 45 miles southwest of Minneapolis.

In the name of “free speech,” the city government has conceded to satanists in their demand to erect a satanic monument in the city’s Veterans Memorial Park.

Liz Sawyer reports for the (Minnesota) Star Tribune that the people of Belle Plaine wanted to honor fallen U.S. veterans with a modest 2-foot steel war memorial called “Joe,” which features a cross.

In January 2017, fearing a lawsuit rooted in the constitutional separation of church and state, Belle Plaine city leaders ordered the cross to be removed.

But the decision to remove the cross proved deeply unpopular in the predominantly Christian city. For nearly a month, more than 100 flag-toting protesters occupied the park each day, often staking their own handmade crosses into the ground in defiance. Almost overnight, small wooden crosses popped up in business windows, on mailboxes and front lawns.

At a February City Council meeting, Belle Plaine resident Andy Parrish, who led the protests, told an overflow crowd:

“The residents feel a sense of duty. Our veterans defended us and it’s our duty to defend them.”

That same night, city officials withdrew its cross-removal order with what they thought to be a solution — designating a small area in the park as a “free speech zone” that would accommodate 10 or fewer temporary memorials, as long as they honor veterans.

So the cross was reinstalled on the monument in April.

The city’s reinstatement of the monument’s cross is criticized by:

  • Jane Kirtley, director of the University of Minnesota’s Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and Law, who says that even when speech is favorable to a majority — as the cross appears to be in predominantly Christian Belle Plaine — the state cannot impose that view on others. Religious symbols, like a cross, carved onto individual grave markers are treated as Constitutionally-protected free speech. But religious symbols in a public cemetery does not have that right.
  • Similarly, Freedom From Religion Foundation objects to religious monuments on other public property. Foundation attorney Rebecca Markert calls the Belle Plaine case an “egregious violation” and questions the constitutionality of the city’s decision to establish a limited public forum in the park so the cross memorial could be restored. The foundation may submit its own “Atheists in Foxholes” monument.

The Satanic Temple was first in line to test Belle Plaine’s free speech zone with an application to erect a satanic memorial allegedly to honor nonreligious service members — a black cube, inscribed with inverted pentagrams and crowned by an upturned helmet.

Founder Doug Mesner disingenuously claims that the Satanic Temple does not worship Satan, but only seeks equity for nonbelievers, and aims to “encourage reason and empathy, reject tyrannical authority and promote justice”.

City Administrator Mike Votca said the Satanic Temple memorial meets all of the town’s requirements and was swiftly approved: “Nothing is bulletproof, that’s for sure. But I think it’s as fair as it can be, which is really what we’re trying to achieve to eliminate the chance of lawsuits.”

Although Andy Parrish acknowledges that “Everyone understood this could happen” and that the satanic monument is “more annoying than it is offensive,” other Belle Plaine residents accuse groups like Satanic Temple and Freedom From Religion Foundation of preying on small towns that lack the resources to fight back.

Katie Novotny, a vocal cross proponent, said the majority of residents have accepted the idea of a monument that includes satanic symbols because “If you’re truly a Christian, how can you be offended by someone wanting to honor our veterans even though they don’t believe in the same things we believe in?”.

To sign a petition asking Belle Plaine to reverse their approval of the satanic monument, click here.

H/t Will Shanley

See also:

~Eowyn

Report confirms government hostility to Christianity spiked under Obama

When Obama was elected POTUS, he promised to “fundamentally transform” America.

And transform he sure did — to the worse.

A new report confirms what many of us suspect — that the 8 years of Obama in the White House were hostile to Christianity, which spurred and encouraged anti-Christian forces in America, as seen in a whopping 76% increase in religious freedom violations since 2014.  (Read the report in PDF format here.)

Although the 66-page Family Research Council report is entitled Hostility to Religion: The Growing Threat to Religious Liberty in America, the title really is a misnomer because it is not hostility to any and all religions. The surge in government hostility is directed not at Islam or Judaism or Buddhism or Satanism, but at one particular religion — Christianity. By logical inference and implication, that makes Barack Hussein Obama an anti-Christ.

That the 76% increase since 2014 in hostility to religion is specifically against Christians and Christianity is made clear in Todd Starnes’ Fox News report of June 29, 2017, in which he provides the following examples of government hostility to “religion”:

  • An 11-year-old student in Hattiesburg, Mississippi was penalized for mentioning Jesus in a Christmas poetry assignment.
  • A Christian acapella group at James Madison University was told they could not perform “Mary Did You Know” because it was religious. They were directed to only sing secular songs.
  • An Ohio library banned a Christian group from meeting to discuss natural marriage unless the group also included supports of same-sex marriage.
  • An Oklahoma bank was forced to remove religious Christmas decorations under orders from the Federal Reserve.
  • Allstate Insurance Company fired a Christian staffer for allegedly using a company laptop to write a column against homosexuality. The company said the column violated its diversity standards.
  • In 2011, the class president at Hampton High School in Tennessee wanted to deliver a prayer at graduation. The principal issued an edict that any child who attempted to pray would be stopped, escorted from the building by police and arrested.
  • Principal Frank Lay and Athletic Director Robert Freedom were charged with criminal contempt because they prayed over a meal. The pair was later found not guilty of violating an injunction banning the promotion of religious events at school.
  • San Diego firefighters were threatened with disciplinary action if they refused to participate in a gay pride parade. The firefighters were subjected to verbal abuse and sexual gestures during the parade.
  • A woman who rented out rooms in her home was sued after she refused to rent to a same-sex couple.

Family Research Council (FRC) president Tony Perkins said:

“The recent spike in government driven religious hostility is sad, but not surprising, especially considering the Obama administration’s antagonism toward biblical Christianity. This report is designed to quantify the threat to our First freedom and to challenge Americans to use their God-given freedoms to protect these freedoms we enjoy as Americans.”

Travis Weber, FRC’s director of the Center for Religious Liberty, said he hopes the report will be a wakeup call for all people of faith:

“In a society like ours, we must be the guardians of our own freedom. Anyone who desires freedom in the future must take note of what these trends tell us about our freedom right now – relative to where we have come from – in order to protect freedom from going forward.”

Perkins said the hostility to religion Christianity report underscores the legitimacy of the actions taken by President Trump to end polices in federal agencies that “fan the flames of this religious intolerance.” Perkins points out that despite the increase in hostility, there is some good news in “the growing courage of Christians, especially young Christians, to defend both their faith and their freedoms.”

~Eowyn

Bernie Sanders: Faithful Christians are racist bigots, unfit for public office

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution states:

no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

But a religious test is precisely what Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) applied on June 7, 2017, in a Senate confirmation hearing for Russell Vought, President Trump’s nominee for deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

To begin, Russell Vought is eminently qualified to be OMB Deputy Director. With a Bachelor’s degree from Wheaton College and a law degree from George Washington University, Vought had been:

  • Executive director and budget director of the Republican Study Committee.
  • Vice president of the conservative policy advocacy organization Heritage Action.
  • Policy director for the Republican Conference of the U.S. House of Representatives.
  • Legislative assistant for U.S. Senator Phil Gramm.

Russell Voight is also an evangelical Christian.

In 2015, Vought’s alma mater, Wheaton College — an evangelical Christian institution — suspended tenured political science professor Larycia Hawkins for stating in a Facebook post that Muslims worship the same God as Christians, and that she would wear a hijab in solidarity with Muslims. In a January 17, 2016 blog post, Vought weighed in on the theological debate sparked by Hawkins’ suspension. Referring to Dr. Hawkins’ suspension, Vought wrote:

“While many faculty, alumni, and outside observers are typically outraged and embarrassed by this ‘assault on academic freedom,’ I am proud of the school and hope they stand their ground. Here’s why:

First, the theological issue at stake is very important, as it pertains to what we believe about our savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God who is fully divine (and became fully human). This matters immensely for our salvation. If Christ is not God, he cannot be the necessary substitute on our behalf for the divine retribution that we deserve. […]

Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned. In John 8:19, Jesus answered, ‘You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.’ In Luke 10:16, Jesus says, ‘The one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.’ And in John 3:18, Jesus says, ‘Whoever believes in [the Son] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.‘”

Note that Vought quoted Jesus’ own words that anyone who rejects Him and doesn’t believe that Jesus is the Son of God is “condemned already”.

For that — for stating his religious beliefs — Vought was browbeaten and called “Islamophobic” and “hateful” by Bernie Sanders during the confirmation hearing for the OMB deputy directorship.

As recounted by John Daniel Davidson for The Federalist:

“On Wednesday, June 7, 2017, another Senate hearing: Sen. Bernie Sanders, in a blatant violation of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, was applying a religious test for an office of public trust.

Specifically, Sanders doesn’t think Christians are fit to serve in government because they’re bigots. Basic Christian theology, in Sanders’s view, ‘is indefensible, it is hateful, it is Islamophobic, and it is an insult to over a billion Muslims throughout the world.’ […]

During the hearing Wednesday, Sanders repeatedly quoted one particular passage he described as ‘Islamophobic’ and ‘hateful.’ Vought wrote: ‘Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned.’

As a matter of theology, there is of course nothing objectionable, much less Islamophobic, about that. It is simply a statement of fact: core Christian doctrine, plainly stated in the Bible, says that eternal life comes only through faith in Jesus Christ. Not that exclusivity is unique to Christianity. By their very nature, most religions are exclusive, especially when it comes to salvation.

As for having a ‘deficient theology,’ one could substitute any other religious group for Muslims: Christians also believe that Jews have a deficient theology, along with Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Zoroastrians, and the tens of thousands of Britons who claim membership in the Temple of the Jedi Order. And of course, members of all these religions likely believe Christians have a deficient theology.

But to Sanders, a sincerely held religious belief—like believing there is only one path to salvation—amounts to bigotry and should disqualify anyone, or at least Christians, from public service. Reporting for The Atlantic, Emma Green noted that at one point, the exchange between Sanders and Vought became tense, with Sanders ‘raising his voice and interrupting Vought as he tried to answer questions.

Sanders: I don’t know how many Muslims there are in America, I really don’t know, probably a couple million. Are you suggesting that all of those people stand condemned? What about Jews? Do they stand condemned too?

Vought: Senator, I am a Christian—

Sanders: I understand that you are a Christian. But this country is made up of people who are not just—I understand that Christianity is the majority religion. But there are other people who have different religions in this country and around the world. In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?

[…] Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who defended Sanders, saying, ‘I don’t think anybody was questioning anybody’s faith here.’ Van Hollen then questioned Vought’s faith and claimed his theology is all wrong: ‘I’m a Christian, but part of being a Christian, in my view, is recognizing that there are lots of ways that people can pursue their God.’

It should go without saying that this is the sort of thing that should never come up in a Senate confirmation hearing. […] Article VI of the Constitution states that ‘no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.’ Yet it seems that Sanders and his ilk not only want to exclude sincere Christians from public office, but to impose a kind of secular test of their own. […]

That’s more or less what Sanders did by conflating Vought’s thoroughly commonplace understanding of Christian theology with racism and bigotry. A spokesman for Sanders said in a statement issued Thursday: ‘In a democratic society, founded on the principle of religious freedom, we can all disagree over issues, but racism and bigotry—condemning an entire group of people because of their faith—cannot be part of any public policy.’ The nomination of Vought, ‘who has expressed such strong Islamaphobic language,’ the statement said, ‘is simply unacceptable.’

At the hearing on Wednesday, Sanders said he would vote against confirming Vought for deputy director of the OMB. Afterwards, Muslim groups including the Council on American-Islamic Relations and Muslim Advocates, along with the American Civil Liberties Union, condemned Vought’s comments, saying without a hint of irony that his views threaten the principle of religious freedom.

[…] the progressives who now run the Democratic Party will turn a blind eye to the exclusivity claims of Muslims and other religious groups they think they need in their political coalition. But they will not suffer Christians. There’s a simple reason for that: Democrats know they have lost orthodox Christians as a constituency, and now they have no use for them.”

Born and raised as an American Jew, Bernie Sanders had a bar mitzvah. Although he rarely speaks about religion and describes himself as “not particularly religious,” when asked about his Jewish heritage, Sanders said he is “proud to be Jewish”. (Wikipedia)

Given that, Sanders surely must know about his Jewish heritage’s Talmud — the collection of sayings and writings by rabbis which has priority over the Torah as Judaism’s sacred scripture. The deeply Christophobic and hateful Talmud that calls Jesus Christ a “bastard”, “conjurer”, “fool”, “seducer” and “buried in hell”; Jesus’ mother a “prostitute” and “whore”; and all Christians as “idolators”, “murderers”, “bestialists”, “evil”, “unclean”, “like dung”, nonhuman “beasts”, lower than dogs, and “children of the ancient serpent”. (See Rev. I. B. Pranaitis, The Talmud Unmasked: The Secret Rabbinical Teachings Concerning Christians; and Michael Hoffman, Judaism’s Strange Gods.)

By his own yardstick, Bernie Sanders should never have held political office as a U.S. senator.

Yet this anti-Constitution man wanted to be President of the United States! What chutzpah.

See also:

H/t FOTM‘s stlonginus and CP.

~Eowyn

Fecal bacteria found in cold drinks of UK’s top coffee chains

Europe is reaping the rotten fruits of multiculturalism, specifically the opening of their doors to Muslim “refugees” and “migrants”:

Then there’s hygiene:

The latest assault on public hygiene is the discovery of fecal bacteria in drinks sold by Britain’s three major coffee chains — Starbucks, Caffé Nero, and Costa.

Kim Hong-Ji reports for Reuters (via RT), June 28, 2017, that a BBC investigation found that ice drinks from Starbucks, Caffé Nero, and Costa all had traces of human fecal bacteria:

  • 7 out of 10 samples from Costa, voted Britain’s favorite coffee shop for the third year in a row, were found to contain the bacteria.
  • 3 out of 10 samples from Starbucks and Caffé Nero were found to contain the bacteria, known as fecal coliform.

Tony Lewis of the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health called the results of the investigation “concerning” because such “opportunistic pathogens” are the cause of “human disease” and “should not be present at any level – never mind the significant numbers found.”

All three chains said they are now investigating the issue.

The news follows a similar scandal earlier this year in which human waste was detected inside Coca-Cola cans arriving in Northern Ireland from Germany.

The contamination was traced to the Lisburn Coca-Cola plant and is believed to have been caused by illegal immigrants hiding inside the vehicles that transported the empty cans. The cans arrived without tops at the Lisburn plant, where they are filled with Coca-Cola. A source told the Belfast Telegraph:

“It was absolutely horrible, and the machines had to be turned off for about 15 hours to be cleaned. It’s really shocking – and beyond the shock of finding something pretty disgusting in the cans is the thought there could have been poor people in that situation. And if they did make that journey, where are they now?”

Fortunately, the fecal contamination was discovered before the Coca-Cola cans were sold — or so we’re told.

Coca-Cola said they take the safety and quality of their soft-drinks “extremely seriously” and launched an investigation in collaboration with Northern Ireland police.

See also “Why the Left encourage the cancer of Muslim migrants”.

~Eowyn

The synagogue of Satan

Karl Marx

Karl Marx

The “Synagogue of Satan” subject keeps injecting itself into our discussions, so here is one treatment of the subject.

Bernie Sanders

Personally speaking (in a non-scholarly way), whenever I see Karl Marx, Bernie Sanders, George Soros or some putrid Hollywood mogul, the term, “synagogue of satan,” comes to mind.

The following treatment (which is slightly different than my opinion) can be found at: https://www.gotquestions.org/synagogue-of-Satan.html.


Question: “What is the synagogue of Satan in Revelation?”

Answer: The synagogue of Satan is mentioned twice in Revelation, once in Jesus’ letter to the first-century church in Smyrna and once to the church in Philadelphia. In both cases, the synagogue of Satan is opposed to the mission and message of the church.

To the church in Smyrna, Jesus says, “I know your afflictions and your poverty—yet you are rich! I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9).

To the church of Philadelphia in Asia Minor, Jesus says, “I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you” (Revelation 3:9).

In short, the synagogue of Satan was a group of unbelieving Jews who were persecuting Christians. These groups were guilty of slandering the church in Smyrna and opposing the church in Philadelphia in some way.

The majority of the persecution the New Testament church faced came from the Jewish community. Even most of the Roman persecution was an effort to appease the Jewish authorities. This is true of Pilate’s condemnation of Jesus (John 19:1–16) and Paul’s imprisonment by the Roman governors Felix (Acts 24:27) and Festus (Acts 25:16). This pattern held true throughout the Roman world in the first century. As long as Christians were considered a sect of Judaism, they were exempt from the required observance of certain aspects of Roman state religion. However, as Christians were expelled from synagogues and denounced by the Jewish leadership, Rome began to see Christianity as a new religion that did not have these same exemptions. Therefore, Christians outside the protective umbrella of the synagogue were open to Roman persecution.

The synagogue of Satan say they are Jews (the people of God), and they persecute those who believe in Jesus the Messiah (the true people of God). In reality, by rejecting the Jewish Messiah, they have renounced their status as “true” Jews, and that is why Jesus calls them “liars.” This distinction between ethnic Jews and faithful Jews is also seen in Romans 9:6 (“Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel”) and Romans 2:28–29 (“For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter”). By their persecution of the true people of God, these unbelieving Jews had become a synagogue of Satan—a gathering of people who were actually following the devil’s priorities.

Both churches are promised victory over the synagogue of Satan. This promise echoes Isaiah 60:14: “The children of your oppressors will come bowing before you; all who despise you will bow down at your feet.” In the context of Isaiah 60, an oppressed Jerusalem will be vindicated. Those who oppress her will bow down at her feet and will have to admit that she is indeed blessed by God—in the language of Revelation 3:9—that God loves her. But Isaiah 60:14 applied to these Jews and the Church is something of a reversal. In Isaiah 60, the oppressing Gentiles will bow down at the feet of Jews and admit that God loves them. In Revelation 2—3, oppressing Jews will bow down at the feet of the persecuted Church (with a significant population of Gentiles in it) and admit that God loves them. This is a striking role reversal.

Internet searches of “synagogue of Satan” produce quite a few links to sites that claim the “synagogue of Satan” refers to the Jewish people today and that promote all kinds of conspiracy theories about how the Jews run the world. Quite frankly, this is a misinterpretation and misapplication of the verses in Revelation. The synagogue of Satan refers to specific Jewish communities in Smyrna and Philadelphia that were persecuting the church, not to any modern situation. Likewise, no modern situation should be used as an interpretive tool to explain a passage firmly rooted in the first-century Roman world. ❦


Okay people, there’s one opinion.
Let’s have at it.