Article
SOURCE
Pope washes, kisses feet of refugees
Updated: 6:24 pm, Friday, 25 March 2016
Pope Francis has washed and kissed the feet of refugees, including three Muslim men, and condemned arms makers as partly responsible for the attacks that killed at least 31 people in Brussels.
He made his comments at a traditional pre-Easter ritual where he washes and kisses the feet of 12 people, 11 of whom were refugees this year, to commemorate Jesus' gesture of humility towards his apostles on the night before he died.
'All of us together, Muslims, Hindus, Catholics, Copts, Evangelicals, but brothers, children of the same God, who want to live in peace, integrated,' he said in unscripted comments at a shelter north of Rome that houses refugees seeking political asylum.
'Three days ago, there was a gesture of war, of destruction, in a city of Europe by people who don't want to live in peace,' he said.
'Behind that gesture there were arms manufacturers, arms traffickers, who want blood, not peace, who want war, not brotherhood,' he said.
Before Francis became pope, the ceremony was held in St. Peter's or another Rome basilica and only included Catholic men, usually priests.
But after his election in 2013, he continued the tradition he started as archbishop of Buenos Aires, allowing women and non-Catholics to participate.
Reuters
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/world/europe/2016/03/25/pope-condemns-arms-traffickers.html
|
Discrepancy:
It's not 2016, it's: 5776
It's not 'Jesus', it's: rabbi Yahushua
It's not 'St Peter's': Shim'on bar Yona's
|
https://consortiumnews.com/2013/03/16/pope-francis-the-cia-and-death-squads/
Pope Francis, CIA and ‘Death Squads’
March 16, 2013
Exclusive: In the 1970s, Father Jorge Bergoglio faced a moment of truth: Would he stand up to Argentina’s military neo-Nazis “disappearing” thousands including priests, or keep his mouth shut and his career on track? Like many other Church leaders, Pope Francis took the safe route, Robert Parry reports.
By Robert Parry
The election of Argentine Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio as Pope Francis brings back into focus the troubling role of the Catholic hierarchy in blessing much of the brutal repression that swept Latin America in the 1970s and 1980s, killing and torturing tens of thousands of people including priests and nuns accused of sympathizing with leftists.
The Vatican’s fiercely defensive reaction to the reemergence of these questions as they relate to the new Pope also is reminiscent of the pattern of deceptive denials that became another hallmark of that era when propaganda was viewed as an integral part of the “anticommunist” struggles, which were often supported financially and militarily by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency.
Pope John Paul II reprimanding Father Ernesto Cardenal at Managua Airport for Cardenal’s support of “liberation theology” and his work with the Sandinista government.
It appears that Bergoglio, who was head of the Jesuit order in Buenos Aires during Argentina’s grim “dirty war,” mostly tended to his bureaucratic rise within the Church as Argentine security forces “disappeared” some 30,000 people for torture and murder from 1976 to 1983, including 150 Catholic priests suspected of believing in “liberation theology.”
Much as Pope Pius XII didn’t directly challenge the Nazis during the Holocaust, Father Bergoglio avoided any direct confrontation with the neo-Nazis who were terrorizing Argentina. Pope Francis’s defenders today, like apologists for Pope Pius, claim he did intervene quietly to save some individuals.
But no one asserts that Bergoglio stood up publicly against the “anticommunist” terror, as some other Church leaders did in Latin America, most notably El Salvador’s Archbishop Oscar Romero who then became a victim of right-wing assassins in 1980.
Indeed, the predominant role of the Church hierarchy from the Vatican to the bishops in the individual countries was to give political cover to the slaughter and to offer little protection to the priests and nuns who advocated “liberation theology,” i.e. the belief that Jesus did not just favor charity to the poor but wanted a just society that shared wealth and power with the poor.
In Latin America with its calcified class structure of a few oligarchs at one end and many peasants at the other, that meant reforms, such as land redistribution, literacy programs, health clinics, union rights, etc. But those changes were fiercely opposed by the local oligarchs and the multinational corporations that profited from the cheap labor and inequitable land distribution.
So, any reformers of any stripe were readily labeled “communists” and were made the targets of vicious security forces, often trained and indoctrinated by “anticommunist” military officers at the U.S.-run School of the Americas. The primary role of the Catholic hierarchy was to urge the people to stay calm and support the traditional system.
It is noteworthy that the orchestrated praise for Pope Francis in the U.S. news media has been to hail Bergoglio’s supposedly “humble” personality and his “commitment to the poor.” However, Bergoglio’s approach fits with the Church’s attitude for centuries, to give “charity” to the poor while doing little to change their cruel circumstances as Church grandees hobnob with the rich and powerful.
Another Pope Favorite
Pope John Paul II, another favorite of the U.S. news media, shared this classic outlook. He emphasized conservative social issues, telling the faithful to forgo contraceptives, treating women as second-class Catholics and condemning homosexuality. He promoted charity for the poor and sometimes criticized excesses of capitalism, but he disdained leftist governments that sought serious economic reforms.
Elected in 1978, as right-wing “death squads” were gaining momentum across Latin America, John Paul II offered little protection to left-leaning priests and nuns who were targeted. He rebuffed Archbishop Romero’s plea to condemn El Salvador’s right-wing regime and its human rights violations. He stood by as priests were butchered and nuns were raped and killed.
Instead of leading the charge for real economic and political change in Latin America, John Paul II denounced “liberation theology.” During a 1983 trip to Nicaragua then ruled by the leftist Sandinistas the Pope condemned what he called the “popular Church” and would not let Ernesto Cardenal, a priest and a minister in the Sandinista government, kiss the papal ring. He also elevated clerics like Bergoglio who didn’t protest right-wing repression.
John Paul II appears to have gone even further, allowing the Catholic Church in Nicaragua to be used by the CIA and Ronald Reagan’s administration to finance and organize internal disruptions while the violent Nicaraguan Contras terrorized northern Nicaraguan towns with raids notorious for rape, torture and extrajudicial executions.
The Contras were originally organized by an Argentine intelligence unit that emerged from the country’s domestic “dirty war” and was taking its “anticommunist” crusade of terror across borders. After Reagan took office in 1981, he authorized the CIA to join with Argentine intelligence in expanding the Contras and their counterrevolutionary war.
A key part of Reagan’s Contra strategy was to persuade the American people and Congress that the Sandinistas represented a repressive communist dictatorship that persecuted the Catholic Church, aimed to create a “totalitarian dungeon,” and thus deserved violent overthrow.
A special office inside the National Security Council, headed by longtime CIA disinformation specialist Walter Raymond Jr., pushed these propaganda “themes” domestically. Raymond’s campaign exploited examples of tensions between the Catholic hierarchy and the Sandinista government as well as with La Prensa, the leading opposition newspaper.
To make the propaganda work with Americans, it was important to conceal the fact that elements of the Catholic hierarchy and La Prensa were being financed by the CIA and were coordinating with the Reagan administration’s destabilization strategies. [See Robert Parry’s Lost History.]
Evidence of Payments
In 1988, I discovered evidence of this reality while working as a correspondent for Newsweek magazine. At the time, the Iran-Contra scandal had undermined the case for spending more U.S. money to arm the Contras. But the Reagan administration continued to beat the propaganda drums by highlighting the supposed persecution of Nicaragua’s internal opposition.
To fend off U.S. hostility, which also included a harsh economic embargo, the Sandinistas announced increased political freedoms. But that represented only a new opportunity for Washington to orchestrate more political disruptions, which would either destabilize the government further or force a crackdown that could then be cited in seeking more Contra aid.
Putting the Sandinistas in this “inside-outside” vise had always been part of the CIA strategy, but with a crumbling economy and more U.S. money pouring into the opposition groups, the gambit was beginning to work.
Yet, it was crucial to the plan that the CIA’s covert relationship with Nicaragua’s internal opposition remain secret, not so much from the Sandinistas, who had detailed intelligence about this thoroughly penetrated operation, but from the American people. The U.S. public would get outraged at Sandinista reprisals against these “independent” groups only if the CIA’s hand were kept hidden.
A rich opportunity for the Reagan administration presented itself in summer 1988 when a new spasm of Contra ambushes killed 17 Nicaraguans and the anti-Sandinista internal opposition staged a violent demonstration in the town of Nandaime, a protest that Sandinista police dispersed with tear gas.
Reacting to the renewed violence, the Sandinistas closed down La Prensa and the Catholic Church’s radio station both prime vehicles for anti-Sandinista propaganda. The Nicaraguan government also expelled U.S. Ambassador Richard Melton and seven other U.S. Embassy personnel for allegedly coordinating the disorders.
Major U.S. news outlets, which had accepted their role treating the Sandinistas as “designated enemies” of the United States, roared in outrage, and the U.S. Congress condemned the moves by a margin of 94-4 in the Senate and 385-18 in the House.
Melton then testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee first in secret and then in public, struggling to hide the open secret in Washington that Nicaragua’s internal opposition, like the Contras, was getting covert help from the U.S. government.
When asked by a senator in public session about covert American funding to the opposition, Melton dissembled awkwardly: “As to other activities that might be conducted, that’s they were discussed that would be discussed yesterday in the closed hearing.”
When pressed by Sen. Howard Metzenbaum on whether the embassy provided “encouragement financial or otherwise of dissident elements,” Melton responded stiffly: “The ambassador in any post is the principal representative of the U.S. government. And in that capacity, fulfills those functions.” He then declined to discuss “activities of an intelligence nature” in open session.
On the Payroll
In other words, yes, the U.S. government was covertly organizing and funding the activities of the supposedly “independent” internal opposition in Nicaragua. And, according to more than a dozen sources that I interviewed inside the Contra movement or close to U.S. intelligence, the Reagan administration had funneled CIA money to virtually every segment of the internal opposition, from the Catholic Church to La Prensa to business and labor groups to political parties.
“We’ve always had the internal opposition on the CIA payroll,” one U.S. government official said. The CIA’s budget line for Nicaraguan political action separate from Contra military operations was about $10 million a year, my sources said. I learned that the CIA had been using the Church and Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo to funnel money into Nicaragua.
Obando was a plodding but somewhat complex character. In the 1970s, he had criticized the repression of the Somoza dictatorship and expressed some sympathy for the young Sandinista revolutionaries who were trying to bring social and economic changes to Nicaragua.
However, after the murder of El Salvador’s Archbishop Romero in 1980 and Pope John Paul II’s repudiation of “liberation theology,” Obando shifted clumsily into the anti-Sandinista camp, attacking the “people’s church” and accusing the Sandinistas of “godless communism.”
On May 25, 1985, he was rewarded when the Pope named him Cardinal for Central America. Then, despite mounting evidence of Contra atrocities, Obando traveled to the United States in January 1986 and threw his support behind a renewal of military aid to the Contras.
All this made a lot more sense after factoring in that Obando had essentially been put onto the CIA’s payroll. The CIA funding for Nicaragua’s Catholic Church was originally unearthed in 1985 by the congressional intelligence oversight committees, which then insisted that the money be cut off to avoid compromising Obando further.
But the funding was simply transferred to another secret operation headed by White House aide Oliver North. In fall 1985, North earmarked $100,000 of his privately raised money to go to Obando for his anti-Sandinista activities, I learned from my sources.
I was also told that the CIA’s support for Obando and the Catholic hierarchy went through a maze of cut-outs in Europe, apparently to give Obando deniability. But one well-placed Nicaraguan exile said he had spoken with Obando about the money and the Cardinal had expressed fear that his past receipt of CIA funding would come out.
What to Do?
Discovering this CIA funding of Nicaragua’s Catholic Church presented professional problems for me at Newsweek, where my senior editors were already making clear that they sympathized with the Reagan administration’s muscular foreign policy and felt that the Iran-Contra scandal had gone too far in undermining U.S. interests.
But what was the right thing for an American journalist to do with this information? Here was a case in which the U.S. government was misleading the American public by pretending that the Sandinistas were cracking down on the Catholic Church and the internal opposition without any justification. Plus, this U.S. propaganda was being used to make the case in Congress for an expanded war in which thousands of Nicaraguans were dying.
However, if Newsweek ran the story, it would put CIA assets, including Cardinal Obando, in a dicey situation, possibly even life-threatening. So, when I presented the information to my bureau chief, Evan Thomas, I made no recommendation on whether we should publish or not. I just laid out the facts as I had ascertained them. To my surprise, Thomas was eager to go forward.
Newsweek contacted its Central America correspondent Joseph Contreras, who outlined our questions to Obando’s aides and prepared a list of questions to present to the Cardinal personally. However, when Contreras went to Obando’s home in a posh suburb of Managua, the Cardinal literally evaded the issue.
As Contreras later recounted in a cable back to Newsweek in the United States, he was approaching the front gate when it suddenly swung open and the Cardinal, sitting in the front seat of his burgundy Toyota Land Cruiser, blew past.
As Contreras made eye contact and waved the letter, Obando’s driver gunned the engine. Contreras jumped into his car and hastily followed. Contreras guessed correctly that Obando had turned left at one intersection and headed north toward Managua.
Contreras caught up to the Cardinal’s vehicle at the first stop-light. The driver apparently spotted the reporter and, when the light changed, sped away, veering from lane to lane. The Land Cruiser again disappeared from view, but at the next intersection, Contreras turned right and spotted the car pulled over, with its occupants presumably hoping that Contreras had turned left.
Quickly, the Cardinal’s vehicle pulled onto the road and now sped back toward Obando’s house. Contreras gave up the chase, fearing that any further pursuit might appear to be harassment. Several days later, having regained his composure, the Cardinal finally met with Contreras and denied receiving any CIA money. But Contreras told me that Obando’s denial was unconvincing.
Newsweek drafted a version of the story, making it appear as if we weren’t sure of the facts about Obando and the money. When I saw a “readback” of the article, I went into Thomas’s office and said that if Newsweek didn’t trust my reporting, we shouldn’t run the story at all. He said that wasn’t the case; it was just that the senior editors felt more comfortable with a vaguely worded story.
Hot Water
We ended up in hot water with the Reagan administration and right-wing media attack groups anyway. Accuracy in Media lambasted me, in particular, for going with such a sensitive story without being sure of the facts (which, of course, I was).
Thomas was summoned to the State Department where Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams heaped more criticism on me though not denying the facts of our story. Newsweek also agreed, in the face of right-wing pressure, to subject me and the article to an internal investigation, which quietly reconfirmed the facts of the story.
Despite this corroboration, the incident damaged my relations with senior Newsweek editors, particularly executive editor Maynard Parker who saw himself as part of the New York/Washington foreign policy establishment and was deeply hostile to the Iran-Contra scandal, which I had helped expose.
As for Obando, the Sandinistas did nothing to punish him for his collaboration with the CIA and he gradually evolved more into a figure of reconciliation than confrontation. However, the hyper-secretive Vatican has refused to open its archives for any serious research into its relationship with the CIA and other Western intelligence services.
Whenever allegations do arise about the Catholic Church’s hierarchy winking and nodding at the kinds of human rights atrocities that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives in Latin America during the 1970s and 1980s, the Vatican PR department lashes out with sternly worded denials.
That practice is playing out again in the days after the election of Pope Francis I. Rather than a serious and reflective assessment of the actions (and inactions) of Cardinal Bergoglio, Cardinal Obando, Pope John Paul II and other Church leaders during those dark days of torture and murder, the Vatican simply denounces all allegations as “slander,” “calumny” and politically motivated lies.
[For a limited time, you can purchase Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush family for only $34. For details, click here.]
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com).
https://consortiumnews.com/2013/03/16/pope-francis-the-cia-and-death-squads/
|
----------------------  ----------------------
COMMENT
What a repulsive, grovelling, corrupt, fraud of a religion erected on fraud upon fraud, and an organisation that would do anything to subvert truth and to subvert the interests of European man.
What kind of messed up religion is this?
Oh, he's emulating historic foot fetishism rituals?
No, he's acting out a theatrical propaganda politico-religious drama, intent on leading followers over a cliff while furthering the interests of the Americans and American-aligned elites, who also do not care that Europe is being destroyed.
The universalist 'brotherhood' propaganda is aiming to appeal to a wide customer base, on the one hand, and acting to exploit gullible masses, on the other.
This guy's a shameless, theatrical manipulator of politics, heading up a sham, theatrical, redundant and wholly unrepresentative, illegitimate organisation that has a long history of corruption and CIA collaboration.
The shameless propagandist head of a religion that was forced upon European man fails to condemn the perpetrators of the violence that killed 31 individuals in Europe.
Instead, he performs as apologist for the killers, while he kisses the feet of the invaders of Europe.
Can you imagine a Chief Rabbi spiritual leader failing to condemn the murder of Israelites, while kissing the feet of the invaders of Israel?
What I see is the betrayal of the people that were murdered, as well as betrayal of all Europeans, by a fraudulent organisation that continues to lead the European flock over a cliff.
Europeans must look to their ancestors and to history that precedes the ascendancy of this church of false doctrine and of breathtaking profanity.
-------/\/\/
Thoughts on religion:
man was not created in the image of god
god was created in the image of a tribal man
there are many tribes and many gods:
as a collective unifying tribal tradition & path
Christianity is an expression of: universal, borderless, masochistic, submissive, and false 'brotherhood'
the 'Christian' church is a painted, hollow vessel
It cannot lead European man
-------/\/\/
'saint' Peter
-- was actually: Shim'on bar Yona [Hebrew]
-- aka: Shemayon Keppa [Syriac / Aramaic ]
-- aka: Petros [Greek]
-- aka: Petrus [Latin]
-- aka: Simon Peter or Simeon or Simon ['New Testament']
-- one of 12 apostles of the Galilean Jewish rabbi & tekton (carpenter, builder), Yahushua
-- note: there is no 'J' sound in Hebrew -- it is not Joshua; it is Yoshua or Yahushua
-- Greek transliteration: ihsoun or 'Iesous', becoming: 'Jesus'
-- Yahushua (aka later as 'Jesus'), founder of a renewal movement within Judaism & apocalyptic preacher
-- considered the 'messiah' by the followers of this renewed Judaism
-- Yahushua was baptised by 'John the Baptist', the preacher of penance for sins & alms to the poor
-- baptised in region of River Jordan, around Perea
-- 'John' is identified with Elijah, the prophet
-- prophet is intermediary between divine and man - ie speaking to man, god's will
-- on baptism, the 'holy spirit' descends on Yahushua as a dove
-- Yahushua hears a voice from heaven
-- declaring him to be 'god's son'
-- prophet Elijah is arrested -- it is then that Yahushua takes up the preaching relay baton
-- crucified & according to converts to this renewed ideology, was resurrected following death
Eliyahu
Elijah (ie Heb. 'Eliyahu')
-- Hebrew: Eliyahu (meaning 'My god is Yahu')
-- aka:
-- Elias [Greek]
-- Elyae [Syriac]
-- Illya, Illyas [Arabic]
-- Eliyahu described as a prophet & wonder work of northern kingdom of Israel
-- Kingdom of Israel once united under: King Solomon
-- divided into:
-- northern Kingdom of Israel
-- southern Kingdom of Judah
-- southern Kingdom of Juda
-- retained the historic seat of government
-- was the focus of the Israelite religion
-- was the site of the Temple in Jerusalem
-- problems arose when King of Israel -- Omri
-- continued policies dating from Jeroboam
-- that were contrary to the laws of Moses
-- laws intending to redirect religious focus away from Jerusalem
-- laws encouraging building of local temple altars for sacrifice
-- laws appointing priests from outside the family of the Levites
-- laws encouraging temples dedicated to the Canaanite god, Baal
-- Omri secures domestic security via marriage alliance
-- son, Ahab m. princess Jezebel (Priestess of Baal)
-- & daughter of king of Sidon (in Phoenicia) - in the Levant, Lebanon
-- result security & economic prosperity for Israel
-- but brought conflict with Israelite prophet strict interpreters of Mosaic law
-- under Ahab, tensions grew
-- Ahab built temple for Baal & his Phoenician wife, Jezebel, priestess of Baal
-- brought large entourage of priests & prophets of Baal & Asherah into Israel
-- it is in this context that Eliyahu is introduced as "the Tishbrite"
-- Eliyahu wore a hairy coat with a leather belt
-- tishbrite interpreted as 'stranger' - thus stranger in Gilead
-- likely denotes birthplace in Tishbe, upper Galilee (Book of Tobit)
-- identified by some as in: el-Ishtib, 22 miles south of Sea of Galilee
-- among mountains of Gilead
-- in reign of Ahab (9th Century BC)
-- biblical book: Book of Kings
-- Eliyahu defended worship of Yahweh over Canaanite god Baal
-- god performed many micracles through Eliyahu
-- miracles incl. raising the dead & brining fire from the sky
-- taken up to heaven by a whirlwind
-- Eliyahu's return prophesied 'before coming of great & terrible day of the lord'
-- Eliyahu is harbinger of the anticipated arrival of the 'messiah'
-- Eliyahu references in: Talmud, Mishnah and the new religions, incl. christianity
-- in Judaism, Eliyahu's name is invoked at Havdalah ritual
-- Havdalah ritual marks end of shabbat
-- Eliyahu is invoked in other Jewish customs: passover seder & brit milah (circumcision)
-- many references, incl:
-- Haggadah
-- rabbinic literature
-- incl. Babylonian Talmud
-- Eliyahu is a figure in misc. christian folk traditions
-- Eliyahu is often identified with pagan thunder gods or sky gods
-- in other traditions, Eliyahu seen as righteous preacher against worship of Baal
-- Baal
-- Canaanite god of fire, thunder, lightning & dew
-- Eliyahu, challenges not only Baal (on behalf of own god, Yahweh)
-- Eliyahu also challenges Jezebel, her priests, Ahab & people of Israel
-- ie. the northern kingdom of what was once a united Judaea
-- after confrontation with Ahab (the king of northern kingdom, Israel)
-- god tells Eliyahu to flee to brook (Chorath) east of Jordan
-- Eliyahu will be fed by the ravens
-- brook dries up
-- god sends Eliyahu to widow living in Zarephatho, Phoenicia
-- poor, insuffient food
-- Eliyahu tells her god will not allow flour or oil to run out
-- feeds Eliyahu last of food & promise miraculously fulfilled
-- lesson: something like the righteous receive
-- receive god's favour while the god's unfaithful in the promised land are denied
-- widow's son dies
-- Eliyahu prays for restoration of dead son
-- god heard voice of Eliyahu & ressurects widow's son
-- first instance of raising of the dead recorded in Hebrew scripture
-- son was only hope for widow in ancient society
-- widow proclaims: "the world of the lord from your mouth is the truth"
-- affirm the god of the Israelites
-- which they themselves failed to do (ie strayed from traditional path)
-- after over 3 years of draught & famine
-- god sends Eliyahu back to Ahab (northern kingdom of Israel)
-- to announce the end of the drought
-- meets Obidiah on the way
-- Obidiah head of Ahab household
-- Obidiah hid 100 prophets of God of Israel (probably Levite priests?)
-- when Ahab & Jezebel were killing them
-- Eliyahu sends obidiah back to Ahab to announce Eliyahu return to Israel
-- Ahab refers to Eliyahu as the 'troubler of Israel'
-- Eliyahu tells Ahab that he's projecting
-- Ahab has troubled Israel by permitting worship of false gods
-- Eliyahu berates the Israelites and Ahab for submitting to worship of Baal
1. If the lord is god, follow him.
2. If Baal [is god], then follow him.
-- met with silence
-- Eliyahu proposes a direct test of powers of Baal & Yahweh
-- Israelites
-- 450 prophets of Baal
-- 4000 prophets of Asherah
-- are summoned to Mount Carmel
-- two altars built (one for Baal & one for Yahweh)
-- wood laid on altars
-- two oxen slaughtered & cut into pieces
-- pieces laid on altars
-- Eliyahu invites priests of Baal to pray for fire to light sacrifice
-- pray from morning to night without lighting fire
-- Eliyahu ridicules their impotent prayers
-- priests of Baal respond by cutting themselves & adding their blood to sacrifice
-- mutilation of body strictly forbidden by Mosaic law
-- Phoenician priests continue praying to Baal - no success
-- Eliyahu orders drenching of altar of Yahweh with 4 large jars poured 3 times
-- asks god to accept this sacrifice & fire falls from sky
-- fire consumes water, sacrifice & stones of altar itself
-- Eliyahu orders the death of the prophets of Baal
-- Eliyahu prays in earnest for rain to fall on land of Israel
-- rains begin; end of famine
-- Jezebel enraged re Eliyahu killing of priests
-- threatens to kill Eliyahu
-- Eliyahu prophesied re Jezebel's death
-- Eliyahu flees to Beersheba, in Judah
-- pryas for death in wilderness under Retamine shrub
-- falls asleep under tree
-- angel of god touches him and tells him to wake up and eat
-- awakens to bread & jar of water
-- eats, drinks & goes to sleep
-- repeat with angel - told he has a long journey
-- Eliyahu travels 40 days and 40 nights to Mount Horeb where Moses received Ten Commandments
-- Eliyahu is only person to have returned to Horeb (in bible)
-- Moses and his people had left centuries before
-- seeks shelter in cave in Horeb
Cave of Eliyahu - Mount Carmel
Moses tried to defend the Israelites when they sinned
-- with a golden calf - Eliyahu, instead, complains
-- in shelter in cave in Horeb, Eliyahu complains bitterly
-- Eliyahu says he is the only remaining adhert
-- told by tod to stand outside cave before the lord
-- wind passes; but god is not in the wind
-- fire passes Mount Horeb; but god is not in the fire
-- still small voice comes to Eliyahu
-- asks why Eliyahu is there
-- Eliyahu did not understand the importance of what he had witnessed
-- this was devine revelation
-- god sends Eliyahu out again: to Damascus to anoint:
-- Hazael as king of Syria
-- Jehu as king of Israel
-- Elisha as his replacement (prophet)
-- Eliyahu encounters Ahab
-- Ahab has vineyard acquired by murder
-- sights set on vineyard of Naboth of Zezreel
-- Naboth won't sell land: god has told him not to
-- Ahab sullenly accepts
-- Jezebel plots acquisition by other means
-- Jezebel arranges feast via local intermediaries
-- at feast Naboth falsely accused of cursing god & Ahab
-- plot results in Naboth's stoning to death
-- Jezebel tells Ahab to take possession of vineyard
-- god tells Eliyahu to confront Ahab with question + prophesy:
Q: Have you killed & also taken possession?
Prophesy: "In the place where dogs licked up the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick up your own blood." [Kings 21:19]
-- Ahab is confronted by Eliyahu
-- Ahab, in turn, accuses Eliyahu of making enemy of god for own actions
-- Eliyahu goes beyond prophesy given by god
-- tells Ahab the kingdom of Israel (the people) shall reject his authority
-- Eliyahu tells Ahab that Jezebel will be eaten by dogs within Jezreel
-- Eliyahu tells Ahab that his family will be consumed by dogs as well
-- if they die in the city of Jezreel
-- Eliyahu tells Ahab that they will be consumed by birds if they die in the kingdom of Israel
-- Ahab repents that god relents in punishing him
-- but god will punish Jezebel & their son Ahaziah
Ahaziah receives message via interception of message from priests of Baalzebub in Ekron
-- by description: hairy coat with a leather belt
-- Ahaziah knows this is message from Eliyahu the Tishbite
-- Ahaziah sends 3 groups of soldiers to arrest Eliyahu
-- two groups destroyed by fire brought down from heaven by Eliyahu's calls
-- 3rd group leader asks for mercy
-- Eliyahu accompanies 3rd group to Ahazia & gives his prophesy in person
[comment: story continues, but my brain has seized ... cannot take any more]
Eliyahu
-- Jewish legends re Eliyahu many in aggadah
aggadah
-- non-legalistic classical rabbinic literature of Judaism
-- recorded in Talmud & Midrash
-- incorporates folklore, historical stories, moral lessons, practical advice in various spheres
-- business to medicine
-- aggadah = part of oral law (Judaism)
-- oral law is the interpretation of the written law (commandments)
-- aggadah is medium for transmission of fundamental teachings re verses in Tanakh
-- some kind of 'hidden' /abstract symbolic truths dimension in aggadah
-- where literal interpretation contradicts rationality
-- rabbis play both sides: rationality & symbolic explanations / interpretations
-- Ramchal (rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzato) had a two-tier literal-allegorical mode of transmission
-- he says oral law = two components:
-- legal (discussing mitzvot & halakha)
-- the secret (symbolic) - deeper meanings / teachings
-- aggadah (with the kabbalah) falls under the 'secret' / symbolic oral law component
*transmission based on consistent rules & principles
OMG! IT'S THE WORLD'S FIRST ENCRYPTION
-- those equipped with 'keys' could unlock meaning
-- of that which to others appears non-rational or fantastic
-- that which is not a commandment (is not halachic)
-- aggadah is any comment occurring in Talmud that is not commandment / halacic (law)
-- see Maimonides preface Tractate Sanhedrin (Perek Chelek) for 3 methods
-- re interpretation of aggadah
1. literal
2. literal intent assumption
3. profound truths intent - teachings on 2 levesls:
-- overt
-- hidden
*assertions intended as parables
-- rest is lost on me
Maimonides approach held widely among mystical streams of Judaism
-- none of the fantastic stories are absent of profound meaning
Aggadah is today recorded in:
-- the Midrash - 2 distinct collections
- comprised of aggadic & halakhic
1. Aggadic Midrashim (explanatory, sermonic, from biblical text)
2. Halakhic Mdrashim (laws from text)
-- the Talmud
Torah
-- commentaries
-- Targumim
text interpreted in light of Aggardic statements
In Talmud, aggadic & halakhic material interwoven
-- legal material is 90%
-- Talmudic aggadah convey deeper teachings
-- aggadic material in Babylonian Talmud presented separately ...
1515 - Saloniki Greece - first publishes:
-- compilation of aggadic material in Babylonian Talmud
(plus commentary)
-- by Jacob ibn Habib (finished by son Rabbi Levi ibn Habib)
-- could be studied with same degree of seriousness as Talmud
-- Jerusalem Talmud pre-dates the Babylonian Talmud
Sefer Ha-Aggadah - published 1908 - 1911, Odessa, Russia
-- 'sefer' means book & sofer is scribe & safrut is literature
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah
http://www.eliyah.com/nameson.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tishbite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggadah
|
|
EU-NATO IMPERIALISM ❌ 
