Landmark Study of Sexual Perversion, Luciferianism, and Satanic Ritual within the Catholic Hierarchy

Lucifer’s Lodge; William H. Kennedy

32 Comments on “Landmark Study of Sexual Perversion, Luciferianism, and Satanic Ritual within the Catholic Hierarchy

  1. Pingback: Entenda melhor por que Jesus purificou o templo…

  2. Pingback: Entenda melhor por que Jesus purificou o templo? – Criacionismo Bíblico da Terra Jovem e Plana


    Why Did Jesus Cleanse the Temple?

    What we need to realize first of all is the fact that animals were not kept in the temple itself. Neither was buying and selling occurring in the temple itself. No person was allowed into the temple except the very priests. The buying and selling of animals and the exchanging of currency occurred in the Court of Gentiles – the furthest district of the temple grounds. The next thing you must realize is the fact that the priests who were of Sadducee sect [Acts 4:1; 5:17] did not turn the temple courts into a common market place where you would go shopping. They kept the animals allowed for sacrifice at the temple grounds so that those who came from far or those who did not have an animal for sacrifice could buy some. Since the only currency in which the sacrificial victim could have been bought was a Tyrian coin they had money changers available to convert the common money into Tyrian coin. The money changers were also there in order to collect the temple tax prescribed in the Jewish Pentateuch. The comment in The New American Bible in reference to Matthew 21:12 also acknowledges these facts:

    “The activities going on in the Temple area WERE NOT SECULAR but connected with the TEMPLE WORSHIP. Thus Jesus’ attack on those so engaged and his charge that they were making God’s house of prayer a den of thieves constituted a claim to authority over the religious practices of Israel and were a challenge to the priestly authorities. These activities were carried on in the court of the Gentiles, the outermost court of the Temple area. Animals for sacrifice were sold; the doves were for those who could not afford a more expansive offering [Leviticus. 5:7]. Tables of the money changers: only the coinage of Tyre could be used for the purchases; other money had to be exchanged for that.”

    In regards to John 2:14 we read:

    “Oxen, sheep and doves: intended for sacrifice. The doves were the offerings of the poor [Leviticus. 5:7]. Money changers: for a Temple tax paid by every male Jew more than nineteen years of age, with a half sheckel coin [Exodus. 30:11-16], in Tyrian currency”.

    Virtually all biblical scholars agree that activities going on in the temple courts in Jesus’ day were perfectly lawful as far as the Jewish Pentateuch was concerned. In Deuteronomy 14:22-27 we find the command that those who live too far from the chosen place should take the silver with them and buy the sacrificial animals at the chosen place. Since the Jewish Pentateuch which is also recognized by the Christian Church sanctions sacrificial cult and buying sacrificial animals at the chosen place – why then did Jesus take such a drastic action? Why did he charge the temple clergy of turning the temple into a den of robbers? The answer is obvious. He objected to the sacrificial cult in general. He agreed with Jeremiah that the sacrificial cult was the product of the lying pen of the scribes. It will also become apparent that Jesus regarded the killing of animals as murder. Jesus did not think that the temple should be Jewish only. Nor that it should be a place of sacrifice.

    He stated that the temple should be The House of Prayer for ALL NATIONS.
    Jesus believed in the synagogue and not temple. In the synagogue prayer was offered as a sacrifice. In the temple animals were butchered. In the House of PRAYER all nations should participate.

    In the temple only those of Jewish ancestry were allowed to worship. Gentiles were allowed in the outermost court. When condemning the activities in the temple courts Jesus referred to two Old Testament prophets: Isaiah and Jeremiah – who both opposed the sacrificial cult:

    “Is it not written: My house shall be called a HOUSE OF PRAYER FOR ALL NATIONS? But you have made it A DEN OF ROBBERS” [Mark 11:17].
    When Jesus stated that temple should be called the “House of Prayer for all Nations” he referred to Isaiah 56:7.

    Jesus emphasized that ALL NATIONS – that is, GENTILES have the right to participate in the HOUSE OF PRAYER.

    The second statement “den of robbers” comes from Jeremiah 7:11 – the very chapter where Jeremiah claimed that sacrificial cult did not come from God Jeremiah 7:21-23.

    What did Jesus mean when he stated that the Sadducees [the priests] transformed the House of Prayer into a DEN of ROBBERS?

    The answer is quite astonishing. The word den has been translated from the Greek word spelaion – number #4693 in Strong’s and means: a grotto, a cavern. Grotto means: a cave. Cavern means: a hollow cave. The Greek word spelaion has been translated den and cave by the King James translators in the New Testament. The word den itself means a cave. The word den in Jeremiah 7:11 comes from a Hebrew word mearah – number #4631 which means: dark cavern or cave. This Hebrew word has been translated cave, den and hole in the Old Testament of the King James Bible. In the New Testament of the King James Bible the word DEN appears three times. Each time referring to Jesus’ statement a DEN of robbers. The word cave appears only in John 11:38 in reference to the tomb of Lazarus – since his grave was a cave. In the Old Testament [according to Jewish tradition of the Masoretic text] we read that Abraham bought a field with a CAVE. This cave became the grave or burial place:

    “Afterwards Abraham buried his wife Sarah in the cave in the field of Machpelah near Mamre [which is at Hebron] in the land of Canaan. So the field and the cave in it were legally transferred over to Abraham by the Hittites as a burial site”
    [Genesis 23:19-20].

    Abraham himself was buried in the same CAVE [Genesis 25:10]. Isaac, Rebekah and Jacob were also buried in the same cave [Genesis 49:29-32]. Jesus charged the priests of transforming the House of Prayer into a GRAVEYARD.

    By perpetually cremating the holocausts on the altar – the temple became the graveyard. But what did Jesus actually want to express by the word robbers? The English word robber comes from the word rob which means: to seize and carry off the property of by unlawful violence or threat of violence. This word is distinguished from the word thief in that it involves violence whereas the word thief only implies stealing.

    The word robbers in Jeremiah 7:11 comes from the Hebrew word periyts – number #6530 in Strong’s and means: violent ones i.e. TYRANTS. This word is also translated destroyers and ravenous in the King James Bible. In the New Testament the word robber has been translated from the Greek word leistes used to render the Hebrew word. It is number #3027 in Strong’s and means: to plunder, a brigand. The word brigand means: a robber in a band of outlaws. An outlaw is a violent robber who resorts to murder. When the temple guards were sent to arrest Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus stated:

    “Am I a robber, said Jesus, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me?” [Mark 14:48].

    Robbers were confronted with swords and clubs because they were violent ones.
    In John 19:40 we are told that Barabbas who was released instead of Jesus was a robber [leistes].

    In Luke 23:18 we are plainly told that Barabbas was cast into prison because of rebellion and murder. Barabbas was a ROBBER, that is, MURDERER.
    Jesus thus charged the priests with murder. He claimed that by perpetually butchering the innocent animals on the sacrificial altar they have become the violent ones. By perpetual slaughter and cremation of the victims they have transformed the temple into a graveyard. After Jesus took control of the temple he immediately allowed access to the blind and the lame.

    Please note:

    “The blind and the lame approached him in the temple area, and he cured them”
    [Matthew 21:14 The New American Bible].
    Now please note the comment on this text from the same Bible:
    “According to 2 Samuel 5:8 [LXX] the blind and the lame were forbidden to enter “the house of the LORD”, the temple”.
    According to 2 Samuel 5:8 David hated the blind and the lame and barred them from entering the temple.
    “David said on that day, Whoever smites the Jebusites, let him get up through the water shaft and SMITE THE LAME AND THE BLIND WHO ARE DETESTED BY DAVID’S SOUL. So they say, The blind and the lame shall not come into the house” [The Amplified Bible].
    The Masoretic Text uses the word ‘bayith’ which has been rendered ‘house’ and ‘temple’ in the King James and Amplified Bible. The Good News Bible follows the LXX, that is, Greek Septuagint and renders the text of 2 Samuel 5:8 in the following manner:
    “That day David said to his men, ‘Does anybody here hate the Jebusites as much as I do? Enough to kill them? Then go up through the water tunnel and attack those poor blind cripples’. That is why it is said, The BLIND AND THE CRIPPLED CANNOT ENTER THE LORD’S HOUSE”.

    Jesus nullified this rule and allowed the blind and the lame access to the temple. There he displayed his power by healing them. These are the last healings recorded by Matthew. Luke states that after cleansing the temple, Jesus taught there every day. The priests wanted to kill him but feared the people who were on his side:
    “And he taught every day in the temple. But the high priests and the scribes and the elders of the people sought to get rid of him; But they were not able to find what to do to him; for all the people gathered around him to hear him” [Luke 19:47-48].
    Mark tells us that after Jesus took full control of the temple he refused to allow anyone to bring anything into the temple:

    “And he would not allow any man to bring goods into the temple” [Mark 11:16 Lamsa’s translation from Peshita].

    The Greek uses the word skeuos which means: vessel, utensil, implement.
    Jesus interrupted normal activities of the temple. In doing so he interfered with the daily sacrifice. Since he drove out all sacrificial animals and refused anyone to bring the same into the temple, he obviously made it impossible for the priests to indulge in sacrificial rites. If Jesus identified with the Jewish Pentateuch and the prescription for the daily sacrifice and other sacrificial offerings then he would not have interrupted the same. In our canonical gospels we have an incomplete preservation of Jesus’ statement regarding the temple. It is stated that he would destroy the temple and make another in three days. The testimony however does not fully harmonize.

    In the Gospel of Thomas however it stated that Jesus said:

    “I will destroy this house [temple] and no man will be able to rebuild it”.

    This statement must be authentic and original. The Roman Emperor Julian the Apostate who was originally a Christian but later abandoned Christianity and reverted back to Paganism actually believed that Jesus said that the temple would never be rebuilt. In order to prove Jesus wrong he gave a command to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. He charged many Jews from the Roman Empire to return to Jerusalem and build the temple. He also provided materials. When the workers went on site to start building the temple, God intervened supernaturally to prevent its construction. They attempted three times to rebuild it and each time there was a supernatural intervention so that the project was abandoned. The events were recorded by Church Fathers and the Roman historian. The facts are stated in many books that deal with supernatural and unexplained mysteries as well as the writings of the several Church Fathers. It is now more than 1900 years since the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed. To date it was not rebuilt. We have the word of Jesus that it will never be rebuilt since God had enough of sacrificial cultus.

    Undergirding the theory that it was the cheating money-changers whom Jesus targeted as the culprits in the system of animal sacrifice, is the claim that the whole process had become “too commercial.”

    This is akin to claiming that the institution of slavery had to be dismantled because it had become too commercial. Although both Temple sacrifices and human slavery had a firm economic foundation, it was the inherent immorality of those systems that brought together the historical forces which finally led to their collapse.

    Several hundred years after prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, and Hosea had denounced the sacrificial slaughter of animals, Jesus carried out what is euphemistically called the Cleansing of the Temple. It was just before Passover and he disrupted the buying and selling of animals that were being purchased for slaughter. And because Christian scholars and religious leaders continue to ignore biblical denunciations of that bloody worship, they also try to obscure the reason for Jesus’ assault on the system.

    They have done this by focusing on the money-changers, although they were only minor players in the drama that took place. It was the cult of sacrifice that Jesus tried to dismantle, not the system of monetary exchange. In all three gospel accounts of the event, those who provided the animals for sacrifice are mentioned first: they were the primary focus of Jesus’ outrage.

    The Gospel of John gives the most detailed account of the event.

    “When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
    In the Temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords and drove all from the Temple, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said: ‘Get out of here.’ (John 2:13-16)

    Matthew’s gospel does not detail the kind of animals that were being sold for slaughter, but it gives the same order of events.

    “Jesus entered the Temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

    ‘It is written,’ he said to them, ‘My house will be called a house of prayer but you are making it a den of robbers.’” (Matthew 21:12-13)

    The same account is given in the gospel of Mark who, like Matthew, also reports that Jesus accused those at the Temple of making God’s house into a “den of robbers.” And there is universal acknowledgement that in both gospels, when Jesus said this, he was quoting from the prophet Jeremiah (7:11). That prophet had hurled the same accusation at the people of his own time, almost six hundred years earlier. He said it while standing at the Temple entrance, after he had already warned the people “do not shed innocent blood in this place.” And when Jeremiah said God’s house had been turned into a den of robbers it could not have had anything to do with money-changers–they did not exist in his time.

    In the time of Jeremiah, as in the time of Jesus, there was a great distinction made between “robbers” and “thieves.” In contemporary times that distinction can best be understood by comparing the crime of petty theft with crimes of armed robbery by those who violently attack/kill their victims. But in ancient Israel there was an even greater distinction. A thief could be anyone who succumbed to a momentary impulse to steal something, but a robber was someone for whom violent crime and killing was a lifestyle.

    Both Jesus and Jeremiah were indignant about the violence of sacrificial worship, not the possibility of petty theft by money-changers. When they said God’s house had become a den of “robbers” the Hebrew word that was used (here, transliterated) was “per-eets’” defined as “violent, i.e., a tyrant–destroyer, ravenous, robber.” It was the violence of the system, the killing of innocent victims in the name of God, that they were condemning. The money changers operating in the time of Jesus were driven out of the Temple because they were taking part in the process of sacrificial religion, not because they may have been cheating the pilgrims.

    The gospel of Mark correlates Jesus’ attempt to dismantle the sacrificial system with the plot to kill him. Like Matthew’s gospel, Mark’s account of the Temple Cleansing starts by saying that Jesus “began driving out those who were buying and selling there.” It goes on to relate how he explained to the people why he was doing this, by quoting Jeremiah’s opposition to animal sacrifice:

    “My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations. But you have made it a ‘den of robbers.’”

    And in the verse of scripture immediately following that statement, Mark reports that “The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard about this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him because the whole crowd was amazed at his teachings.”(Mark 11:18)

    It is ridiculous to claim that the religious leaders of Jesus’ time would have plotted his death because he undermined the function of the money-changers. Nor would the crowd have been “amazed at his teachings” if Jesus was simply telling them to make sure they were not short-changed when they purchased Temple coins. What the people were amazed at was his condemnation of animal sacrifice; it had been hundreds of years since that kind of condemnation had been heard in Jerusalem. And it would not be allowed. A few days after he tried to overthrow the cult of animal sacrifice, Jesus was crucified. The religious leaders of his time were determined to preserve the belief that it had been ordained by God, who demanded its continuance.

    That determination is echoed in the teachings of contemporary Christian leaders. In spite of Jesus, and in spite of the many biblical denunciations of animal sacrifice (*see endnote) they continue to maintain the ancient fiction that it was God who demanded His creatures be killed and butchered as an act of worship.

    It is understandable that in the time of Jesus the religious leaders were committed to upholding the system of Temple sacrifice at all costs: it was the center around which their lives revolved and their livelihood depended. And in biblical times, most people were illiterate and dependent on what their religious leaders taught them concerning the scriptures. But it is not easy to understand why contemporary Christians uphold the validity of the cult of animal sacrifice. In an age of widespread literacy, there is a choice to be made. The bible clearly presents an ongoing conflict between those forces that demanded sacrificial victims in the name of God, and those forces that opposed it as a man-made perversion.

    And because there is a choice to be made, it is deeply disturbing to see Christian leaders joining hands across the centuries with their ancient counterparts, in order to validate a system of worship in which the house of God became a giant slaughterhouse, awash in the blood of its victims.

    *Partial list of scriptures opposing animal sacrifice.
    Psalm 40:6
    Isaiah 1:11-17;
    Jeremiah 7:3-7,11,21-25
    Hosea 8:11-13,
    Amos 5:21-25
    Micah 6:6-8


    Psalm 119:9 How can a young man cleanse his way? By taking heed according to Your word (The Law & The Prophets).

    Did you get the answer? Your way can only be cleansed by taking heed according God’s Word, The LAW and The Words of God’s Prophets, who delivered HIS law to HIS people

    Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them

    Does your preacher or pastor today speak according to God’s Law or His Prophets?

    Proverbs 6:23 For the commandment is a lamp, And the law a light; Reproofs of instruction are the way of life,

    Hosea 14:1 O Israel, return to God your FATHER, for you have stumbled because of your iniquity;

    Hosea 14:2 Take vows with you, And return to God. Say to Him, “Take away all iniquity; Receive us graciously, For we will offer the sacrifices of our lips



    1Samuel 15:22 So Samuel said: “Has God as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams.

    Proverbs 21:3 To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.

    Deuteronomy 6:25 Then it will be righteousness for us, if we are careful to observe all these commandments before God our FATHER, as He has commanded us.

    Hosea 6:6 For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, And the knowledge of the Lord more than burnt offerings

    Isaiah 1:10 Hear the word of the Lord, You rulers of Sodom; Give ear to The Law of our FATHER, You people of Gomorrah:

    Isaiah 1:11 “To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to Me?” Says the Lord. “I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams And the fat of fed cattle. I do not delight in the blood of bulls, Or of lambs or goats.

    Isaiah 1:12 “When you come to appear before Me, Who has required this from your hand, To trample My courts?

    Isaiah 1:13 Bring no more futile sacrifices; Incense is an abomination to Me. The New Moons, the Sabbaths, and the calling of assemblies– I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred meeting.

    Isaiah 1:14 Your New Moons and your appointed feasts My soul hates; They are a trouble to Me, I am weary of bearing [them].

    Isaiah 1:15 When you spread out your hands, I will hide My eyes from you; Even though you make many prayers, I will not hear. Your hands are full of blood.

    Isaiah 1:16 “Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean; Put away the evil of your doings from before My eyes. Cease to do evil,

    Isaiah 1:17 Learn to do righteousness; Seek justice, Rebuke the oppressor; Defend the fatherless, Plead for the widow.

    Isaiah 1:18 “Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the Lord, “Though your sins are like scarlet, They shall be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They shall be as wool.

    Isaiah 1:19 If you are willing and obedient, You shall eat the good of the land;

    Isaiah 1:20 But if you refuse and rebel, You shall be devoured by the sword”; For the mouth of the Lord has spoken

    Jeremiah 33:8 ‘I will cleanse them from all their iniquity by which they have sinned against Me, and I will pardon all their iniquities by which they have sinned and by which they have transgressed against Me.

    Isaiah 43:25 “I, even I, AM HE Who blots out your transgressions for My own sake; And I will not remember your sins.

    The Lord God blots out our transgressions for His own sake, not because of any human or animal blood sacrifice:

    Hosea 6:6 For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, And the knowledge of the Lord more than burnt offerings.

    This means that the BLOOD SACRIFICES of the Jews were worthless and so is the BLOOD SACRIFICE OF THE ROMAN JESUS!




    Unwitting Disciples of Zoroaster: The Influence of Zoroastrianism on Rabbanism in the Talmud and Midrash

    From 226 to 379, the Persian kings gathered and systematized the works of Zoroaster. The result was twenty-one great volumes – against the twenty-one words of the most holy Persian prayer, the Ahuravarrya. Known as Nusk, it is the Talmud of the Zoroastrians (speaking anachronistically).

    Due to the hostilities between the Persians and the Arabs in the latter half of the eighth century, the books of the Nusk were singled out for destruction. What now remains to the remnants of Zoroastrianism are five volumes:

    (1) Yasna – the book of sacrifices, which contains seventy-two chapters among them the Gatha passages (the oldest and most hallowed writings of the Zend-Avesta)

    (2) Vendidad – twenty-two chapters on the laws regulating evil spirits.
    (3) Yasht -an elaborate, detailed account of the Persian deities.

    (4) The Vispered – twenty-four chapters (a supplement to Yasna).

    (5) Khorda – an abridged edition of the laws in the Zend-Avesta.

    The Talmud was greatly influenced by Persian culture. It derives, in fact, much of its content directly from the Zend-Avesta, as will be detailed in brief below. One finds in the Talmud not only Persian superstition and legend, but many legal decisions handed down in accordance with Persian code. Not to mention the customs and usages of Persian life. Even the forms and expressions of the literary Pahlavi entered into the Talmud in no small way. The Persian influence on the Talmud is so great that, at times, it is difficult to separate what is Jewish from what is Persian in it.

    A system of nomenclature for angels in Jewish lore, prior to Persian influence, did not exist. We find for example, angels being named for the first time in the book of Daniel (a book compiled during the Persian exile). The naming of angels was important in the Persian religion, and the Talmud itself relates that: “Shemot HaMal’akhim ‘Alu Lahem MiBavel” – “The names of the Angels arose from Babylon”. Those familiar with Rabbanite theology will note how it is replete with the mention of good and bad angels (just think of the Rabbanite Shalom ‘Aleikhem song for Shabbat night).

    In Persian teaching, there were two gods, a good god, Ahura Mazda, and an evil god, Ahriman. The Talmud, in fact, went to the extent of borrowing the names of many of the deities and angels in the Persian pantheon, such as: Mithra (called Metatron in the Talmud), Hadar (called Hadarni’el in the Talmud), Dahriman, Tir, Serosh(1) , Aesmadiv [“spirit of anger” in Persian] (called Ashmedai in the Talmud), Angra/Agra (called Agrat in the Talmud),and many more…


    As with angels, so did the Amora’im [the Rabbis quoted in the Talmud]of Babylon and the writers of the Christian scriptures draw freely from the Zend-Avesta’s troves of superstitions about demons and imps. Let’s start with a look at Ahriman. From the Talmud, we learn that the angel, Ahriman is identified with Satan (Masekhet Bava Batra 16). Masekhet Sanhedrin 29, and the Vendidad II, 384 refer to Ahriman as the Serpent of Hell.

    Ahriman’s myriads of helpers are referred to as divs, what we now call devils. Vendidad I, 21 notes that these divs are more numerous than the dust of the earth (as does Talmud Masekhet Berakhot 6, Midrash Tehillim 17, Tanhuma, etc.,). The following passages from the Talmud and Midrash regarding demons (divs) were derived or directly copied from Vendidad II:

    Masekhet Sanhedrin 25 notes that devs are particularly active in graveyards. Masekhet Gitin 68 and Midrash Qohelet state that divs are male and female. Masekhet Berakhot 61 and Masekhet Hulin 105 state that demons can assume the shape of human beings, or flys. Masekhet Hagigah 16 contends that demons, like human beings, can reproduce. Masekhet Gitin 68 calls Ashemdai (Aesmadiv in Persian) the greatest of the divs. One of the fundamental teachings of Persian religious conduct is the avoidance of unclean hands (Masekhet Shabbat 109). It was believed that Sabetkh, a div, rests upon such hands: The Qissur Shulhan Arukh 2.1 quoting Yosef Caro’s Beit Yosef states, “when a man is asleep, the holy soul departs from his body, and an unclean spirit descends upon him. When rising from sleep, the unclean spirit departs from his body except for his fingers, and does not depart until one spills water upon them three times alternately. One is not allowed to walk four cubits (six feet) without having one’s hands washed, except in cases of extreme necessity.”

    Masekhet Megillah 3 states that during the period of night, no one must offer or receive the hand of another (for fear of an evil spirit). Masekhet Shevu‘ot 15 and Masekhet Berakhot 4 contain the Persian prayer to repel the unseen forces of evil.

    The driving off of evil spirits by adjuration was an integral part of the Persian religion. Whole systems of conjuration were devised by them; and many were the invocations with which some of them commanded the devils. All of these spells and “prayers” can be found in the Talmud. A few examples will serve to illustrate:
    Vendidad II, 223 and Masekhet Qiddushin 81 state that the chief thing to utter when exorcising a demon was, “I expel you from me.”
    If one has been bitten by a mad dog, a spell must be intoned in order to eject the hurtful spirit. [This very incantation, from Vendidad I.30, as well as the spell to ward against forgetfulness and the spell to insure that the sheep of the slaughterhouse may be fat have been written in the Talmud]

    The Persian beliefs in cameos, amulets, and talismans were also absorbed into the Talmud, along with the reading of sacred writings to restore health. In general, Zoroastrian influence is directly responsible for the presence of demons and devils in the Midrash and Talmud.


    To attempt to detail every point where the Talmud draws upon the Zend-Avesta would take a book. The following section will detail some of the more prominent concepts:

    The matter of benedictions, or the saying of grace over something that is eaten is of Persian origin (Vendidad II.112)
    The entire marriage ritual, with its special blessings, ceremony and rites is fully delimitated in the Zend-Avesta (II.157, 158, III.228)
    Vendidad II.130 and Midrash Tehillim both contend that the righteous who dwell in Paradise are as luminous as the stars.
    Vendidad 18, 166 and Masekhet Sanhedrin 17 state that the art of magic does not come from the Evil Power, and all wise men (in the case of the Talmud the men of the Sanhedrin can practice it).

    Both the Zend-Avesta (according to the Persians) and Torah (according to the Talmud) are able to repel demonic influences, merely by their recitation (c.f., Seder Eliyhau, Zuta 82, Masekhet Megillah 31, and Masekhet Ta‘anit 27).
    The passage in the Zend-Avesta where Ahura Mazda speaks to Zoroaster of the life of virtue that follows death has been copied directly into the Talmud (Masekhet Avot 86).

    The disciples of Zoroaster are assured of a heavenly existence, so the Talmud says of the nation of Israel (Masekhet ‘Eruvin 10).

    God is with him who studies and mediates in the night (Vendidad 18, Masekhet ‘Avodah Zarah 3, Masekhet Berakhot 30).

    The Persians believed that life is but a passing, unimportant state of existence, only after death does one truly begin to live, so Midrash Qohelet Rabba. Zoroastrians were loath to convert others to their faith, so too is found in the Talmud a discouragement to prosetylization (Masekhet Qiddushin 70).

    Though the Zend-Avesta was unknown before the coming of Zoroaster, the righteous who had lived before him were aware of it, and followed the precepts it contained. The Talmud, in this vein, contends that the Patriarchs perfectly observed the Torah even though it had not yet been given (Masekhet Yoma 28).

    Truly, all of the enjoinments concerning demons and spirits detailed in the Vendidad may be found in the Talmud. It is as if the authors of the Talmud sat down and copied the Vendidad into the Talmud. Many of the laws of Yasna: sacrificial arrangement, rendering of divine service, and regulations of cleanliness form the major portion of Talmudic law in these matters. The list goes on and on, to the extent that one begins to wonder if Rabbanites – and, for that matter, Christians – are unwitting disciples of Zoroaster.


    The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia
    Palestinian geographer; born at Flosz, Bavaria, Oct. 22, 1804; died at Jerusalem
    Feb. 5, 1865. When he was seventeen years old he graduated as teacher
    from the Königliches Schullehrerseminar of Colberg, after which he joined his brother Israel at the University of Würzburg, where for five years he devoted himself to the history and geography of the Holy Land, and published a map of Palestine (1829; republished at Vienna, 1831, and Triest, 1832). It was his ardent desire, however, to study in Palestine itself the physical history and geography of the Holy Land, where his knowledge of Talmudic sources and early Jewish writers would be of more service. Accordingly he decided to settle in Jerusalem, whither he went in 1833. Schwarz then began a series of journeys and explorations in various parts of Palestine, to which he devoted about fifteen years.
    The results of his investigations and researches into the history, geography, geology, fauna, and flora of that country have placed him in the front rank of Palestinian explorers and geographers. HE IS THE GREATEST JEWISH AUTHORITY ON PALESTINIAN MATTERS SINCE ESTORI FARHI (1282-1357), the author of “Kaftor wa-Feraḥ.”

    (Be sure to Google this article)
    614-1096 C.E.
    From the Accession of the Mahomedans to that of the Europeans.

    By Rabbi Joseph Schwarz, 1850

    Rabbi Shallum, son of the then Resh Gelutha, in Babel, aka Abu Bachr al Chaliva al Zadik, Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, was in fact: [A JEWISH RABBI] Rabbi Shallum, son of the then Resh Gelutha, in Babel, perceiving this dreadful predicament, went to Mahomed, and offering him his submission, friendship, and services, endeavoured to enter with him into a friendly compact. Mahomed accepted his proposition with pleasure, conceived a great affection for him, and took his daughter, a handsome young girl (A 6 YEAR OLD CHILD), for wife; he made him also a general in his army, and gave him the name of Abu Bachr al Chaliva al Zadik, literally:
    The father of the maiden, the descendant of the righteous; this means, that of all his wives, who were either widows or divorced women, this one was the only one who had never been married before, and then she was the granddaughter of the celebrated chief of the captivity; therefore, the descendant of the righteous. This occurrence induced Mahomed to give up his terrible intention to destroy the Jews in his country, and thus did Rabbi Shallum save his people.

    Rabbi Shallum aka Abu Bakr and Umar hijacked Islam to create an army to destroy the PERSIAN & BYZENTIUM EMPIRES


    Assassination of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his pure family)
    ( Section : Explanation )


    Dear Shaykh Yasser
    Can you cite the sources of your assertion that Aysha and Hufsa were involved in assassination of Mohammed (SAW)?
    Jaweed Ahmed


    In His Name the Most High,
    All praise is due to Allah, may peace be upon Muhammed and his pure progeny and may the curse of Allah be upon their enemies.
    Assalamu Alaikum,

    The Office Answer:

    There are a number of traditions from the Shi’ah and Bakri sources concerning the involvement of Aysha and Hafsa in assassination of Prophet Muhammad as previously stated by the Sheikh in many lectures. However, in order for us to cite the sources of these traditions, it might be useful to look at the following verse first.

    “And Muhammad is no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him; if then he died or is killed will you then turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah; and Allah will reward the grateful.” (Sura 3:144).

    If we pay a closer attention to this section: “if then he died or is killed.” We find that it confirms that the Prophet would not die a natural death. Rather, it confirms that he would be killed. For the reason that the conjunctive (or) in this verse means “Rather” In Arabic, sometimes (or) indicates uncertainty and probability. In other contexts, it imparts correction.

    Since it is next to impossible that anyone should suspect Allah’s word, since He has insight into the unknown, Allah must have intended to impart the other meaning. Accordingly, the meaning of the verse is:

    “If he died, rather, he is killed, you turn upon your heels.”

    We hereby understand that the Prophet was to be killed and his assassination was to be followed by turning back and apostasy. This actually happened, and turned in favor of the rebels who seized power, i.e. Abu Bakr and Omar. Thus, it was particularly addressed to figures who were followers of Islam at the time of the Prophet and not to the Jews who were no longer a threat in Medina as the Bakries believe.

    How then was the prophet killed? And who were those involved in such a heinous crime? Was it really, as Aysha narrates, the Jewish woman Zainab Bint al-Harith who invited the Prophet and his companions after gaining victory over the Jews in the battle of Khaibar to a banquet; when she poisoned the meat she cooked causing the Prophet to die four years later!

    Ignoring the fact that the Battle of Khaibar actually took place in the seventh year of Hijra, while the Prophet (Peace be upon him and his pure family) died in the eleventh year. Is it really likely for a person to die because of a poisoned food he had consumed four years ago! Regardless of the fact that the effect of poison is immediate and even if it takes time it cannot exceed a few months in which the health condition deteriorates gradually; In addition to the fact that the prophet had no unusual health complaints and would participate in the battles throughout that intervening period!

    Or rather was the prophet poisoned by Aysha and Hafsa as commanded by their fathers Abu Bakr and Omar, which is evidenced in the Bakries’ as well as Shi’as’ books of Hadith?

  6. Omar, also y do some Muslims say Yahweh was before Allah & should be worshiped not Allah? I guess yah comes from Egypt, represents the sun etc…

    • Names are important. Regarding Jesus:

      Another matter of matchless solemnity is that Jesus was/is not his name! His Hebrew name was Yahshua or Yeheoshua, which literally translates ‘Yahveh Saves or Yahveh is Salvation’, as opposed to ‘Jesus saves’. Jesus was a common Greek appellation for many Middle Eastern pagan messiahs, and is a word which means hero or saviour; while Christ or Christos, is the Greek word for ‘the anointed’. The magnanimously tolerant Greeks commonly referred to Hercules and the many foreign god-men messiahs as ‘Jesus Christos’ (anointed hero); furthermore, christos was also commonly used as a vernacular term for ‘good’. This is not news to Biblical scholars or well read laymen like me, but it is a shocking revelation to commonly-pewed worshipers, and yet of considerable insignificance to most practicing prelates!

      It is of the utmost import to realize the term ‘Jesus’ was directly utilized as a
      title for pagan gods and goddesses; e.g.:

      Issa/Issi from India, Isis/Isu from Egypt,
      Ieso-Iaso-Zeus-Iasus-Iasion-Iasius from Greece.
      Chrestos or Chrestus was the actual Greek name of Osiris, the sun-
      god of Egypt!
      Christos was also the title of Zeus, principal god of the Greek

      If this is not enough to impress the uninformed novice, it is also a
      fact there was no ‘J’ in the English alphabet until 400 years ago!

      Regarding Allah:

      Elah or Alah is another form of Elohim: a combination of El or Strength and Alah or Swear. See Strong’s 425 and Scofield’s Reference Bible, First Edition, where Allah has been deleted from the revised text. It is also thought to be a combination of two other words meaning ‘the God’, and is used in reference to God more than 2500 times in the OT. All invocations in Islam definitely identify Allah with ‘The God of Abraham’, and not some tree or moon god as is commonly taught by many illiterates who’ve never read Al’Qur’an.

      the Tetragrammaton: YHWH pronounced Yahveh. Original form is Yah. El was used as ‘Lord, King, or Chief’. The combination El-Yah or Lord-God is quite sensible, and it is not inconceivable that El-Yah, Al-Yah, or the Aramaic Eli reportedly spoken on the cross, are derived from this use. The first inscription bearing the name Yahveh is found on the famous
      Moabite Stone. YHWH means I AM WHO AM or I BE.

      From my Book “Trinity” Hope this is helpful

      • Thanks again. I’ve heard similar stuff u said. I never heard it put together like that but I know the basics of what you said & The sun God thing. So how does one know for sure which is the real God? You were basically saying Yahweh isn’t him right? Is it Allah or Yahweh?

        So what’s your take on The Jesus story? You said the definitions are applied as pagan? I knew the God saves part but did he perform miracles, & born of a virgin, I read the resurrection was added & that Christians don’t believe the muhammad thing because it was after & doesnt fit with everything else. Is this true?

      • I’ve addressed these queries in my books Forgotten Saints and Trinity, the Metamorphosis of Myth you can download the pdfs here

      • Why is The tetragrammaton used in occults? How can God allow Satanic works through this? Some say the old testament God may be the devil for it tempted Abraham & David & required sacrifices just like Satanic rituals?

      • Allah swt has permitted Satan to tempt men and has given mankind the freewill (choice) to follow what is harmful. The use of G’d’s Name in Occult rites is simply blasphemy, which also is permitted according to man’s free choice, although it is forbidden by Divine Law. What must be understood here is that the ‘one’ life on earth given to all of us is both a school and a test. Men are given sufficient time and leeway to condemn themselves as Satan suggests.

  7. Some say Muhammad was deceived? I always look at motive. Many say it’s just metaphorical stories not literal. What’s the motive to lie& say all that unless was only what they believed but not reality? The Bible is written in 3rd person which is strange since u would think if Moses was really author of 1st 5 books then how come write in 3rd person & who wrote his death account? This is one of many questions I have lol

      • I plan to read it all. Thanks. Why are some Muslims killing Christians because they won’t convert/Deny Jesus? Aren’t many of the stories the same? I always wanted to read them both thoroughly& compare& contrast.

        What do u think about The Nephilim? U think they were Satan’s seeds or Angels mating with Women? Some say daughters of sons of god meaning demons slept with women. There’s many speculations.

  8. So how would one know Quran is correct ? I was told Muhammed was added & since was after Jesus it also didn’t go with the previous scriptures throughout? How do we know what’s what?

    • Salaam,

      Muslims who murder Christians, such as the ISIS criminals, have lost their Islamic guidance and essentially are no longer in the fold of true belief. What they do is not Islamic in the least. They have, in essence, become like the Catholics of the Inquisition, perhaps even worse. Damned they are!

      As for the Nephilim. Most likely these were tribes of Jinn who preceded humans on earth. Neither alien or human, they are beings from a parallel dimension, many of which (the majority) have become wicked in nature.

      The Catholics in the Vatican worship them and have mistaken them for angels and other messengers of God, but this is the natural consequence of idolatry. They are real and their manifestations are also real. It is most likely that certain of their tribes are responsible for the infamous ‘bloodlines’ that infect the elite of the world with pride and selfishness. This is also natural and is represented by the curse on Cain who failed to repent and then became ruler over ‘Sin” who ‘stood at the door’.

      I trust this is of some help. Kind regards, omar

      • Yes it helped in some areas thanks. There’s many questions people can’t answer me. Christians or Muslims. So of one wanted to be Muslim then how do u convince a preconceived christian? Also why does it say kill the infidels in the Koran but not in the Christians version? I asked a minister once why Moses could get away with murder which was a commandment & my reply was murder is to kill with good cause. The definition changed later. That’s why u see “Thou shalt not kill” now. I then said well how does that make it right& The response was God commanded Moses so it’s ok as direct orders of God. The orders were only for the Jews to gain their power over others that were sinful & try to start new. Then look at King David, favored by God in all that he does but he did so many things wrong but only got punished for sending Basheeba husband in front line of the army to die. Idk if they even repented & I’m sure they make it to heaven. Also why some just never got a chance to get salvation. Seems a little unfair that some who never heard or were on the wrong side by upbringing die & go to hell. To die as a infant would be better than to live to an adult. The child is dead in innocence with no choice but clearly a better predicament for their soul.

      • The scripture says “thou shalt not MURDER” = there is justifiable homicide … also, the NT is not entirely authentic. I’ve addressed these queries in my books Forgotten Saints and Trinity, the Metamorphosis of Myth you can download the pdfs here.

      • Thank you again Omar. I have read some of your stuff & you seem very knowledgeable & wise. Wisdom comes with experience not intelligence. Seems you have learned a lot & are not as ignorant as many can be.

        Please answer this. Why does The Koran say “kill the infidels”? What does that really mean to sensible Muslims & is that why Isis is so crazy or is it something more? You know Muslims traditional views etc than I do so I figured you could enlighten me.

      • Muslims were under direct attack from Pagan tribes in Mecca/Arabia __ that was the context and remains so __ Jihad is defensive only …

  9. Thanks for replying. So what about time dated on B.C & A.D? I was asked if Jesus wasn’t real then y is the calendar based off of him & how come he says I am the way, no one gets through to the father but through me?

    • Most of what is quoted from the NT is not necessarily authentic representations of what Prophet Isa (Jesus) said.

  10. I n order to submit myself total to Lord Satan is it true I must denounce my God of the bible I have had for over 50 yrs. and why do I get so aroused when I worship Satan?

      • Hey Phil … you just proved my position … Catholics are intolerant Fascist mass murderers … always were and will continue to be until Jesus returns and puts an end to them … enjoy your fantasy while it lasts. – oz

    • Exactly — The Catholic Facade is completely pagan — always has been — any serious study of world history unveils the truth that Catholicism is nothing but ancient Mystery Religions re-wrapped for efficient crowd control … they are the best at what they do, which is to lie, deceive, steal and destroy – that is completely Satanic — That is Rome …

      • I agree with the Roman catholics thing but not sure what’s what. So u saying The Holy Quran Is the legit truth? U believe in muhammad? So u believe that Jesus was only a prophet?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: