* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Hoffman's Lies, Lying About History And "Usury,"
Borne Of Sheer Ignorance, Pretension
(Apollonian, 24 Mar 19)
(Apollonian, 24 Mar 19)
Folks: Mike A. Hoffman has transformed over the yrs into a full-fledged Pharisaic-styled liar and outright mystic moron--he's LOST the meaning of Christianity which is simply worship of truth (= Christ, Gosp. JOHN 14:6) against satanic lies and lying, Jews (JOHN 8:44) the foremost liars and satanists, such Christian truth directly implying the objective reality which gives meaning and substance to truth, reality being the necessary reference for any truth.
Jews, defined as followers of Pharisees and Talmud (distinct fm Judeans, the people who lived in Judea at time of Christ, only 5% of whom were followers of Pharisees, the middle-class party), rather hold to "midrash" and "Oral Law Tradition" (SUBJECTIVISM) by which Torah is INTERPRETED, meaning then ONLY what rabbis say it means, according to their "midrash" (interpretation), this "midrash" depending then upon what is "good for the Jews" and against the gentiles (humanity) who are hated by Jews as simple matter of course and dogma--gentiles to be made slaves, upon whom Jews are to parasitize.
Thus Hoffman now wants to pretend no one can criticize Jews but for Hoffman himself--as if Hoffman owns the Jews by his putrid, mysticism and virtue-signaling "moralistic" putridity and pretension. Just listen to (read) all this nonsense and psycho-babble by Hoffman in his (above) comment # 111. And remember further that the "Church" is simply the people--TOTALLY DIFF. FM that bureaucracy of parasite officials and charlatans which we now call the "Vatican." The "Vatican" (and officials) ARE NOT NOT NOT same as the "Church"--never forget that.
Note then there is serious problem for what the very word, "usury" really means--ESPECIALLY if it is to connote something objectionable. For if "usury" is truly something objectionable, it couldn't merely be the charging of interest--for there's nothing wrong w. charging of interest. And remember, charging of interest is simply a matter of CONTRACT and agreement btwn individuals--there could be nothing wrong w. such "interest" unless there was some fraud or coercion involved. And simple historical fact is that the increasing business of late medieval and Renaissance times couldn't have occurred without the natural charging of interest which made lending and borrowing more feasible among the people.
Note further that if there's competition among businessmen for the borrowing of (relatively) scarce money--real money, like gold/silver--then the charging of interest makes perfect sense to everyone, the lender naturally preferring the customer willing to pay the competitive price, other conditions being equal. And this practice of lending to and among business people was historically what was evermore taking place during the late medieval, early Renaissance time in question, don't forget.
Thus ALL BUSINESSMEN AND BANKERS understood the NECESSITY of charging interest, given the business conditions, and it was simply idiotic for the "Vatican" bureaucracy (NOT THE "CHURCH") to stand in the way of economic life and necessity for charging of interest--the "Vatican" looks stupid and foolish pretending to dis-approve and condemn what all the business people KNEW had to be done (charging of interest), and which was being done by everyone ANYWAY. It was the "Vatican" bureaucracy which found soon enough they had to change their moronic dogma regarding "interest"--or they (the "Vatican" charlatans) would simply pass into ever greater ridicule and irrelevance.
Another relevant side-note to consider is that "Vatican" and its personnel were intimately involved w. their own banking, lending, and buying and selling activity--they knew perfectly well the problems of the "usury" prohibitions which could obstruct otherwise legitimate activity among the people.
It's far more likely that "usury," understood as something objectionable, most probably referred to "central-banking" and "fiat-currency" (see Mises.org; use their search-engine) which "currency" is artificially produced in place of real, commodity-based money, like gold/silver, which is FINITE in amount, currency being practically INFINITE (literally legalized counterfeiting), constantly issued, thus fraudulently losing value per unit as the amount issued is ever-increased, the people despoiled and impoverished who are forced to using such currency--as we see in this very day.
Upon this fraudulent currency, note it doesn't matter if "interest" is charged or not--the currency system will necessarily collapse as the "inflation" continues, regardless of interest charging. Thus the blame of "usury" is falsely put upon charging of interest, rather than the fraudulent issuance of "currency" (fake money--legalized counterfeiting) in place of real commodity-based MONEY, like gold/silver.
Such then are the real facts and circumstances regarding money, banking, charging-of-interest, and "usury." Hoffman is simply the typical moralistic Pharisaic, obsessed w. pretending to pushing his virtue-signaling, imagining he is "better," more "moral" and "virtuous than others w. this nonsense and brainless clap-trap about "usury," etc. Can thou imagine the hellish lives of this fool, Hoffman's children, of whom I understand he has about ELEVEN--those poor kids, having to endure such a fatuous, brainless, pretentious fool as parent. Lord have mercy.
--------------------above by ap in response to below-copied--------------------
# 111, Michael Hoffman says: • Website
March 24, 2019 at 3:49 pm GMT • 500 Words
@Digital Samizdat
Still, it is rather clear that under the Presidency of Donald Trump the US influence and power in the world have declined truly dramatically – so much for making anything at all “great again”.
Actually, if ruining The Empire’s image is the best we can get out of Trump, I’ll still take it.
BTW, does anyone else here see an inconsistency in the following two statements:
As for the Papacy, it has been in bed with Talmudic and Kabbalistic rabbis for many centuries (just read Michael Hoffman’s superb book, the 700 pages long “The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome”) and not just since Vatican II (as some Latins naively believe!).
If it weren’t so ugly and tragic, it would actually be funny (especially to see the Latins and the Talmudists in bed with each other after centuries of mutual hatred).
So when exactly did the “Latins” first hop in bed with the Talmudists? Many centuries ago? Or a few years back, when Steve Bannon first hit the scene?
Apart from a few minor quibbles though, this is a good essay overall. Saker has an important point to make: now that nationalists are making a comeback in the West, it’s totally predictable that the zionists will try to infiltrate and steer their movements for the benefit of Israel. If they succeed, there’s no way this can end well. If you don’t believe me, take a look at what happened to all those zio-rapture-Xtian idiots. What did they ever get out of that relationship? Zilch.
Don’t let this happen to you, alt-right. Don’t get used by the Zionists. They will never repay you for your services, no matter what they promise.
Cardinal Raymond Burke and the rest of the Maltese-masonic “Catholic conservatives” are representative of the chess game that has been in play since the middle of the fifteenth century, beginning with the first stirrings of Neoplatonic Hermeticism, Talmudism and Kabbalism bankrolled by the Medici and other exceedingly wealthy Italian and German-Catholic (House of Fugger) usury operations, which were all non-Judaic (http://a.co/ac3tikh).
Promotion, preservation and publication of the Babylonian Talmud was a sub-rosa project of the papacy in the 16th century, followed by a few token theatrical burnings of the Talmud to placate disoriented and demoralized conservative forces whose fealty had to be maintained until the coming of the Revelation of the Method era in the 20th century, when the reality of the papal-rabbinic alliance no longer needed to be concealed.
The “Latins first hopped into bed” with the Talmudists in the Renaissance as documented in The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome (http://a.co/8qqGIwf). There were indeed initiatives put forth prior to the fifteenth century, but medieval popes, monarchs, Judaic converts (Nicholas of Donin), poets (Dante Alighieri) and saints (such as the anti-usury crusader Anthony of Padua) halted the movement in that direction. The very real Latin/Judaic clash of the Middle Ages was at the center of Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice, a Renaissance-era play attempting to rekindle medieval truths.
Renaissance Catholicism represented the first time in the history of the Church when situation ethics — the core of Talmudic epistemology — gained firm purchase, and the ancient standard of antiquity and catholicity (universality) — what was believed always and by all— was abandoned (except rhetorically). Consequently, the immemorial Catholic dogma against the renting of money, the recognition of the implacable hostility of the Talmud to the gospel of Jesus, and the intrinsic incompatibility of paganism and Christianity — all were derogated in the name of a “situation” — “changing times.” This is one reason why the arguments of the pseduo-traditionalists against the innovations of the Second Vatican Council are laughed out of consideration by the hierarchy of the Roman Cryptocracy who are well aware that those arguments were long ago vitiated by the radical changes instituted by Renaissance popes employing the situation ethics which would be fully displayed beginning with the pontificate of Paul VI and every pontiff thereafter.
Cognizant of the traditionalist claims made for the supposedly orthodox Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII and Pius X as papal paladins who combated these trends, one should keep in mind the infernal depths of deceit of the Kabbalah-steeped papacy. Pius IX achieved Joseph de Maistre’s masonic aim of institutionalizing the papacy as a dictatorship with the power to move the church in any direction; Leo XIII publicly attacked Freemasonry in patently anemic terms (never once unmasking the key Kabbalistic doctrine and praxis of the Brotherhood), while Pius X finally removed all proscriptions against the renting of money from the 1917 Code of Canon Law (which he did not live to see promulgated).
The history of the Church of Rome since the Renaissance is the history of high hoax.
https://www.revisionisthistory.org/p...ge5/page5.html
No comments:
Post a Comment