In an article by New York Post called Millennial men want 1950s housewives after they have kids, the author Jennifer Wright wrote:

“Even in normal times, women spend approximately two hours more per day tending to domestic work than their partners. A 2013 research paper by economics professors Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn claimed that ‘modern men do not adjust the amount of time they dedicate to housework based on their wives’ employment status.’

“‘Professional working mothers who find themselves with partners who are unwilling to make that shift in perspective and allocation of time and resources have a tough choice,’ writes Bazelon. ‘Radically compromise who they are and what they want to stay in the marriage, or leave.’ Plenty of women opt for the latter; according to a 2015 study by the American Sociological Association, women initiate 69 percent of divorces, and among college-educated women, it’s 90 percent.

“In 2022, for families to thrive, husbands may need to start supporting their wives’ careers the way wives have supported their husbands’ for generations. Women aren’t going to go backwards. If men want relationships to last, they’ll have to go forward into the 21st century.”

My first post that went viral was about this very topic. It was about wives not expecting their husbands to do housework. If their husbands helped, great, but if they didn’t, that’s okay too, since women were created to be the keepers at home, the homemakers, and the care takers of the children. This is our God-ordained role. Of course, women were furious over this post. They fought for their rights, and they’re not giving them up or going backwards!

Women leaving their homes for the workforce have not produced any good fruit at all. Colleges have more women than men graduating. Women are thus taking away places in colleges and in the workforce that men need to support their families as God has ordained. Women have left their God-ordained roles and expect men to pick up the pieces. If they don’t, they divorce their husbands and then say that they love having the free time to pursue their careers while dad cares for the children part-time. Children are moved from one house to the other. This has been devastating on the children.

Men are NOT called to support their wives’ careers. I don’t care how much women want them to do this. Men weren’t created to be keepers at home. This emasculates men. I’ve watched some men being keepers at home while their wives make the money. The wives provide for their families instead of the husbands. God didn’t create the roes this way. It greatly harms marriages and even children. Women are the nurturers and caregivers. They’re the ones God has called to be home with the children and work hard in the home.

Women are called to support their husbands’ career as help meets that are suitable for them. Once women left their role, chaos has ensued as we are witnessing in our nation. Women, stop divorcing your husbands because they aren’t helping with the housework! Stop expecting him to support your career. Begin obeying God. Go home and learn how to cook and keep your home clean and tidy. Love and nurture your children. They need and want you. Your “fulfillment” isn’t in the workforce. It’s obeying God and being thankful and content while doing it.

Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.
Jeremiah 6:16


Written By Owen Strachan

Housework isn’t “below” a woman or “demeaning” to her. Housework doesn’t “squander her gifts.”

We often hear such language today, even from professing evangelicals who say they believe texts like Proverbs 31 and 1 Timothy 5. But sadly, a good number of professing Christians are frankly embarrassed by the Bible. Instead of flatly affirming biblical truth, they’ll subject it to death by caveat, telling you 19 things they don’t mean about biblical womanhood before they say a solitary thing about what they do mean.

No true Christian is embarrassed by Scripture. Every true Christian loves Scripture. We recognize that the life men are called to and women are called to is often tough. Daily Christianity, what we could call Christianity of the trenches, is not a highlight-reel existence. It’s challenging, frankly. It’s often anonymous. It’s regularly taxing. It’s not a picnic. You’re carrying a cross on your back every second you live, after all.

The true problem here is not really a debate over womanhood or the meaning of work. Godly women (or men for that matter) aren’t actually tied up into little twisted exegetical knots over whether Scripture calls them to homemaking, motherhood, and marriage (as most are). No, the Bible is clear on these things. The true problem here most of the time is a problem of the heart. We don’t like what’s before us. We belittle it. We hold a grudge against God for calling us to it. We want more. We want something different. We want out. We want what we want. We have a heart problem, not an intellect problem.

Here’s some rugged truth in response: Christianity doesn’t “spectacularize” our existence. For most of us, life is plain, ordinary, and usually anonymous. Christianity doesn’t make your life a living reality TV show of unending awesomeness. What Christianity does do is enchant the ordinary. All your humble life, so much of it quiet, matters to God. All your existence is “coram deo” (unto God). No moment is ACTUALLY anonymous. Every moment a Christian is a priest unto God, performing meaningful service even when doing tasks that look–and are–totally ordinary and unspectacular (1 Peter 2:4-5).

This is true for men, and this is true for women. Women haven’t been saddled with a bad hand. The call to be a wife and mother (if called as most women are) and homemaker and nurturer (as all women are) is a call from God. Yes, it’s challenging. But so is what men are called to as providers. Most men provide through work that is often gritty and unspectacular and hard. The work of provision by a man is not normally primed for a really exciting “Day in the Life” series on YouTube. Most of what men do on a daily basis to glorify God is humble. A lot of it can be challenging. Some of it is downright hard.

So, a word of exhortation: don’t complain. When you do, when your heart grumbles, when little wisps of ingratitude and anger against God’s will for your life slip out in passive-aggressive conversation, repent. Stop whining. Stop making excuses. Claim the grace that is in Christ. Know that you are a work in progress. We all are. We all fail. We all stumble. We all whine. We all need to confess our sin to God. Every last one of us, not just a few of us. Then, remember that you are thinking wrongly; you’re lying to yourself. You’re preaching the wrong message. God doesn’t hate the simple and the plain; God loves the simple and the plain. God has called you to these good gifts, and his call does not mean you are “squandering” anything. In truth, the only thing you’re “squandering” are the moments you’re complaining. Those are moments that you and I could be using to praise and worship our king even in the most common tasks of our days.

So yes, keep this glorious reality before you at all times: Christianity sanctifies the ordinary. It does not rob a quiet life of dignity; it infuses a quiet life with dignity. It lets women wake up to their true nature and calling, just as it lets men wake up to their true nature and calling. If you are in the trenches today, and your life feels rather plain and simple, let me assure you that you are very likely right in the center of doxological Christianity. God loves your humble work; God will honor your day-by-day faithfulness; God is an incredibly kind God who set up the world to run as it does, so God clearly values the unspectacular, the anonymous, and the self-sacrificial.

If you doubt that last part, just think about Jesus’ life. Though the incarnate Son of God, he spent most of his life doing nothing that landed on the front page. He lived most of his life exactly like you live yours, and all of it mattered, and all of it glorified his Father. So too can your life, when you embrace the enchantment of the ordinary in the power of the Spirit.

I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.
1 Timothy 5:14

If you would like to read more on these themes, see this resource HERE!


What do husbands who have wives who have become submissive wives think about their wives now? Do they like the “new” wife or do they miss the old one? A woman asked this question on my Facebook page so I decided to ask the women in the chat room to ask their husbands. Ken answered the woman on Facebook:

“I can tell you that my marriage has been revolutionized since Lori has chosen to be a submissive wife. No more arguing, peace in my home and in my own skin, love where I know that she desires to put me first now instead of last. I used to be stressed out constantly hoping I would not upset my wife by saying or doing things she didn’t like. It wasn’t overt so much as a frown on her face, a snide remark, or becoming distant and aloof. I don’t have to fear that anymore and she is so much happier knowing she doesn’t have to be in control of my and our lives. Instead, harmony reigns.” 

Maggie wrote: “My husband would say that he gets to eat dinner at home. Years back I never considered starting dinner until after he arrived, then he would eat dinner at his mom’s every night before he came home and I’d be livid. It put a wedge between my MIL and him and me. Now that I know my role, he comes home to a hot meal and he doesn’t take it for granted.”

Evie: “I’ll ask him when he wakes up (still on his night shift schedule) but the main thing he always mentions is how the arguing is now nonexistent. We have literally nothing to fight about thus far because most of our past arguments derived from household chores and decisions being made.”

Molly: “My husband said out of the blue that I was much more ‘live and let live’ instead of bossy. I was really happy to hear that.”

Kayla: “’Smoother, not so much stress, and hardly any fighting’ is what my husband said. Man of few words but I’d never really asked him if he noticed a change and it’s nice to know he has.”

Michelle: “My dear husband says that there is more peace in the house. There is rarely any arguments between us. I also demonstrate my role as a wife and mother by being more joyful.”

Debbie: “He said I don’t get upset or mad very easily anymore. He likes that I get ‘upset’ now if he doesn’t let me get his food or drink refills. Being open with all things financial (purchases, etc), asking him for permission instead of just going out on my own about everything.”

Libby: “He told me our home is more enjoyable. He said before I found this group, he knew I was trying to let him lead, but he said once I found y’all I have really stepped into my proper place. He also said he is enjoying that I am teaching this to our daughter as well; that we need to take care of dad, and be happy to see him.”

Rayma: “Mine says he doesn’t believe it yet…(looks like he needs some time…I only asked for his forgiveness for my rebellious, disrespectful, unsubmissive behavior a few months ago, at which point he said he can’t forgive me, because I couldn’t change the past). BUT I can see in his actions that he is actually simply enjoying being home more. He talks to me. He has moved back into our shared room. He lets me know what his work schedule is like. He spends time with me and the kids taking day trips – things that never happened before! The BIG WALL OF BITTERNESS we both built to distance ourselves is finally cracking!!!”

Cassie: “He said that I don’t think I am in charge of the marriage any more.”

Some men have responded on my blog that they don’t want submissive wives. They don’t know what they are missing!

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Ephesians 5:22-24

The Mask Represents Enslavement (“Compliance”)


(left, masking means you’re been forced to accept an illusion)

We’re being inducted into the Illuminati satanic cult

as slaves, at the base of the pyramid. 

This article summarizes where we stand and where we’re headed. 

When you neglect anything too long, it collapses. When you allow a satanic cult, Freemasonry, to infiltrate all social institutions, you will be destroyed. Slavery is making a comeback. And the slaves are embracing it.

Latest-  Masks are worse than useless in preventing transmission of viruses…..

More evidence that their purpose is political. 

from Sept 30, 2020 

by Wicked Truths

(abridged by

Masks are incapable of stopping COVID-19 virus particles.

The COVID-19 virus’ size has been reported to be 80, 120 or 150 nanometers (Britannica).

The best mask (3M) cannot stop particles smaller than 300 nanometers (0.3 microns). 
It’s like trying to stop flies with chicken wire…

If you’re still not convinced, here you find links to peer-reviewed research which concludes face masks are useless and dangerous

Mask harm:

  • Decreased oxygen intake (PubMed)
  • Increased toxic CO2 uptake (video 1 below)
  • Increased inhalation of toxic chemicals from the mask
  • Increased pathogen intake: the moist and warm mask fibers are an ideal breeding ground for pathogens.

CO2 measurements inside a mask. [full screen]Panel of 100+ doctors vote masks to be unnecessary and harmful. [full screen]


The government:

  • mandates masks while they don’t work.
  • violates the constitution & human rights.
  • forces you to harm your own health: a crime against humanity.
  • claims you cannot do with your own body what you want.
    • A dangerous precedent that will undoubtedly continue when the vaccines arrive.

Masks as social engineering tool:

Create fear, division, separation, and dehumanization

When we see people wear masks, we think there’s a real threat. Mask wearers might be infected. People without masks might infect us. Regardless if there’s a pandemic or not, when we go out on the streets, it certainly looks like there is one. As such, it reminds us every time and propagates fear throughout societies. Fear weakens the immune system.

Mask wearing creates a great division in the population. Often, mask wearers attack those that won’t, verbally and even physically.

Face masks cover our mouths and noses and rob us of our individuality and expression. They block us from truly connecting to the people we talk to. I surely feel like I’m talking to a masked robot, zombie or slave. 

Historically a muzzle for slaves:

In the past, mouth masks were used to punish and silence slaves. The psychos behind the scamdemic must be pissing themselves, seeing people putting it on themselves, only because they believe the propaganda.

Pagan initiation ritual:

To knowledge to write this chapter comes from this source.

Sects and cults often perform initiation rituals to introduce new members. The ceremony is meant to tear down the old way of thinking and to introduce the cult’s mindset (rules, rituals, etc.).

Strategies in the tear-down-process include isolation, repetition and trauma. 


Another key component is masks.

The purpose of masks in an initiation ritual

  • Ego/identity death
  • Imposed silence
  • Token of submission (to ritual master and cult mindset)
  • Signal consent for transformation
  • Signals acceptance of ‘the spirit of the mask’
    • The spirit of the mask depends on the nature of ritual.
    • In this case, the nature of the ritual is satanism.
    • The mask wearer welcomes the spirit of satan…

UN Agenda 30 has sugar-coated, deceptive propaganda on the website of United Nations, videos on YouTube etc…

The new world envisioned by UN Agenda 30, is a one-world government. A global high-tech surveillance prison state, controlled by AI and drones.

Key points

  • Global inventory & control plan of all the resources of the world
    • Resources include food, water, energy, land, production, education, animals, people and more.
    • Centralized global resource control IS a one-world government (in this context)
    • Complete monitoring, tracking, tracing & control of everybody’s day-to-day lives
  • Clear out rural areas => move people to the smart megacities
  • Communitarianism: community goals override individual rights
    • Community “interests” dictated by governments & corporations
    • Dissidents will be outcast
  • No private property for living and business

A compilation of Rosa Koire & James Corbett on UN Agenda 30. [full screen]

Before the new world can be built, the old world has to be destroyed.

COVID-19 is the battering ram to destroy the old world: depopulate the masses, destroy the economy, make people accept loss of freedom, rights violations (because there’s a “health emergency”), introduce violent police & so on.

Once UN Agenda 30 is completedthis is the new normal. COVID-19 is just a temporary deception to make us accept it temporarily, which is never temporarily as we should all know by now.

To be able to have AI control populations, a technological connection needs to be established between the people and the information technology infrastructure. This can be achieved by introducing nano-tech into the bodies of the people e.g. via vaccination.

The nanobots in the body are able to send and receive information using wireless communication: 5G cell towers & satellites. This technology is so far advanced that it is possible to read out the thoughts of people, and introduce thoughts artificially. Needless to say to stay away of the vaccine by all means necessary.

Black-and-white evidence that COVID-19 is a long-standing plandemic is found on the World Economic Forum (WEF) website.

In their insanely detailed COVID-19 transformation map, you can read about topics that have nothing to do with a pandemic, such as 5G, AI and global government.


  • Digital identity: ID2020
  • Digital health card: COVI-PASS
  • Digital monetary system, cashless society
    • Connected to your identity and health records via blockchain.
  • Vaccination
  • AI
    • Resource control
    • Population control
  • Smart cities
    • Facial recognition cameras
    • Digital access control
    • 5G
    • Smart meters
    • Self-driving cars
  • Gobal totalitarian police state
  • Wildlands project (to “restore wildlife”)
    • Remove people from rural areas.
      Example: “SDGs marked your land as a wildlife reserve. Leave.”
    • Move them into smart mega cities.
  • No private property
    • Land, house
    • Business
    • Your body
      • Mandatory vaccination
      • Masks
  • Communitarianism: the ideology of ‘the common good’
    • Community goals trump individual rights.
    • Community “interests” dictated by governments & corporations.
    • Dissidents will be outcasts.

The Great Reset (World Economic Forum):

The technocrats want a fully digital money system, linked to identity and health data via blockchain.

According to them, the best way to achieve that is to completely destroy the old system and introduce the new system.

The World Economic Form (WEF) has already come out publicly with ‘the new’ and calls it The Great Reset. Skouras covers WEF’s The Great Reset. [full screen]

Destroying the middle class:

The first lockdown has already dealt a major blow to the middle class, self-employed, SMEs.

A second, longer, tougher lockdown will completely wipe out the middle class. Anyone who observes the media with open eyes sees that the second wave is planned on the basis of infections. Infections are irrelevant because the PCR test is scientific fraud and because only the death toll is important.

An awake population will not accept a second lockdown.

Collection of DNA, vaccination and transhumanism:

Via the COVID test the state is able to acquire the DNA of the population.

Via vaccination, the state can modify the DNA of the population and bring in nanorobotics.

If you hear the people of WEF (partner of the UN) talking, you can see that transhumanism is an important goal for them. Such is the kind of people that are the driving force behind covid and vaccination.

High-tech surveillance:

Face recognition to”monitor that you’re wearing your slave mask”. Attendance registration. Temperature measurements. Contact tracing. Resource access based on your health (now masks, later COVI-PASS).

All sensitive practices that would never have been accepted without a “health crisis”.

Police state:

The rollout of these agendas will meet resistance, requiring a tougher, more violent police force. As long as the COVID illusion persists, the police can always hide behind the mantra for your safety.

Fundamental freedoms and basic rights are violated. Now “for your safety”, after COVID that’s the”new normal”. It gives an idea of how long they want to hold on to the virus illusion. They want to complete the agenda by 2030.



Every night before I go to sleep, I listen to a preacher. I have listed some of them in my Instagram saved stories. I love learning from men who love God and His Word. Last night, I listened to John MacArthur preach to the men at The Master’s Seminary about Fortitude. It was an excellent sermon. I will summarize some of it here.

Twenty five million children have no biological father in their lives. There are 73 million children in the US and 78 million dogs. It shows what many value more. If there’s no father, there’s no mother either since she is forced to go out and make a living. The children are then at the mercy of school teachers. A large core of lesbians are now school teachers grooming children to be homosexuals.

Fifty percent of children born in the US are born outside of marriage. Fatherless children are more likely to go to prison, do drugs, and live tragic lives. This country is suffering due to the absence of strong men. This has happened due to fornication, feminism, and porn. The only hope for society is virtuous manhood. Men are now largely fearful of women.

What is masculinity? It’s the willingness and determination to take the responsibility to reduce evil and produce good. The feminist lie is that patriarchy is tyrannical, toxic, and must be destroyed. Destroying masculinity is to destroy society. Weak men introduce the death of a society. Weak men abuse women and children.

Our churches need manly pastors. They need to have fortitude, firmness, and strength of soul. John MacArthur then went on to exhort all of the men preparing to be pastors to be men of conviction, courage, and endurance who stand firm in the faith and don’t compromise truth.

Our pastors are graduates of The Master’s Seminary. They are masculine men. They preach truth boldly and unashamedly. Their wives have meek and quiet spirits. They’re home raising their amazing, well-behaved children.

I love the way John MacArthur handled the entire Covid fiasco. He never feared. He simply trusted God in the battle against the government. He never closed his church. People began coming back. Soon, the entire sanctuary was packed full. People want masculine, fearless, bold pastors. He told them that bold pastors allow the people to find safety in their strength to withstand evil.

Watching John MacArthur through the shutdown caused us to decide to permanently leave our old, lukewarm church and attend a solid biblical church. It’s the best church I have attended in my life! We sing hymns and spiritual songs that are filled with biblical truths. Our pastor isn’t afraid to teach anything in God’s Word. He doesn’t compromise with the world. He wants unbelievers who attend to be uncomfortable listening to his sermons. Godly preachers will convict and challenge people to repent, believe, and live a life of obedience. Find a church like this, women. It will bless you greatly!

One last thing, during the Covid nightmare, our pastor told us that we do not fear a virus, disease, persecution, or ever death. The God of the universe has it all under control. Our days are numbered. Our eternity is secure. He fights our battles. What a breath of fresh air! Also, the people in our church know and love God’s Word. They are warm, kind, and loving. This is the way God’s Church should be!

Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you [act] like men, be strong.
1 Corinthians 16:13

Israel Shahak – Judaism Hates Gentiles


In essence, the suffering of mankind today is a result of Judaism’s hatred of non-Jews.This is not the view of ordinary Jews. It applies to Organized Jewry and can be seen in thepolicies of the World Central Banking Cartel, UN, IMF, WHO, WEF, CDC, and Freemasonry.  
The Communist New World Order is essentially the Cabalist Jew World Order. But to focus on all Jewsjust lets the Cabalists (Satanists, Masons) off the hook because they can dismiss opposition to their demented agenda as racism. At the same time, ordinary Jews had better wake up and stop accepting the blame for the Cabalists.

Shahak states that Judaism is imbued with both hatred and ignorance of Christianity, and that this is largely independent of any Christian persecution of the JewsIsrael Shahak (born Israel Himmelstaub, 28 April 1933 – 2 July 2001) was an Israeli professor of organic chemistry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, a Holocaust survivor, an intellectual of liberal political bent, and a civil-rights advocate and activist on behalf of both Jews and Gentiles (non-Jews). For twenty years, he headed the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights (1970-90) and was a public critic of the policies of the governments of Israel. 

A Review of Jewish History, Jewish Religion by Israel Shahak
Pluto Press, 1994

by Spencer J. Quinn
(abridged by

For a thorough airing of Jewish dirty laundry, one cannot do much better than Israel Shahak’s  Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years (JHJR). First published in 1994, JHJR, represents a humanist critique of classical and modern Judaism which extends to the pervasive anti-gentile attitudes of Jews throughout history. …
One of Shahak’s main contentions regarding classical Judaism is its totalitarian nature. He mentions how eighteenth-century Jews burned books, persecuted dissidents, banned non-Jewish education, and were absorbed in mysticism. Tolerance was not part of the equation, and Shahak quite cheekily points out how at times even unfriendly gentile societies were kinder to the Jews than the Jews were to themselves. He states bluntly that when Jews were liberated or emancipated throughout the nineteenth century, they were in many cases freed from “the tyranny of their own religion” rather than from any gentile oppression. He offers as an example the Metternich regime in Austria in the 1840s, which actually enforced laws protecting Jews from being murdered. Shahak makes a similar point regarding Tsar Nicholas I:

    Nicholas I of Russia was a notorious anti-Semite and issued many laws against the Jews of his state. But he also strengthened the forces of ‘law and order’ in Russia–not only the secret police but also the regular police and the gendarmerie–with the consequence that it became difficult to murder Jews on the order of their rabbis, whereas in pre-1795 Poland it had been quite easy.

Shahak characterizes pre-emancipated Jewish societies as “sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism and ignorance” and describes how in the first Hebrew work on geography (published in 1803), the authors complained about how a great many rabbis were still denying the existence of America…


And as for anti-gentile language, there is a lot of it, and not just in the Talmud. The Hebrew word shaqetz refers both to unclean animals and to gentile children. In a work known as The Book of Knowledge, Jews are instructed to exterminate gentiles with their own hands (a passage wholly expunged from the book’s English translations). In the Hasidic text known as Hatanya, gentiles are considered Satanic creatures. The Halakhah, which outlines the legal system of classical Judaism and springs from the Babylonian Talmud, openly approves of war crimes (i.e., the killing of ostensibly good gentile civilians during war). In Maimonides’ Guide to the Perplexed, Blacks and some other nomadic races are likened to “mute animals” and “are not on the level of human beings.” (In the 1925 American translation, editors obfuscated this embarrassing detail by replacing the Hebrew word Kushim, meaning Blacks, with the nonsensical  “Kushites”). 

(This letter was originally written in 1879. Explains why goyim will own nothing in 2030.)

There is a morning prayer in which Jews thank God for not making them gentiles. In another prayer, the worshipper declares, “and may the apostates have no hope, and all the Christians perish instantly.” Devout Jews are enjoined to utter a curse whenever passing a gentile cemetery or upon seeing a large gentile population. The fourteenth-century work called The Book of Education reinterprets seemingly universalist verbiage from the Bible into chauvinistic, pro-Jewish exhortations. For example, according to The Book of Knowledge, the verse “Thou shalt love thy fellow as thyself,” really means “Thou shalt love thy fellow Jew as thyself.” Finally, according to the Talmudic Encyclopedia, the intricacy of the law regarding adultery with gentile women reveals that, to devout Jews, all gentile women, even the ones who convert to Judaism, are presumed to be whores.

Keep in mind that while devout Jews were praying for the death of gentiles and while Jewish leaders were fully aware of the hidebound aspects of their own religion, they pressured the Catholic Church during the mid-20th century to remove the line about God forgiving Jews in one its Good Friday prayers; because, of course, to say such a thing would be anti-Semitic…

According to Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, the Talmudic Encyclopedia, and R. Yo’el Sirkis’ Bayit Hadash, Jew-on-Jew murder is a capital sin, but Jew-on-gentile murder is not, and is therefore not punishable by any Jewish court. R. David Halevi declares in his seventeenth-century text Turey Zahavwhich comments on the Shulhan ‘Arukhthat a Jew must not directly harm a gentile, but he allows for indirect harm of gentiles. Maimonides himself proscribes Jewish doctors treating gentiles. 
Basically, a gentile life must not be saved. For example, a Jew would not be allowed to shove a gentile down a crevice, but if the gentile is already in the crevice, the Jew is under no obligation to pull him out. Indeed, if there is a ladder which could facilitate the gentile’s rescue, the Jew may also remove the ladder.

Unless, of course, such indirect harm would then bring hostility upon the Jews as a whole. Then, and only then, would a Jew not be permitted to indirectly harm a gentile. This, I call “the hostility exception,” and Shahak brings it up a lot. Jews respect power, and this power more than any universal set of values informs their jurisprudence. When gentiles (or heretic Jews) are weak, they are afforded no mercy in the law. However, when gentiles are strong, then Jews are required to do the very minimum to not increase their hostility. One crass and recurring example of this was how Jewish doctors would be encouraged to treat wealthy gentiles, including kings, nobles, lords, and the like. But poor gentiles, never. Obviously, such self-serving codification defies any absolute sense of Right and Wrong–moral particularlism at its most egregious, and is one of the aspects of classical Judaism that Shahak finds so offensive.


This next one might be the worst of them all. According to the virulently anti-gentilic Maimonides in his “Prohibitions on Sexual Intercourse”(emphasis mine):

  If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if she is a minor aged only nine years and one day–because he had wilful coitus with her, she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got in trouble.

Get that? According to one of greatest Jewish scholars of all time, a Jew has license to murder, rape, and molest children as long as the victim is a gentile. And of course, the sanctity of gentile marriages amounts to nothing.

Here are a few more anti-gentilic laws, all of which adhere to the “hostility exception” described above:

    Gentiles are forbidden to bear testimony in rabbinical courts, since all gentiles are presumed liars.
    Jews must not offer gifts to gentiles.
    Jews must exact interest when lending money to gentiles.
    Jews must never return items lost by a gentile.
    Jews shall not deceive other Jews in business, but may practice “indirect deception” when doing business with a gentile.
    Jews shall not steal without violence from anyone, gentiles included. However, there are certain circumstances under which they may steal with violence from gentiles under their control.
    Jews are forbidden to sell unmovable property (i.e., structure and land) to gentiles in Israel.

Shahak, left, states further that Judaism is imbued with both hatred and ignorance of Christianity, and that this is largely independent of any Christian persecution of the Jews. Thus, he often takes the gentile perspective when reviewing Jewish history in JHJR. 

He makes it clear that even the poorest Jews were better off than serfs. He also points out that Jews, as agents of kings or nobility, often exploited the peasantry, especially in Poland. He doesn’t deny that European peasants triggered anti-Jewish uprisings throughout history, but he also lists historical peasant uprisings that had nothing to do with Jews. 

Clearly then, what Jews call “anti-Semitism” is not inherent to European peasants. Shahak says the quiet part out loud when concluding that Jewish influence declines when gentile nations assume a more nationalistic (read: ethno-nationalistic) attitude and have a greater political connection between the rulers and the people–what it now termed populism in American political culture. 

There is a long history going back at least to the 1930s of Jewish anti-populist writing (Chapter 5 of The Culture of Critique)–writing that eventually penetrated American academic and media culture with the rise of Jewish power.

Most damningly, Shahak states:

Before the advent of the modern state the position of the Jews was socially most important, and their internal autonomy greatest, under a regime which was completely retarded to the point of utter degeneracy.

In other words, Jews readily made alliances with oppressive, degenerate non-Jewish elites and participated with these elites in exploiting the non-Jewish population…
———–RelatedJudaism is Template for Covid Tyranny


Written By Ken and Lori

We graduated from Westmont College in 1980. I (Lori) wasn’t strong in biblical knowledge so I didn’t know if what I was being taught was biblically accurate or not. I wasn’t wise and discerning back then like most college students. I asked my husband (Ken) one morning if Westmont was falling away from biblical truth when we went there, and he said it was. The crack in the conservative view of the scriptures had already begun.

Yesterday, I received a magazine from Westmont College. I put it in the trash pile but then decided to see what was in it. The first article I saw when I opened it was called “Taking a Deeper Look Into the Woman at the Well.” The article was written about a woman named Caryn Reeder who is a professor of New Testament and gender studies at Westmont. Immediately, red flags were waving at me. How can we keep keep our children from walking away from biblical truth if we are sending them to Christian Colleges which have drunk the Kool aid and are directly teaching against the true biblical roles of women in the Bible and Church?

Here we find a bright, intelligent, and perhaps even loving woman Professor teaching our young men and women that it is okay for women to teach men in the Church. And it’s in almost all our Christian colleges now.  Teachers teaching “gender studies” refuse to teach what the Bible commands the younger women be taught: to be keepers at home, submit to their husbands, and leave the leadership and teaching in the churches to the men. Young minds are being trained just the opposite of what God’s Word teaches in our own Christian schools.

Caryn Reeder wrote this about the woman at the well: “She is a model for women’s voices being heard. I’ve always treasured this story of a woman engaging in a theological debate and becoming the first missionary. This nameless woman, who lacks wealth and power, engages in the longest conversation Jesus has with anyone in the Bible. It teaches us about who gets to be God’s people.”

Most women these days would read that and think, “That’s so cool!” And in many ways the “Woman at the Well” is a very cool story of redemption, as the story shows the heart of Jesus willing to reach out to anyone with His love and truth, even a woman, a social outcast, and a woman five times married and now living with a sixth man. Yet, she was seeking truth and believed Jesus enough to go running back to town to tell everyone that she had encountered the Messiah.

But here is where we diverge from Dr. Reeder. There is a big push in progressive churches to find within the stories of women in the Bible things never found before by theologians and commentators. Rooted in a desire to “elevate women” in the churches and “empower” them, is this need to read into these well-know stories a lot of conjecture and postulations that will fit the woke Church narrative that women can indeed by teachers and leaders in the Church. Somehow the story of the “Woman at the Well” combined with the other stories of the women of Bible negate the clear teaching of God’s Word that says:

“But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (1 Timothy 2:12).

We are now to believe that the “Woman at the Well,” who has throughout Church history seen as one who had an extraordinary encounter with Jesus, now becomes the focal point of the story as the first woman theologian and missionary? We cannot let the story just speak for itself and focus on Jesus and God’s great love that transcends gender and social classes, even sin and sinners, to reach all with the love and truth of God? We must find some things so exceptional in the story pertaining to women that will help justify the real purpose for the book, to use the story to help overturn the clarity of God’s Word regarding God’s desire for male leadership and teaching in the Church?

Did she have a theological debate with Jesus? No. She talked to him about the knowledge she had concerning worship and the coming Messiah. She asked questions, but did not debate with Jesus. Was she a missionary? No. She simply went to the men in the city, told them that there was a man who knew all about her, and said “Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?” Even by definition a missionary is one who goes to a foreign land and shares the gospel of Christ. No foreign land and no gospel, but she does ask them to come see and discern if this is not the Christ.

Unfortunately this is the pattern of the new modern church. Mary Magdalene becomes the first evangelist. Pricilla becomes the first woman teacher. Junia, or Junias, becomes the first woman apostle and any woman who had a house church in her home is automatically a pastor. No proof of any of these things is necessary, because if the feminists in the Church can just have the ignorant see how “cool” it is that these wonderful women of the Bible were indeed leaders and teachers in the Church based on embellishments, then they can justify women preaching and being pastors in the churches. Instead of looking at God’s clear commands on this issue, women like Caryn look for examples that try to negate these commands, zero in on them, and then write entire books about it.

 To alleviate any doubt as to the true purpose of the embellishments added by Professor Reeder to the story, just listen to the reviewers of her book. They get it. They understand why she is trying to add to the story a certain “twist” to make is say far more than it does so the modern day Christian woman has a license to violate the Word of God and teach men, preach and be elders:

“If ever a story needs retelling, it is that of the falsely maligned Samaritan woman (John 4). Reeder sets the record straight―the Samaritan woman is not the sexual sinner alleged by previous commentators. Reeder brings to life the woman’s historical circumstances and expertly locates this story within the overarching narrative and theology of John’s Gospel. Reeder reclaims the Samaritan woman’s voice for the church today. Beautifully written, pastors and lay leaders alike will be inspired and encouraged to raise up women theologians, teachers, and evangelists.”

— Lynn H. Cohick, provost and dean of academic affairs, professor of New Testament, Northern Seminary

Many female “Bible” teachers want to find some justification for their disobedience to the Word. They make every woman story in the Bible they can adorned by speculation and if that is not enough, they focus on women’s abuse as justification why God can no longer want us to follow the word’s of the apostle Paul or Peter. They tickle women’s ears and create large followings instead of mentoring women as God commands them to do.

We all love the story of the “Women at the Well” where we too identify as sinners and outcasts in need of a Savior. We need to know that Jesus is the Christ who paid the penalty for our sin, died on the cross, rose again, and all who believe in Him will have eternal life in Him. Nothing Dr. Reeder writes negates Christian women’s primary role of being wives, mothers, homemakers, and being silent in the churches. No, the “Woman at the Well” does not in any way justify women preaching or being pastors. This wasn’t the point of the story at all. Beware of women like this and very wary of sending your children to Christian schools that want to turn your precious gifts from God into disbelievers of the Word.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
2 Timothy 4:3,4