Paul, the Cuckoo Bird

[Ben Masada]

This is what makes Paul's ideology controversial. Is Reform Judaism right, or is Orthodox Judaism right? Orthodox Jews accept and obey halakha. Reform Jews accept it but don't believe they need to follow it.

All Jews are right, whether they are Reform, Conservative or Orthodox. They all accept Halakha, which is Jewish law. I do too, as long as it walks hand-in-hand with the Tanach as it does. In the case of Paul, this was no longer Jewish when he decided to found Christianity, a Hellenistic faith. (Acts 11:26)

Neglecting the things you've said that make you sound like a Karaite or Sadducee, I take it you're an Orthodox Jew. -- or maybe you're ultra-Orthodox?

Why Karaite or Sadduacee? On what sense you suppose they were different? That Karaites did rejected midrashim that were interpreted against the Tanach? So, do I. Midrashim are parable-like. They must walk hand-in-hand with the Scriptures. And why Sadducees, that they did not believe in bodily resurrection? Who among the Jews believed in bodily resurrection, the Pharisees? Nonsense! Paul was too cunny. He said so because he was in trouble before the Sanhedrin and invented that idea for posterity. Perhaps he himself did not know the difference between bodily resurrection and the metaphorical one.

Different people in early Christianity had a different interpretation of the death of Jesus. The Jerusalem Church probably interpreted it as meaning that they should follow either Jesus' own teachings or the teachings of Beit Hillel.

There was no contradiction between the teaching of Beit Hillel and that of Jesus. Jesus was of the same line of thought and interpretation.

For the Jerusalem Church, Jesus' death had a similar meaning to what the heavenly voice (Bat Kol) said when it declared, "these and these are the words of the living God, but the Halakha follows the rulings of Beit Hillel."

There was never such a thing as Jerusalem Church. Paul was never able to raise a church in Israel or Jerusalem for that matter. In Jerusalem was the headquarters of the Nazarenes, in whose leadership was James, the brother of Jesus. And they were not Christians. Christians started with Paul in Antioch about 35 years after Jesus had been gone. (Acts 11:26)

Jesus' death set the Nazarenes free from having to follow the teachings of Beit Shammai so they could follow teachings similar to Beit Hillel. This would have been the equivalent of today's Orthodox Jewish ideology.

Jesus' death set only himself free from the daily struggles of life.

Paul went further than that. Paul's interpretation was that halakha wasn't that important anymore.

I know that. His interpretation was that the whole Law was not important anymore. Even the Catalogue. See Romans 7:7. He was referring to the Catalogue when he taught about freedom from the Law.

It was not license to sin, but rather it was an acknowledgement that others could also be "righteous" apart from Jewish halakha.

No one can be righteous apart from God's Law. That's what shows what man has done wrong, and grants life with repentance.

Jewish halakha did not have a monopoly on righteousness or morality. Gentiles too had a sense of morality.

Really! What sense of morality had the Greeks? For them homosexuality was the most common and natural thing to be practiced. What sense of morality was that? Paul was a Hellenistic Jew; when he found out in the Jewish laws that homosexuality was a sinful condition, it became like a thorn in his flesh, if you read Romans 7:13-25. Since he could not get rid of repressed homosexual feelings, he made of himself an exception to the rule that one cannot serve two masters. He decided that it was possible to serve God in his mind and sin in his flesh. (Rom. 7:25)

Jewish halakha could be discarded if a person could substitute it with a different but equivalent system of ethics.

Bingo! You are right, because that's exactly what Paul did in Romans 7:25.

Notions of sin and righteousness had their equivalent in foreign cultures, which had different ways of expressing it. It was not a dismissal of halakha, but a way of justifying the idea that it was interchangeable with something else. Paul's position was the equivalent of today's Reform Judaism.

Here you err for not knowing anything about Reform Judaism. Reform Judaism is only an example of liberal Judaism. Paul's position was the one to condescend with a sinful condition if it became a thorn in one's flesh.

I have no idea how Catholics see this -- I got the impression from some documentary I saw recently that the Catholic Church actually explores the dispute/conflict between Peter and Paul and Peter had different views on Jewish Law than did Paul.

Here, we are of the same mind. Peter had indeed a very much different view of Jewish Law than did Paul. And how!

Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

The reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Jesus says it so do I. He is the preacher I follow as well as all the prophets of the Lord. We are One in the Holy One of Israel , the Lord, the God of hosts. Paul was a deceiver and no brother of ours. Jesus said; "As the father sent me that is how I send you." I take it to heart. I know the Lord and I keep His words.

The Lord says this;

"Hear the word of the Lord, you who tremble at his word: Your brethren who, because of my name, hate and reject you, say, "Let the Lord show his glory that we may see your joy"; but they shall be put to shame.The Lord’s power shall be known to his servants, but to his enemies, his wrath.
The Lord shall judge all mankind by fire and sword. and many shall be slain by the Lord."

Lo, the day of the Lord comes, cruel, with wrath and burning anger; To lay waste the land and destroy the sinners within it!

If you wish to return, O Israel, says the Lord, return to me. If you put your detestable things out of my sight, and do not stray,
Then you can swear, As the Lord lives, in truth, in judgment, and in justice; Then shall the nations use his name in blessing, and glory in him.

This is the nation which does not listen to the voice of the Lord, its God, or take correction. Faithfulness has disappeared; the word of the Lord is gone from their speech.

No one speaks the truth. They refuse to recognize me, says the Lord.

The Lord has a sword which consumes the land, from end to end: no peace for all mankind.


That's the word of the Lord who sent me. I do nothing on my own; I judge as I hear, and my judgment is just, because I’m not seeking my own will but the will of the One who sent me.
The Lord who sent me has testified on my behalf. But you have never heard his voice nor seen his form, and you do not have his word remaining in you, because you do not believe in the One whom he has sent. Search the scriptures if you think you have eternal life through them; even they testify on my behalf.
But you do not want to come to me to have life.

So, as you say above, "Paul was a deceiver and no brother of ours." Tell me Princely, do you believe that Jesus was the Messiah and that he resurrected? Of course you do! Take a look at 2 Timothry 2:8. That's from a letter to his disciple Timothy when Paul confessed to him that Jesus was the Messiah and that he had resurrected was a message according to his gospel. It means that you are adopting the message and burning the messenger. Adopting the doctrine and rejecting the preacher as a deceiver. How can you live with that contradiction?
Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

You've got it all wrong: to Nietzsche and some of his later disciples, Paul was the ultimate Jew. Paul, with his "transvaluation of all values," in other words, outdid the Jews.

Some years later, to Nietzsche's charge of “rabbinical impudence” against St. Paul, General Ludendorff, probably a disciple of the former rather than the latter, added that Paul was a gay epileptic and distiller of the Jewish poison, i.e., Christianity, through a defenseless, pagan Europe.

Serv

Probably, General Ludendorff was indeed right. Considering the results following Paul's fall from his horse in the Road to Damascus, we can easily see the symptoms of epilepsy. And for the suspiction of homosexuality, Paul used to complain about his struggles against a sinful condition as a thorn on his side, which he just could not get rid of. (Rom. 7:13-25)

Scholars claim that Paul was a Hellenistic Jew, in whose ideology homosexuality was the most common behaviour loosely practiced without any sense of morality. Paul says that when he became familiar with the Law, this acted upon him in a way to produce death. (Rom. 7:13) Since he could not get rid of his struggle against such feelings, he repressed them with the condescending choice that he could serve two masters: God in his mind and sin in his flesh. (Rom. 7:25)
Ben

 

[Servetus]

Probably, General Ludendorff was indeed right. Considering the results following Paul's fall from his horse in the Road to Damascus, we can easily see the symptoms of epilepsy. And for the suspiction of homosexuality, Paul used to complain about his struggles against a sinful condition as a thorn on his side, which he just could not get rid of. (Rom. 7:13-25)

Scholars claim that Paul was a Hellenistic Jew, in whose ideology homosexuality was the most common behaviour loosely practiced without any sense of morality. Paul says that when he became familiar with the Law, this acted upon him in a way to produce death. (Rom. 7:13) Since he could not get rid of his struggle against such feelings, he repressed them with the condescending choice that he could serve two masters: God in his mind and sin in his flesh. (Rom. 7:25)

Source (pp. 168-170)
Pierre van Paassen (interviewing Germany's General Ludendorff)

“… the Jews are not our enemies because of their race, but because one of their subtlest rabbis, the man called Saint Paul, distilled the poison of the Christ myth out of the life story of Jesus of Nazareth. The Jews are the enemies of the Nordic race because they produced Christianity, which has been the poison that has destroyed the vitality of the Aryan peoples. Think of our Teutonic ancestors –the whole world was afraid of them! Rome launched its finest legions against the Rhine and Danube, but could never conquer the Germans … Unable to conquer the Germanic tribes by force of arms, Rome had recourse to a vile stratagem: it sent its missionaries up north … The poison dripped into their pure [German] souls by small drops, and has remained there ever since. The poison of a religion which taught men to turn the left cheek after the right had been struck.


“Of course, Jesus had nothing to do with this, you understand that,” went on the General [Ludendorff]. “He was an Aryan himself, the son of a Batavian legionnaire named Pandor [Talmud: "Panther"] and of a certain Mary, probably an Arabic girl of easy morals who lived in a Syrian garrison town. All this has been scientifically established. The real poisoner, as I said before, was Paul of Tarus, the Apostle Paul if you wish, an epileptic fanatic, a man with a diseased body, a hunchback, probably a homosexual, with the fiendish mind of the pervert. His emissaries penetrated into Germany by a ruse, and began to talk to the Teutons of loving one’s enemies, and of forgiveness and brotherliness. Sentimental and fundamentally good, our ancestors imbibed the alien doctrines. Germany was conquered and became the playball of Europe. They still sneer at us dumme Deutsche –stupid Germans- in the chancelleries of Europe. And we deserve it: for we Germans, sincere and frank as we are, we are the only ones who took Christianity seriously. We did not see that the evangelization of the Teutonic world was a trick to rob us of our birthright, of our place in the sun. We became the door mat of history. Every scheming bandit wiped his feet on us. Not until we get rid of the Christian mentality will we regain our independence of spirit. That a people of so fertile an imagination as the Germans, a tribe of such creative intellectual powers, should have accepted a Jewish religion that the Jews themselves rejected –that is the greatest imposture of history! Obviously the whole maneuver,” wound up the General, reverting to military terms, “was a snare, a pitfall, a ruse de guerre! And it worked –for fifteen centuries!”


Pierre van Paassen concludes his interview by observing:


“… Germany is much farther on the road to dechristianization than the Soviet Union, even if the churches in the Reich remain open and the incense still rises from the altars."


Serv

 

[Ben Masada]

Source (pp. 168-170)
Pierre van Paassen (interviewing Germany's General Ludendorff)

“… the Jews are not our enemies because of their race, but because one of their subtlest rabbis, the man called Saint Paul, distilled the poison of the Christ myth out of the life story of Jesus of Nazareth. The Jews are the enemies of the Nordic race because they produced Christianity, which has been the poison that has destroyed the vitality of the Aryan peoples. Think of our Teutonic ancestors –the whole world was afraid of them! Rome launched its finest legions against the Rhine and Danube, but could never conquer the Germans … Unable to conquer the Germanic tribes by force of arms, Rome had recourse to a vile stratagem: it sent its missionaries up north … The poison dripped into their pure [German] souls by small drops, and has remained there ever since. The poison of a religion which taught men to turn the left cheek after the right had been struck.


“Of course, Jesus had nothing to do with this, you understand that,” went on the General [Ludendorff]. “He was an Aryan himself, the son of a Batavian legionnaire named Pandor [Talmud: "Panther"] and of a certain Mary, probably an Arabic girl of easy morals who lived in a Syrian garrison town. All this has been scientifically established. The real poisoner, as I said before, was Paul of Tarus, the Apostle Paul if you wish, an epileptic fanatic, a man with a diseased body, a hunchback, probably a homosexual, with the fiendish mind of the pervert. His emissaries penetrated into Germany by a ruse, and began to talk to the Teutons of loving one’s enemies, and of forgiveness and brotherliness. Sentimental and fundamentally good, our ancestors imbibed the alien doctrines. Germany was conquered and became the playball of Europe. They still sneer at us dumme Deutsche –stupid Germans- in the chancelleries of Europe. And we deserve it: for we Germans, sincere and frank as we are, we are the only ones who took Christianity seriously. We did not see that the evangelization of the Teutonic world was a trick to rob us of our birthright, of our place in the sun. We became the door mat of history. Every scheming bandit wiped his feet on us. Not until we get rid of the Christian mentality will we regain our independence of spirit. That a people of so fertile an imagination as the Germans, a tribe of such creative intellectual powers, should have accepted a Jewish religion that the Jews themselves rejected –that is the greatest imposture of history! Obviously the whole maneuver,” wound up the General, reverting to military terms, “was a snare, a pitfall, a ruse de guerre! And it worked –for fifteen centuries!”


Pierre van Paassen concludes his interview by observing:


“… Germany is much farther on the road to dechristianization than the Soviet Union, even if the churches in the Reich remain open and the incense still rises from the altars."


Serv

I agree with every thing in this post about General Ludendorff, but one, that Christianity was a Jewish religion. No, Christianity, since its very onset, rose as a Hellenistic religion. There was nothing Jewish about Christianity.
Ben

 

[Servetus]

I agree with every thing in this post about General Ludendorff, but one, that Christianity was a Jewish religion. No, Christianity, since its very onset, rose as a Hellenistic religion. There was nothing Jewish about Christianity.

The next step, after almost bringing one's self into harmony with General Ludendorff, is to get all tingly with excitement at Wagner’s Parsifal .


Source: (pp. 16-17)
Friedrich Nietzsche:


“… the Christian Church as compared with the “chosen people,” lacks all claim to originality. Precisely on this account the Jews are the most fatal people in the history of the world: their ultimate influence has falsified mankind to such an extent, that even to this day the Christian can be anti-Semitic in spirit, without comprehending that he himself is the final consequence of Judaism.” [emphasis in the original]

Serv

 

[Ben Masada]

The next step, after almost bringing one's self into harmony with General Ludendorff, is to get all tingly with excitement at Wagner’s Parsifal .


Source: (pp. 16-17)
Friedrich Nietzsche:


“… the Christian Church as compared with the “chosen people,” lacks all claim to originality. Precisely on this account the Jews are the most fatal people in the history of the world: their ultimate influence has falsified mankind to such an extent, that even to this day the Christian can be anti-Semitic in spirit, without comprehending that he himself is the final consequence of Judaism.” [emphasis in the original]

Serv

What did Nietzsche know about Judaism? The Christian is rather the final consequence of Hellenism. And this is brought about by the Bishops/scholars who translated the Saint Joseph's edition of the New American version of the Bible. The quote is found in the appendix dictionary at the end of the the Bible under Christian Church.
Ben

 

[Servetus]

What did Nietzsche know about Judaism?

Friedrich Nietzsche (ibid., p. 46)

“… The first thing to be remembered [when reading the gospels] if we do not wish to lose the scent here, is that we are among Jews. The dissembling of holiness which, here, literally amounts to genius, and which has never been even approximately achieved elsewhere either by books or by men, this fraud in word and pose which in this book is elevated to an Art, is not the accident of any individual gift, of any exceptional nature. These qualities are a matter of race. With Christianity, the art of telling holy lies, which constitutes the whole of Judaism, reaches its final mastership, thanks to many centuries of Jewish and most thoroughly serious training and practice. The Christian, this ultima ratio of falsehood, is the Jew over again –he is even three times a Jew.” [emphasis in the original]

Serv

 

[Servetus]

Source:
Pierre van Paassen:

“One of the strangest figures to come to The World’s [his newspaper's] office, where there was a daily flow of visitors, was Ignace Trebitsch-Lincoln. Said to be a son of Jewish parents, Trebitsch, when I knew him, had been a Catholic priest in Vienna, an Anglican clergyman in London, a Member of Parliament in Westminster, and was said to have been a secret agent for Germany in the USA and Canada during the World War. He had been secretary to Leon Trotsky, political adviser to one of the Chinese governments, and something or other at the court of Afghanistan. He always knew –sometimes months in advance- what was going to happen, but he never revealed his sources. This gave him an air of mystery, although there was nothing fundamentally mysterious about him. He was a restless soul, the Wandering Jew par excellence, who vainly sought for peace of mind in all the highways and byways of life …

Thereafter, it was in 1930, Trebitsch disappeared. In the summer of 1935 he was back, but this time he was wearing the yellow robe of a Buddhist monk. I noticed him at the wicket in the Gare du Nord buying a ticket for Berlin.

“I see,” I said to him, “that you have gone back to the yarmakle,” pointing to his tight-fitting skullcap of a type that his Jewish ancestors must have worn in Hungary.

“I announce to you,” replied Trebitsch gravely, “the doctrine that is glorious in the beginning, glorious in the middle, and glorious at the end –the Gospel of Our Lord Buddha.”

Trebitsch said he was on his way to see the Fuhrer and the leaders of the neopagan movement in the Reich. “Buddhism,” he explained, “is a purely Aryan religion, and if the German people want to have done with that Jewish cult known as Christianity …”

I wished him the best of luck in his interview with Hitler, but never learned how he fared …” (pp. 123-124)

 

[iBrian]

Ben you might like a read of this:
Pauline Conspiracy : Interfaith

 

[Ben Masada]

Friedrich Nietzsche (ibid., p. 46)

“… The first thing to be remembered [when reading the gospels] if we do not wish to lose the scent here, is that we are among Jews. The dissembling of holiness which, here, literally amounts to genius, and which has never been even approximately achieved elsewhere either by books or by men, this fraud in word and pose which in this book is elevated to an Art, is not the accident of any individual gift, of any exceptional nature. These qualities are a matter of race. With Christianity, the art of telling holy lies, which constitutes the whole of Judaism, reaches its final mastership, thanks to many centuries of Jewish and most thoroughly serious training and practice. The Christian, this ultima ratio of falsehood, is the Jew over again –he is even three times a Jew.” [emphasis in the original]

Serv

So, according to Nietzsche, the whole Judaism constitutes the art of telling holy lies, isn't that right? Now, can you see what mean when I said that he didn't know the ABC's about Judaism? And neither do those who belive his words. If you do, tell me about some of the holy lies. Nietzsche was acting like the unlearnt of today who still cannot understand the use of metaphorical language in the Tanach.
Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

Source:
Pierre van Paassen:

“One of the strangest figures to come to The World’s [his newspaper's] office, where there was a daily flow of visitors, was Ignace Trebitsch-Lincoln. Said to be a son of Jewish parents, Trebitsch, when I knew him, had been a Catholic priest in Vienna, an Anglican clergyman in London, a Member of Parliament in Westminster, and was said to have been a secret agent for Germany in the USA and Canada during the World War. He had been secretary to Leon Trotsky, political adviser to one of the Chinese governments, and something or other at the court of Afghanistan. He always knew –sometimes months in advance- what was going to happen, but he never revealed his sources. This gave him an air of mystery, although there was nothing fundamentally mysterious about him. He was a restless soul, the Wandering Jew par excellence, who vainly sought for peace of mind in all the highways and byways of life …

Thereafter, it was in 1930, Trebitsch disappeared. In the summer of 1935 he was back, but this time he was wearing the yellow robe of a Buddhist monk. I noticed him at the wicket in the Gare du Nord buying a ticket for Berlin.

“I see,” I said to him, “that you have gone back to the yarmakle,” pointing to his tight-fitting skullcap of a type that his Jewish ancestors must have worn in Hungary.

“I announce to you,” replied Trebitsch gravely, “the doctrine that is glorious in the beginning, glorious in the middle, and glorious at the end –the Gospel of Our Lord Buddha.”

Trebitsch said he was on his way to see the Fuhrer and the leaders of the neopagan movement in the Reich. “Buddhism,” he explained, “is a purely Aryan religion, and if the German people want to have done with that Jewish cult known as Christianity …”

I wished him the best of luck in his interview with Hitler, but never learned how he fared …” (pp. 123-124)

After reading this post of yours above about Trebitsch Lincoln, none was in my mind but Paul, who once said that he could be anything, anywhere, according to any situation. A Roman among the Romans, a Greek among the Greeks, a Jew among the Jews, a Gentile among the Gentiles, anything anywhere, anyhow. The man of a thousand and one faces. Like Trebitsch, he had lost the identity of who he really was. And for that matter, he never found peace, as he was constantly plagued by his thorn in the flesh.

And as a footnote, Christianity is not and was never considered a Jewish cult. The last Jewish sect in the First Century was called the Sect of the Nazarenes, aka, "The New Way." (Acts 9:2) Christianity was born as a Hellenistic cult, which ceased to be a cult in the year 310 ACE, when Emperor Constantine adopted it as the religion of the Empire.
Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben you might like a read of this:
Pauline Conspiracy : Interfaith

Yes, I liked it. Very nice reading. Only that James, the brother of Jesus was the head of the Sect of the Nazarenes in Jerusalem. And the name for their gathering place was synagogue and not church. Then, IMHO, Paul did not corrupt the original Christian message, as it orginated with him, according to Acts 11:26.
Ben

 

[Servetus]

So, according to Nietzsche, the whole Judaism constitutes the art of telling holy lies, isn't that right?

Nietzsche:

“The concept of God falsified; the concept of morality falsified: but the Jewish priesthood did not stop at this. No use could be made of the whole history of Israel, therefore, it must go! These priests accomplished that miracle of falsification, of which the greater part of the Bible is the document: with unparalleled contempt and in the teeth of all tradition and historical facts, they interpreted their own people’s past in a religious manner …

In plain English: a stupendous literary fraud becomes necessary, “holy scriptures” are discovered [reference, I think, to the time of Ezra], and they are published abroad with all hieratic pomp, with days of penance and lamentations over the long state of “sin.” ... With severity and pedantry, the priest had formulated once and for all –even to the largest and smallest contributions that were to be paid to him (-not forgetting the daintiest portions of meat; for the priest is a consumer of beef-steaks)- “what he wanted,, “what the Will of God was.” Henceforward everything became so arranged that the priests were indispensable everywhere. At all the natural events of life, at birth, at marriage, at the sick-bed, at death, not to speak of the sacrifice (“the meal”), the holy parasite appears in order to denaturalize, or in his language, to “sanctify” everything ...” (pp. 25-26)

And as a footnote, Christianity is not and was never considered a Jewish cult.

Nietzsche:

“The case is of supreme interest: the small insurrectionary movement christened with the name of Jesus of Nazareth, is the Jewish instinct over again.” (p. 27)

“… little ultra-Jews [i.e., Christians], ripe for every kind of madhouse, twisted values round in order to suit themselves, just as if the Christian, alone, were the meaning, the salt, the standard and even the “ultimate tribunal” of all the rest of mankind … The Christian is nothing more than an anarchical Jew.” (p. 47)

 

[iBrian]

Yes, I liked it. Very nice reading. Only that James, the brother of Jesus was the head of the Sect of the Nazarenes in Jerusalem. And the name for their gathering place was synagogue and not church. Then, IMHO, Paul did not corrupt the original Christian message, as it orginated with him, according to Acts 11:26.
Ben

Indeed - the Jersulem Church as a Jewish sect appears supported even within the NT texts.

For it to move away from this, it requires Paul to claim the same authority as an apostle - and then above the rest! Then Paul moves it away from being a Jewish sect, and instead a hellenistic cult based around a Jewish teacher. And ends up being called the religion of Christianity. Bizarre!

 

[Servetus]

Source:

Emil Gustav Hirsch:

"… Judaism before Paul's time had begun to extend its influence, but the barriers of the law kept out a waiting world. In the days of Paul men were yearning for a new light, they were athirst and cried out, as the children of Israel in the desert cried out … But Peter, as the Jews before him, insisted the barriers shall stand; none shall be admitted except he have the seal of the covenant in his flesh [i.e., circumcision].

Paul with one bold sweep of the pen opened the gates for the conquest and conversion of the world. Had the Jews of that time been able to read the inscription on the wall, had they looked at the hand on the dial, they might have reclaimed the world with the ethics, their own ethics, lived and taught by Jesus of Nazareth; they might have gone forth and brought to the thirsty the water, to the hungry the bread of life. But they would not, as today they will not. The times were ripe; Judaism neglected the opportunity. Paul embraced it. He preached in words comprehensible to the pagan world the doctrine which he had discovered in his own God-touched heart ...”

 

[radarmark]

A couple of Jewish frinds and I thought about creating a reform or even non-denominationalistic Hasidism back in the 70s. I think our intentions (Chabad House really taught us how preposterous the notion was) pretty much parallels Paul's.

 

[Ben Masada]

Nietzsche:

“The concept of God falsified; the concept of morality falsified: but the Jewish priesthood did not stop at this. No use could be made of the whole history of Israel, therefore, it must go! These priests accomplished that miracle of falsification, of which the greater part of the Bible is the document: with unparalleled contempt and in the teeth of all tradition and historical facts, they interpreted their own people’s past in a religious manner …

In plain English: a stupendous literary fraud becomes necessary, “holy scriptures” are discovered [reference, I think, to the time of Ezra], and they are published abroad with all hieratic pomp, with days of penance and lamentations over the long state of “sin.” ... With severity and pedantry, the priest had formulated once and for all –even to the largest and smallest contributions that were to be paid to him (-not forgetting the daintiest portions of meat; for the priest is a consumer of beef-steaks)- “what he wanted,, “what the Will of God was.” Henceforward everything became so arranged that the priests were indispensable everywhere. At all the natural events of life, at birth, at marriage, at the sick-bed, at death, not to speak of the sacrifice (“the meal”), the holy parasite appears in order to denaturalize, or in his language, to “sanctify” everything ...” (pp. 25-26)



Nietzsche:

“The case is of supreme interest: the small insurrectionary movement christened with the name of Jesus of Nazareth, is the Jewish instinct over again.” (p. 27)

“… little ultra-Jews [i.e., Christians], ripe for every kind of madhouse, twisted values round in order to suit themselves, just as if the Christian, alone, were the meaning, the salt, the standard and even the “ultimate tribunal” of all the rest of mankind … The Christian is nothing more than an anarchical Jew.” (p. 47)

All those falsifications you allude to above, is, IMHO, related to the literal interpretations of the Scriptures. To make it a little simpler to understand, I would like to suggest to you to give me some examples with the proper quotations.

And with regards to your case of "supreme interest," Jesus never had anything whatsoever to do with Christianity, which was raised out of the roots of Hellenism, considering that Paul had been a Hellenistic Jew himself from birth.
Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

Indeed - the Jersulem Church as a Jewish sect appears supported even within the NT texts.

For it to move away from this, it requires Paul to claim the same authority as an apostle - and then above the rest! Then Paul moves it away from being a Jewish sect, and instead a hellenistic cult based around a Jewish teacher. And ends up being called the religion of Christianity. Bizarre!

There is a lot of things supported within the NT which, what seems in the surfice to assimilate with Judaism, is part of the attempt to replace Judaism with Christianity, which was the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology.
Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

Source:

Emil Gustav Hirsch:

"… Judaism before Paul's time had begun to extend its influence, but the barriers of the law kept out a waiting world. In the days of Paul men were yearning for a new light, they were athirst and cried out, as the children of Israel in the desert cried out … But Peter, as the Jews before him, insisted the barriers shall stand; none shall be admitted except he have the seal of the covenant in his flesh [i.e., circumcision].

Paul with one bold sweep of the pen opened the gates for the conquest and conversion of the world. Had the Jews of that time been able to read the inscription on the wall, had they looked at the hand on the dial, they might have reclaimed the world with the ethics, their own ethics, lived and taught by Jesus of Nazareth; they might have gone forth and brought to the thirsty the water, to the hungry the bread of life. But they would not, as today they will not. The times were ripe; Judaism neglected the opportunity. Paul embraced it. He preached in words comprehensible to the pagan world the doctrine which he had discovered in his own God-touched heart ...”

So, when "The times were ripe; Judaism neglected the opportunity, Paul embraced it, by preaching to the pagan world the doctrine which he..." Now, would you be so kind as to quote to me where in the NT he, Paul, started doing that? As far as I am concerned, since his first attempt at it was in the synagogues of the Jews in Damascus (Acts 9:1,2) and until his last station in Rome, he never left the Jews in peace. (Acts 28:17) How is it that he thought about pagans in the synagogues of the Jews?
Ben