Jews Who Shmad Themselves Can Still Do Teshuvah! (Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Narrated)

WHEN A JEW BECOMES A CHRISTIAN (Reply2 one for israel maoz tbn jewish voice messianic jews for jesus

Published on Oct 2, 2018

WHEN A JEW BECOMES A CHRISTIAN – A New Video written by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, z”l and narrated by Daniel Ventresca, Senior Volunteer, Jews for Judaism.

For the Jew, accepting Christianity involved much more than merely accepting a false Messiah. Aside from its belief in Jesus as the Messiah, Christianity has altered many of the most fundamental concepts of Judaism. Here, we explore the Halachic consequences of a Jew who embraces Christianity.

JEWS FOR JUDAISM is an international organization dedicated to countering the multi-million dollar efforts of Christian missionary groups that target Jews, the impact of cults and eastern religions, and the growing rate of intermarriage that is devastating the Jewish community. JEWS FOR JUDAISM achieves its goal through FREE educational programs, materials and counseling services that connect Jewish people to the spiritual depth, beauty and wisdom of Judaism and keeps Jews Jewish. Please contact us if we can help you. www.jewsforjudaism.ca

WHEN A JEW BECOMES A CHRISTIAN (Reply2 one for israel maoz messianic jews for jesus евреи за иисуса)

From YouTube, here.

How the Economic School of ‘Do Not Steal from One Another’ Will Win

Have Hope: Our Opponents Are Economic Imbeciles.

Gary North – January 05, 2016

I have never had a lot of patience. I suppose this is one of my character flaws.

I do not suffer fools lightly. I suppose this is another one of my character flaws.

I use strong rhetoric to deal with economic imbeciles. I do not regard this as one of my character flaws. I regard it as one of my strengths.

ECONOMIC IMBECILES

All around us are economic imbeciles. We find them in the major university economics departments. We find them on the financial media sites. We certainly find them in Congress. Above all, we find them on the Federal Open Market Committee. These people believe that a government committee, filled with tenured bureaucrats, is better equipped to solve economic problems than the competitive free market is, where people have their own money on the line.

They really are economic imbeciles. They may have IQ’s that got them through college or graduate school. But, in their understanding of cause and effect, they are imbeciles. They do not understand that they are imbeciles. They preach to the choirs that surround them.

Why do economic imbeciles get a hearing? Because voters desperately want to justify the fact that they have used the state, and especially the federal government, to confiscate wealth from each other. They want to believe in their hearts that they are doing the morally right thing by sending out a thug with a badge and a gun, who tells the hapless citizen to fork over his money, or he will go to jail. We have an entire political and economic system which rests ultimately on this threat.

Anyone who falls intellectually for this kind of immorality is not a reliable judge of much of anything. When this person goes looking for an expert opinion to justify the fact that he is a thief, he is likely to find that only third-rate logicians, who cannot follow the chain of reasoning, are going to come forward in the name of organized theft.

It starts with a moral problem. It starts with a violation of the commandment not to steal. We have a modern civilization that is built on a systematic violation of this commandment.

The overwhelming majority of voters today are convinced that the present economic order in no way violates this principle. Virtually all of the pastors in the pulpits are convinced of this. They don’t preach against the organized theft of modern Keynesianism. They don’t think it’s part of their calling to point out the obvious ethical implications of the system of government that compels people to support other people, merely because the other people don’t want to go out and get a job.

Or maybe other people do want to go out and get a job, but they find competition from outside the country difficult to deal with. So, they call upon economic imbeciles to justify their desire by establishing trade barriers against imported goods. Fortunately, on this particular issue, there are a limited number of economic imbeciles with any influence, and there have not been many since the early 19th century. From Adam Smith until Murray Rothbard, economists who understand cause and effect have been opposed to trade barriers. So, those people who feel that they have a right to keep foreigners from competing against them have to appeal to economic imbeciles who cannot think straight.

I suppose I shouldn’t use strong rhetoric. The phrase “economic imbeciles” is strong rhetoric. The problem is this: these people really are economic imbeciles. They literally cannot follow cause-and-effect and economic analysis. This is why they don’t like Austrian school economics. This is why most of them favor central banking. This is why they favor government intervention into the economy. Their instinctive reaction to every problem is to get the government to pass a law, set up a bureaucracy, and send out people with badges and guns to tell other people what to do. It is a way of life for these people. It is also a way of life for the court economists who are on government payrolls in tax-funded universities.

BAD ETHICS AND PAINFUL OUTCOMES

If there were no built-in self-destruct arrangements in the very character, meaning moral character, of the institutions of organized theft, then I don’t think we could win the battle. If it were simply a matter of good arguments driving out bad arguments, I don’t think we could win this thing. Self-interest really is dominant. That is what economic analysis teaches, and I believe this principle.

But self-interest on behalf of organized theft is misplaced. Built into the creation, and built into the free market economy, are a series of poison pills. When individuals use violence or the threat of violence to interfere with market processes, they don’t look at the long-term consequences of these interferences. Somewhere down the road, there is going to be hell to pay. There is going to be a great default. There is going to be something that disrupts the lives of those voters, as well as their victims, who vote in favor of the expansion of governments into the lives of citizens.

The defenders of organized theft deny that there are these built-in negative sanctions against any society that follows these practices, but, as I’ve said, the defenders are economic imbeciles.

If incorrect ideas and bad ethics did not produce bad results, the case for liberty would never get off the ground. People would simply ignore the arguments. But, there really are built-in negative sanctions that will produce disasters in those societies that extend the influence and power of civil government into market processes. The public will be astounded when these sanctions arrive. Millions of voters are going to go looking for answers. In that period of confusion, consternation, and enormous capital losses, which is going to destroy the dreams and schemes of generations of complacent thieves, the thieves are going to want to know how this happened.

I think the success of the movie, The Big Short, is indicative of the opportunity that lies ahead. The movie does not talk about the Federal Reserve System, but it certainly talks about the bankers, greed, and the fact that the government did nothing to protect the victims. When the really big short takes place, defenders of liberty will have an opportunity to enter the competitive arena of ideas. We will have this advantage: we are not economic imbeciles. We can follow cause and effect. We can express these ideas without resorting to arcane formulas. We can actually speak in English. Most of our opponents do not have this ability. They cannot make themselves understood by the general public.

A BATTLE OF SLOGANS

The Keynesians have no equivalent of this slogan: “There is no such thing as a free lunch.” This is a powerful slogan. So is this one: “You can’t get something for nothing.” So is this one: “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.” So is this one: “Honesty is the best policy.” But, above all others, we have this one: “Thou shalt not steal.”

The Keynesians have this slogan: “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you.” The entire case for Keynesianism is based on this slogan.

This is why it pays to defend freedom. Even when the overwhelming majority of voters do not want to hear the arguments, we should keep making them. We should keep pointing out that there will be horrendous negative repercussions for violations of the principle of voluntary exchange. We don’t get a hearing, except during crises. I have good news. There will be plenty of crises in which we will get a hearing.

From Gary North, here.

האם מותר לצרוך סמים לשם תענוג? הרב אמנון יצחק: לא

ש”י ✔ מפתיע? האם מותר לעשן גראס שלא לצורך רפואי | הרב אמנון יצחק

Published on Aug 14, 2018

צדיק האמת הרב אמנון יצחק נשאל האם מותר להשתמש בקנאביס לשימוש אישי שלא קשור למחלות?
למי שרוצה לראות את ההרצאה המלאה ממנה לקוח קטע וידיאו זה – שילחץ כאן
https://www.shofar.tv/lectures/1186

מאתר יוטיוב, כאן.

Standardized Scholing Hurts Children!

I quit, I think

I’ve come slowly to understand what it is I really teach: A curriculum of confusion, class position, arbitrary justice, vulgarity, rudeness, disrespect for privacy, indifference to quality, and utter dependency. I teach how to fit into a world I don’t want to live in.

I just can’t do it anymore. I can’t train children to wait to be told what to do; I can’t train people to drop what they are doing when a bell sounds; I can’t persuade children to feel some justice in their class placement when there isn’t any, and I can’t persuade children to believe teachers have valuable secrets they can acquire by becoming our disciples. That isn’t true.

Government schooling is the most radical adventure in history. It kills the family by monopolizing the best times of childhood and by teaching disrespect for home and parents.

An exaggeration? Hardly. Parents aren’t meant to participate in our form of schooling, rhetoric to the contrary. My orders as schoolteacher are to make children fit an animal training system, not to help each find his or her personal path.

The whole blueprint of school procedure is Egyptian, not Greek or Roman. It grows from the faith that human value is a scarce thing, represented symbolically by the narrow peak of a pyramid.

That idea passed into American history through the Puritans. It found its “scientific” presentation in the bell curve, along which talent supposedly apportions itself by some Iron Law of biology.

It’s a religious idea and school is its church. New York City hires me to be a priest. I offer rituals to keep heresy at bay. I provide documentation to justify the heavenly pyramid.

Socrates foresaw that if teaching became a formal profession something like this would happen. Professional interest is best served by making what is easy to do seem hard; by subordinating laity to priesthood. School has become too vital a jobs project, contract-giver and protector of the social order to allow itself to be “re-formed.” It has political allies to guard its marches.

That’s why reforms come and go – without changing much. Even reformers can’t imagine school much different.

David learns to read at age four; Rachel, at age nine: In normal development, when both are 13, you can’t tell which one learned first — the five-year spread means nothing at all. But in school I will label Rachel “learning disabled” and slow David down a bit, too.

For a paycheck, I adjust David to depend on me to tell him when to go and stop. He won’t outgrow that dependency. I identify Rachel as discount merchandise, “special education.” After a few months she’ll be locked into her place forever.

In 26 years of teaching rich kids and poor, I almost never met a “learning disabled” child; hardly ever met a “gifted and talented” one, either. Like all school categories, these are sacred myths, created by the human imagination. They derive from questionable values we never examine because they preserve the temple of schooling.

That’s the secret behind short-answer tests, bells, uniform time blocks, age grading, standardization, and all the rest of the school religion punishing our nation.

There isn’t a right way to become educated; there are as many ways as fingerprints. We don’t need state-certified teachers to make education happen–that probably guarantees it won’t.

How much more evidence is necessary? Good schools don’t need more money or a longer year; they need real free-market choices, variety that speaks to every need and runs risks. We don’t need a national curriculum, or national testing either. Both initiatives arise from ignorance of how people learn or deliberate indifference to it.

I can’t teach this way any longer. If you hear of a job where I don’t have to hurt kids to make a living, let me know. Come fall I’ll be looking for work, I think.

John Taylor Gatto wrote this article for The Wall Street Journal, July 25th, 1991. Gatto was a New York State Teacher of the Year. An advocate for school reform, Gatto’s books include Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling, the Underground History of American Education and Weapons of Mass Instruction.

From Education Revolution, here.

Jewish Clericalism Meets Reality…

A Different Chareidi Perspective From Beit Shemesh