The Zionist and Jewish subtexts of Shimon-Peter's sermon on Shavuot: The Holy Spirit poured out on all flesh?

Once, when he was eating with them he announced, "Do not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, whereof you've heard from me. For John baptized you with water, but in a few days you all will be baptized with the holy spirit". Acts 1:4-5. That this "baptism" would occur on Chag Shavuot/Pentecost demonstrates that the Qabbalat Torah is the "promise of the Father", and the re-enactment of Matan Torah every year on Shavuot, is the essential element of the "baptism of the holy spirit" described here, together with belief in the resurrection and earnest hope for messianic redemption. All of these are fundamentals of the faith of orthodox Judaism.

His disciples asked him: "Will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6) This questions demonstrates that messianic zionism as final redemption was a fundamental element of their faith, and their rebbe's response does not reject that element in the slightest, it only refutes "at this time", and lays out the order of operations in that program:

"It is not for you to know the hours or appointed times (χρονους η καιρους) that the Father has put under his own authority", Joshua responded, "but when the holy spirit comes upon you, you will be endued with power and will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in Judea, and Samaria, and even to the ends of the earth."

(Acts 1:7-8) He ascended into heaven immediately afterward, in verse 9, and is apparently still waiting for someone to be his witness in the Hague and explain to the bureaucrats of the ICJ that the place names used throughout the new testament are Judea, Samaria, and Israel, and that the name Palestine does not occur anywhere in that text, and that he's not a Palestinian.

The following are source texts of the Shavuot/Pentecost sermon given in the temple courtyards by the apostle Shimon-Peter, Cephas, according to the Book of Acts chapter 2. Afterward, I list the Zionist and Jewish subtexts which were omitted from the sermon as recorded, possibly in order to shield the original authors from prosecution and persecution for the revolutionary and anti-imperial potential of this movement. The general tenor of his words in the book of Acts, and in the two epistles of Peter, make clear that he remained an adherent of Judaism and a messianic Zionist throughout his life. If Peter were alive today, he would probably be cast out of the church as a heretic.

Like Acts and Peter's epistles, the evangelists, the Pauline and the other "catholic" epistles, and the apocalypse should be considered non-dogmatically within their own context, which was Jewish, and later among the communities that Paul addressed, Noahide and Jewish. An open-minded, non-dogmatic reading of the texts is generally not possible in the Christian context where they are most often read, being obviated by charismatic authoritarianism, social pressure, nationalistic pride, universal ambitions, and magical thinking that informs the doctrines that have come down from Nicaea and the ecumenical councils and are maintained even in the so-called protestant and evangelical churches today. Instead, consult your local orthodox rabbanim and hasidic rebbes on how to interpret and apply the mussar given by this sermon, and encourage wandering Jews and and your christian friends to exit the harlot of Babylon and give up the great apostasy of lawlessness.

ZIONIST AND JEWISH SUBTEXTS

Psalm 110:1 is also quoted by Hebrews 1:13, whose author holds this prophecy to refer to the Son of Miriam. Hebrews 7 contains a long discourse on the "priest forever in the order of Melchizedek" described in Psalm 110:4. Both of these citations of Psalm 110 omit the zionist and militant elements of that psalm, which may have been redacted by later church censors, so that the texts would better comply with the anti-zionist and anti-jewish doctrines of ecclesiology, soteriology, and trinitarian theology which became later mandatory in the ecumenical councils in the 4th century.

Quoting the messianic prophecy of Psalm 132, Peter mentioned verse 11, but not 12-13 listed here, or at least the author of Acts (Luke) who was writing much later, did not record it. Either way, it would have been known, understood, and accepted by his (Jewish) audience though context, and through other Torah teaching about what the Messiah would do (teach the law).

Later gentile christians deliberately ignored and forgot this obvious context, after they excommunicated the Notzrim, the Ebionities, and other Jewish-christians from the church. Perversely, they were excommunicated precisely for the act of keeping the covenant and the decrees.

The very salient first few verses of Psalm 16 are omitted from the sermon as recorded. They seem to renounce not only the blood-drinking cults of local canaanites, but all foreign religions other than the "saints and the nobles" of Torah Judaism as understood by David:

Marcionite rescensions of the new testament removing its "Jewish" aspects are known to have been in wide circulation in the early church, along with the gnostic and neo-platonic writings, and it is possible that the new testament we have, although much more complete than Marcion's version of it, is a compromise with his wildly popular anti-Jewish version. The book of Acts may have been censored or redacted to remove its inherent elements of Zionism and Torah Judaism. Since the Nicean christian churches all claim to "Bride of the Lamb" (Apocalypse 21:9-10), and since the "New Jerusalem, descending from heaven" is explicitly described as "prepared like Bride, beautifully adorned for her man" (Apocalypse 21:2), therefore the interpretive error of the church required it also to claim, improbably, to be the "New Jerusalem" as well. This is how anti-zionism became foundational to christian identity, and a fundamental part of its anti-judaism, supercessionism, and replacement theology. These are all based on a profound interpretive and moral error, which is still realized from the time of Senora Helena in the 3rd century and up to our own day as the "church of the holy sepulchre", which is thought to be "the new Jerusalem" and is now the christian quarter of that city.

Marcionite rescensions of the new testament removing its "Jewish" aspects are known to have been in wide circulation in the early church, along with the gnostic and neo-platonic writings, and it is possible that the new testament we have, although much more complete than Marcion's version of it, is a compromise with his wildly popular anti-Jewish version. The book of Acts may have been censored or redacted to remove its inherent elements of Zionism and Torah Judaism. Since the Nicean christian churches all claim to "Bride of the Lamb" (Apocalypse 21:9-10), and since the "New Jerusalem, descending from heaven" is explicitly described as "prepared like Bride, beautifully adorned for her man" (Apocalypse 21:2), therefore the interpretive error of the church required it also to claim, improbably, to be the "New Jerusalem" as well. This is how anti-zionism became foundational to christian identity, and a fundamental part of its anti-judaism, supercessionism, and replacement theology. These are all based on a profound interpretive and moral error, which is still realized from the time of Senora Helena in the 3rd century and up to our own day as the "church of the holy sepulchre", which is thought to be "the new Jerusalem" and is now the christian quarter of that city.

Whereas Holy Spirit in Judaism is manifested through the law, the "Holy Spirit" in christianity is thought to be anti-Law, having replaced it with grace and mercy, and manifested through the church, constituting a separate person of the godhead. The religion is more accurately described as "churchianity", a form of christian communism, regarding themselves as "Christ's hands and feet". Whereas Joshua Christ himself is someone they never knew, having accepted an idolatrous mis-representation of him instead, or in the case of protestants, a reconstructed misconception of his teaching and personal identity based on fundamental misreadings of the new testament. This leads to magical thinking, superstition, charismatic authoritarianism, and moral perversions characteristic of avodah zarah, therefore the anti-zionism and Jew-hatred, must be renounced by Noahides and converts to Judaism, as well as by anyone who sincerely wishes to be a disciple of the Notzri himself. Hegelian idealism and Marxist historic materialism both borrow Christian anti-Jewish eschatology and translate it into their dialectics, as Islam had earlier done. The anti-zionism of the progressive left is mish-mosh of all these otherwise incompatible ideologies, and that's why the Palestinian cause is so energizing and unifying for them: they can project onto it whichever utopian ideal is currently fashionable, all of which share the same common denominator of emancipating the world from Judaism, and "liberating" themselves from the law and the kingdom of God.

To that conspiracy or confluence of rebellion, Psalm 2 would give a relevant reproof. Simon-Peter himself preaches from that very psalm to the community of believers, immediately after he was released from questioning by the Sadducees and high priestly family of Annas and Caiaphas who arraigned him before the Sanhedrin, for having healed the cripple at the shaar tiferet of the mikdash and for preaching at Solomon's porch. That story begins at 3:1, with this quote given in 4:25 and explained immediately thereafter: