Genesis and the Jewish Connection

People are more and more waking up to the fact that there is a “Jewish Connection” between our present economic system and the Jews. I have long maintained that the ‘Mystery Babylon” could only be the Jews, but a former schoolmate of mine, who grew up to be a lawyer and an Episcopalian minister (which makes him doubly disgusting to me), pointed out the beginnings of Jewish economic philosophy in Genesis 46 and 47.

You are already aware of the story of Joseph, rising to the power of Pharaoh’s finance minister, but a more detailed description of his plans and policies are given away in Genesis. When Joseph invited the tribes of his father and brethren into Egypt, he had this story planned out for the Pharaoh:

Genesis 46: 32: “And the men are shepherds, for their trade hath been to feed cattle; and they have brought their flocks, and their herds, and all they have.”

Then Joseph advised his family: “

…when Pharaoh shall call you, and shall say ‘ What is your occupation?’ That ye shall say, Thy servants’ trade hath been about cattle, from our youth even until now, both we, and also our fathers; that ye may dwell in the land of Goshen; for every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians”.


What ensued from that is a sharp contrast of economic philosophies. Israel took their herds to Goshen, and Pharaoh let them grow and trade freely, as well as making them “rulers” over his own herds and flocks(Gen. 47:6).

 It was then that the famine had taken hold in Egypt, and Joseph had been fortunate enough to store grain for the Pharaoh. There was no bread in the land, so the Egyptians were forced to buy grain from Joseph, who happily took all their money. As the famine extended, the Egyptians came again to Joseph, and asked him for a solution to the problem, as they had no more money. Joseph worked out another deal (Gen. 47:16), and asked for their cattle.

Of course Israel was officially in charge of the Pharaoh’s cattle, so they had free reign in the land to trade and build further fortunes. Then the Egyptians ran out of cattle, and the famine persisted. The next step was socialism, verse 19, suggested by the people:

“Buy us and our land for bread, and we will be servants unto Pharaoh: and give us seed, that we may live…”.

All the land then became the Pharaoh’s. The next step was simply to gather the people into cities. They were effectively caged so the armies of the Pharaoh could keep an eye on them.

But Joseph was very shrewd, as he left the land of the priests untouched. They had effectively the same freedom as Israel, and their leadership with such freedom would no doubt support the Pharaoh and justify his position as a god before the people. So, the Egyptians said, “In God We Trust”. Joseph had separated church and state, but had given exemptions so the church would be inclined to support the state. Very shrewd.(Gen 47:22).

 All that remained was for Joseph to give the people seed to plant, so they could grow wealth for Pharaoh, and Joseph laid a tax on them, Genesis 47:24:

 ” And it shall come to pass in the increase that ye shall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own for seed…”

 Sound familiar in principle?  “And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part, except the land of the priests only, which became not Pharaoh’s.”

 Verse 27: “And Israel dwelt in the land of Egypt, in the country of Goshen; and they had possession therein, and grew and multiplied exceedingly.”

 The plan was simple enough: first, get control of the money. If the control of money is taken from the people, they are forced to begin trading possessions. Once possessions are taken away, the people are easily managed  to become obedient citizens. If the religions are free, and if they are given their freedom by being servant to the king or the government, they will tend to support the benevolence of the government, with lines like “this divinely ordered capitalist system”.

 The interesting twist is found in Genesis 50:20, as Joseph was about to die:

 ”But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive”.

 But notice that Israel had free enterprise and wealth, while the Egyptians had traded their freedom and possessions away for security, even serving a priesthood that owed its  ‘freedom” to Pharaoh.

What we see in our own government today was laid out in principle thousands of years ago. Of course, we also see that free enterprise doesn’t serve the needs of empire and war. Israel became equal slaves to the Egyptians, forced to labor for the Pharaoh, because the Pharaoh had seen, in Exodus 1:9, ” The people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we”.

The problem, as Pharaoh correctly saw, was that a free people tend to act in their own self interest, and if Pharaoh should wage a war with other countries, Israel might well choose to serve his enemies out of self interest. The motivation of government to grant “security” is well shown by that example. Since Israel was not willing to become “equal” with Egyptian citizens, they became subject to forced labor, with their possessions taken by decree. What Israel saw as slavery, other Egyptians would see as justice, “equality”.

 The lesson, from Genesis to Revelation, is not lost on the Jews. Their history has been one of adaptation and control by trade and commerce, from Babylon to the present day. As historian Max DiMont points out in “The Indestructible Jews”, they have developed the beginnings of our present banking system, developed a process of common law by which nations would be ruled, and were selected as the finance ministers for gentile kings due to their ability to charge interest on non-Jews. As Joseph did in Genesis, once they gained control of the money, all else follows. This lesson is not lost on Christians either. They took the banking system from the Jews and began “saving souls” for God, king, and country, using the same formula.

 Karl Marx laid out the formula quite well. When money becomes the “universal equivalent”, the general purchasing power, all things can be had for money. But people do not sell for money, wrote Marx, until the possessor had “alienated’ himself from the property. This meant, wrote Marx, that the “so-called inalienable rights, and the fixed property relationships corresponding to them, break down before money”. He was, after all, a Jew. He was also quite correct in that regard. What Marx wrote, Joseph had long ago put in practice.

Breaking The Spell: Religion As A Natural Phenomenon

Philosopher Daniel Dennett writes in a book titled Religion As A Natural Phenomenon, a tiny parasite called the Lancet Fluke has captured the brain of an ant, and forced it to climb the tallest blade of grass. The ant gains  nothing from this, but the Fluke profits by using the ant to get itself into the stomach of a sheep or cow to reproduce itself. The cow eats the grass, and the Fluke produces another generation.  Of course the ant has no reproductive machinery, and perhaps that is the reason the Fluke can use it so easily. Perhaps there is a kind of “ecstasy of the cells” in the ant when they discover they have a driven purpose of reproduction, even if not their own. Other parasites infect fish and mice for similar reasons. Dennett writes:

 “Does anything like this ever happen to human beings?….We often find human beings setting aside their personal interests, their health,  their chances to have children and  devoting their entire lives to furthering the interests of an idea that has lodged in their brains.”
 Dennett proposes a connection and writes:
 “The word of God is a seed, and the sower of the seed is Christ. These seeds take roots in individual human beings, it seems, and get those human beings to spread them, far and wide (and in return the human hosts gets eternal life…)”.
 Certainly this eternal life cannot be proven, so there is no actual biological profit as far as anyone can tell. But something is definitely reproduced, and it grows and changes in time.
 In spite of the fact there is no proof for such sacrifice, millions of people will sacrifice their lives for an idea with no guarantee of any kind of personal reward. There is a kind of ecstasy associated with this kind of faith, and the individual will quite willingly sacrifice himself along with millions of others, even if that individual is not certain s/he will receive a reward for doing so.
 Are we acting out of free will in such situations? If the ant could have a concept of free will, would it not conclude that it was freely acting as it climbed the tallest and juiciest blade of grass? Is it possible that the ant might feel a kid of joyous celebratory effect as it waited to be eaten?
 Eric Hoffer and Erich Fromm have written that the individual joins a mass movement because it allows him/her to escape a miserable, lonely existence.  It is, as Fromm wrote, “escape from freedom”.
 Humans desire to transcend, and they can’t transcend if they’re not part of something more wonderful than themselves. Nazi Germany shows us that individuals, even decent individuals, can lower themselves to the most horrible atrocities simply because their countrymen are also doing it.
 Christianity takes it for granted that the word must be spread, as does Islam. This who do not accept and repent are fodder forever burning hell. The drive becomes so powerful that, as Jesus said, those who kill you will think they’re doing God a service.
 The atheist will look at the idea of christianity and scoff, as well he should, because christians gain a proselytizing zeal that often borders on fanaticism, again, similar to Islam.
 Christians do not see it as an infection of a parasitized brain, but rather a duty, a God-given prime directive to make others like themselves. They consciously accept the “parasite” without question. Even worse, they will argue that their “mission” is righteous and holy and is of God.
 At this point, I have to go back to the old standby scriptures, Matthew 24:23, Romans 8:7, and Isaiah 55:8. If the natural mind is enmity against God, and cannot be subject to God, and if God’s thoughts and ways are not our thoughts and ways, then it stands to reason that our desire to convert the masses to “one way” cannot be a drive that is Biblical approved, and is the reason Jesus told us not to believe any of them. It is as much a disease of parasites as the Lancet Fluke that captures the ant’s  brain. The only difference is that humans breed the disease within themselves from their own desires to transcend.
 “From whence come wars and fighting’s among you? Come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have no, ye kill and desire to have, and cannot obtain…(James 4:1-2)”.
 The “self” disease, however, is not something we can simply  correct by developing laws that are righteous, because the most stringent and enforced laws are themselves subject to corruption. The disease is within ourselves, but we are a collection of uncounted parasites that inhabit our  bodies and use our bodies for their own reproduction as surely as the Lancet Fluke uses the ant’s brain. We are a culmination of all those germs and bacteria that accumulated to create “me” and “you”. There is no separation from this drive. It is innate and basic to everything we do.
 And all that is subject to genes, whose main purpose is to replicate themselves from generation to generation while seeking to minimize and control change. So, the “lusts that war in our members” are drives that come from the combined needs of billions of microorganisms that use our  bodies to reproduce themselves. At the conscious level, we seek to extend communities of those like ourselves, to extend our own reproductive success statistically, with genes selecting those most like themselves, as E.O. Wilson pointed out in his  concept of sociobiology. Given n o perceived kinship, we tend o act selfishly, to preserve our own interests at the costs of others. Given a kindred family, we see it more successful to our own genes by preserving those genes most like our own. It should be no surprise, then, that we seek to “convert” others to “brothers in  Christ” or in Islam, and eliminate them if they do not believe.
  Christianity and Islam are purely biological processes that parasitize our brains and use us to control environments so that the genes replicate with as little change as possible, and the idea of heaven as the reward of the “saved” allows for total sacrifice of self for the good of heaven, even if it destroys the world in the process.
-Ralph Haulk