Speaker 1: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining me today on
Speaker 1: Jay Sleigh USA. I'm so glad you're here. We have
Speaker 1: a very special show for you today, very special guest, Jaydyer,
Speaker 1: somebody had been following for a while at a distance,
Speaker 1: and just he's going to be the perfect guy, I think,
Speaker 1: to cover the material that so badly needs to be
Speaker 1: covered today. And this is a subject being Epstein, the
Speaker 1: Epstein Files, and the Christian conscience about it, as well
Speaker 1: as the Christian conundrum, especially with the Christian Zionist crowd.
Speaker 1: You know, what are we seeing from them? What are
Speaker 1: they doing and why so? Jay Dyer is a YouTuber,
Speaker 1: a Christian apologist, author, and public debater who's known for
Speaker 1: his sharp analysis and fearless engagement with controversial topics. He
Speaker 1: is a former I believe he's a former Protestant who
Speaker 1: converted to Orthodoxy, and he brings a deep theological, historical,
Speaker 1: and philosophical lens to everything he does. He's been featured
Speaker 1: on many major platforms and is respected for his debating
Speaker 1: ability and research skills. I discovered Jay seeing him debate
Speaker 1: this weird way to discover him. He was debating the
Speaker 1: Misfit Patriot all right, And this was a guy who
Speaker 1: just I think he just badly wanted attention. But he
Speaker 1: was coming out strong with all the major Zionist talking points.
Speaker 1: Even though he wasn't really good at the hasbara, he
Speaker 1: still did it strongly. So he was being featured on
Speaker 1: like Rabbis shows and these Christian Zionists would you have
Speaker 1: him on their shows? And Jay basically put him to
Speaker 1: bed pretty quickly. I actually think that this guy did
Speaker 1: not complete the interview if I remember, or the debate.
Speaker 1: So what was clear to me though that was Jay
Speaker 1: was not just a guy who argues well or debates well.
Speaker 1: He studies, He knows the background to things that he's
Speaker 1: talking about, so there's some credibility and substance there. So
Speaker 1: we could probably come on and talk about a whole
Speaker 1: lot of topics that affect the Christian world. But based
Speaker 1: on where we're at right now with this whole Epstein thing,
Speaker 1: I thought, who better to come on my show and
Speaker 1: do a deep dive into the Epstein files and the
Speaker 1: reaction to it, especially among the Christian world, than Jay Dyer.
Speaker 1: So with that, Jay, thanks again for coming on. Glad
Speaker 1: to have you.
Speaker 2: Thanks Jeremy, Glad to be with you. Do I need
Speaker 2: to repeat what we I don't mind you don't know
Speaker 2: not at all.
Speaker 1: Don't worry about it a bit. I think what you
Speaker 1: were giving was a background and you said this is
Speaker 1: actually the way that it's worked ever since Old Testament days.
Speaker 1: You go and yeah, and we will. I'm sure cover it,
Speaker 1: and you know as we talk here, but let's start
Speaker 1: with this, Jay, I want to start with you because
Speaker 1: I really have not had this conversation with you. Can
Speaker 1: you give us the high level background of your journey
Speaker 1: from I think you were an Evangelical Protestant to Orthodoxy.
Speaker 1: And I'll say I have people in my feed all
Speaker 1: the time saying, Jeremy, will you please try your local
Speaker 1: Orthodox church, you know, because they know the problem I'm having. Really,
Speaker 1: So anyway, fire away, man.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I was raised Baptist, come from a military family, so
Speaker 3: my family moved a lot when I was young, and
Speaker 3: we ended up in California for a while San Diego,
Speaker 3: my dad was in the military.
Speaker 2: Then we moved back to Tennessee and I went to was.
Speaker 3: Originally going to go to Bible College when I graduated
Speaker 3: high school, so I went to some Baptist schools for
Speaker 3: a while and ended up kind of questioning a lot
Speaker 3: of the Baptist stuff because I was really into church
Speaker 3: history and reading about the formation of the Biblical can
Speaker 3: and how it came together. And I was really young,
Speaker 3: that was in my young my early twenties, maybe twenty
Speaker 3: twenty one, when I was doing a lot of that reading,
Speaker 3: and I bought the Church Father set here that you
Speaker 3: see behind me, so that that kind of got me
Speaker 3: all focused on early Church and the Batristic era, and
Speaker 3: I had a lot of questions. This is back in
Speaker 3: like twentyd and one, two and three. There weren't a
Speaker 3: lot of a whole lot of internet resources on this
Speaker 3: stuff back at that time, so I ended up kind
Speaker 3: of in the Catholic Protestant debate world, not myself debating,
Speaker 3: yet just kind of consuming a lot of that and
Speaker 3: trying to work through that content. I spent a little
Speaker 3: bit of time at a evangelical seminary, and while I
Speaker 3: was in the midst of those classes and doing a
Speaker 3: lot of reading, I just couldn't reconcile the biblical case
Speaker 3: for tradition and the Biblical canon with what I had
Speaker 3: been assuming was just sort of the de facto given
Speaker 3: position of solo scripture and whatnot. So long story short,
Speaker 3: that read me. That led me into a long period
Speaker 3: throughout my twenties of being a Roman Catholic. So all
Speaker 3: of my twenties I was a traditional Catholic, went to
Speaker 3: the Latin Mass, got very into Thomas Aquinas and Catholic apologetics.
Speaker 3: But I was also at the same time really interested
Speaker 3: in philosophy. Ended up leaving Baptist Bible College and I
Speaker 3: went in seminary and I went to a just four
Speaker 3: year standard state university and I did my undergraduate in
Speaker 3: philosophy in history, and then did grad work in English and.
Speaker 2: Philosophy that cognate discipline there.
Speaker 3: Long story short, So I was studying film, I was
Speaker 3: studying philosophy, I was studying semiotics and symbolism and film,
Speaker 3: and I was doing grad work on Ian Fleming at
Speaker 3: the same time as being really interested in theology and
Speaker 3: the Bible and apologetics. And I would say around twenty
Speaker 3: I was interested in Orthodoxy about two thousand and seven
Speaker 3: and eight and started reading the Eastern Church Fathers, reading
Speaker 3: a lot on Orthodox theology, but I held off and
Speaker 3: it didn't end up becoming Orthodox until about twenty sixteen. Seventeen,
Speaker 3: I was getting more serious about it, and then I
Speaker 3: think I came in about twenty eighteen. So I've been
Speaker 3: orthodox in twenty eighteen. But I think the weird part
Speaker 3: is a lot of people on the internet. I'm not
Speaker 3: speaking about you, just in general, like people usually think
Speaker 3: of people as like doing one thing.
Speaker 2: You know, he's the guy that does the debates.
Speaker 3: Actually we were doing on my channel, my sphere, we
Speaker 3: were doing a lot of movie film stuff. Way before
Speaker 3: I even had the idea to do a debate. That
Speaker 3: just kind of happened accidentally. Somebody said, hey, would you
Speaker 3: debate this atheist guy, and then that led to another
Speaker 3: atheist debate, and then so I said, hey, will you
Speaker 3: debate this Muslim guy? And then that led to a
Speaker 3: bunch of Muslim debates, and then that just snowballed on
Speaker 3: its own. But we were doing a lot of film analysis.
Speaker 2: For example. I just thought this was funny.
Speaker 3: I was writing film analysis stuff that was coinciding with
Speaker 3: my grad work.
Speaker 2: And so in twenty sixteen I.
Speaker 3: Published a book, Essoty Hollywood, and I just want to
Speaker 3: note that in the first chapter I talked about the
Speaker 3: rothchilds and sex cults and networks and espionage. I talked
Speaker 3: about how films were actually telling us this, and I got.
Speaker 2: A lot of flak from that.
Speaker 3: What year was that, Jay, Well, the essay was written
Speaker 3: in twenty fourteen or fifteen, and then the book was
Speaker 3: published in twenty sixteen. So, but the first book I
Speaker 3: read on ritual stuff was actually two thousand and four,
Speaker 3: and it was William Kennedy's It was a really rare text.
Speaker 2: Now you can't really find it.
Speaker 3: William Kennedy's book Lucifer's Lodge that came out in two
Speaker 3: thousand and fourth, the first journalistic work on the history
Speaker 3: of the PDP skin on the Roman Catholic world and
Speaker 3: the abuse going on there. So anyway, I've been into
Speaker 3: this kind of stuff for a long time. But you
Speaker 3: mentioned this journey. You know, for me it wasn't just
Speaker 3: theological it was also the geopolitical conspiracy world too. I
Speaker 3: kind of came out of the Christian Zionist stuff back
Speaker 3: even when I was a Protestant, so at Baptist Bible
Speaker 3: College and then at the seminary I was at, I
Speaker 3: was under the influence of a lot of Calvinists and
Speaker 3: a lot of people like Greg Bonnson, and they had
Speaker 3: already written some stuff back in the late nineties that
Speaker 3: I was reading in the early two thousands that kind
Speaker 3: of got me out of the evangelical dispensational perspective. So
Speaker 3: I got into you know, post millennial type theology in
Speaker 3: the early two thousands, reading David Chilton and Onsen and
Speaker 3: Rush June and all those guys Ken Gentry, and then
Speaker 3: I kind of, you know, that partially transitioned to me.
Speaker 3: Not it wasn't just eschatology, but that some of that
Speaker 3: theology is kind of what propelled me as well to
Speaker 3: you know, leave Christian Zionism and dispensationalism and all that
Speaker 3: which I.
Speaker 2: Was raised with.
Speaker 3: So but I also, you know, was starting to realize
Speaker 3: that there's stuff going on in the geopolitical realm, which
Speaker 3: at that time I just thought it was conspiracy stuff.
Speaker 3: I was watching Alex Jones' and stuff back in two
Speaker 3: thousand and two or three. It was the first time
Speaker 3: I saw some of his material, and he was talking
Speaker 3: about scull and Bones and Mahemian grove and so what
Speaker 3: is this? And I remember I heard about Anthony Sutton
Speaker 3: had a book on skull and Bones, and I bought
Speaker 3: that book and then I watched Alex's documentaries and got
Speaker 3: really heavy into the conspiracy world. And then I started realizing,
Speaker 3: I think I was in a unique position. And I'll
Speaker 3: shut up here in a second because I don't want
Speaker 3: to bore you, But I was in a unique position
Speaker 3: because I think a lot of people, you know, when
Speaker 3: they get into this kind of stuff, they're they're getting
Speaker 3: into it through the Internet, and as was I. But
Speaker 3: this was back in the early two thousands, and I
Speaker 3: was also studying this stuff, right, So I was taking
Speaker 3: philosophy classes, I was taking film classes, and I started
Speaker 3: noticing that there's a real parallel between what I was
Speaker 3: seeing in the conspiracy world on the Internet and what
Speaker 3: I was seeing in movies. And I've always been early
Speaker 3: into the film and always been a film buff, and
Speaker 3: so yeah, I just started focusing on the relationship between
Speaker 3: Hollywood and intelligence agencies, between cults and Hollywood and cults
Speaker 3: and intelligence agencies. And I just kept finding these overlaps,
Speaker 3: and certain books would come my way, and academic journals
Speaker 3: and things, and oh yeah, of course this director, this
Speaker 3: Hollywood person, they worked for the CIA, they worked for
Speaker 3: the OSS, they were you know, confidential informats and you
Speaker 3: would find these details about a list actors and producers
Speaker 3: and people that how come I never heard this that
Speaker 3: this you know person was a spy in real life
Speaker 3: and so that was its own rabbit hole and so forth.
Speaker 3: So anyway, long story short, I eventually put it into
Speaker 3: a book and then you know, that led to hosting
Speaker 3: for Alex for the last six years on most Fridays,
Speaker 3: so I've been able to do that, and then, you know,
Speaker 3: so it's it's sort of like a bunch of separate
Speaker 3: things that we do, writing for Sam Hide, doing comedy,
Speaker 3: that kind of stuff, but they all kind of overlap
Speaker 3: because you know, in the Internet world, all of these
Speaker 3: seemingly crazy areas, they all kind of like merge together
Speaker 3: in one, one infinite scrolling feed of insanity. So yeah, anyway, yeah,
Speaker 3: that's that's how I got to where we are now,
Speaker 3: you know, debates, comedy, writing the books on movies, all
Speaker 3: that kind of stuff.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, it's interesting people that spend the years
Speaker 1: that it takes, and I would say, I'm I've spent
Speaker 1: years now researching. We all come at this from our
Speaker 1: own angles. But if there's one true story that is
Speaker 1: being told, and there's the there's if there is objective truth,
Speaker 1: then when we detach from the stories we were told
Speaker 1: which made sense to us when we weren't smart enough
Speaker 1: to ask the questions. Okay, then you detach, and then
Speaker 1: you feel like A girl called me this morning and
Speaker 1: she was she's in this. She's like, I feel like
Speaker 1: I'm in a dizzy bat race. I feel like I've
Speaker 1: detached from all these people that I thought because she
Speaker 1: worked heavy I'll tell you exactly what it was. She
Speaker 1: worked in the heavy pro life industry with Lyla Rose
Speaker 1: and did all these things with these various Catholic five
Speaker 1: oh one c threes. But these people won't touch Epstein.
Speaker 1: They won't touch you know, the genocide and Gaza, the
Speaker 1: amount of kids that have died over there. They won't
Speaker 1: touch it. And it's driving her insane. And she's like,
Speaker 1: I now don't know what to do. I don't know
Speaker 1: what to believe other than She's like, I believe in Jesus,
Speaker 1: but I feel so disoriented because all the leaders that
Speaker 1: I'm supposed to trust and respect have gone silent on
Speaker 1: the biggest issue of our times. And I was like,
Speaker 1: tell me about it, you know, But what I was
Speaker 1: going to say is people detached, they get dizzy. Then
Speaker 1: they start finding some of these threads that make sense.
Speaker 1: And it's a long process, but eventually you come to
Speaker 1: a place where when you figure out what's going on
Speaker 1: and who's pulling the levers of power, it starts to
Speaker 1: make a whole lot of sense again. And so I
Speaker 1: just want to encourage the people watching, like, Man, I'm confused.
Speaker 1: If you stick around and you really care about the truth,
Speaker 1: and you tell me, Jay, if you agree with this,
Speaker 1: if you really care and you you are seeking God
Speaker 1: and seeking truth, you were going to come back to
Speaker 1: a firm foundation where life and the stories around us
Speaker 1: make coherent sense. That's that's what I believe.
Speaker 4: What do you think, Jay, Yeah, you know the existence
Speaker 4: of this extreme form of evil, you know, in all
Speaker 4: in all capacities, pretty much everything that you could think
Speaker 4: of as the most evil.
Speaker 3: I mean, I think this kind of triggers a lot
Speaker 3: of people to also realize that, well, if there's this
Speaker 3: much evil, then there probably is a reality to the good.
Speaker 3: And I don't I don't mean that in some kind
Speaker 3: of weird gnostic way. I'm just I'm just saying that
Speaker 3: I think that this is what happens to a lot
Speaker 3: of people and see so many comments and people saying, man,
Speaker 3: if this kind of evil stuff is real and this
Speaker 3: is what's going on, then there's.
Speaker 2: Got to be a God.
Speaker 3: There's got to be spiritual good and not just spiritual evil.
Speaker 3: So yeah, you know, in regard to the Roman Catholic Church,
Speaker 3: you know, that's a world that I was in for
Speaker 3: you know, about a decade, and I know it.
Speaker 2: I know it very well. It's been many years since
Speaker 2: I was in that world.
Speaker 3: But you know, since leaving and seeing it, you know,
Speaker 3: I don't hate Catholics. I think because I do a
Speaker 3: lot of debates with the Roman Catholics, people think that
Speaker 3: I hate them. I'm opposed to the people more so.
Speaker 3: The corruption is from the institution, from the top down.
Speaker 2: And uh. And it's not just a matter.
Speaker 3: Of espionage and you know, compromising the Vatican at a
Speaker 3: geopolitical level to promote you know, UNESCO or Davos Agenda.
Speaker 3: It's it's more than that. It's also a spiritual corruption.
Speaker 3: It's a it's a networking infiltration that goes back to
Speaker 3: the Middle Ages, particularly in the eleventh century when you
Speaker 3: have what's called the Grigorian Reforms and during that period
Speaker 3: of the papacy took on a new approach to being
Speaker 3: a geopolitical world power. Prior to that, most of the churches,
Speaker 3: even though some of the patriarchates and the important bishoprics
Speaker 3: of the Church in the first Milameium they had a
Speaker 3: lot of power, there were specific canons in Chalcedon and
Speaker 3: other ecumenical councils that forbade the Church from taking on
Speaker 3: a civil state role. And what the Roman Church did
Speaker 3: after the formation of the papal States, et cetera, was
Speaker 3: to claim for itself more and more political power, until
Speaker 3: eventually in the eleventh century you have documents like the
Speaker 3: Tatus pape under Pope Gregory, and then you have later
Speaker 3: on Unum sanctam under Pope urban In the thirteen hundred
Speaker 3: and thirteen eighty two, I think eleventh century to thirteen
Speaker 3: eighty two, you get this rise in the papacy again
Speaker 3: just focusing more so on geopolitical stuff, standing armies. If
Speaker 3: you're not accepting what's called the temporal supremacy of the
Speaker 3: Roman bishop, then you're no longer able to be saved.
Speaker 3: And I think that was a key moment for the
Speaker 3: departure from the Orthodox perspective. That's that century of eleven
Speaker 3: hundreds to the thirteen hundreds. That's really the key point
Speaker 3: when Rome deviated from what the Church of the first
Speaker 3: thousand years East and West agreed upon.
Speaker 1: And I when you say that, am I understanding this correctly?
Speaker 1: You're saying that was the moment where the Vatican said, basically,
Speaker 1: the Pope's word is equivalent to God's word.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Dick toddispape has this phrase in it, which now
Speaker 3: is admitted even by the Vatican to be a forgery,
Speaker 3: even though it's still in some of their canon law.
Speaker 3: No one judges the First Sea, so no one can
Speaker 3: a judge or criticize or come against the First Sea
Speaker 3: because he's supreme in all matters. So basically it sets
Speaker 3: the groundwork for the autocratic view of the papacy, which
Speaker 3: then gets confirmed at Vatican One, which happened in the
Speaker 3: late eighteen hundreds. That was one of their four Vatican
Speaker 3: two in the nineteen sixties, the last Roman Catholic Dogmatic
Speaker 3: Council was Vatican one, which confirmed the doctrine of in
Speaker 3: foul ability and indefectibility of the Roman bishop. So yes,
Speaker 3: eventually that culminates. You could say in that perspective, and
Speaker 3: then all of that sets the stage for Vatican Two
Speaker 3: in the nineteen sixties, which ironically there was a I
Speaker 3: think his name is Gregory Baum was the author of
Speaker 3: the document called Nostrette, which is the decree on Acumenism
Speaker 3: that's part of the Vatican two documents, and it specifically
Speaker 3: states that Roman Catholics, Muslims, Jews, even Hindus, we all
Speaker 3: kind of worship the same God and we can now
Speaker 3: have these sort of ecumenical gatherings and practices where we
Speaker 3: pray together because it's all the same generic deity that
Speaker 3: was at once a spiritual and a geopolitical maneuvering to
Speaker 3: turn the Roman Catholic Church into ant into a form
Speaker 3: of soft power. So it's extending the American attitude during
Speaker 3: the Cold War. This is a declassified document called the
Speaker 3: Doctrinal Warfare Program. C. D. Jackson was one of the
Speaker 3: people that head that up, and they recruited John Courtney
Speaker 3: Murray to.
Speaker 2: Be kind of their representative and their attache.
Speaker 3: So Gregory Baum who wrote No Sar Tati, which completely
Speaker 3: changed the Romancolic Church's perspective on the Jews, which previously
Speaker 3: had a very negative sort of antithesis position to Judaism
Speaker 3: or beining Judaism. Now that completely flipped into the opposite
Speaker 3: to where we're all or sort of on the same path,
Speaker 3: the same journey. I think Francis a few years ago
Speaker 3: created the Abu Dhabi Faith Center, which is Mustims, Christians
Speaker 3: and Jews all worshiping together.
Speaker 1: Isn't it specifically Catholics?
Speaker 2: What's that?
Speaker 1: Isn't it specifically Catholics though, like Muslims, Catholics and Jews.
Speaker 3: Well, the yeah, I mean the language of Vatican two
Speaker 3: kind of says both, because it'll say Catholics, Muslims, and
Speaker 3: Jews and Hindus is all the same God. But then
Speaker 3: in other places they'll say all Christians all share in
Speaker 3: the same The whole thing is really just to catch
Speaker 3: to cast this really broad, watered down net which denies
Speaker 3: John fourteen six. You know, Jesus is on the way
Speaker 3: that you're in the life. No one comes to Father,
Speaker 3: but they're me. Well, now all the other religions can
Speaker 3: also be pathways to God. In fact, Francis even said
Speaker 3: this a few years ago. I eclipped it, got a
Speaker 3: lot of views on that clip. Before he passed away,
Speaker 3: he was affirming that what Vatican two means is that
Speaker 3: you can be saved in any religion, right, and this
Speaker 3: is going to denial of the fundamentals of Christian theology
Speaker 3: and the tradition of the Church. So even I mean,
Speaker 3: nobody in the first thousand years of Chritianity taught anything
Speaker 3: like that. So these are really clear indicators of just
Speaker 3: specifically where the Roman Catholic Church went off. But separate
Speaker 3: from that, the reason I'm bringing in people like Gregory
Speaker 3: Baum is that he was explicitly working, at the best
Speaker 3: of Jewish interests to change the Roman Catholic Church's attitude
Speaker 3: and make it more of an a humanist approach, a
Speaker 3: syncrotist type of approach. And that's why you see the
Speaker 3: Roman Catholic Church being so different than it was even
Speaker 3: in the nineteen forties and fifties, almost night and day.
Speaker 3: But there's a geopolitical motivation behind that. Gregory Baum was
Speaker 3: was he was. He was a gay Jewish man who
Speaker 3: changed the theology of the Vatican explicitly.
Speaker 2: This is admitted.
Speaker 1: I need I need to read on that guy. That
Speaker 1: that's that's important.
Speaker 2: That's uh. Yeah.
Speaker 3: He was then deproocked and then left the priesthood because
Speaker 3: he had done it, he had completed his mission. So
Speaker 3: but that's within the Roman Catholic world. I mean you
Speaker 3: get similar types of things within evangelicalism, where you have
Speaker 3: the promotion of the Schofield Study Bible, of course, which
Speaker 3: promoted the idea that the present day nation state of Israel,
Speaker 3: which was oddly enough a creation of atheistic sort of
Speaker 3: Hegel influenced UH Zionists like Moses Has and he invites
Speaker 3: them and Theodore Hertzel. I mean, I've got Moses Has's
Speaker 3: books up here. So he explicitly says we're going to
Speaker 3: use Freemasonry UH as a way to teach a new religion.
Speaker 3: He says, going to change Christianity. We're going to move
Speaker 3: these religions into focusing world religion on Tel Aviv. So
Speaker 3: Moses hes was very explicit about it. It's not totally atheistic,
Speaker 3: it's not really theistic. It's more of a political position
Speaker 3: that uses a generic theism for political means. And they
Speaker 3: were very explicit about how they had convinced in the
Speaker 3: eighteen sixties the Rothchilds to support this venture. And I
Speaker 3: have the Rodchell's biography and in the biography they talk
Speaker 3: about going in and sort of buying up the Holy
Speaker 3: Land and places and sites in the Holy Land from
Speaker 3: the Turkish sultans who had previously had control of that area.
Speaker 2: Now people will.
Speaker 3: Say, well, political Zionism doesn't come on the scene until
Speaker 3: you know, the early nineteen hundreds. Yeah, but it was
Speaker 3: formulated in the eighteen fifties and sixties right by people
Speaker 3: like Moses Has.
Speaker 2: In fact, Moses Has says that he brags about.
Speaker 3: How, you know, early on and how he had been
Speaker 3: meeting with the Rothchild brothers in the eighteen sixties to
Speaker 3: plan a new homeland for the Jews, and other places
Speaker 3: were discussed as well. They talked about New Zealand, they
Speaker 3: talked about Austria, they talked about other places to create
Speaker 3: a homeland. But it was ultimately at the behest of
Speaker 3: the Rothchilds to brag about the Balfour Decoration being one
Speaker 3: of the ways which prepared the way for the eventual
Speaker 3: nineteen forty eight what is it recognition to the nation
Speaker 3: state of Israel, which only happened because of World War Two.
Speaker 3: So it's interesting that even tiny mustache man fits into
Speaker 3: that as a justification for the nation state of Israel
Speaker 3: and all the evangelicals in America are duped then into
Speaker 3: thinking that.
Speaker 2: Not to a fulfillment of prophecy, we got to support
Speaker 2: the atheist, socialist kipliz nation state of Israel.
Speaker 3: It's a fulfillment of prophecy. Now, it's not the fulfillment
Speaker 3: of prophecy. Is the Church is the Kingdom of God.
Speaker 3: Jesus said, the Kingdom of God is among you, it's
Speaker 3: within you. He said he would bring the kingdom. He
Speaker 3: says to the apostles that they will be princes and
Speaker 3: judges of the Kingdom. That means that the kingdom is
Speaker 3: established at the first event, not at the end of
Speaker 3: the Second Advent. Now it comes to full fruition, we
Speaker 3: would say at the second Coming. But all of that
Speaker 3: rapture dispensational theology is a psyop It's all a very
Speaker 3: late invention by John Nelson Darby, guy who was a
Speaker 3: schismatic of the Anglican Church, created his own cult, his
Speaker 3: own group, and they came up with this prophecy theory
Speaker 3: that then spread to America via Oxford Press publishing the
Speaker 3: Scofield Study Bible. So when you get into the history
Speaker 3: of all that and you understand the geopolitical motivations. It
Speaker 3: makes perfect sense why that was pushed in America prior
Speaker 3: to nineteen seventeen in the Balper Declaration, Like, yeah, it
Speaker 3: was clearly by design to get American evangelicals, especially to
Speaker 3: support the geopolitical designs of what quickly calls the atlanticis establishment.
Speaker 1: You know, it's it's interesting. I was always taught when
Speaker 1: I studied Christian apologetics that I thought it was a
Speaker 1: deep level. It was probably, you know, pretty pedestrian level.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I was reading all the you know, the
Speaker 1: Rabbi Zacharias books for Christian apologetics or John Lennox or whatever,
Speaker 1: you know, and this while I'm traveling as a ballplayer.
Speaker 1: So I thought I was doing pretty good, you know,
Speaker 1: and maybe I was. But the key phrase was always
Speaker 1: the truth is not afraid of being questioned. The truth
Speaker 1: is not afraid of being questioned. You know, we could
Speaker 1: handle it. Ask us your questions. But it was within
Speaker 1: a certain sphere. And now looking back, it's like, you know,
Speaker 1: there were so many things they never talked about. I'll
Speaker 1: give a few examples right here. You mentioned even though
Speaker 1: I was trained under the wing of the fourth largest
Speaker 1: this by the Jerusalem Post, the fourth largest Christian Zionist
Speaker 1: pastor in America is Alan Jackson out of Murphy's Brough, Tennessee.
Speaker 1: And he pulled me under his wing as when I
Speaker 1: was a young, you know, college athlete during an off season.
Speaker 1: It was right after on the heels of nine to eleven.
Speaker 1: We're at a cracker barrel. He broke out a map
Speaker 1: of the Middle East, and Israel was in blue and
Speaker 1: all those other big bad bullies were in red, and
Speaker 1: he's like, look at this miracle. Look, you know, just
Speaker 1: to they exist even one day, it's a miracle every day.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: I didn't know we were giving them billions and billions
Speaker 1: of dollars a year of support. I didn't know what
Speaker 1: apac was. I didn't know the word Christian Zionism. I
Speaker 1: didn't know the word Zionism. I didn't know the word dispensationalism.
Speaker 1: I never heard of Schofield, I never heard of Darby.
Speaker 1: Yet I became, over a period of ten years, the
Speaker 1: biggest Christian Zionist that I knew. I mean, I was
Speaker 1: ready to blow all those other countries off the map
Speaker 1: because I thought, well, they're just leading their kids right
Speaker 1: to Hell. Anyway, it'd be better for them not to
Speaker 1: even be there, because the Jews are a passive people.
Speaker 1: They're simple people. They don't have any power. They just
Speaker 1: want to be left alone. That was what I was taught,
Speaker 1: and I'll have one more growing up being taught the
Speaker 1: history of theology, Jesus, the Church, the Temple. We knew
Speaker 1: the temple fell, but did I ever hear anything other than, yeah,
Speaker 1: the prophecy came true. The temple fell in seventy eighty.
Speaker 1: I had no eye idea how big of a deal
Speaker 1: this was for the Jewish nation. I didn't know the
Speaker 1: way that it scorned them, and I didn't know about
Speaker 1: the tallmu. So that to me is just a average
Speaker 1: intelligence thinking guy tells me, if the majority of the
Speaker 1: Evangelical Church and maybe the Catholic Church too, is purposely
Speaker 1: obfuscating and not talking about giant swaths of historical fact,
Speaker 1: we have a serious problem. And my audience is mostly
Speaker 1: evangelical or former evangelicals who are starting to get these things. So,
Speaker 1: you know, to me, I kind of went on a
Speaker 1: rant there, But that's that was one of my big awakenings,
Speaker 1: was all the things they didn't teach me that all
Speaker 1: I've got to do is pick up a book and
Speaker 1: read about it. I'm like, how is this never said?
Speaker 2: You know?
Speaker 1: So I'll ask one more question along these lines and
Speaker 1: we'll move on to Epstein. Now that you're Orthodox and
Speaker 1: you've been through the Catholicism, you know, ten year phase.
Speaker 1: You started out as a Baptist, so you know that theology.
Speaker 1: I think you said you were in Baddist Seminary.
Speaker 3: Well, I went to about Bible College, and then I
Speaker 3: did a semester of Bonson Seminary, which was a non
Speaker 3: accredited school that focused on the apologetics and the theology
Speaker 3: of Greg Bonson and the Christian Reconstructionists. So but that
Speaker 3: was right when I was converting out of Protestantism, is
Speaker 3: when I left that school.
Speaker 1: Okay, what are the biggest gaps that are filled for
Speaker 1: you by the Orthodox Church that Catholicism didn't have or
Speaker 1: the Evangelical Church didn't have, and then maybe a different
Speaker 1: set of things for both of those. But why did
Speaker 1: you land on Orthodox?
Speaker 2: Well, there's a lot of different things.
Speaker 3: I'll just try to boil it down to like I
Speaker 3: said earlier, you know, when I got into studying the
Speaker 3: formation of the Biblical Canon, that that really got me
Speaker 3: into looking into the church fathers and the ecumenical councils,
Speaker 3: and what was the attitude of the Christians immediately after
Speaker 3: the death of the Apostles, right, so this is called
Speaker 3: the post Apostolic fathers. So I started reading Clement and
Speaker 3: Ignacious and Cyprian, all these bishops of the early Church.
Speaker 3: And then, of course, even as a Baptist, I remember,
Speaker 3: you know, well, we believe the Council of Nicea because
Speaker 3: it taught, you know, the deity of Christ. And I
Speaker 3: went to actually read Nicea and the church fathers who
Speaker 3: were there, and you know, Saint Athanasius and these guys,
Speaker 3: and I realized, okay, they believe a lot of stuff
Speaker 3: that I don't believe. And I read City of God,
Speaker 3: which was Augustine's gigantic apologetic. I read the whole thing
Speaker 3: when I was at Bible College, and I took I
Speaker 3: wrote down a bunch of questions for the Baptist professors.
Speaker 2: I went took at my.
Speaker 3: Questions that I said, can you guys tell me, like,
Speaker 3: why does he believe in the real presence? Why does
Speaker 3: he say he believes in absolute succession? Why does he
Speaker 3: talk about relics, and why does he talk about all
Speaker 3: this stuff? That just doesn't really make sense with Baptist theology,
Speaker 3: and I I didn't really get good answers, and so
Speaker 3: that kind of led me gradually out of Baptist stuff
Speaker 3: into Covenant theology and then into you know, I didn't
Speaker 3: even know about Orthodoxy back then. It was like two
Speaker 3: thousand and four or five. I just knew about Catholicism
Speaker 3: and Protestant debates. And I think when you're Protestant, if
Speaker 3: you're a young person and you are looking into this stuff,
Speaker 3: especially in the two thousands, but there's a lot fewer
Speaker 3: resources online, you didn't really I didn't know about Vatican
Speaker 3: Two yet, I didn't know what it taught. I just thought, Okay,
Speaker 3: I'm looking at what's the historic church, and it's either
Speaker 3: going to be something like, you know, Anglican, or it's
Speaker 3: going to be something like you know, Lusing maybe. And
Speaker 3: I gave all of those a lot of a lot
Speaker 3: of chances. I read about six of Luther's commentaries and works.
Speaker 3: I read several Anglican texts, Petertoon, people like that, and
Speaker 3: I just ultimately didn't find a lot of those arguments
Speaker 3: about the church from those churches perspectives very convincing. So
Speaker 3: that was always in the back of my head, even
Speaker 3: as a Protestant, or even even when I convert to Catholicism.
Speaker 2: I was like, Okay, this has got to be it.
Speaker 3: And then when you get into the Roman Catholic documents,
Speaker 3: as I've got like a bunch of Vatican two and
Speaker 3: all all the ecumenical councils and the people encyclicals over there, like,
Speaker 3: you just start to notice, Okay, Rome has changed its theology.
Speaker 3: So what do I do with this? And for me,
Speaker 3: it was just because I had such a love for
Speaker 3: church history. I want to know then, okay, well, the
Speaker 3: true Church, if it's not any of those, it's got
Speaker 3: to have the same teaching as the church in all
Speaker 3: those early centuries. So I'm looking for a church that
Speaker 3: didn't change its fundamental doctrines. What church still teaches what,
Speaker 3: for example, the Canons of Nice say, I'm not talking
Speaker 3: about the Nicene Creed, some of the canons that accompany
Speaker 3: the creed, because the canons also give us an insight
Speaker 3: into the mind of the Church fathers and the people
Speaker 3: who compose those creeds. And people might say, well, yeah,
Speaker 3: I don't really care about the Church fathers though, I'm
Speaker 3: just really interested in what the Bible says. Well, the
Speaker 3: problem with that is that as I was reading evangelical
Speaker 3: scholars like F. F. Bruce on the Canon Scripture or
Speaker 3: Lee McDonald Formation of the Biblical Canon, they were admitting
Speaker 3: this important role of tradition and even knowing what texts
Speaker 3: were apostolic. So certainly apo authorship is a key point
Speaker 3: when it comes to the Canon. It's not the only thing,
Speaker 3: but it's a very important point. Well, if we don't
Speaker 3: know who Matthew the author, Matthew was other than the
Speaker 3: church saying in different bishoprics and ce, this is the
Speaker 3: text that Matthew wrote. And if we're having to rely on,
Speaker 3: for example, Irenaeus or Cyprian to reconstruct a lot of
Speaker 3: early manuscript evidence for the Bible itself. In other words,
Speaker 3: we're looking at say Urinaus and his voluminous writings. He
Speaker 3: cites many, many, many New Testament passages and Old Testament passages,
Speaker 3: and those are other witnesses to the veracity of the
Speaker 3: New Testament texts and the Old Testament texts in the
Speaker 3: second century.
Speaker 2: So that's very early.
Speaker 3: And none of these people have Protestant views on anything.
Speaker 3: I don't believe in soul Scripture. They don't believe in
Speaker 3: soilo grascia, they don't believe in a memorialist view of
Speaker 3: the Eucharist, they don't believe in a symbolic view of baptism.
Speaker 3: I mean, they believe in all these things that I
Speaker 3: thought were you know, really problematic teachings. And so, you know,
Speaker 3: why would I trust those people to put the Bible
Speaker 3: together when I think that they have heretical, you know,
Speaker 3: fundamentally wrong theology on the Gospel. And so it just
Speaker 3: really caused me to re evaluate everything. But then in
Speaker 3: the Roman Catholic world, you know, you have all these
Speaker 3: problems as well, with innovations and change, and so eventually,
Speaker 3: in about twenty fifteen sixteen, I just came to the
Speaker 3: position that the only church that really maintains the essential
Speaker 3: fundamental core, not just theology, but also the practice of
Speaker 3: the church, no changes in the liturgy, no revolutions like
Speaker 3: Vatican two did with Novasorto Mass and all that is
Speaker 3: the Orthodox Church. And so the more I studied, the
Speaker 3: more I spent time in the Orthodox world, the more
Speaker 3: I was convinced that, you know, for Christianity, that's really
Speaker 3: the all there is, that's the only authentic expression of Christianity.
Speaker 2: That's not to say that there's not problems in the
Speaker 2: Orthodox world. It has its own problems, for.
Speaker 3: Sure, but I really felt like there was no more fundamental,
Speaker 3: systemic level problems and contradictions like I had in the
Speaker 3: Protestant world in the Roman Catholic world.
Speaker 2: So that was the long story as to why I
Speaker 2: ended up there.
Speaker 1: You know, this may seem like a cheap question, but
Speaker 1: I think it's a question a lot of people like
Speaker 1: myself would have who have never been to an Orthodox church.
Speaker 1: You know, you Jay, as you your regular guide, dressed
Speaker 1: normal and all that, do you wish that the would
Speaker 1: you call them priests?
Speaker 2: The author?
Speaker 1: Okay, so the priests of the Orthodox do you wish
Speaker 1: that they dressed like you and I?
Speaker 2: Or do you?
Speaker 3: This comes out of when Christianity permeated society. It made
Speaker 3: sense for them to, even in the day to day world,
Speaker 3: have themselves marked out as unique because in our review,
Speaker 3: you know, it's not a weekend profession, it's a it's
Speaker 3: every day I mean, in the Orthodox Church, priests priests
Speaker 3: have to do things every day all day, so they're
Speaker 3: basically twenty four to seven ministers. Now there's obviously flexibility there,
Speaker 3: Like a lot of priests have jobs as well, so
Speaker 3: they might be working, you know, I mean, they have families.
Speaker 2: In the Orthodox Church, priests are married.
Speaker 3: I'm glad to hear that they have families and they
Speaker 3: have kids, so there might be situations obvious where they're
Speaker 3: not all the time dressed. One of my best friends
Speaker 3: is a deacon in an Orthodox Church, and deacons a
Speaker 3: lot more important role than it is saying the Calolic
Speaker 3: Church or even the Protestant Church. Deacons are right next
Speaker 3: to priests. They're ordained that there's who that's who's ordained
Speaker 3: to the priesthood is the is the deacon. So and
Speaker 3: they do a lot of the teaching, a lot of
Speaker 3: the theology in the Orthodox world. And uh, you know,
Speaker 3: my my buddy for the deacon annyas he's always going skiing,
Speaker 3: but he doesn't ski in his cassick.
Speaker 2: So I mean, it's not like you have to always
Speaker 2: address it.
Speaker 3: But I think again, this is just a practical thing
Speaker 3: that comes out of you know, the early Middle Ages,
Speaker 3: to delineate within a Christian society who the minister is,
Speaker 3: because you know, it's a twenty four to seven job.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Okay, Well, we could do a whole show on that,
Speaker 1: but the title of this show is it has to
Speaker 1: do with Epstein. So I'm going to let you insert
Speaker 1: knowing kind of generally what my audience is. They're all
Speaker 1: seeing what I'm seeing. Most of them are from an
Speaker 1: evangelical background, or they still are in it, but they
Speaker 1: might be asking questions. They know about the Epstein files,
Speaker 1: they've heard generally what's in it. I'll let you just
Speaker 1: start this conversation with, you know, high level, what do
Speaker 1: you think people need to know? First? And then let's
Speaker 1: dig into some of the responses and reactions.
Speaker 3: I think the simplest way to make this palatable is
Speaker 3: if everybody saw Specter, the James Bond film with Daniel
Speaker 3: Craig that came out a few years ago, Right, I mean,
Speaker 3: basically that's real. That's the easiest way I could think
Speaker 3: to explain it. Maybe everybody can immediately relate to in
Speaker 3: some kind of recent recent movie. And if you saw,
Speaker 3: you know, movies like Kubrick's Size White Shut, you know,
Speaker 3: that's another movie that I think was really pivotal for
Speaker 3: explaining to the mass consciousness, you know, in a movie way,
Speaker 3: because everybody can relate to movies, especially from our generation.
Speaker 2: You know that that kind of stuff is it's not
Speaker 2: one und percent real.
Speaker 3: Obviously, James Bond's a fictional character, but it's based on
Speaker 3: composites of what these people knew and saw in their
Speaker 3: real life. And so, you know, Epstein might not be
Speaker 3: the top of the you know, villain hierarchy in terms
Speaker 3: of real power and control because he had.
Speaker 2: A limited amount of wealth.
Speaker 3: He was more of a mid tier kind of fixer, controller,
Speaker 3: consultant person. But he was definitely a blowfelk kind of person.
Speaker 3: You know, if you remember Inspector, when James Bond is
Speaker 3: trying to infiltrate and figure out who's running this criminal
Speaker 3: syndicate that's responsible for terrorism, responsible for wars, responsible for
Speaker 3: all this, you know, he infiltrates this meeting that's kind
Speaker 3: of like a World Economic Forum Davos Builderberg meeting, and
Speaker 3: you've got these you know, specter villains. They're talking about, Yes,
Speaker 3: this year, we have increased human trafficking forty percent. You know,
Speaker 3: we have stolen thirty three billion dollars in you know,
Speaker 3: mortgage lending.
Speaker 2: So they're basically.
Speaker 3: Listing all of their crime stats at this giant meeting
Speaker 3: so I would say that's pretty much kind of how
Speaker 3: it is. And you know, with Epstein, what we have
Speaker 3: is a person recruited into an operation early on through
Speaker 3: Bill Barr of the OSS and into what would be
Speaker 3: something adjacent to the CIA. This is why he has
Speaker 3: multiple passports. For example, as Whitney Web points out in
Speaker 3: her book, that operation ends up funneling him into Wall
Speaker 3: Street bear Stearns. He's an insider trader there, he gets
Speaker 3: busted for that, and ironically he has a partner. His
Speaker 3: partner is the one that does time. So I think
Speaker 3: that's a key indicator that early on Epstein didn't do
Speaker 3: any time for the insider trading at bear Stearns, but
Speaker 3: what he was learning was criminal organizations in relation to
Speaker 3: high finance. So then Maxwell and just Lame bring him
Speaker 3: into their operation, which we know was a Rothschild front,
Speaker 3: and that's where he was taught corporate takeover procedures viper
Speaker 3: corporatism there and then also the blackmail stuff. Right, So
Speaker 3: this would then suggest that Robert Maxwell, who was British
Speaker 3: Intelligence and Masade, was also then sort of grooming and
Speaker 3: teaching Epstein how to run that operation.
Speaker 1: Let's work on Maxwell on Robert for just a second,
Speaker 1: because a lot of people have not read the book
Speaker 1: The Super Spy and all that. I have not read
Speaker 1: it myself, but I do you know, I was very surprised.
Speaker 1: I knew that Jeffrey Epstein was Jewish, I did not
Speaker 1: know Maxwell was, And later on I found out she was,
Speaker 1: and I was like, well, I wonder where when her
Speaker 1: father had that weird death, where's he buried? Because that
Speaker 1: sometimes tells a lot about where somebody's loyalties lie. And
Speaker 1: I find out, Wow, he was given a state funeral
Speaker 1: in Israel, attended by both state leaders and religious leaders,
Speaker 1: and then buried on the Mount of Olives, like.
Speaker 3: He's buried in Israel because most of his lifetime of
Speaker 3: service was to the Nation instead of Israel for espionage.
Speaker 3: But then we had that really curious email where Epstein said, yeah,
Speaker 3: I'll tell you the real story of what happened to
Speaker 3: him and his death, and it was that he was
Speaker 3: sort of playing both sides in the Cold War. He
Speaker 3: was also passing on something seekers to the KGB to
Speaker 3: the Soviets, which is interesting because I have a friend
Speaker 3: who's a specialist in that area, and he translates old
Speaker 3: KGB communicas and documents, and one of the articles that
Speaker 3: he translated about ten years ago on his website was
Speaker 3: about Robert Maxwell from the vantage point of the KGB.
Speaker 3: And what's funny is that they actually said, Okay, we
Speaker 3: think he's playing both sides and he's selling us secrets
Speaker 3: as well, so they kind of knew what he was
Speaker 3: up to and that was confirmed, assuming that Epstein is
Speaker 3: telling the true story in this recent email, because it
Speaker 3: says that what he did was he sort of took
Speaker 3: it upon himself to say that he was going to
Speaker 3: be the attachade to the Soviets for Massade, and they
Speaker 3: didn't really want him to do that, but he did
Speaker 3: it anyway, and then he tried to extort Massade for
Speaker 3: four hundred million pounds, and that is important, according to Epstein,
Speaker 3: what led to his untimely demise of falling off the boat.
Speaker 3: But they still apparently gave him a, you know, a
Speaker 3: heroes burial in Israel. So another person kind of like
Speaker 3: that is James G. Sangleton, the Cold War person who
Speaker 3: was very closely in the JFK files when that came out,
Speaker 3: also liaison with Israel, and of course that shows a
Speaker 3: degree of backdoor telecommunications and messaging with Masad, and then
Speaker 3: partly I think motivation for Masaud and the CIA and
Speaker 3: organized crime.
Speaker 2: To have a role in JFK. So yeah, you know.
Speaker 1: I'm glad you brought up JFK because that was another
Speaker 1: eye opener for me when I came to the knowledge.
Speaker 1: And I don't know where you land on who's at
Speaker 1: the top of this world power structure, but I do know,
Speaker 1: and I think it's a new kind of hit term
Speaker 1: has packed Judaica. There is definitely a rise of what's
Speaker 1: happening in Israel according to their eschatology that they're pushing forward,
Speaker 1: be it political or religious or both. It's happening, okay,
Speaker 1: and everything that springs forth from that. Where was I
Speaker 1: going with that? Oh? Regarding JFK though, So you've got
Speaker 1: that going on. You've got JFK back in the late
Speaker 1: fifties and sixties doing you know, he's writing angry letters
Speaker 1: with David mc gurion. He's not letting them do what
Speaker 1: they want with their nuclear testing. He's not wanting to
Speaker 1: give what was previously known before Apak it was just
Speaker 1: Israeli intelligence. I knew all that stuff already, all right,
Speaker 1: And then they redacted. I think most of it. Of course,
Speaker 1: it's you know, fifty sixty years later, so people don't
Speaker 1: care quite as much. But what shocked me was this
Speaker 1: most of the redactions that had been I'm sorry, the
Speaker 1: unredactions that had been redacted for decades had to do
Speaker 1: with anything to do with Jewish intelligence, Israeli intelligence. There
Speaker 1: was a whole line about you know, we've got the
Speaker 1: Jewish money now, like all this stuff that would be
Speaker 1: highly embarrassing to Christian Zionists and their platforms, and I
Speaker 1: was still it was the first time I was shocked
Speaker 1: by this where it's like, this has been one of
Speaker 1: those conspiracies that people have been asking about for decades.
Speaker 1: It finally comes out. And I remember guys like Eric
Speaker 1: Taxes and others, if they tweeted about it, they were like, oh,
Speaker 1: so it was the CIA, Yeah, it was the CIA.
Speaker 2: It's like.
Speaker 1: I just I was. I was dumbfounded. And I guess
Speaker 1: maybe you wouldn't be dumbfounded by that because you'd already
Speaker 1: seen through a lot of the way that those people operate.
Speaker 1: But it kind of told me also, why today with
Speaker 1: something as dark and deep as this Epstein release and
Speaker 1: the things that it's alluding to why they're just able
Speaker 1: to ignore it and and not have to pay the
Speaker 1: price for that.
Speaker 3: Well, yeah, that's there's a complicated connection and intertwining of
Speaker 3: a lot of interests. And I've always thought, going back
Speaker 3: a year now, that the reason that Trump wasn't so
Speaker 3: eager to release these was that, like Alex said that
Speaker 3: he was asked, I think, on the on behalf of
Speaker 3: you know, British intelligence and Israeli intelligence and the CIA,
Speaker 3: to not do this because it would be too devastating
Speaker 3: and destabilizing.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 3: So that makes sense to me, And that's because I
Speaker 3: think with Epstein, especially if you look into.
Speaker 2: The money managing and the.
Speaker 3: Mega Group and Les Wexner and the billionaires that are involved,
Speaker 3: this would be the up ending of a lot of
Speaker 3: the existing financial structure, the Fiat system. That's why it
Speaker 3: was so I think amazing that you had the very
Speaker 3: beginning of the Bandon interview. Epstein says, well, I was
Speaker 3: also brought in through bear Stearns and what I learned
Speaker 3: there to Rockefeller's networks of the Trilateral Commission, because I
Speaker 3: understood high finance and fractional reserve banking, the Fiat debt system,
Speaker 3: that we have. He said, I understood that so well
Speaker 3: that I was able to explain that to a lot
Speaker 3: of them. So they recruited me into trilateral, which again
Speaker 3: shows that it's not well, is it the roll Trials
Speaker 3: or is it David Rockefeller, is it Barzenski, or is
Speaker 3: it Kissinger or who's a builder bird? They're all part
Speaker 3: of the same steering groups, networks and committees, and the
Speaker 3: Rothchilds and the rock Fillers work together. They're banking empires
Speaker 3: that are joined at and heaven.
Speaker 2: For a long time.
Speaker 3: For example, in the United States, JP Morgan has been
Speaker 3: for a long time a front for Rothchilds, so they
Speaker 3: did have a presence here. It just wasn't called Roche
Speaker 3: It was called JP Morgan and JP Morgan, Chase and
Speaker 3: Chase Bank, and they've all been working together because at
Speaker 3: that level, if you look at something like the Bank
Speaker 3: for National Settlements, which is the Global feder Reserve, right,
Speaker 3: America has it's Federal Reserve private bank, and the world
Speaker 3: has it's Federal Reserve of Federal Reserves, which is the
Speaker 3: BIS that was all set up post World War Two
Speaker 3: by the entities that we're talking about, like JP Morgan
Speaker 3: Bank and Allen Della set of Schroeder Bank, et cetera.
Speaker 3: So that's who's really running the system and the sex
Speaker 3: stuff and all of that. It's I mean, it matters,
Speaker 3: but it plays a role in compromising those powerful people, right,
Speaker 3: that's the blackmail side of it. Maxwell was doing that
Speaker 3: kind of stuff too, back during the Cold War. So
Speaker 3: this is not a new thing. It's an old thing.
Speaker 3: We've lectured, for example on my channel for a long
Speaker 3: time out of a bunch of books just from historians
Speaker 3: about the history of sexpionage or sex blackmail. I mean,
Speaker 3: this is this is a long time state practice. Nothing
Speaker 3: new there either. In fact, for example, Japan was able
Speaker 3: to have a lot of success in the Japanese Chinese
Speaker 3: War back at the turn of the century because a
Speaker 3: figure named Kinji Douihara. He was Japan's epstein, and he
Speaker 3: was able to figure out how to set up a
Speaker 3: network of brothels throughout China, put flood China with opium
Speaker 3: and then compromise them and get the prostitutes to be spies.
Speaker 3: And China basically was unable to fend off Japan's attacks
Speaker 3: during that war. So I'm not trying to deflect off
Speaker 3: of Epstein, but sure, just pointing out that this is
Speaker 3: this is if you get into history, like this is
Speaker 3: a pretty well known thing. But again, I mean Epstein
Speaker 3: understood the Vatican Bank, he understood that it it's a
Speaker 3: secret bank. He understood shadow banking, and a lot of that.
Speaker 2: Comes out in the band and interview.
Speaker 3: So that's the real, I think, crux of how they
Speaker 3: know how to game the system by shorting markets on
Speaker 3: the basis of advanced intelligence. And that's really important because
Speaker 3: there's that famous story about Waterloo and the Rothchild's having
Speaker 3: advanced intelligence and then buying up the market and the
Speaker 3: UK stock market when it collapsed. Well, turns out in
Speaker 3: the Rothchild's other osbiography there's a whole section where they
Speaker 3: brag about that being true. They say, yes, of course
Speaker 3: we were able through advanced intelligence to buy up the
Speaker 3: stock market.
Speaker 2: There it is right there.
Speaker 3: And so what I'm getting at is that fast forward
Speaker 3: two hundred years from the eighteen hundreds to now, and
Speaker 3: Jeffrey was doing the exact same thing as the representati
Speaker 3: of the Rothchild's saying yeah, we have advanced intelligence, we collapse
Speaker 3: through chaos, and then we buy up on the fire
Speaker 3: sale out of the chaos.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's an old system, there's no doubt about that.
Speaker 1: I wish I had the different emails in front of me.
Speaker 1: I'd like to get your take on what should people believe,
Speaker 1: you know, because anybody can say, oh my gosh, they
Speaker 1: were There's emails about satanic torture, rituals, child murder. I
Speaker 1: mean the worst things like you just just think it
Speaker 1: in your mind of how horrible it could be. And
Speaker 1: I don't want to say because I don't want to get
Speaker 1: kicked off of YouTube, but bad, bad stuff with small,
Speaker 1: small children, and it's alluded to an emails. There's a
Speaker 1: lot of the symbolic language. I'm not just talking about
Speaker 1: the Pizzagate language, but I'm talking about even more clear stuff.
Speaker 1: There's also a hatred of Christianity. There's making fun of
Speaker 1: little girls that are saying I knew Jesus would be
Speaker 1: with me and stuff like that that's just like really
Speaker 1: dark and can lead people into if they believe in
Speaker 1: the evil that much, there must be a god, then
Speaker 1: Jesus must be real.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: My question and all that Jay, is this, what do
Speaker 1: you believe people should should believe about this? When they
Speaker 1: read the emails about the really dark stuff. What is true,
Speaker 1: what is not? And how do you know?
Speaker 3: Yeah, the ones that have been fake I think are
Speaker 3: pretty obviously fake common sense wise. You know some of
Speaker 3: those clip together AI pictures of Trump with little kids,
Speaker 3: and I'm not just trying to defend Trump just to
Speaker 3: defend Trump, but I mean that was obviously fake. The
Speaker 3: email between Epstein and Maxwell about creating bitcoin was obviously fake.
Speaker 3: It had two different two's up at the top, so
Speaker 3: that was obviously a fake email.
Speaker 1: The other thing, let me clarify by question I'm not
Speaker 1: talking about I shouldn't have said fake or real. I meant,
Speaker 1: what is a joke where they're haha, like to them,
Speaker 1: it's really dark, but it's locker room humor to them
Speaker 1: versus no, they're really engaging in this stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah, good question.
Speaker 3: I mean some of that is a little hard to
Speaker 3: decide for, Like you know, that's why I put a
Speaker 3: tweet up today asking a question like when he says
Speaker 3: the thing about shrimp and you cut the head off
Speaker 3: and you keep the body, like, I mean, is he
Speaker 3: talking about seafood or is he talking about something else?
Speaker 3: Some of them are ambiguous. It's hard to say, but
Speaker 3: I would say that given the the multitude of references,
Speaker 3: it's really odd that they would be so obsessed with
Speaker 3: beep jerky pizza and these these weird sort of code.
Speaker 2: Words, and the fact that they're redacted.
Speaker 3: Why would you redact a bunch of things and names
Speaker 3: if they're just talking about junk food and seafood. So
Speaker 3: I think that's very suspect and probably is the case,
Speaker 3: because if you think about it, you know, if you
Speaker 3: read C. S.
Speaker 2: Lewis's Space Trilogy, the.
Speaker 3: Third volume, it has this scientific institute called Nice, which
Speaker 3: is supposed to be funny because they're like a satanic scientific,
Speaker 3: you know, entity, like the Tavisak Institute basically, And one
Speaker 3: of the things they do is that when they recruit
Speaker 3: people into Nice, and csours is writing about the demonic
Speaker 3: international control structure in that book, the aliens are actually demons.
Speaker 2: At Nice.
Speaker 3: They have a ritual where you're initiated, but you have
Speaker 3: to degrade yourself and you have to do the most
Speaker 3: degrading things to join, because then they know that you've
Speaker 3: made your bones, like in the mafia, right, so they
Speaker 3: have the dirt on you, so you're never going to
Speaker 3: wrap them out because you've done the worst imaginable thing,
Speaker 3: and I think that that's what's going on here, is
Speaker 3: that for those people, it is kind of a Satanic joke.
Speaker 3: Hard to know exactly how many of them took Satanism seriously,
Speaker 3: but you don't have to take theistic Satanism seriously to
Speaker 3: be under the control of Satan.
Speaker 2: I mean, you can be atheist. You've been atheist to
Speaker 2: me engaging in this.
Speaker 3: I mean some of the emails between biologist and people
Speaker 3: like that, talking about how you can do worse things
Speaker 3: with kids. I'll just leave it at that, like that
Speaker 3: suggests you know that these people are I mean, you
Speaker 3: can be an atheist to be completely degraded.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: There were two Christians who are well known who were
Speaker 1: mad at me for things that I was saying, tying
Speaker 1: Epstein to the Tumud, or to to Israel or Judaism
Speaker 1: or whatever, and both of them the route they took
Speaker 1: was to say, well, he worked for Arab nations as well,
Speaker 1: and there's just as much, just as much evidence that
Speaker 1: he was being funded also by that. I think one
Speaker 1: mentioned Katar. You know, it's like I've read I've never
Speaker 1: met an Arab or heard of any mom that uses
Speaker 1: Goyam as a phrase in like multiple emails. I've never
Speaker 1: seen anybody of any other faith have the prime minister
Speaker 1: come like the Israeli Prime Minister come visit a whole
Speaker 1: bunch and talk about the jew It's the Jews versus
Speaker 1: the world. Presently Jews are winning. Like, how do you
Speaker 1: tie him or do you tie him to religious Judaism
Speaker 1: or I think from my own research, is not as
Speaker 1: much the nation of Israel itself, but it's more like
Speaker 1: he was proud of his Jewish heritage and spoke of
Speaker 1: it often alongside of these really dark emails.
Speaker 3: Well, Judaism has a lot of ways that you could
Speaker 3: can take it. I mean, you have people who are
Speaker 3: Jewish who have basically no beliefs, atheistic, and you have
Speaker 3: you know, people who are extreme Rabbinic Jews who when
Speaker 3: you get into Telmuodick and rabbinic rabbinic philosophy and theology.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's basically just like a cult and doesn't
Speaker 3: really differ in any way from other weird cults in
Speaker 3: terms of the practices, the irrational rules and.
Speaker 2: Legalities.
Speaker 3: But also within other world religions, even Islam at a
Speaker 3: very high level, you can have people who are in
Speaker 3: an inner core clique that don't act or profess what
Speaker 3: the public, profane members of the religion and the masses
Speaker 3: have right, So there could always be these kind of
Speaker 3: inner clicks. For example, if you read Ezekiel, you'll remember
Speaker 3: that Ezekiel has shown a vision at one point where
Speaker 3: he sees that behind what's going on in the temple worship,
Speaker 3: they have a secret compartment where they're engaging in abominable
Speaker 3: practices on the download in the tunnels. So there has
Speaker 3: always been this tradition, I think, within any religion, and
Speaker 3: that includes tumudig Judaism too, to have an inner, secret
Speaker 3: approach and a secret religion that practices all kinds of
Speaker 3: who knows what, And that again, this is what even
Speaker 3: the prophets themselves talk about. Jeremiah talks about the Jews
Speaker 3: practicing human sacrifice while on the face of it they
Speaker 3: pretend that they're righteous. So this goes back to the
Speaker 3: Old Testament, This goes back to the ancient world. Shouldn't
Speaker 3: be surprising that there would still be these kinds of traditions.
Speaker 3: And one of the things that Epstein see to refer to,
Speaker 3: especially in the Bannon interview, is Kabbala, which is medieval
Speaker 3: Jewish mysticism, which can range from speculations about numerology and
Speaker 3: gematria all the way over to ritual magic, creating sigils,
Speaker 3: invoking and trying to control dybooks or demons. And it's
Speaker 3: interesting that Leslie Wesner himself has said in interviews that
Speaker 3: he does believe and he's not joking that he's possessed
Speaker 3: by a dybbuk, which is the Hebrew word for a devil.
Speaker 3: So there is absolutely a component of cabalistic mysticism in
Speaker 3: terms of Epstein's philosophy, so far from what I've seen
Speaker 3: from the interview, and that's the public Bannon interview.
Speaker 2: Go ahead. Well, there was also that.
Speaker 3: Picture too, where it's hard to tell exactly. It could
Speaker 3: just be an old set of encyclopedias, but it does
Speaker 3: look like there's a picture with him with the set
Speaker 3: of the Talmud behind him. So I wouldn't be surprised
Speaker 3: if he didn't have obviously some tumutic influence. And you
Speaker 3: don't have to go into buying a fifty volume Talmud set.
Speaker 3: I mean, you can get academic texts like Peter Schaefer,
Speaker 3: who himself is a Jewish scholar, has a book called
Speaker 3: Jesus and the Talmud.
Speaker 2: There's a whole chapter on how Plashimus the Talmud is.
Speaker 1: So yes, I've got it right over there. It was
Speaker 1: very enlightening, and he wrote it in such a way.
Speaker 1: I mean, I did not know he was Jewish. I
Speaker 1: actually thought he was German. But he I mean, he's
Speaker 1: a Princeton professor, and yeah, he's very, very respected even
Speaker 1: by among Jewish people.
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, evangelicals just need to come to grips
Speaker 3: with the fact that rabbinic telmeutic Judaism is nothing like
Speaker 3: the Old Testament proto Christianity. Right, Old Testament Hebrew Christianity
Speaker 3: is what prepares the way for the Church. Yes, and
Speaker 3: that's not what today's rabbinic Jews teaching. In fact, Rebinic
Speaker 3: Judaism even says, you don't read those texts, you don't
Speaker 3: read the Torah. You read the Talmud and that tells
Speaker 3: you what the Torah means.
Speaker 1: Yes, absolutely, there's a really weird thing. And I deal
Speaker 1: with this all the time because again I'm still in
Speaker 1: this world and maybe I still respect these people too much,
Speaker 1: and it drives me nuts. It's probably a personal flaw,
Speaker 1: really and I need to consider them a little bit
Speaker 1: more irrelevant. But you've got all these evangelical leaders that
Speaker 1: are leading their flocks to do service trips in Israel,
Speaker 1: to kiss the wall, to love Israel, to the They
Speaker 1: would never call it worship, but that is actually what
Speaker 1: it is. I've just seen that they turn a blind
Speaker 1: eye to every evil and it's crazy. But yet, if
Speaker 1: I show them a video of the most celebrated Talmudic
Speaker 1: Kabbalistic wizard of the twentieth century, it would be the
Speaker 1: revy Menochem Schneerson, and people would say these samely. It
Speaker 1: would say, well, that's an outlier, that's a marginal thing. No,
Speaker 1: it's not. That's where Mike Huckabee and Trump will go,
Speaker 1: symbolically at minimum to pray and to throw their little
Speaker 1: prayers at his grave. And it's just super weird. And
Speaker 1: then I could show these same people, Okay, what did
Speaker 1: he preach in his synagogues and translate his weird Yiddish
Speaker 1: Hebrew to English and he's speaking straight Kabbalah. He's straight
Speaker 1: up saying our souls is Jewish people, we're the chosen
Speaker 1: ones of God. We have different souls from the sphere
Speaker 1: of light. And the Goyam they have souls of darkness,
Speaker 1: and through our ticcoon alone, we're going to save the world.
Speaker 1: And you know he believed in the Noahyde laws and
Speaker 1: that gets into Jewish eschatology, which I was never taught.
Speaker 1: And you see it happening. It's like, what for that
Speaker 1: little country with so few people to actually accomplish what
Speaker 1: they would need, They would need to fool the biggest,
Speaker 1: most powerful countries in the world, well, which which you
Speaker 1: know wall are all these countries' leaders kissing. It's that
Speaker 1: little wall over there, whatever it is, And I just
Speaker 1: I am every day, Jay, I'm bothered by this because
Speaker 1: I can't stand for Christian leaders who should see something
Speaker 1: so clear, that's so obvious to completely just be blind.
Speaker 1: I don't know if they're blind to it or if
Speaker 1: they know what's going on, and it just pays too well,
Speaker 1: I just don't know what it is. Can you help
Speaker 1: me with that?
Speaker 3: Probably all the above going on, because you know, I
Speaker 3: remember when I was a Christian Zionist, you know, when
Speaker 3: I was younger. I've still got my scho filled Bible
Speaker 3: and I got my John Hagee Prophecy studied Bible over there.
Speaker 2: Than I had when I was nineteen.
Speaker 3: So yeah, I mean I remember what it was like
Speaker 3: to think in that way, and I think the things
Speaker 3: that began to really kind of make that crumble for
Speaker 3: me was I started realizing there's all these New Testament
Speaker 3: passages which are very clear that at the First Advent
Speaker 3: Jesus brought the Kingdom and brought the Church and fulfilled
Speaker 3: what the nation state of Israel and the Old Testament
Speaker 3: was a type of. So if Israel is a type,
Speaker 3: it doesn't really make any sense to continue to think
Speaker 3: of what has been fulfilled as this future reality to yeah,
Speaker 3: be fulfilled. So in other words, when Galatians six says
Speaker 3: that the church at Galatia is the Israel of God,
Speaker 3: when Paul says in Galatians three that you're in Christ
Speaker 3: through faith, You're the seat of Abraham through faith in Christ,
Speaker 3: there's no other seat of Abraham. In fact, Galatia, when
Speaker 3: he gives an algory, he says, those who serve at
Speaker 3: the temple are of this world, and they have no
Speaker 3: right to eat our flesh, our Christ, our Eucharist. Compare
Speaker 3: that to Hebrews thirteen, where he says we have an
Speaker 3: altar which we eat the sacrifice and of the Church,
Speaker 3: that those who serve at the tabernacle have no right
Speaker 3: to eat. So Judaism is presented as an Old Testament
Speaker 3: thing that is now fulfilled. It is done and evangelical
Speaker 3: Zionism is a form of Judaizing heresy which doesn't recognize it.
Speaker 3: In Matthew twenty one forty three, when Jesus gives the
Speaker 3: parable of the bind Dresser, he says to the Phariseasons
Speaker 3: of the Jews, he says, you reject the message of
Speaker 3: the prophets, and then when the sun comes you reject him. Therefore,
Speaker 3: the Kingdom of God is taken from you and given
Speaker 3: to a nation, producing the frue self thereof predicting the
Speaker 3: largely gentile Church, and that's exactly what we see in
Speaker 3: the Book of Acts. The Church shifts from largely Jewish
Speaker 3: in the first ten chapters to largely Gentile. No, that
Speaker 3: doesn't mean that Jews can't be saved, and I do
Speaker 3: believe Romans eleven does predict a future conversion of the Jews.
Speaker 3: But Judaism as such, or the Nason of Israel as such,
Speaker 3: is not what those texts are talking about.
Speaker 2: The Church is.
Speaker 1: Israel, where would your eschatology. As an Orthodox person land
Speaker 1: today generally ten thousand foot level, you don't have to
Speaker 1: get into every nuance.
Speaker 3: For Orthodox Christianity, pre millennialism is condemned by the Second
Speaker 3: Ecumenical Council, So you cannot be achillist. You can't believe
Speaker 3: in a literal thousand years because the thousand years is
Speaker 3: equated to the Kingdom and to the Church, and so
Speaker 3: if Jesus brought that at his first advent, no Orthodox
Speaker 3: Christian can affirm any kind of millennialism in a literal sense.
Speaker 3: So post millennial or a millennial would be the norm
Speaker 3: amongst every church father and everybody for the first thousand
Speaker 3: years of Christianity.
Speaker 1: Would you hold two post or a millennialism.
Speaker 3: I tend to favor of post millennial view, but I'm
Speaker 3: not hard set on that. I think it's there's there's
Speaker 3: flexibility there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I would favor it too, just because it's the
Speaker 1: winning I like as an athlete athlete man like I hate,
Speaker 1: you know, fighting for something. I remember going to a
Speaker 1: Charlie Kirk event where I was I was a donor
Speaker 1: back in the day when I first kicked all this off.
Speaker 1: So I went down to Phoenix and I met with
Speaker 1: his teams and you know, did the whole thing you
Speaker 1: do as a for a donor invite thing. And I
Speaker 1: remember reading his mantra for Turning Point and it was
Speaker 1: going on the offensive to win the culture war for
Speaker 1: Christ and I'm thinking, but Charlie Kirk's own premillennial dispensationalism
Speaker 1: says he's really going to lose this culture war and
Speaker 1: be raptured, and then it's going to get really awful,
Speaker 1: and then Jesus is going to come back at the
Speaker 1: end of that and you know, save the day, which
Speaker 1: is great, but it's like it was a weird juxtaposition
Speaker 1: between you got this guy who's full of energy and
Speaker 1: wants to do the right thing, but really within his
Speaker 1: own theology, he's building a tiny pyramid of success within
Speaker 1: a much larger pyramid that he believes in that is
Speaker 1: going to count him out, you know what I'm saying,
Speaker 1: And that that conflict really bothered me. And that's actually
Speaker 1: the avenue with which I discovered the truth about Schofield
Speaker 1: and Darby and even some of the Jesuits before that.
Speaker 1: It was maybe a strange way into that knowledge, but
Speaker 1: where I began to learn the truth about some of
Speaker 1: those eschatologies. So what else do you have to say
Speaker 1: on the Epstein thing, man, Because I feel like we're
Speaker 1: leaving some things on the table here. I should have
Speaker 1: written more questions down before we started. What are some
Speaker 1: other things you feel that people need to know about it?
Speaker 2: Well?
Speaker 3: I think, you know, again, it really vindicates the hunch
Speaker 3: that a lot of people in the conspiracy world had
Speaker 3: they didn't know all the details.
Speaker 2: Maybe they couldn't fill everything in.
Speaker 3: But just how wide scale and wide scope this this
Speaker 3: operation actually was. And you know, I think that at
Speaker 3: the top of the pyramid on the earthly plane, I
Speaker 3: guess you could say you have Rothschilds, Rockefellers, banking and
Speaker 3: corporate elites. There is a large, you know, Zionist component
Speaker 3: to that, for sure, but it's not exclusively that. For example,
Speaker 3: one of the emails that even surprised me was that
Speaker 3: Epstein had been scheduled to meet with like fifteen heads
Speaker 3: of state across the world. He had this like planned out,
Speaker 3: He's going to go to all these different countries, and
Speaker 3: I think we see that a lot of say, you know,
Speaker 3: Saudi or Islamic countries. You know, really at that level
Speaker 3: of heads of state. It's it's an international networking of elites.
Speaker 3: It's not tied to a nation state. Right, so we
Speaker 3: might think that, oh, well, the Muslims hate the Jews.
Speaker 2: Actually, and I was.
Speaker 3: I was very ignorant of Islam even back in the
Speaker 3: two as a Christian. It's only been in the last
Speaker 3: seven or eight years that I've really gotten heavy into
Speaker 3: studying the history of Islam and debating all the top
Speaker 3: Muslims except for Muhammad, a job who won't agree to
Speaker 3: a debate.
Speaker 2: But Islam is talmutic. This is what people don't understand.
Speaker 3: Like people think, oh, well, if Christianity is true and
Speaker 3: Judaism is actually the thing that's subverting Christianity and the
Speaker 3: rabbinical Talmudic philosophy is evil, then the Muslims must be
Speaker 3: good because they're not as blasphemous as the Jews. Well,
Speaker 3: what people don't realize is that many scholars who are
Speaker 3: fairly neutral on the subject, they're not committed to any position.
Speaker 3: They've been reconstructing the actual origins of the influence on
Speaker 3: Muhammad for many, many years, many decades. It turns out
Speaker 3: that Muhammad was very influenced by the Talmud many, many,
Speaker 3: many hadiths, and many many sections of the Qur'an are
Speaker 3: directly out of Talmudic traditions. So what I think we
Speaker 3: get with the early phases of Islam is a person
Speaker 3: who was illiterate, in the case of Muhammad, and so
Speaker 3: he was hearing these these traditions and these stories about
Speaker 3: the prophets, and he was hearing about Jews, and he
Speaker 3: was hearing about this Jesus character, and he crafts his
Speaker 3: own religion, which he says originally early on, is I
Speaker 3: want this to be a way to reconcile Jews and
Speaker 3: Christians with my philosophy that is ultimately a religion for
Speaker 3: the Arab peoples. So it begins with something as the
Speaker 3: revelation to the Arabs, because Muhammad thought that Judaism was
Speaker 3: God's revelation for Jews, and Christianity was Allah's revelation for
Speaker 3: the Christians, and then he would bring the revelation for
Speaker 3: the Arab peoples. So he saw it in a very
Speaker 3: ethnic way early on, and then he gets gets more
Speaker 3: and more radical and warlike in the later phases of
Speaker 3: the Qur'an to where he conceives of it as a
Speaker 3: jad that's also literal. So I think we have to
Speaker 3: be very careful because I see a lot of evangelicals
Speaker 3: and a big fan of Tucker. Tucker's having me on
Speaker 3: a show that the whole segment with him, and I
Speaker 3: like Tucker, but I think he's also kind of leaning
Speaker 3: into this position, and that the Hodgewins and others are thinking, well, hey,
Speaker 3: maybe Islam's not that bad, maybe they're actually on our side.
Speaker 2: No, no, it's not true at all.
Speaker 3: They're they're absolutely anti Christ when you get into the
Speaker 3: real meat potatoes of what Islam teaches, and in fact,
Speaker 3: Muslims many people have said this, and even rabbis say
Speaker 3: Islam is the broom of Judaism. So if you're a
Speaker 3: Christian in the West, that's how to understand that. And no,
Speaker 3: the Imams are not your friends. Their Islam is not
Speaker 3: your friend at all. Just because they don't have as
Speaker 3: blasphemous language. Well, it doesn't matter, John saysn't one John.
Speaker 3: Anybody who denies that Christ is the son of the
Speaker 3: Father and flesh is of the spirit of Antichrist. And
Speaker 3: that is fundamental to Islam to deny the deity of Christ.
Speaker 3: Whole religion is predicated on denying the deity of Christ,
Speaker 3: and it is rabbinically influenced heavily. So nobody should be
Speaker 3: misunderstanding this. And it doesn't make you don't fall into
Speaker 3: the low IQ dialectics of thinking that if you're against Islam,
Speaker 3: then you might be a Zionist, or if you're against
Speaker 3: Zionism you must be pro Islam can.
Speaker 2: Be we're both of those.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Where Tucker and others and the Hodge twins would
Speaker 1: be coming at this is they didn't know anything about Islam.
Speaker 1: They thought they did, and then they found out that
Speaker 1: when you talk to an act that.
Speaker 2: Happened to me, this is me in the two thousands.
Speaker 2: I was in that same boat.
Speaker 3: I didn't know about anything about Islam, and I thought, oh, well,
Speaker 3: maybe the Muslims are because they're Patsy's on nine to eleven.
Speaker 3: Maybe they were innocent. It's way more complex than that.
Speaker 3: But the religion is actually tell what, Dick, how.
Speaker 1: Would you when you say it's anti Christ? But yet
Speaker 1: I will have a Muslim two or three that I
Speaker 1: know they will bless Christ in the way they talk
Speaker 1: about him. They will tell me that they don't believe
Speaker 1: that he is the Messiah in terms of a deity
Speaker 1: being the son of God. They do not believe that,
Speaker 1: but they do say very kind things about him. Now
Speaker 1: I know that that's that's still denying him as the Messiah.
Speaker 1: That's a big deal. But in comparison, and this is
Speaker 1: why I'm saying, Tucker and Hodge Twins and many others
Speaker 1: would say, well, at least they're a little closer because
Speaker 1: they have good things to say about Jesus. In fact,
Speaker 1: one Muslim person, when he knew I was really into
Speaker 1: a difficult conversation about Zionism with another Christian of mine,
Speaker 1: friend of mine, he told me he's like, treat them
Speaker 1: like Christ, to treat them like Jesus Christ. He was
Speaker 1: using that as a way for you know, so, I
Speaker 1: don't know what would you say to that.
Speaker 3: No, there, I mean Muslim it's actually in the Qur'an
Speaker 3: to despise them in your heart and smile with your face.
Speaker 3: That's one of the lines in the Koran. So they
Speaker 3: do believe in the principle that you can lie to
Speaker 3: for the sake of jahad. You can lie to those
Speaker 3: who are not Muslims because they're actually guilty of shirk.
Speaker 3: So if you believe in the Trinity Muslims already believe
Speaker 3: that you are guilty of idolatry and you are liable
Speaker 3: to be put to death when Muslims have the power
Speaker 3: to do so. And that is absolutely true. In fact,
Speaker 3: we've compiled many moms, especially Salafi and Sunni and moms,
Speaker 3: they actually say this in their sermons. They just say,
Speaker 3: befriend them until you have the upper hand and you
Speaker 3: subdue them and subject them. And yes, it is they
Speaker 3: are liable to be put to dead. Now, there can
Speaker 3: be different situations under Islamic law or what's called thick
Speaker 3: where in some situations they might tolerate you, but that
Speaker 3: doesn't mean that they're going to put a tax on you.
Speaker 3: They're gonna make you submit to Sharia law. They're gonna
Speaker 3: make you submit to And you have to understand that
Speaker 3: there's as many Islamic sects as there are almost Protestant sects,
Speaker 3: So there's different ways of approaching this. Because when you
Speaker 3: bring this up, some Muslim will say, well, a Saud
Speaker 3: protected Christians. That's true, a Sad is a sect of
Speaker 3: Muslims alo white that has a more positive attitude, and
Speaker 3: that might even be true in Iran, right, but that
Speaker 3: doesn't mean that the rest of the religion is in
Speaker 3: any way ultimately compatible with Christianity because there are these
Speaker 3: sectarian examples. I mean, you can find Christian sects that
Speaker 3: are pacifist. Well, that doesn't make Christianity pacifist, right. So
Speaker 3: in the same way, Islam, in terms of its fundamental
Speaker 3: tax and it's hadiths, is a very crazy it's a
Speaker 3: crazy cult.
Speaker 2: It's insane. You only have to get into Just go
Speaker 2: watch some of my debates with the Muslims and you'll
Speaker 2: see this very very quickly.
Speaker 1: I think, okay, I think one last thing I'll say
Speaker 1: on this, and then we're going to move on to
Speaker 1: a subscriber only thing for about ten more minutes. The
Speaker 1: problem for the average mind who has broken out of
Speaker 1: worshiping the Jews as having a second Covenant running in
Speaker 1: the background. So now we're seeing it clearly, and we're like, well,
Speaker 1: the Muslims didn't kill JFK. The Muslims didn't attack the
Speaker 1: US's liberty. The Muslims might have had a hand in
Speaker 1: nine to eleven, but it seems like Israel did too,
Speaker 1: So you know, the Muslims probably didn't have anything to
Speaker 1: do with Charlie Kirk's death. But Israel might have you know,
Speaker 1: you go down the line and it's like the Muslims.
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein wasn't Muslim, and he was calling us goyam,
Speaker 1: which is a Jewish thing. So all these things are
Speaker 1: stacked up. And then you've got every single Glenn Beck
Speaker 1: out there just chanting all day long about the evils
Speaker 1: of Islam, the evils of Islam. But yet there's this
Speaker 1: awakening happening where all of us Christians are like, okay,
Speaker 1: but we hear you, Glenn, but we've heard that our
Speaker 1: whole life. And you're not talking about all this stuff,
Speaker 1: like when the truth came out about JFK, you're just
Speaker 1: ignoring it. And oh, on top of that, it's not
Speaker 1: all of our politicians are not going to Mecca and
Speaker 1: kissing that cube. They're going and kissing the wall and
Speaker 1: you know, kind of doing this what I think is
Speaker 1: a humiliation ritual where they're saying, we're subservient to this future,
Speaker 1: whatever this plan is. And just the same way you
Speaker 1: describe Jay of Islamic eschatology and where they think all
Speaker 1: this is going and how you know they'll be kind
Speaker 1: to your face until they can subdue you and kill
Speaker 1: you or whatever. The Jewish eschatology is exactly the same.
Speaker 1: So that I think that's why Epstein wrote Jews Versus
Speaker 1: the World Jews currently.
Speaker 2: Winning, yeah again.
Speaker 3: And both of those principles for both of the religions
Speaker 3: are Talmudic. It's a Talmudic dual ethic principle that's in
Speaker 3: Judaism and in Islam, to have one ethic for the
Speaker 3: outside letters and a separate ethic for the insiders.
Speaker 1: I learned the other day from Yanadanoon and her husband
Speaker 1: who lived in Israel for a long time and they
Speaker 1: discovered they were a Christian Zionists. They discovered what you're
Speaker 1: talking about and left. They told me that in this
Speaker 1: this lends credibility to what you're saying. They said that
Speaker 1: under Jewish what is it Hallockic law? Is that the
Speaker 1: right word that a Jewish person can pray in a
Speaker 1: mosque and it's a valid prayer, but they cannot pray
Speaker 1: in a Christian church.
Speaker 4: You did.
Speaker 2: Many rabbis have that ruling.
Speaker 3: And but remember Judaism is very flexible because in traditional
Speaker 3: Jewish practice, you don't ask a bunch of different rabbis.
Speaker 2: You just asked your rabbi. And in their system.
Speaker 3: Typically God is giving you your answer through whatever rabbi
Speaker 3: that you asked, So you don't like go check fact
Speaker 3: check a bunch of you know, rabbis to find the
Speaker 3: true rabbinic position, so you can have Judaism. Again, that's atheistic,
Speaker 3: or that's Haraati, or that's it's all over the place.
Speaker 2: So uh, yeah, but I've.
Speaker 3: Heard many rabbis give the ruling that to pray inside
Speaker 3: a Christian church would be idolatry because they don't worship
Speaker 3: the Trinity. But because Muslims worship the One God, it's uh,
Speaker 3: it's not idolatry.
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, and that makes sense. Well, to everyone watching
Speaker 1: on substack, keep watching. To everyone else, come on over
Speaker 1: to j SLAYUSA dot com and you can watch this
Speaker 1: full feature with Jay Dyer. What is your take on
Speaker 1: Trump's involvement with Epstein? What what you've seen of his
Speaker 1: name in the files?
Speaker 2: What?
Speaker 1: Just in general, I'll lay it out there. What's your
Speaker 1: your opening take on that