EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!

EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!
CLICK - GOAL - 100,000 NEW SIGNATURES! 75,000 SIGNATURES HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED TO GOVERNOR CUOMO!

CLICK!

Wednesday, December 07, 2016

Shedding Light On The Conversion Racket! The Facts Of The "Jewish Converts" Industry - The Vast Majority Do It For Personal Reasons Totally Unrelated To Becoming Jews!

 photos of a woman from the adult film industry very recently converted to "Orthodox Judaism"

 We must take a hard look at the 2 rabbis that have made conversions their top priority as rabbis. Leib Tropper & Barry Freundel (among many others). Google these two perverts and you'll understand what motivates them!
....."Where questions of religion are concerned, people are guilty of every possible sort of dishonesty and intellectual misdemeanour".....Sigmund Freud; The Future Of An Illusion.

 Conversion to Judaism: Denomination by Denomination

From JTA's special series on conversion: Do you want a Reform, Orthodox or Conservative conversion — and what does each entail? Compare the denominations.


Orthodox

Number of converts: Unknown. Over the last seven years, approximately 1,275 conversions have been certified by conversion courts affiliated with the Rabbinical Council of America, but plenty of Orthodox conversions take place outside the RCA’s system.

Ritual: Approval by a three-judge religious court comprised of three Orthodox men (usually rabbis), male circumcision (or, for circumcised men, symbolic drawing of blood at the place of circumcision) and ritual immersion in a mikvah.

Requirements: Commitment to performing all the Torah’s commandments according to Orthodox interpretations of Jewish law. (Practically never happens)

Preparation: In most cases, regular study with a rabbi and/or religious mentor. The only rabbi known to offer an Orthodox conversion class in the United States, Rabbi Maury Kellman of New York, has a yearlong curriculum for his Manhattan Mechina L’Giyur that covers Jewish philosophy, law, history and ethics; field trips to places like Brooklyn and Israel; and occasional Shabbaton weekends. Prospective converts are expected to adopt Jewish practices, join an Orthodox Jewish community and regularly attend synagogue.

Who’s converting?

 Spiritual seekers, non-Jews dating Jews, gentiles drawn to Judaism through friends and those who converted through other Jewish denominations. The latter category includes individuals raised as Jews in non-Orthodox households who subsequently realized they don’t count as Jewish according to Orthodox Jewish law (usually because their mother isn’t halachically Jewish), as well as individuals who previously converted Reform or Conservative and then decided they wanted an Orthodox conversion. This usually happens because they became more observant or want their Jewish status to be unimpeachable. Kellman estimates the breakdown of students at his Orthodox conversion course in Manhattan as 30-35 percent converts who already converted outside of Orthodoxy, 30 percent relationship converts, 15 percent seekers and 15 percent drawn to Judaism for social reasons. (That makes it 60% are invalid converts out the gate) The vast majority of Kellman’s students are women, mostly aged 25 to 40.

Attitude toward conversions performed by other denominations: Not good enough. Orthodox conversion is the only acceptable path to becoming a Jew.

Problems: Only in 2007 did the Rabbinical Council of America, the country’s main centrist Orthodox rabbinic association, establish a standardized process for conversions. The system, called Geirus Policies and Standards, or GPS, constituted an attempt to “provide reasonable assurance that its converts and their offspring be accorded acceptance and recognition in other Jewish communities in the future.” But with many Orthodox conversions still taking place outside this system (perhaps most), critics say the establishment of central standards automatically casts aspersions on the Jewish credentials of anyone who does not go through the GPS process.

Who is a Jew without conversion: Anyone whose mother is Jewish according to halachah. In cases of uncertainty, such as some Ethiopian immigrants to Israel or members of so-called Lost Tribes whose Jewish ancestry is not universally accepted or known, most Orthodox authorities prefer conversion just to be on the safe side.

Conservative

Number: Unknown. A ballpark estimate of 2,500-3,000 converts per year worldwide is cited by the head of the movement’s Rabbinical Assembly, Rabbi Julie Schonfeld, a figure based on an extrapolation from the 350 people the movement says convert every year under its aegis in Los Angeles.

Ritual: Approval by a three-judge religious court, male circumcision (or symbolic drawing of blood) and mikvah immersion. The court judges ideally will be three Conservative rabbis, but it’s not a must. In smaller communities, cantors or suitable community members will do.

Preparation: Several U.S. cities have conversion institutes that run Introduction to Judaism courses. In addition — and in some places instead of classes — conversion candidates will meet with a rabbi one on one. Prospective converts are also expected to become part of the Jewish community, attend synagogue, celebrate holidays and engage with Jewish practice in some meaningful way. A sponsoring rabbi is necessary to complete the conversion.

Requirements: “The prospective convert must renounce all other religious beliefs and practices and commit to living a moral life according to Jewish teaching, having a Jewish household and, if they have children, raising them as Jews,” Schonfeld says. “They must commit to adopt and grow in their observances of Shabbat and holidays and kashrut, to give tzedakah and to engage in Jewish study. The exact minimum requirements for these and other observances vary somewhat from rabbi to rabbi.” Few if any rabbis require commitment to Jewish law as defined by the Conservative movement.

Who’s converting? Two-thirds are non-Jews in an interfaith relationship with a Jew, says Rabbi Adam Greenwald, director of the Miller Introduction to Judaism Program at American Jewish University in Los Angeles. But because intermarriage is so prevalent among Conservative Jews these days (nearly four in 10 Conservative Jews are doing it, according to Steven M. Cohen of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion), partners willing to go the extra step and convert tend to be pretty involved with Judaism, Greenwald says. The other one-third of Conservative converts include spiritual seekers, young people turned on to Judaism through friends in college, the elderly — even single moms looking for direction, according to Greenwald.

Attitude toward conversions performed by other denominations: If the conversion meets Conservative requirements, it’s kosher. That generally includes Orthodox conversions and excludes Reform ones, but not across the board. If a Reform conversion included an acceptable three-judge panel, mikvah, circumcision, and a serious course of study and commitment to Jewish life, there are Conservative rabbis who would find it acceptable.

Problems: Conservative conversions are not recognized by Orthodox institutions, including Israel’s Chief Rabbinate. So if you immigrate to Israel (the Israeli Interior Ministry accepts Conservative conversions for the purposes of immigration), you probably won’t be considered Jewish by the Rabbinate and therefore won’t be permitted to marry a Jew in Israel. You’ll either have to marry overseas, have an “unofficial” wedding in Israel that won’t be recognized by law or re-convert Orthodox style.

Who is a Jew without conversion: Anyone with a Jewish mother according to Conservative interpretations of Jewish law.

Reform

Number: Unknown, but at least 800-900 per year. The American Jewish Archives in Cincinnati keeps a record of conversion certificates but does not know what proportion of converts send them in. The Union for Reform Judaism says over 1,000 individuals took one of its 16-week conversion classes in 2013.

Ritual: Varies. All “Jews by choice” make some kind of public declaration of commitment. It may be in the rabbi’s office before a three-person religious panel, in front of the entire congregation in the synagogue sanctuary or at the mikvah. Mikvah immersion is recommended but not required. Some men also undergo circumcision or the symbolic drawing of blood, but it’s not required. In synagogue conversion ceremonies, the convert typically holds the Torah, recites the Shema, is given a Hebrew name and receives a blessing.

Preparation: A 14- to 16-week Introduction to Judaism class that meets weekly and covers such topics as basic Hebrew and prayer, holidays, Jewish history, Jewish lifecycle, Israel and how-to Judaism. These may be supplemented or substituted by individualized counseling or study sessions with rabbis.

Requirements: Broadly speaking, commitment to the Jewish people, living life as a Jew and Jewish values. Some ceremonies require affirmation of six key tenets as outlined in the conversion service published by the movement in 1988: accepting Judaism to the exclusion of all other religious; freely entering the covenant between God and the Jewish people; being loyal to Judaism and the Jewish people; establishing a Jewish home and participating actively in synagogue and communal life; pursuing Torah and Jewish knowledge; raising one’s children as Jews.

Who’s converting? Longtime non-Jewish spouses of Jews who may have raised Jewish children and long been involved in synagogue life and now want to formalize their Jewish identity; gentiles marrying Jews; spiritual seekers.

Feeling toward conversions performed by other denominations: If you have chosen to become a Jew and gone through some kind of legitimate conversion, you’re Jewish.

Problems: If you’re applying for Israeli citizenship, Reform conversions usually pass muster with the Israeli Interior Ministry but not with the Orthodox-dominated Israeli Chief Rabbinate. That means you can move to Israel but you can’t marry a Jew there. In the United States, too, Orthodox institutions don’t accept Reform conversions. Your conversion probably won’t count according to Conservative interpretations of Jewish law, either, but that depends on the specifics of your conversion and which Conservative rabbi you ask.

Who is a Jew without conversion: Anyone with a Jewish parent (mother or father) living as a Jew. Someone with a Jewish parent who identifies with another faith is not considered Jewish.

(This piece does not include conversion by other denominations or no denomination because the numbers are negligible compared with the three main American Jewish religious denominations.)


http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/features/1.619502

Tuesday, December 06, 2016

"According to the Jewish People Policy Institute, only 23 percent of Jews believe that a rabbi should have the final say on who is and who isn't a Jew."


Vast Majority of Jews Don’t Want Rabbis Deciding if They’re Jewish, Survey Shows

According to the Jewish People Policy Institute, only 23 percent of Jews believe that a rabbi should have the final say on who is and who isn't a Jew.

Most Jews do not believe rabbis should have the authority to determine who qualifies as a member of the faith, and even among the Orthodox, only a slight majority do.

According to a report published on Monday, 37 percent of Jews worldwide believe that local communities should be the final arbiter of who is a Jew. Another 30 percent would have individuals decide for themselves, and only 23 percent think the question should be determined by rabbis. A small minority of 6 percent believe the state of Israel should have the final say in this thorny matter.

The report, published by the Jewish People Policy Institute, a Jerusalem-based think tank, was based on responses received from 715 participants in dialogue groups held in March and April this year in Israel, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Brazil and Switzerland. The majority of the participants were from the United States.

Among Orthodox Jews, 54 percent said rabbis should be left to determine who is Jewish.

Among Conservative Jews, it was 24 percent, and among Reform Jews, only 10 percent.

In Israel, it is the Orthodox rabbinical establishment that determines who is a Jew for the purpose of marriage.

When questioned whether Israel should consider views of non-Israeli Jews when determining who is considered Jewish in Israel, only a tiny minority of 6 percent of the respondents said the state need not take into account their views.

Still, 57 percent of the participants said it was “necessary to have a broadly accepted understanding of who is a Jew.”

On the question of whether a conversion by a Reform or Conservative rabbi should be considered legitimate, Israelis seemed to be far more rigid than their counterparts abroad. They were the only group in which a large portion of the participants (44 percent) objected to some degree or another to non-Orthodox conversions.

Asked whether they “strongly agree” that Israel’s definition of a Jew is an “insult” to Diaspora Jewry, more than 20 percent of Conservative Jews and more than 30 percent of Reform Jews responded in the affirmative.


http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/news/.premium-1.755828

Monday, December 05, 2016

Merry Chanukah - Happy Christmas! The More Fraudulent "Conversions", The More Confusion!


Natalie Portman to put up first Christmas tree

 

With Hanukkah and Christmas coinciding this year, pregnant actress and her Jewish family make exception to tradition


A pregnant Natalie Portman talks with Jimmy Fallon on The Tonight Show, November 29, 2016. (YouTube screenshot)
A pregnant Natalie Portman talks with Jimmy Fallon on The Tonight Show, November 29, 2016.


It’s taken 35 years, but Natalie Portman is finally getting her first Christmas tree.

The Jewish actress told The Tonight Show’s Jimmy Fallon on Tuesday that since the first night of Hanukkah coincides with Christmas eve this year, her family has decided to celebrate both holidays together. 

Portman, her French choreographer husband Benjamin Millepied (who converted to Judaism in 2014), and their 5-year-old son Aleph usually observe Hanukkah at their home, and celebrate Christmas with Millepied’s family at their house. However, this holiday season Portman and Millepied are hosting everyone at their Los Angeles house, with both a Christmas tree and a menorah on display.

“I was asking my husband, ‘Is it okay for your family if we don’t have a tree?’ and then my parents were like, ‘We can get a tree,'” she told Fallon.

The Jerusalem-born Portman, who is pregnant with her second child, said she couldn’t have been more pleased about her parents’ willingness to deviate from tradition, at least this once.

“So excited! Like my whole life no Christmas tree, and then all of a sudden they have this great excuse, because it’s every Jew’s kind of secret wish to have a Christmas tree,” Portman explained.

Happy for the actress to have her first Christmas tree, Fallon presented her with an official The Tonight Show ornament to hang on it. Fallon pointed out that the ornament was silver and blue, presumably referring to traditional Hanukkah decoration colors.

It is unlikely, given the Israeli-born Portman’s outspokenness about her Judaism and Zionism, that the tree is a sign of any weakening of the actress’ Jewish identity. Furthermore, it can be expected that Portman and her husband will raise their second child in the Jewish faith, as they are their son Aleph.

News of Portman’s second pregnancy broke in September when she appeared at the premiere of her film “Planetarium” at the Venice Film Festival with her baby bump showing through her form-fitting white Grecian-style Dior gown. Portman’s pregnancy was also apparent as she has walked the red carpet recently for her other soon-to-be release film, “Jackie,” in which she plays the former first lady Jacqueline Kennedy.

Portman’s due date has not been announced, but she assured Fallon that it is not for months, despite how large her belly is already.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/natalie-portman-to-put-up-first-xmas-tree/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Jared the Jew joins the xmas festivities

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1346715344001/a-trump-family-christmas/?#sp=show-clips


RCA GEIRUS STANDARD AND POLICIES:

Requirements of Other People in a Candidate’s Life

When a candidate is previously intermarried or is converting for the sake of an individual Jew,  the spouse’s observance level and attitudes must be consistent with the present and future Torah observance of the candidate and not be a source of conflict or opposition to the convert’s adopting a halachic lifestyle. The Beit Din should also consider whether other significant individuals in the candidate’s life such as parents, or any existing minor children, will have an impact on the success or failure of the process and the aftermath of conversion.

http://www.judaismconversion.org/GPS_Policies_and_Procedures.html



“Both a man who converted for the sake of a woman and a woman who converted for the sake of a man,” we read in Yevamot 24b, “they are not converts.”

Friday, December 02, 2016

Rabbi Hershel Schechter and the RCA - Rabbinical Council of America - I AM WATCHING YOU!

On Saturday Josh Kushner Goes For A Stroll With Girlfriend Supermodel Karlie Kloss


-
The paparazzi were out on regular patrol in New York on Saturday, and this time they were able to capture entrepreneur Joshua Kushner, whose brother Jared is married to Ivanka Trump, out for a regular Saturday stroll in Soho in the Spring sunshine, with his girl friend Victoria’s Secret model Karlie Kloss.

Both wore regulation blue jeans and appeared to be wrapped up in each other’s eyes as they held hands. The photographs appeared in today’s Daily Mail.Karlie, 21, was wearing a black top and a blazer to match, while 28-year-old Joshua, whose sister-in-law is Ivanka Trump, was low key in a cozy sweater.

According to US Weekly, the couple met at a Victoria’s Secret party a year and a half ago, and have been going out ever since.
-
Vostu CEO Daniel Kafie Discusses Gaming Site
-
When interviews by Metro.com just in February, she was asked if she believed in falling in love at first sight. “Yeah, I do, I was definitely not planning on falling in love [with Joshua]. But I think that’s the thing about it. You can’t plan or anticipate it.”
While Kylie enjoys life as a super model she is also pretty smart, and even took a business class at Harvard recently, studying the Business off Entertainment and Sports there, according to the new York Post, posting this picture of herself there on Instagram. (NOT FOR THIS BLOG)

 -

Thursday, December 01, 2016

You Know I'm Hitting Home When Weiss And Angel are Whining That The RCA is Being Too Tough On Previous Conversions And Converts!

RCA must stand behind the conversions performed by its members

205shares
A women converts to Judaism in front of a three-judge Orthodox rabbinic court in Jerusalem. (Flash90)
A women converts to Judaism in front of a three-judge Orthodox rabbinic court in Jerusalem.


(JTA) — Let us begin with the facts: Converts whose conversions were conducted according to halachah, or Jewish law, are 100 percent Jewish.

In the eyes of God and Torah, they are full Jews, just as Jewish as any born Jews. Their Jewishness is not contingent on the Israeli Chief Rabbinate or anyone else. Halachic converts are Jewish, their children are Jewish, they are obligated to fulfill the mitzvot like all other Jews.

Anyone who casts aspersions on the Jewish status of these converts is in violation of one of the most important laws in the Torah: not to oppress the convert.

Yet there are those who raise doubts about halachic converts. With a heavy heart, we note that modern Orthodoxy’s Rabbinical Council of America is doing just that. (The RCA is a national organization that includes in its ranks several hundred synagogue rabbis.) Indeed, new information that has come before us leads us to believe that Jews who were converted by RCA rabbis prior to its institution of a centralized conversion system in 2008 known as GPS (Geirus Policies and Standards) should beware – their conversions are now being questioned by the RCA itself. This affects not only them but their progeny as well.

Let us explain:
Prior to GPS, members of the RCA routinely convened a beth din, or Jewish court, and performed conversions. Converts who desired to marry in Israel would turn to the Chief Rabbinate there, through which all Israeli marriages are performed. To assure that an RCA rabbi’s conversion was valid, the Israeli Rabbinate would consult the RCA leadership to ascertain the conversion’s validity. The leadership of the RCA would pro forma verify that the RCA rabbis who performed the conversions were members in good standing, knowledgeable and reliable.

This would be good enough for the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. In America, too, when leaders of synagogues and day schools were unfamiliar with the converting rabbi, they would seek similar confirmation from the RCA.

As rabbis of large synagogues for many decades, scores of our conversions were approved over the years by RCA leadership. We know firsthand that there are countless other rabbis whose conversions were similarly approved.

This longstanding process was shattered when the Israeli Chief Rabbinate proclaimed in 2006 that even if an RCA rabbi’s conversion was confirmed by the RCA leadership, it would not be sufficient.

A few of us urged the RCA to challenge this decision. We urged the RCA to uphold the honor and integrity of its members and, more importantly, affirm the validity of their conversions. Regrettably, the RCA chose to “make peace” with the Chief Rabbinate by establishing the GPS system of centralized rabbinical courts in 2008. No longer would the RCA vouch for conversions performed by its members. Only those conducted by rabbis from the newly formed courts would be approved by the RCA.

In an article we wrote here in March 2008, we argued that the new system would raise questions concerning conversions done prior to GPS. It read: “What is most troubling is that conversions, done years ago with the informal backing of the RCA, are now being scrutinized. This, we believe, strikes at the very ethical fabric of halachah. Over the years, thousands of people have been halachically converted, and now they and their children, and for that matter their marriages, will all be questioned. The pain that this will cause the convert, a person whom the Torah commands to love, will be unbearable.”

The RCA, clearly stung by this criticism, responded a day later, dismissing our concerns.

“Public written statements over the last few days have raised questions regarding the status of conversions performed by RCA rabbis in the past, and whether all such converts would be subject to special re-evaluation or scrutiny by the RCA or by Israel’s Chief Rabbinate,” the organization wrote in a statement. “There is nothing in the RCA/GPS protocol for conversions that implies or states such a thing, and there was and is no intention to review or scrutinize, much less nullify, previous conversions. All conversions performed by RCA member rabbis that were considered valid in the past will continue to be considered valid in the future.” (Emphasis added.)

Rabbi Marc Angel, left, is the rabbi emeritus of Congregation Shearith Israel in New York and past president of the Rabbinical Council of America. Rabbi Avraham (Avi) Weiss, right, is the senior rabbi of the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale and a longtime me ()
Rabbis Marc Angel, left, and Avi Weiss are co-founders of the International Rabbinic Fellowship (Courtesy of the IRF).

Therefore, it was with deep pain that we read a statement issued recently by the current chairman of the GPS conversion program responding to media reports that the Chief Rabbinate of Israel had rejected several conversions done by leading Orthodox rabbis associated with the RCA beth din. The chairman explained that the RCA had an understanding with the Chief Rabbinate that all GPS conversions were valid. The conversions in question were performed prior to the creation of the GPS system, concerning which the Beth Din of America issued a ishur, a legal attestation, confirming their validity.

The statement went on to say that the RCA was taking “affirmative steps … in consultation with the office of the Chief Rabbinate in Israel to provide greater assurances to those who converted outside of the GPS network of Batei Din and received ishurim from the Beth Din of America.”

Summing up the RCA position, the chairman wrote: “The Rabbinical Council of America stands behind every GPS conversion as well as every ishur issued to converts by the Beth Din of America, and recognizes all such converts and their children to be an integral part of the Jewish people, no less than every other Jewish person, including the community of RCA Rabbis and our families.”

This statement makes the position of the RCA clear: It will not stand behind the conversions performed by its members prior to the establishment of the GPS system unless those conversions receive an ishur by the heads of the Beth Din of America.

This is a major deflection from the RCA’s prior promise. Conversions done prior to the GPS system never involved the RCA Beth Din. Now an ishur from the Beth Din of America is required. For the RCA, this ishur will not only be necessary to prove the bona fides of conversions for the Israeli Rabbinate, but for Orthodox synagogues and schools in America, as well.

One wonders what the Beth Din of America will require from the rabbi to issue the ishur. Will it investigate the religious bona fides — as they now define them — of every converting rabbi? How far will the court go back and how deep will it dig? There were RCA rabbis in the 1950s whose synagogues hosted mixed dances. There were rabbis who were sent by Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, the era’s revered leader of modern Orthodoxy, to mixed-seating congregations in the ’60s and ’70s. Will all of these conversions be invalidated?

And how about the convert? Will non-observance nullify the conversion retroactively? Suppose the convert seeking the ishur is no longer observant. Or suppose the convert’s grandson or granddaughter who is not observant is seeking the ishur. The RCA has a responsibility to be fully transparent and answer these questions.

Unfortunately, the concerns we expressed in 2008 were entirely valid. Any pre-GPS convert will not be pro forma accepted as a valid convert. If the Beth Din of America feels the convert does not meet its standards, for whatever reason, the ishur will not be issued.

With this development, many thousands of people who were converted by RCA rabbis and are fully halachic Jews are now having their status as Jews thrown into doubt. This is a great travesty. Converts with whom we have had contact feel betrayed.

Even RCA rabbis who support the GPS system should stand up with courage and vigorously demand that those who converted with RCA rabbis prior to the GPS system be recognized as the halachic Jews that they are – without an ishur from the beth din. Applying GPS standards to pre-GPS conversions that had previously been accepted is immoral. Members of the RCA must let their leadership know how disappointed and outraged they are by the RCA’s change of policy.

It must also be added that not only is the RCA casting doubt on conversions done prior to GPS, it is also sending a message that conversions done today by modern Orthodox rabbis outside of GPS are questionable. This is precisely what happened in the recent case of the (highly respected)? Rabbi Haskel Lookstein of New York, when a conversion he performed outside of GPS was turned down by the Israeli Rabbinate, resulting in grave anguish not only to one of the great modern Orthodox rabbis of our time, but to the convert herself.

By invalidating halachic conversions, the Israeli Chief Rabbinate continues on the path of alienating the masses of Jews in Israel. In linking itself to the Chief Rabbinate, the RCA undermines its credibility as an honest broker relative to conversions, placing power politics ahead of its responsibility to the Jewish people.

(Rabbis Avi Weiss and Marc Angel are co-founders of the International Rabbinic Fellowship. Angel is rabbi emeritus of the Spanish-Portuguese Synagogue and founder of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals. He is also a past president of the RCA. Weiss is the founding rabbi of the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale and founder of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah and Yeshivat Maharat.)

http://www.jta.org/2016/11/20/default/rca-must-stand-behind-the-conversions-performed-by-its-members

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Rupert Murdoch and his ex Wendi Deng, who famously reunited them after Ivanka Trump broke off the relationship, sore that Jared Kushner didn’t stand up to his father who insisted she convert to Judaism...

 Ivanka Trump Coerced To Convert To Judaism! What Say You Hershel Schechter, Haskel Lookstein and the RCA?


 Wait, there’s more! This week, The New Yorker reported that Deng is responsible for the unholy alliance (Is that too cruel? Do I care?) between Trumpistan and Kushervania. That is to say, she brokered their reconciliation in 2008, when they briefly split due to that fact that Ivanka (who, as the magazine recalls, appeared in the documentary Born Rich “wearing a necklace with a silver cross”) was not exactly who Kushner’s mother imagined him standing under the chuppah with. And if you’re reading this, you know exactly what I mean (and honestly, hasn’t poor Seryl Kushner been through enough?)

http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/211056/wendi-deng-ivanka-trump-jared-kushner-instagram-dubrovnik

 Rupert Murdoch and his ex Wendi Deng, who famously reunited them after Ivanka broke off the relationship, sore that Jared didn’t stand up to his father who insisted she convert to Judaism, according to The New Yorker.

http://forward.com/news/355360/is-jared-kushner-on-the-verge-of-becoming-donald-trumps-de-facto-president/?utm_content=daily_Newsletter_MainList_Title_Position-1&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=New%20Daily%202016-11-28&utm_term=The%20Forward%20Today%20Monday-Friday

VALID AND INVALID CANDIDATES 
 The Torah’s Approach to Conversion


Based on: Jewish Conversion, Its Meaning and Laws, by: Rabbi Yoel Schwartz, 1995, Feldheim Publishers, Pages 14-60.
 
To be valid, a conversion must be sincerely motivated, and accompanied by the willingness and opportunity, to observe the precepts. Insincerely motivated candidates, are unacceptable, and are to be rejected, even if we merely suspect their insincerity. Although the Talmud (Yevamos 24) rules that once performed, insincerely motivated conversions are valid, this statement requires much clarification, and is dependent on numerous, complex, factors.

The Talmud is speaking of situations in which mitzvah (commandment) observance is the traditional requirement for acceptance into Jewish society. When such is the case, even the insincere proselyte has to conform to the norm. Thus, of necessity, his conversion results in religious observance. Because our current society is free and permissive, conversion does not necessarily result in mitzvah (commandment) observance.

 In addition, those who interdate or intermarry, are obviously totally uncommitted to Judaism, and it is highly improbable that they will build Torah homes, once their Christian partners have converted. It is highly unlikely, too, that a female proselyte, will be more observant than her Jewish husband, who by his very behavior, in chosing a gentile for a wife, demonstrates that he is far removed from Jewish values.

In the light of these problems, how do we procede when faced by applicants whose motives are ulterior?

a. The conversion of one who evidently has no intention to observe the precepts, who is merely mouthing a false acceptance declaration, is obviously invalid.

b. The conversion of one who did not present the court with sufficient guarantee that he would
observe the precepts, is highly problematic, and under certain circumstances may be invalid.

c. According to Maimonides: Laws of Forbidden Relations 13:12 and the Shulchan Aruch (Code of Jewish Law) (yoreh De’ah 268:12), a person who has already converted for ulterior motives, but whose intentions at the time of conversion (regarding precept observance) are not known, is accorded the status of a doubtful convert. When he demonstrates, by his subsequent conduct, that he is indeed precept observant, he is accorded the status of a genuine proselyte. The reason we do not nullify his conversion at the outset, as in case “b,” is that we fear that as he uttered his acceptance declaration, he might have truly intended to observe the precepts. (Case “b”, involves a conversion performed without sufficient guarantee that the convert had fully accepted Torah observance.) (Recently, the Worldwide Central Rabbinic Committee for Conversion Matters, alerted converts involved in such cases to this problem. Since then, many conversions have been referred to the Committee. Each case was presented to Israel’s greatest rabbis for a decision. In cases where the convert was currently Torah observant, and it was not possible to ascertain exactly what took place at the time of his conversion, the Committee advised the convert how to procede.

(Note: We have not presented halachic (Jewish Law) decisions. A qualified rabbi or conversion court, must be consulted in each and every case. Our purpose is to provide a general understanding of the conversion issue.)

Sometimes, various arguments are forwarded to justify the validity of conversions performed for the sake of marriage. It is worthwhile to review these arguments and to point out their flaws.

The first argument is based on the principle that “devarim she’balev, einam devarim,” which literally means that “tacit thoughts are inconsequential.” Some people use this principle to prove that the insincere convert’s mental negations of the precepts, cannot nullify his positive oral acceptance of them. However, nearly all of our rabbinic authorities, assert that this claim is invalid. In Teshuvos Achiezer (111, no.26), HaRav Chaim Ozer Grodzinski maintains that one who mentally negates the precepts, while orally accepting them, is not a true convert. He bases his argument on the rationale that because conversion is in itself a “davar she’balev” “a matter of the heart,” it is the candidate’s inner conviction which determines the validity of his conversion. Other authorities invalidate the claim of “tacit thoughts are inconsequential” as it pertains to conversions, on the grounds that this principle applies only to matters of transaction, and not to ritual acts.

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein views the problem from a different vantage point. He accepts the argument that tacit thoughts cannot invalidate ritual acts. However, he points out that it is inapplicable in the case of such conversions, because the very marriage of a gentile woman to a non observant Jew, is equivalent to an open declaration that she will not observe the precepts. As we have already explained, this is so, because it is highly unlikely that the gentile member of such a union, will be more committed to Judaism than her remiss Jewish husband. Unlike mental or tacit negations, explains HaRav Feinstein, open declarations do invalidate conversions. When such cases appear before a rabbinical court, its members actually become witnesses to an acceptance declaration that is not sincere. Therefore, it is no longer a tacit insincerity, but rather an obvious one. As such, they are forbidden to sanction the conversion. 

There are rabbis who permit such conversions, even when it is highly unlikely that the converting partner will observe the precepts. They base themselves on the principle advanced in the Talmud Shabbos 34, that “one who converted amidst gentiles, is still a convert.” This principle is referring to one who converted, even though he knew very little about the precepts, particularly the Sabbath. These modern rabbis claim that such candidates assume that the precepts are merely ceremonial and not obligatory, and therefore place them in the category of those who have accepted Judaism on the basis of a very meager knowledge. However, this argument is faulty for two reasons. Firstly, the Talmud is speaking of one who would observe the Sabbath, if informed of its laws. Generally, people who convert only to facilitate marriage, have no interest in leading Torah lives, and as such, cannot be equated with the above mentioned Talmudic archetype. In addition (as taught by the Chazon Ish: Rabbi Karelitz), the conversion of one who does not believe that the Divine origin of the Torah is the binding force of all the precepts, is invalid. As a rule, most people who convert for the purpose of marriage, lack this basic inner belief.

http://www.torahlab.org/community/article/the_torahs_approach_to_conversion/


This declaration that the convert was clearly lying about his wish to convert and accept mitzvos - that there was never conversion - is not some obscure minority opinion. It is clearly the view of the Achiezer and Rav Moshe Feinstein - amongst others.


The Achiezer says here that if the convert does not keep Shabbos and kashrus - that shows that the conversion was not sincere and never took place


Rav Chaim Ozer Grodinski(Achiezer 3:26.4):… Because of this reason it appears that Rav Posen is concerned about conversion these cases because they won’t observe the laws properly. However according to what I have explained there is no concern for this since they have accepted to observe all the mitzvos – even though it is true that they have in mind to transgress certain mitzvos later out of lust. However this intention does not disqualify their acceptance of mitzvos. It is only where they specifically refused to accept mitzvos that their acceptance of the mitzvos is disqualified. However where is clear that after conversion they will definitely transgress the Torah prohibitions against violating Shabbos and eating improperly slaughtered meat and we know clearly that their conversion was only for appearance sake without inner sincerity – it is an umdena demukach [a proven assessment] that this that he said he was accepting the mitzvos was totally meaningless. Consequently their acceptance of mitzvos is invalid [and they are not valid converts].

Rav Chaim Ozer Grodinski(Achiezer 3:28): Concerning the common practice of converting women who are married to Jews - according to the straight halacha it is not correct to convert them. That is because they are converting for the sake of marriage. Therefore even after marriage she is prohibited to him as is clear from the Rashba (#1205). While previously I had written to be lenient in these cases and I based myself on the Rambam (Pe’er HaDor 132) and Rav Shlomo Kluger also paskened leniently in an actual case. Nevertheless the fact is that there is not genuine acceptance of mitzvos in these cases. It is quite obvious that their hearts are not with the Jewish people since they do not observe Shabbos or niddah and they eat unkosher food as I wrote in the previous letter. This problem has already been noted by by the Beis Yitzchok who concluded that a proper beis din would not be involved in this. And regarding the issue of governing the non‑Jewish children…However the writer is correct that a good beis din should not be involved in this type of conversion. Nevertheless I don’t see that it is proper that the rabbis of the generation should make an open protest against conversion. That is because in the eyes of the masses it would be viewed as a chilul HaShem to prevent the women to convert and in particular their children since according to the straight halacha it is possible to convert them.

Reb Moshe is saying here that those who convert for ulterior motives are on probation to establish if they were sincere in their acceptance. If there is no sincere acceptance then there never was conversion.

Igros Moshe(Y.D. 3:106): A candidate for conversion who does not want to accept a certain mitzva is he a ger bedieved?… Concerning the subject of conversion, the vast majority of them want to convert because of marriage and therefore should inherently not be accepted. However if they were accepted anyway - they are in fact valid gerim. This reservation about accepting converts for the sake of marriage is true even if they accept all the mitzvos since they did not decide to convert for the sake of Heaven. Therefore it is obvious that there is suspicion that despite the fact they stated before the beis din that they are accepting to do the mitzvos – that they are not telling the truth and they need to be examined further. 

 This in fact is the intent of the Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 268:12): When it is known that they converted for ulterior motivation, they should be treated with suspicion until that their righteous is established. That is because since they converted for ulterior motivation, they should be suspected that even though they have verbally accepted the mitzvos but not in their heart. Since there is clear reason to suspect their lack of sincerity, it is not considered a merely a possible mental reservation which has no halachic significance (devarim sheb’lev). See Tosfos (Gittin 32a) and Tosfos (Kiddushin 49b)…Therefore they are to be viewed as doubtful gerim until their righteousness is establish and then they are viewed as definite gerim. 

Most of the time and perhaps all of the time when a Jew wants a non‑Jew, that the Jew himself is not observant. Therefore it is not logical that the non‑Jew who is converting for the sake of a Jew will be more observant. It is as if we are witnesses that the non‑Jew is not definitely accepting the mitzvos. 

Therefore it requires a great deal of deliberation in the acceptance of gerim. Unfortunately due to our many sins the situation has degenerated in many places that they accept these type of gerim – even G‑d fearing rabbis – because of the pressure of congregants on them. Therefore it is very critical to fix and create protective measures to stop this great breakdown of the system. It is certain because of these problems that the rabbis of Holland made a decree that gerim would not be accepted unless all of the rabbis agreed. This type of decree is a legitimate approach to protect the Torah and mitzvos against that which can not be permitted as is stated in Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 228:28). Concerning the present case where the candidate for conversion wants to accept all the laws of the Torah but does not want to accept wearing modest clothing. She wants to wear the clothing that are worn – due to our many sins – by the average woman of this degenerate generation. The question is whether to accept her as a valid ger and if the answer is negative - what is her status if she is accepted anyway?

 This requires careful thought. Bechoros (30b) states that a non‑Jew who comes to accept the entire Torah except for one thing is not to be accepted. R’ Yose says that he isn’t accepted even if rejects one detail of a rabbinic halacha. The question is whether this gemora is only concerning initially whether to accept the candidate as seems from the language of the gemora or that even if he accepted – he is not a valid ger? It is certain that gerim are accepted even though they don’t know most of the laws of the Torah - because we instruct them only in some of the mitzvos. It is certain that we don’t even teach them most of the laws of Shabbos. Furthermore we find an even more extreme situation in that even if the ger doesn’t know any mitzvos he is still a valid ger. This is stated in Shabbos (68b) that a ger who converts amongst non‑Jews is liable for one chatas for all the violations on every Shabbos and prohibited blood and fat and idolatry. Thus we see that even if he isn’t instructed in a single mitzva or even the foundations of religious belief he is still a valid ger. That is because the case in the gemora concerns a person who has accepted upon himself to do all that a Jew is required to do – and that is sufficient for valid conversion. 

We are not concerned with the possibility that if he knew this particular mitzva he would not accept it. That is because even if it were so it is only a mental reservation which has no halachic significance. Thus informing a candidate for conversion of the nature of mitzvos is only something that is desirable, but has no halachic consequence if not done. Therefore we must say that the language of the Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 268:3) “all matters of conversion have to be in the presence of 3 fit to judge whether it is to instruct him about mitzvos or for his acceptance of mitzvos” – is not to be understood literally. That is because the point of the Shulchan Aruch is that the acceptance of mitzvos has to be in the presence of 3 but instructing him about mitzvos is not required for the validity of the conversion. The reason the Shulchan Aruch mentions instructing him in mitzvos is because that is what the beis din does concerning some of the mitzvos when he accepts the obligation to do mitzvos.

 That is in fact the language of the Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 268:12) “and even if he is not informed of the reward and punishment of mitzvos he is still a valid ger.” This wording of the Shulchan Aruch here is also not precise because even if the candidate is not instructed at all concerning any mitzvos – as long as he accepts the obligation to do all the mitzvos that Jews are required to do – he is still a valid ger. It is only because it is typically not forgotten to instruct him in some mitzvos that the Shulchan Aruch mentions that they forgot to instruct him regarding the reward and punishment of mitzvos – because it is possible to forget this occasionally. However if they do tell him a particular mitzva or he knows about it himself since he sees Jews observing it and he says that he doesn’t accept it – that is the case that Bechoros (30b) says that he is not accepted as a ger. Therefore it is possible that in this case even if he was accepted as a ger – despite his rejection of a particular mitzva – bedieved he would still not be a valid ger. However Bechoros (30b) says that he is not to be accepted - which seems to be that he is only not accepted initially if he rejects any mitzva. Furthermore it would seem from the statement of R’ Yose in Bechoros (30b) that even if rejects a single detail of a rabbinic law he is not accepted – it would seem that since he has accepted every Torah mitzva including not to deviate from the rabbinic teachings – but at least he would be a ger according to the Torah. That is because it doesn’t make sense that the Sages would uproot the Torah level conversion - which is relevant to the validity of marriage and other matters – and to create a leniency and that this would not be mentioned openly in the gemora. Therefore we can conclude that even according to R’ Yose he is only saying not to accept them initially but if they were accepted – even if they had rejected a rabbinic law – they are still valid gerim. Furthermore they would be obligated to keep even the mitzva that they had rejected. That is because this that they did not accept it has no halachic significance to exempt them because they are make a condition against that which is written in the Torah – and therefore the condition is nullified...

 Therefore this woman who doesn’t want to accept to wear only modest clothing should definitely not be accepted initially. However whether she should be accepted bedieved depends on this doubt and it would seem more likely that bedieved if she was accepted that she would be a valid convert. Furthermore concerning whether to accept her initially – any conversion which is because of marriage even if she accepted the entire Torah – she should not be accepted. 

If so it is certainly is a major justification for the requirement that all the rabbis of Holland agree to accept her conversion – even if she accepted all the Torah laws. Nevertheless it is good that all the rabbis did not agree to accept her because of her refusal to wear modest clothing. That is because accepting her with two issues against her is much more serious than if she only had one. However there is another consideration since because of our many sins we find that Jewish women also are not careful about wearing only modest clothing – even those who are Torah observant. Therefore a non‑Jewish woman who comes to convert might think that modest clothing in only an act of piety that the rabbis are trying to impose on her more than is actually required – because she knows women who are observant and yet wear immodest clothing. And even if the rabbis tell her that it is actually prohibited and not just an act of piety – she doesn’t believe them. If so perhaps she should be viewed as converting without knowing the laws of the Torah and would be considered a valid ger according to Shabbos (68b)? This seems logical – even though I don’t have a proof for this presently. Nevertheless with all things considered it is better not to accept her because she should not be accepted anyway since the conversion is for the sake of marriage. Therefore even though people are lenient to accept converts for the sake of marriage it is not correct to be lenient in additional factors. Consequently the decree is correct and she should not be accepted

http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2008/05/contrary-to-some-rabbis-conversion-can.html




On Conversion to Judaism, by Rabbi Dr. Chaim E. Schertz

 

 

Rabbi Schertz received his semicha from Yeshiva University in 1969.  He also received masters in Jewish Philosophy from YU’s Bernard Revel Graduate School.  He has a second masters in the History of Ideas from New York University, and a PhD from New York University in the History of Western Thought.  He taught Classics in Pennsylvania State University and Philosophy at Regis College in Denver, Colorado. Rabbi Schertz served as the Rabbi of Kesher Israel Congregation in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania for over 25 years and is currently retired and living in Harrisburg.


  1. COERCION AND REJECTION
The one element in the process of conversion with which all interpretations of the concept agree is the insistence that conversion may not happen under duress or coercion. The Talmud clearly states that a non-Jewish slave may be circumcised under duress [against his will] for becoming a slave, but a free man may not undergo such conversion. The Talmud gives the example of an adult who comes to be converted, nevertheless, he has no power to convert his adult son against his will. This is the opinion of Rabbi Shimon Eleazer as interpreted by Rava. The rabbis, however, go one step further and insist that even a slave, who is an adult, cannot be converted against his will. Thus, no adult can be coerced into conversion. [Yevamot 48:a]
In addition to such biblical analysis and exegesis there appears to be a logical underpinning to this conclusion. The Talmud stated in Ketubot 11:a that in cases dealing with minors one may provide them with Judaism without their awareness. This is based on the principle that one may provide another with any benefit [in this case the benefit is Judaism) without the consent or knowledge of the other. The corollary to this concept is that one may not impose any obligation upon another without that person’s awareness or consent. The Talmud assumes that in the case of an adult non-Jew, who has been raised as a non-Jew, the freedom that he enjoys in living as a non-Jew overrides any aspect of Judaism because Judaism entails a host of obligations. He is not anxious to limit his life style by the myriad of obligations which Judaism imposes despite the fact that Judaism may endow him with a higher spiritual life. Any attempt to impose such obligations upon him is tantamount to coercion and has no halachic validity.

The one other objection to the use of coercion is historical by nature. We have stated above that the foundation upon which the principles of conversion were established upon the conversion of the Israelites on Mt. Sinai. This was stated clearly by Maimonidies that in all future generations if a non-Jew wishes to enter the Covenant he must undergo the same ritual and requirements which the ancestors of the Jews underwent in the Wilderness [Issurei Biah 13:4]. This is similarly maintained by the Tosafists [Sanhedrin 68:b, under the heading Katan]. The Tosafists there maintain the various elements which allowed the Israelites to be converted into Jews, including the conversion of children. These principles applied to the future conversion of non-Jews.

Perhaps the most famous example of the invalidity of conversion when duress is an underlying issue, is the matter of the acceptance into Judaism of the Kutites. The Talmud discusses a controversy between Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva whether the Kutites, who inhabited the Land of Israel after the Babylonian expulsion, were to be considered true converts (gerei emet) or converts who became so because of their fear of lions that roamed that area (gerei arayot). It is clear that if their conversion resulted from their fear, it was not acceptable in any sense. See Kiddushin 75 b.

The historical circumstances which demonstrated the inapplicability of coercion was stated in Tractate Shabbat 88:a.   The Talmud introduced an Aggadic interpretation of the Biblical text which implied that the Israelites camped beneath Mt. Sinai. Rabbi Avimi bar Chama bar Chasa stated that this came to teach that God placed the mountain upon their head and threatened them that if they did not accept the Torah they would be buried in that location, which seems to be a coercive statement. Rav Acha bar Jacov derived from this incident that due to the coercive nature of the act it had no legal or moral authority. Thus, if God should attempt to indict the Jews for non-observance they could always respond that their conversion had no validity because it was done under duress. Rava then stated that the issue of duress was canceled during the days of Achashverous when the Jews willingly accepted their conversion.

We must note that there appears to be one discrepancy in the Book of Esther that may lead to an opposite conclusion. The text states that, “many from the nations of the land became Jews because the fear of the Jews fell upon them” resulting from the king’s decree which empowered Jews (Esther VIII: 17). This implies that conversion which resulted from fear was an acceptable conversion. One could reply to this question by pointing out that the text never stated the normal term for conversion mitgayarim, but rather a unique term mityahadim. That could easily be taken to mean that there was no real conversion, but that these people merely took upon themselves the external appearance of being Jews to avoid calamity. Rashi, however, does interpret that the term mityahadim means mitgayarim i.e. conversion. One could explain this interpretation by noting although the conversions were performed, there is no indication that these conversions were accepted by the rabbinic authorities of that day. This is similar to the case of the Kutites who also converted. If, however, they converted primarily out of fear, then it is agreed that their conversion was invalid.

The passage outlined above in tractate Shabbat 88:a is quite problematic. It implies that from the time of the Exodus until the Persian conquest of the Babylonians, a period of about 700 years, there were no real Jews in the world. One, thus, must understand that this passage is to be seen as hyperbole rather than an accurate historical record. It is important, however, because it demonstrates how much emphasis the Talmud placed upon the requirement that no coercion could be part of the conversion process.

An adult may reject any element of the conversion process with which he does not agree or finds offensive which in turn nullifies the conversion itself as long as it is done prior to the conversion. “If a non-Jew is ready to accept the Torah with the exception of one law we should not accept him as a Jew. Rav Jose the son of Rav Judah says, even if he rejects one point or detail of the laws established by the Scribes ( the Oral Law)” [Bechorot 30:b] In the case of the conversion of minors, following the view of Rabbi Yosef (Ketubot 11:a) upon reaching adulthood they may always reject their prior conversion.

https://yulamdan.com/2015/03/29/on-conversion-to-judaism-by-rabbi-dr-chaim-e-schertz/

Teshuvot Chemdat Shlomo (Y.D. 29-30, referenced in the Pitchei Teshuvah 268:9) draws a fundamental distinction between Hoda’at Mitzvot and Kabblat Mitzvot. Chemdat Shlomo argues that although Hoda’at Mitzvot is not essential, Kabbalat Mitzvot is crucial. The convert’s commitment to observe (all) Mitzvot signifies the core of the conversion. If in a peculiar case the Beit Din mistakenly failed to inform the convert of the Torah’s obligations, the Geirut is acceptable BeDiEved. 

 However, if the convert is not committed to accept the Torah’s rules when he finds out what they are, the conversion is invalid.

The Chemdat Shlomo’s distinction has been accepted by the overwhelming majority of Poskim. These authorities include Rav Yitzchak Shmelkes (Teshuvot Beit Yitzchak Y.D. 2:100), Rav Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook (Teshuvot Da’at Kohen 147), Teshuvot Devar Avraham (3:28), Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinsky (Teshuvot Achiezer 3:26 and 28), Rav Moshe Feinstein (Teshuvot Igrot Moshe Y.D. 1:157), Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik (citing his father in footnote 22 to Kol Dodi Dofeik), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Teshuvot Minchat Shlomo 1:35) and Rav Yosef Shalom Eliashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:104). 
These authorities rule that if a covert did not commit to observing the Torah, the conversion is invalid.

Thus, were a non-Jew to be convinced (coerced) to undergo a conversion ceremony but is fully aware eating shellfish is forbidden by Jewish religious law and has no intention of observing those strictures, his or her mouthing of a mitigated “kabbalat hamitzvot” does not result in a conversion.

Rabbi Feinstein Igrot Moshe. In number 157 he writes:
… it is obvious and clear that [a non-Jew who did not accept (all) the mitzvot] is not a convert at all, even after the fact [of his conversion ceremony]… because kabbalat hamitzvot for a convert is essential [“me’akev”]. And even if he pronounces that he is accepting the mitzvot, if it is clear to us [“anan sa’hadi”] that he is not in truth accepting them, it is nothing.
And Rabbi Feinstein, concludes:
I altogether do not understand the reasoning of rabbis who err in this. Even according to [their mistaken notion], what gain are they bringing to the Jewish People by accepting such ‘converts’? It is certainly not pleasing to G-d or to the Jewish people that such ‘converts’ should become mixed into [the Congregation of] Israel. As to the halacha, it is clear that they are not converts at all.

***

Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner celebrated Kushner’s 31st birthday with an intimate dinner rather than a blowout Tuesday, when they were seen at “a cozy corner table” at Jesse Schenker’s West Village hot spot Recette. Spies say the pair nibbled on hamachi with uni, fluke with shellfish congee and s’mores with graham cracker ice cream, topped off by a candle. Trump then presented her hubby with two maroon Polo Ralph Lauren waffle shirts and other gifts.  

http://pagesix.com/2012/01/12/private-b-day/

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Bible Codes Connect Arson in Israel With Hot Air from Agudah Convention and Messianic Donkeys from Brooklyn...

 “Who makest winds Thy messengers, the flaming fire Thy ministers.” Psalms 104:4 (The Israel Bible™)





According to international Bible Codes expert Rabbi Matityahu Glazerson, the fires that have been burning in Israel from Haifa to Jerusalem are “a sign that we are nearing the time for Messiah.”
The series of Bible Codes videos, released in quick succession by Rabbi Glazerson, connect the fires with Nibiru, the arrival of the Messiah, and terror. 

In the second of two videos, released on November 24, Rabbi Glazerson finds, in the same table, Bible codes for Hamas, haFatah (Mahmoud Abbas’s political party, Fatah), terror and mitzitim (arsonists). In addition, he points out that the code for hatzatot (arson) crosses with the code for haAravim (the Arabs).

Terror Arson in Bible Codes

Rabbi Glazerson often calls the Torah “the blueprint of creation”. This point can be seen especially clearly in this table when he points out Bible Codes for srayfot (fires), Israel and Cheshvan 5777 (the Hebrew month and year that corresponds to November 2016). In other words, Bible Codes contain specific details of events that would not happen for thousands of years. 

Toward the end of the video, Rabbi Glazerson mentions several times that, according to Kabbalah (Judaism’s mystical tradition), there will be many troubles all over the world toward the End of Days. Paradoxically, such troubles reinforce the hope of those waiting. “According to Kabbalah,” he teaches, “this is a sign that we are nearing the time for Messiah.”

Rabbi Glazerson expanded on the point that constant troubles are a sign of the End of Days. Speaking to Breaking Israel News, he said, “As the Vilna Gaon (a world-renowned Jewish sage from the 18th century) says that, like the birth pangs are frequent before the birth, so are the troubles before Moshiach. And like the darkest night before dawn, so are the troubles before redemption.”

This video, connecting the fires and the coming of the Messiah, came short on the heels of another, released November 23, in which Rabbi Glazerson mentions earthquakes, fires and floods as by-products of the dwarf star Nibiru’s influence on Earth. He points out the code for Nibiru in the table. 

Nibiru, Messiah and Fire

 

This is significant because the table in this video is based on the Book of Numbers 23-29, which Nibiru expert and End of Days blogger Menachem Robinson points out, “happens to be exactly where the Torah tells us about the Star of Jacob, Nibiru. It is all coming together.”
I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not nigh; there shall step forth a star out of Yakov, and a scepter shall rise out of Yisrael, and shall smite through the corners of Moab, and break down all the sons of Seth. Numbers 24:17
Reflecting on the large number of disasters occurring in the world today, Rabbi Glazerson said, “These are all signs before Messiah to bring us to the understanding that the world is not in our hands.” 

Rabbi Glazerson also points to several codes related to Messiah. This table includes the codes Ben Yishai (son of Jesse, a reference to King David and the lineage of the Messiah), David (King David, of whom the Messiah will be a descendant), Moshiach (Messiah) and Moshiach Ami (the Messiah of My people).

Rabbi Glazerson ends the video with a piece of advice: “Everything which is happening is in the Torah, and therefore keeping the Torah is the only way to bring us Messiah and peace and quiet.”


Agudah Codes At Every Table With The Bencher @  Convention - #CANTKEEPMYEYESOPEN
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE :-)


Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/79252/bible-codes-connect-arson-israel-nibiru-messiah-watch/#q9k7lPXo50hIeOw4.99