A Memo from the Church in the Year 1984 – by Jim

A Memo from the Church in the Year 1984


Brothers of the Ministry of Information, our Big Brother is concerned about the ongoing negative reaction of the Jewish community to the News.  It is imperative that we give them the New History, so that they will no longer offer resistance to our policies.  Please follow the guidelines outlined here, which will bring them into the fold.


Many of you have been emphasizing love in your broadcasts.  You are to be commended.  The Love of Big Brother envelops us all.  However, this is not enough!  As the Ministry of Information, we must inform the Jew that never has there been anything but love between our people and theirs.  New History will show that the wars of the past, what they call “massacres,” were waged only against our common enemy.  We have never hated the Jew!


Our enemies, to drive a wedge between us, have found old pirated footage of Big Brother.  These speeches of his seem to indicate a deep pathological antipathy to the Jew.  You should know, Brothers, that these words have all been carefully cut by our enemies to deceive the Jews and confuse them.  As members of the Ministry, it is your job to properly contextualize his speeches.  It should be obvious that when he called them the “children of Satan” he did not mean all of them, only those that were children of Satan.  Unfortunately, the Jews lack discernment, so we must inform them what a child could perceive.


The same can be said of any other of his speeches that turn up.  Those of you who work in the archives will know that not all of his speeches emphasized love.  He was known to call members of the now-defunct Jewish leadership “vipers”.  One of the early Ministry members referred to their worship centers as “synagogues of Satan”.  These hard words are of course the true essence of love, but some of the Jews have been avoiding the Ministry of Information, and they have not gotten their minds quite right.


Deflect such concerns by illustrating Jewish guilt.  Show them our archival footage of Jews trying to entrap Big Brother.  Show them the maddened crowds, foaming at the mouth, crying out for his execution.  Show how they bribed one of the Ministry of the Treasury to betray Big Brother.  They will understand why Big Brother called them vipers and such.  Surely they will be assuaged when they see they are the source of his hard words.


Your broadcasts must emphasize the eternal love of Big Brother for the Jew, and of course all of those within our organization.  It has never been anything but love.  If footage comes up wherein he calls the Jews “children of the devil” with murder in their heart like their father, you must emphasize his Jewishness.  Once they see that he is Jewish, they will understand that he was not talking about all Jews, only the murderous ones.


To aid you in this endeavor, we have Gumped the footage.  Do not let any unfamiliar scenes confuse you.  The yiddishisms dubbed in and the changing of Jesus’ name do not alter the meaning.  Soon, you will come to see that the New Footage is what the Footage always was.  All footage is New Footage.


Digital technology has helped us greatly in this project.  We have been able to highlight the yarmulke on his head that was always there, but was invisible to the eye because of the poor quality of the old film.  Do not be surprised to find Big Brother eating a bagel in scenes you do not recall him noshing in previously.  Big Brother is Jewish; of course he ate bagels!  He also said, “Oy!” more than you may recall.  This is nothing more than your mind focusing on details that it once missed.  Because you are emphasizing the message to the Jew, you are more aware of his Jewishness than you were previously.  Do not be alarmed.


Do not be alarmed when you hear his new name, either.  It is not new.  We have only cleared up the audio on the footage.  Still, among yourselves, feel free to use either name.  When presenting New History to the Jew, however, only use his original name, the one found in the cleaned up footage.


Likewise, emphasize his status as a rabbi.  Some may have a false memory of rabbis being abused by the Ministry of Truth.  This false memory is a lie spread by the enemy.  Big Brother was a rabbi, and so none of us in the Government could ever have touched them.  We have only loved them eternally, as Big Brother does.  However, avoid questions regarding his ordination (they may use the word ‘semicha’).  Emphasize rather his deep devotion to their archives.


You may point out that he is mentioned in their archives.  In fact, their whole history and legal structure is about him.  But do not spend too much time on this.  Early members of the Ministry of Information already showed them footage of their Prophets, giving speeches that clearly referred to Big Brother.  These snippets were unable to reach their hard hearts.  They will only be softened by New History and the eternal love of Big Brother.  Some of them have kept footage of their archives and may refer back to their own copies.  Emphasize the superior of our digital footage, which has cleaned up their old film copies, restoring dialogue previously too garbled to hear.  If they do not find the original garbled, move on.


Some will question Big Brother’s Jewishness, not so much his genetic code, but the idea of Big Brother in general.  They will point to foreign gods having children, demigods who walked among men.  Such an idea they will find repugnant to Judaism.  Refer back to the archival footage to illustrate just how Jewish the idea of Big Brother is.  Possible comparisons: he was like the ark that saved the whole world.  You can point out he had a hole in his side, like the ark did.  He was like the Pesach lamb.  (Pesach is their word for “Passover.”  If you cannot remember the word, do not worry.  In a generation or two, they will forget their ancient terminology.)  It may be a good idea to illustrate his lambness, by parading a seared lamb on a vertical skewer.  He can also be compared to the Day of Atonement sacrifice (try not to say “goat”) that also takes away the sin of the world.


All the while, remind them that he was not only a Jew as an idea, but genetically.  This will smooth over any objections, until their minds accept the New Truth.  Study “Fiddler on the Roof” so that you can understand their language and culture as he did.  Point out that his first disciples were fishermen.  They may be surprised to know that he created the first gefilte fish recipe.  As you all know, Big Brother also had a great sense of humor, just like Jerry Seinfeld.  How much more Jewish could he be?


As the Jew learns the New History, he will forget about the intervening years as portrayed by the enemy.  The enemy has blamed us for the oppression of the Jews.  As we know, that could not be farther from the truth.  Those in the Government who used archival footage of Big Brother to support their hatred had nothing to do with us.  And we never liked them anyway.


Do not be concerned if this leaves what some historians are calling a “historical vacuum”.  We are not to worry if our History begins at Big Brother, runs for forty years, is interrupted for 2,000 and picks up again forty years ago.  Those intervening 2,000 years are irrelevant.  Historians will fill in the details when Big Brother finds it necessary.  For now, avoid the issue of those 2,000 years.  Appeal to the eternal love of Big Brother and the Government today.


Above all, speak to them like they are children.  The Jew is slow to understand.  This must surely be a genetic mental disorder.  Impatience will drive them away.  We must talk down to them to lift them up.  Soon, this issue will no longer exist.  Once the Jew views our cleaned up footage, he will unite with us.  In thirty years, the Jews will have forgotten they were Jewish at all, just as happened to all the Jews before them that joined our most worthy enterprise.



If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.


Judaism Resources is a recognized 501(c) 3 public charity and your donation is tax exempt.

Thank You

Yisroel C. Blumenthal

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to A Memo from the Church in the Year 1984 – by Jim

  1. Dina says:

    Truly Orwellian. Love the newspeak!

  2. paul says:

    I think things are getting desperate here.

  3. yashar19 says:

    May I borrow Dina’s words to me sometime ago when I wrote in parable: Yisroel, “You are not serious.”

    How can you post the above in good conscience (even if it was written by Jim), after you complained about “The dissemination of untruths” in your post called “Slander” (May 21, 2014). Why should it be ok to post untruths about the church (as above and in a number of previous posts, if it is not ok to post untruths about the Pharisees. In my understanding neither is ok.

    Find out what the facts really are and then post about them in a truthful instead of vindictive way, or G-d will judge that ” you are not yashar”.

    • Jim says:


      As the author of the above piece, may I ask you what points you find to be untrue?


      • yashar19 says:

        What I find to be true or untrue is not of significance. Truth itself is. As per my last line to R. Yisroel, it is your task to find truth, not mine to spoon feed it. A heart hungry for truth will find it when it humbly seeks the LORD for it. This usually takes time.

        • Jim says:


          If you are going to accuse me of falsehoods, then you should be able to identify them. I wrote a satirical piece illustrating the folly of the modern missionary methods. You have basically accused me of lying. It is your responsibility, if you make such a claim, to back it up with evidence or argumentation. Let me give you an example.

          In my piece, I accuse the Church of trying to make things more appealing to the Jewish people by emphasizing the Jewishness of Jesus. For example, I write that Jesus is to be shown eating bagels and such. This is my funny way of addressing writers like David Stern who not only Hebraicizes names in the Gospels, (books that were written in Greek) but he replaces translations with Jewish terms. This is particularly absurd in the Gospel of Luke, not only written in Greek but by a non-Jew. But to appeal to the Jewish people he so desperately wants to convert to Christianity (that is to say to turn from God-worship to man-worship) he injects in the book of Luke a myriad of Jewish words. He does not write “priest”; he writes “cohen”. Jesus doesn’t bless; he gives a “b’rakhah”. Pharisees are “P’rushim”, disciples “talmidim”. He uses words like “hutzpah,” “s’mikhah,” and “sheilah.” Strangely, he does not make “Messiah” into “moshiach”. That one he leaves alone for some reason. This is not to provide clarity. It is not a better translation from the Greek. It is to make things palatable to the Jewish “unbeliever”.

          Now, I have supported my point. If you are going to accuse me of falsehoods, you have a similar responsibility to present an argument. Prove that I have issued lies. If that is something with which you cannot trouble yourself, then you had no business accusing me of lying.


          • Yedidiah says:

            Beside Stern’s “Jewish Bible”, one might ask how truly “Orthodox Jewish” Philip Goble’s Yiddishe “Orthodox-Jewish Bible” is with it’s “Brit-Chadasha” (not to be confused with “the Christian’s new testament”) which is one of several “messianic” &/or “Hebraic Roots Version” NT’s & Bibles” that have come out not too long after 1984. Since I was a Christian interested in the “so-called Jewishness” of Jesus, I have several electronic or hard copy beta- or 1st version copies of these “Jewish bibles & “Brit Hadasha’s” written by Christians.

            I also have seen dozens of Christian-messianic “Haggadahs” that have come out since the 1980’s and which differ quite a bit from any Jewish Haggadah that I have seen. “First century” Jews or Jesus would have been perhaps unpleasantly surprised at the interpretations contained in these Haggadahs or Bibles.

          • yashar19 says:

            Hi Jim,

            I’m not interested in entering into an argument with you. Also, I am not accusing you. My response was to R. Yisroel. I do not need to defend truth by pulling your satire apart and enter into fruitless escalating dissertations. Truth is not found that way.

            Doth not wisdom call, and understanding put forth her voice? In the top of high places by the way, where the paths meet, she standeth; Beside the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors, she crieth aloud: ‘Unto you, O men, I call, and my voice is to the sons of men. O ye thoughtless, understand prudence, and, ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart. Hear, for I will speak excellent things, and the opening of my lips shall be right things. For my mouth shall utter truth, and wickedness is an abomination to my lips. All the words of my mouth are in righteousness, there is nothing perverse or crooked in them. They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.


          • Dina says:

            Yashar, it doesn’t matter who you addressed your response to, whether it was Jim who wrote the piece or Rabbi Blumenthal who posted it. You accused someone here of lying. That is a serious charge. Either back it up or apologize.

            If you are interested in truth, that is truly the right thing to do.

        • Dina says:

          Yashar, you wrote, “What I find to be true or untrue is not of significance.” Obviously, you do think that what you find to be true or untrue is at least significant enough to merit a comment from you. And if you think your opinion counts enough to want to comment on the truth or untruth of what is posted here, then you ought to be willing to defend such a statement.

          You wrote that “A heart hungry for truth will find it when it humbly seeks the LORD for it. This usually takes time.” Why then are you unwilling to take the time to engage with us in the painstaking and time-consuming but ultimately uplifting search for truth?

          • yashar19 says:


            My way of finding truth is not through aggression and arguments. Do not anger and hatred blind the eye of righteousness? That’s why I seek to stay clear of them.

            Your and Jim’s aggressive tone of voice betray to me that humility and hunger for truth are some way off yet. The man who seeks to feed a child that is not hungry, ends up wearing its lunch. I don’t want to be that man.

            Take what I have written as a challenge, not as an accusation about lies, and seek to do something with it that will bring you closer to the truth we both say we are seeking. Thanks and Shalom

          • Dina says:


            For hundreds of years, Christians have accused us (or “challenged” us, if you prefer) of lying while refusing to hear us out. In their eyes, the Jews knew the truth but clung to falsehood out of malice or hardness of heart or spiritual blindness, take your pick.

            You are following in this tradition by throwing out accusations (however politely couched), refusing to engage with us, and then saying that anger and hatred blind us to the truth.

            You posted a serious and ugly charge (or “challenge”) against Rabbi Blumenthal for posting lies, then pretended to be above the fray and disgusted when there was an angry reaction.

            It is unjust (not yashar) to make unsubstantiated allegations (and calling it a “challenge” doesn’t make it so). It is also not a loving-your-neighbor type of thing to do. Is this how you would like to be treated? Or would you like your accuser to show you at least enough respect to explain why he thinks you are lying?

            May God Who is the Father of us all lead us in the light of His truth.


          • Jim says:


            An argument can of course be conducive to the finding of truth. That is why Christians like Dr. Brown and Lee Strobel write books outlining the reasons they think one ought to believe in Jesus. Those are arguments. The question isn’t whether or not arguments are “nice” but whether or not they are “true”.

            In fact, in this thread you have begun building an argument as to why you don’t need to justify your statements. The argument is self-refuting, inasmuch as it attempts to show that one shouldn’t argue through argumentation.

            Frankly, I find argument to be much less aggressive than the condescending tone you take. As you are above arguments, you make pronouncements and issue challenges. You don’t need to have conversations with us. We are to listen to what you say with no response, while you dismiss what we say with declarations of “falsehood”! Such declarations you do not need to substantiate; you are above that. This is far more aggressive than those of us who give reasons for our opinions. It shows us no respect. You issue challenge imperiously and are answerable to none for you own words.

            You write that the truth takes time to find. That is often true. You should be comforted that I study the truth regularly. When I left Christianity, it was not impetuous. Long consideration of the facts was done. And going over the facts and the arguments of the Church, I can see that they are false. I have taken much time, and I go slowly for I have not a quick mind. But you can breathe easier today knowing that I have committed myself to study the truth.


  4. C.S says:

    As always, love it Jim!

  5. Yedidiah says:

    Since we know the first day of the week is Monday, we know the Sabbath falls on Sunday (but never say Sunday when you can say Sabbath or Shabbat, however you may celebrate/Worship on Saturnsday to appear to be truly traditionally Jewish). You may be safe with some by calling Sunday, the Lord’s Day. Be very careful and avoid your old habit, if one asks who “The Lord” is. We know Passover (try to say Pesach) always falls on the Sabbath (never say Sunday, plus never say Easter or even Resurrection Day). We also know Shavuot also always falls on “the Sabbath” (never say Pentecost to an “unbeliever”).

  6. Yedidiah says:

    “Big brother” is often not in control of “his people”. It seems that the disciples often do battle with each other as much as they do with the “outsiders”. One group has this to say about their fellows in an web article: “Language. Powerful stuff. If you can control the language, define the terms, manipulate the paradigm of a thing – you exercise great power.” And, “One of the things that is really important to be aware of regarding this and other heretical movements is that they engage in the re-definition of terms. Once that is accomplished, those re-defined terms become fields in which seeds of questionable doctrine can be cultivated” (from, http://joyfullygrowingingrace.wordpress.com/2008/09/25/hebrew-roots-movement-messin-with-the-word/). Although this author tries to distinguish between several different modern groups or movements among the brethren and disciples of the way, others who are more traditional are more hostile to these “new heretic” “pharisees”.

    In the above mentioned post it also states that, “Once the canon of Scripture is cast under a shadow of doubt and “new” scriptures are introduced, the door opens wide for great doctrinal deception…” I could not help but think how Jews and the old Jewish texts were then and still are cast aside, diminished, or “replaced” with a “new world order of the Brotherhood”.

  7. Yedidiah says:

    Prov 7&8. Wisdom stands at the “gates of the city” to protect those within. But there is also the “harlot” who some seek and others are called. If one does not seek “her” truth, “she” goes on a mission n order to tempt those to the “new truth”; to sell them on the “new way”. “She” sways them with eloquence and turns them aside with smooth talk. The voice is that of the tempter.

    But Wisdom’s voice is that of a protector; a guardian of the children of God. “She” calls out in various ways; to simple ones, shrewdness is taught and “dullards”, instruct your minds. Wisdom cries out in various ways, even with satire, which is a method whereby “human vice or folly is attacked through irony, derision, or wit”. That does not deny, but rather warn us and to help awaken some of us, to the still voice of God.

  8. Pingback: Christian Anti-Semitism – Is It Still Relevant? – by Jim | 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.