A 2000-Year-Old Rabbinical Psyop: Did Jews Invent Christianity to Deceive Gentiles?

Anyone reading White Nationalist literature is bound to come across articles hostile to Christianity. The foremost claim appears to be that Christianity itself was invented by Jews (whether by Saint Paul or some unknown rabbinical cabal) for the purpose of deceiving gentiles. Christianity was devised by Jews, then, as a way of conditioning gentiles to be sympathetic to Jews and Jewish causes and take down the Roman Empire with its radically different ethics. It was a means of influencing them from the beginning to oppose Rome, its power, and its paganism.

By portraying Christianity’s greatest hero as a humble Jewish carpenter turned Messiah, along with his Jewish apostles and, particularly, by “rabbi” Paul as its foremost theologian who shaped what Christians were to believe, gentiles would unknowingly turn out to be great proponents of all things Jewish.

Thomas Dalton expresses well this viewpoint:

The likeliest conclusion to this mess is that the Jew Paul and the anonymous Jewish gospel writers made it all up: that there was no miracle-working Son of God, no virgin birth, and no resurrection. They did so, not for fame or money, but because they believed that promulgating a pro-Jewish, anti-Roman theology would aid the Jewish cause. (Pro-Jewish, because the Christians are to worship the Jewish God, the Jewish rabbi Jesus, and the Jewish ‘virgin’ Mary; anti-Roman, because “the worldly powers” of Rome are a manifestation of Satan and must be defeated.) And in the end, it did. Judeo-Christianity flourished, ideologically defeated Rome, and then took up residence in Rome itself. (‘Jesus the Jew,’ The Occidental Observer, 5/22/2023).

This position has, essentially, been promoted over the years by such respected White racialists as the late Oliver P. Revilo and William L. Pierce. Each of these men have made great contributions to understanding the Jewish Question, and the need for Whites to pursue their own racial and cultural interests over that of the interests of outside groups. Interestingly, the greater number of White racialists in prior generations have not been nearly as antagonistic to Christianity as Oliver, Pierce, Dalton, and other pro-White advocates (e.g., George Lincoln Rockwell).

It seems to me, however, that when addressing Christianity and the problems of Jewish cultural subversion, these esteemed writers have over-reached in their criticisms. Their zeal to vanquish Christianity has not always been grounded on a true knowledge of Christian theology and history. They have often appealed to outdated liberal higher-critical arguments against Christianity’s origins (e.g., the theory of pagan derivation, including notions that the gospels were composed decades or even hundreds of years after the death of Christ) with almost no awareness of how conservative biblical scholars have rebutted such polemics. Almost all of it is an overreaction to the lunacy and slobbering obsession that far too many Christians today have of Jews and Israel. Much of it is also the result of their animosity toward Jews who have been at the forefront in orchestrating and funding Jewish organizations that promote Third-World immigration into the West. Anything connected to the Jewish people, Israel, or the Torah is viewed as fundamentally hostile to White racialism. There are no exceptions to this, and there are no “good Jews” either although some might make rare exceptions for Jews such as Gerard Menuhin, Benjamin H. Freedman, Norman Finkelstein, Gilad Atzmon, Ron Unz, and a few others.

Since Christianity has obvious Jewish origins — including its founder, Jesus, who was a descendant of David and of Abraham (Matthew 1:1) and who also was an observant Jew, as well as Saint Paul who claimed that he was “circumcised on the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews, as to the Law, a Pharisee” (Philippians 3:5) — it’s reasoned that no White person should be associated with Christianity because it was merely invented to fool non-Jews and to weaken every bit of European racial identity.

But is any of this true? Was Christianity ‘invented’ by Paul or by some secret faction of Jews for the express purpose of deceiving the Goyim? And when gentiles come to faith in the person of Jesus as depicted in the New Testament, is that just ‘part of the plan’? How does any of this help Jews when so much of Christianity is diametrically opposed to Talmudic Judaism?

The apostle Paul

There are a host of reasons why we should seriously question this theory. It seems to me that this entire notion appeals to those who have such a deeply entrenched animosity toward Jews that they are unable to see straight when it comes to these matters. They are so opposed to Jewish cultural subversion (rightly so) that they haven’t bothered to think carefully through their own theory that Christianity was ‘invented’ by Jews to deceive gentiles and, thereby, grant the Jewish people supremacy over the world. It may sound persuasive to some at first hearing, but without a thorough investigation of the matter, one cannot be certain of its truth.

It should be noted that the purpose of this article is not to defend Christianity as the ‘true religion’ per se. My intention, instead, is to challenge this idea of Christianity as a Jewish psyop, to show that some of the most glaring and fundamental problems with it are either never or rarely addressed by those promoting it. They have failed to think carefully through the implications of their own theory. And it isn’t long before the assiduous student runs into an array of problems when he or she tries to maintain that Christianity is just a Jewish invented trap to deceive gentiles.

Let’s consider a few of these problems.

1.Whatever one may think of Christianity, there can be no reasonable denial that Christianity from its inception has been fundamentally opposed to Talmudic or Pharisaical Judaism. Jesus openly condemned the religious leaders of his day in no uncertain terms: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!” . . . “Blind guides” . . . “You fools and blind men!” . . . “Full of robbery and self-indulgence” . . . “White-washed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but on the inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness” . . . “Full of hypocrisy and lawlessness” . . . “Sons of those who murdered the prophets” . . . “Serpents and brood of vipers” (Matthew 23:1-33). And that’s just from one chapter in the New Testament!

The entire rabbinical system, then, is condemned by Jesus not merely because it deviated from the express teachings and spirit of the Torah, but because the rabbis placed so many additional laws on the Jewish people that religious observance became a burdensome yoke (see Acts 15:10). Rather than freeing their own people, the rabbis only enslaved them.

Yet, we must ask ourselves: How could such hostile denunciations by Jesus in any way endear gentiles to Jews, especially toward their religious leaders? If the person of Jesus was invented by a secret cabal of Jews, what benefit would it serve them to portray him as one continually condemning rabbinical hypocrisy? Why would they portray Jesus as someone always getting the best of them? How does an ‘invented’ Jesus who time after time refutes the rabbis and publicly maligns their integrity and spirituality serve to benefit ‘the plan’? Wouldn’t this be obviously detrimental to their purpose? Does any of this comport with what we know about Jews — namely, their hubris and self-applauding nature? One would think that if Jews were to ‘invent’ a religion to both attract and deceive the gentiles, they would at least portray themselves in the best possible light, as victors in every theological dispute, right? Yet this is never what we find.

2. The New Testament contains numerous passages that portray the Jewish people in a less than flattering light. For instance, in Matthew 27 when Pilate is reluctant to have Jesus killed, the Jews began to cry out all the more: “Crucify him!” They even asked for Barabbas, a robber and a thief, to be released rather than Jesus. The Jews were so determined to have Jesus crucified that they cried out, “His blood shall be on us and our children!” Well, it seems like they got their wish.

In another passage, Paul describes unbelieving Jews and their leaders as those “who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and drove us out. They are not pleasing to God, but hostile to all men” (1 Thessalonians 2:15). Why would pro-Jewish schemers think that such broad denunciations would create a sympathetic view of them among non-Jews? A fair reading of the New Testament, if anything, leads one to an exalted view of Jesus and his disciples and a very low opinion of Jews in general. Seriously, why would any Jew let alone a caucus of Jews allow this sort of thing into a religious document they intend to deceive gentiles with? The nature of the Jew, generally, is to portray himself in the most exalted fashion, superior in intelligence, and able always to outwit the dull-minded Goyim who are no different than the beasts of the field.

In Revelation 3:9, the apostle John records the prophetic words of Jesus: “Behold, I will cause those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie — I will make them come and bow down at your feet and make them know that I have loved you.” Oops, looks like the secret committee of Goyim-deceiving Jews forgot to take that passage out of the New Testament! How does a text like this fit into the great Jewish ‘scheme’ to dupe all gentiles?  The proponents of this fanciful theory never really tell us.

3. Some have argued that even many Jews recognize the beneficial service of Christianity in spreading knowledge of Yahweh and of the Jewish people throughout the entire world. In this narrow sense, they argue that the spread of Christianity has benefitted Jews. There’s an element of truth in this, but it’s not the whole truth. Never forget that Jews often falsely claim ownership and as having ‘invented’ this or that as a means of promoting their supremacy over non-Jews. As a result, much of the world is deceived into believing that Jews possess skills, intelligence, and an intellectual prowess far above gentiles.

Thus, knowledge of the Jewish people and that of the Hebrew God may have indirectly been spread throughout the world because of Christianity, but that knowledge is still connected to one that is not particularly favorable to them. Somehow, boastful Jews neglect to mention this important bit of truth.

One doesn’t come away from reading the New Testament with notions of how wonderful Jews are. Instead, it portrays them as deceived and foolish enough to crucify their own long-awaited Messiah. They are depicted as legalistic distorters of the Mosaic law, blinded by their own false traditions, defiant against the New Covenant that Jeremiah had predicted centuries earlier (see Jeremiah 31), and as persecutors of the early Christians — something they have continued for centuries in doing. If there’s any doubt about it, you can watch a host of videos on YouTube which documents just how vile Jews are in their treatment of Christians in the so-called ‘Holy Land.’

Because of such unfavorable passages, Jews describe the New Testament as “anti-Semitic.” But, again, we’ve got to ask ourselves why Jews would ‘create’ or ‘invent’ a Christianity that’s so “anti-Semitic”? How would this benefit them? We’re never really told. We’re just assured by the ‘Christianity-is-a-Jewish-deception’ crowd that it’s all ‘part of the plan.’

Interestingly, if Jews are to condemn the New Testament because of its blatant “anti-Semitism,” then they should surely condemn the Old Testament just as equally. Have you read how Yahweh describes his own people — a people so obstinate that he declares to Moses that his anger will burn against them and utterly destroy them (Exodus 32:9)? Have you read how Moses describes the Israelites — a rebellious and stubborn people (Deuteronomy 31:27)? Have you read the many descriptive and overtly offensive words the prophets used to denounce the Israelites? It’s not pretty. Yet if these same expressions were employed in the New Testament (and some of them are), the Jews in typical knee-jerk reaction would describe it as “anti-Semitic.” If so, maybe they should just concede that the entire Bible is replete with “anti-Semitism”?

Jews are much too self-absorbed to realize that if they make everything they don’t like “anti-Semitic,” then they’ll certainly end up condemning their own Hebrew Bible. It’s almost impossible to discern such a simple truth when one is convinced that their people are history’s ‘eternal victims’ and that “anti-Semitism’ is solely the result of ‘jealousy’ and ‘hate.’

4. Gentile Christians in the New Testament are described as a people on par with Jewish believers. Together, both Jews and Greeks (gentiles) are described as one in Christ. Thus, rather than exalting Jews as superior over gentiles, the New Testament repeatedly places both groups on equal footing (see Galatians 3:28-29). The Jewish privileges of circumcision, one’s Jewish ancestry, and possession of the Mosaic Law means relatively nothing in the writings of Peter, Paul, the author of Hebrews, and in the Book of Acts. These are nothing for Jews to boast about as is common among Jews. Why would Jews bent on deceiving gentiles allow such concepts to be believed if they are seeking to control them?

The New Testament, in fact, employs the same exalted expressions once used of the ancient Israelites to gentile Christians! Writing to gentile believers, Saint Peter describes them as a “chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession (1 Peter 2:9). Earlier in the epistle, Peter tells these same gentile Christians that they too are privileged to do what only the ancient Levitical priests were allowed to do in the temple — namely, “offer up spiritual sacrifices” because they are a “holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5).

Why would a cabal of Jews intent on creating a Christianity to deceive dumb Goyim portray them as just as equally privileged and special as themselves? How does this comport with a grand ‘plan’ to bring about worldwide Jewish supremacy?

In Galatians 6:16, Paul refers to gentile Christians as “the Israel of God.” In his epistle to the Romans, he also defines for his readers who is a true Jew: “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter, and his praise is not from men, but from God” (Romans 2:28-29). In his letter to the Philippians, he warns gentile Christians to “beware of the false circumcision; for we are the true circumcision” (3:2-3).

The point in referencing all these passages together is to show how absurd the notion that ethno-centered and self-serving Jews would somehow ‘invent’ a religion that would place the despised gentiles on equal standing with themselves.

Again, is this how Jews are known to think and behave? Have you ever known Jews to give preferential status and position to non-Jews over themselves? The very notion is preposterous! It defies everything we know about the Jewish people.

5. Historically, and particularly in modern times, Jews have worked feverishly to undermine and ultimately destroy Christianity. Even when they can’t fully nullify the Christian faith, they try to dilute its central message of redemption. By means of numerous federal court decisions, Jews have sought to vanquish every bit of religious influence that Christianity might afford in the public square (e.g., school prayer, Christian symbols on federal or state properties, pro-life efforts). Yet, why would they do this if Christianity comports with their grand ‘plan’ to deceive and ultimately control the gentiles? Wouldn’t they want Christianity’s influence to spread if it was in fact designed to snare the Goyim? How come Jewish activist organizations such as the ADL and the SPLC seem to be unaware of this great conspiracy to dupe White people by means of Christianity? Even the notion of America as a ‘Christian nation’ has large numbers of Jews up in arms. But why? Wouldn’t this align with ‘the plan’? How would opposition to all things Christian serve to benefit ‘the plan’ of clever Jews who allegedly ‘invented’ Christianity to deceive gentiles?
6. While it’s true that individual Christians and European Christian nations over the centuries have given the Jewish people a certain amount of sympathy and refuge from their enemies, some important considerations need to be kept in mind before succumbing to the ‘Christianity is a Jewish deception’ viewpoint.

The first is that while Jews at times were given refuge by Christian nations, these same nations also ejected them when Jews had taken advantage of the natives. When Christians had had enough of their monetary scheming, usury, vice industries, their unwillingness to assimilate, and their parasitical ways, Jews got the collective boot. It has happened to them over a hundred times in fact.

The second thing to note is that European Christians did not allow their ‘anti-Semitic’ feelings about the Jews to be squashed because the Founder of their religion was Jewish. They had no such guilt because they understood the duplicitous nature of Jews. It has only become a recent phenomenon among modern-day Christians to feel guilty about everything connected to the ‘Holocaust,’ slavery, and race because we have been constantly bombarded by Jewish propaganda for the past 60 years telling us how evil we are for just being White.

7. Advocates of the theory that Christianity is merely a ‘Jewish scheme to entrap gullible gentiles’ have failed to grasp just how deeply opposed Christian theology is to Jewish legalism, to the Mosaic Law itself. The New Testament writers, for instance, view the Law as belonging to an old era that has passed away with the coming of Christ (Romans 7:4-6; 1 Corinthians 9:20-21; Galatians 3:24-26; 5:1). The starting point of Christian obedience, then, is what Jesus said and not what Moses declared on Mount Sinai (Matthew 17:1-8; John 1:17; Hebrews 3:1-6). The Law itself was “only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things” (Hebrews 10:1). The New Covenant has replaced the Old Covenant and is even described as a “better covenant” that has been enacted on “better promises” (Hebrews 7:22; 8:6-13). The entire Levitical system with its animal sacrifices, its priests, its temple, and even the ancient land promises have been done away with in Christ (Hebrews 7:12; 9:1-24; 11:8-16). Christians seek a “better country, that is, a heavenly one” (Hebrews 11:16), and not a dry and dusty plot of land in Palestine.

Considering this, does it really make sense to think that conniving Jews would write such condemnatory things about their own religious system, its laws, and the very covenant between them and Yahweh in some bizarre attempt to make gentiles sympathetic to their plight against the Roman empire? If anything, it would seem to have the opposite effect since it would provoke non-Jews to realize that Jewish religious beliefs have been jettisoned by even their own God! It would tend to paint observant Jews who still cling to their religious traditions as doing so in vain. How is such blatant anti-Judaism going to win over ‘gentile dogs’ when the Christianity Jews supposedly ‘invented’ condemns all their religious creeds and ancient institutions? How could any of this be viewed as “pro-Jewish”? The entire theory is a bit too clever for its own good.

8. Some anti-Christian White racialists have argued that the widespread popularity of ‘Christian Zionism’ in the U.S. serves as ‘proof’ of how Jews have deceived the gentile masses through the ‘trick’ of Christianity. These same ‘Christian Zionists,’ admittedly, support every conceivable Jewish cause. They also fund millions annually to Israeli-organized charities and Jewish political organizations.

Yet what’s not often pointed out is how comparably recent the ‘Christian Zionist’ movement in America is. Yes, there are influential Christian pastors like John Hagee who do almost nothing other than urge Christians to ‘stand with Israel.’ There’s also no doubt that the 1909 Schofield Bible has had an overtly pro-Israel emphasis for the past the century and has done much to spread the insidious beliefs of Dispensationalism. It was funded and promoted by a Jew, Felix Untermeyer.

C.H. Schofield

But this has not been the historic position of most Protestant churches nor of the Catholic Church. Reformed Protestant Christians, in fact, have been at the forefront in publishing books critical of ‘Christian Zionism’ and Dispensational theology. Centuries prior to the publication of the Schofield Bible, then, Christians were not so pro-Jewish as some imagine. The Protestant reformer, Martin Luther, had no crisis of conscience when he authored his scathing work, The Jews and Their Lies (1543). Apparently, the grand scheme among cunning Jews of concocting a “pro-Jewish” Christianity hasn’t worked out as well as they thought for most of church history.

9. Finally, we must address the question of whether Saint Paul the “rabbi” invented Christianity. This is a common objection raised by liberal theologians, including those who are anti-Christian White racialists. Space won’t permit a detailed examination of this issue, but a couple of notable points may help the reader to recognize that this theory of the origin of Christianity hardly does justice to the evidence when it’s weighed fairly.

Paul, no doubt, played a leading role in formulating much of Christian theology, but that’s not quite the same as having ‘founded’ the Christian faith. While some may argue that Paul’s letters were constituted to serve as “anti-Roman” diatribes, this seems less than convincing when one considers that he instructed the early Christians in Romans 13 to “Submit to the governing authorities, “to not resist them because they have been established by God,” to “pray for them,” “to pay their taxes,” and to “give honor to whom honor is due” (vv.1-7). Saint Peter, likewise, commands his readers to “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers” (vv.13-14). If that’s not clear enough, he further urges them to “honor the king” (v.17).

We are compelled to ask: Why would a group of “pro-Jewish” writers say such things especially when their primary purpose is to deceive gentiles so that they become just as “anti-Roman” as themselves? How is any of this promulgating an anti-Roman theology?

In fairness, I can’t ‘prove’ my position, at least not to everyone’s satisfaction. The best I could do is provide reasons, including some internal evidence within the New Testament writings itself, why the notion of Paul being the founder of Christianity is not plausible. For instance, Paul was concerned about preserving a body of traditions that he had received from the apostles (2 Thessalonians 2:15). He, in turn, urges Christians to hold firm to such traditions. Appealing to a core set of beliefs and traditions already in circulation and well-known among the larger Christian communities makes little sense if Paul is some maverick or inventor of new teachings previously unheard of.

Paul was careful to distinguish between his own words or opinions and that of Jesus (1 Corinthians 7:12). It indicates his unwillingness to attribute to Jesus words that were merely his own. This sort of thing doesn’t comport with someone eager to fashion a Jesus or create new doctrines out of thin air.

There is also no compelling evidence that the Gospel writers got their ideas from Paul as if he were the unchallenged source for what they were supposed to say and write. In fact, the interesting thing is how none of the theological controversies addressed in Paul’s epistles are found in the Gospels. One would think that if they were making it all up, they would find a way to insert a saying of Jesus that would clear up any matters of theological dispute. But this never occurs even once.

The reason that Paul did not always appeal to sayings or events in the Gospels (though at times he does) is because his letters were ad hoc in nature, meaning they were intended to address immediate issues and controversies present in the churches he had planted. These were matters of concern to the Christians he was writing to. Thus, the Gospels present the foundation of who Christians have believed in while the later epistles of Paul and Peter serve as instructional and practical for the Christian life — namely, how it is to be lived out now that they have come to faith in Jesus.

Finally, although one may claim that Paul was a deceiver and allege that he “made it all up,” this is not the kind of character we find depicted in his epistles. Instead, we find a person who seems devoted to truth, willing to suffer abuse and rejection for the sake of the Gospel, willing to live in poverty rather than gain riches at the expense of others, willing to be ridiculed rather than destroy his personal testimony, and all the while strongly urging individual Christians and church leaders to live circumspectly, holy, and honorably in all that they do (see Acts 20:33-35).

Even Peter speaks affectionately of Paul and refers to “the wisdom given to him” by God (2 Peter 3:15-16). None of this is suggestive of a duplicitous nature on his part or of manipulating people and events to concoct a religion to overthrow Rome.

Conclusion

The entire notion that Christianity was merely invented by Jews to deceive gentiles and, thereby, make them anti-Roman and pro-Jewish falls short at every point. It cannot account for the many explicit anti-Pharisaical statements found in the New Testament. It cannot logically account for why these pro-Jewish writers would place the despised gentiles on the same footing as themselves. Everything about it runs counter to what we know historically and experientially about Jewish people in terms of their ethno-centrism, hubris, and self-glorifying natures.

A fair reading of the Book of Acts, including that of Paul and Peter’s letters, portrays the early Christians as not particularly anti-Roman. This doesn’t mean they didn’t view Rome as morally corrupt and polytheistic, but only that this was not their primary concern. In fact, there are far more passages condemning false religious traditions among the rabbis, including warnings against false Jewish teachers, than that of vilifying the Roman empire (see Philippians 3:1-9).

The theory of a deceptive, manipulative theology created and promoted by Jews fails because its proponents never or rarely bother to follow through with the logical outcome or implications of it. Why, for instance, would a series of documents (New Testament) written by “pro-Jewish” authors repeatedly paint the Jewish people in the worst possible light, attacking not only their ancient Abrahamic pedigrees which they trusted in, but exposing the entire rabbinical system of that period as a sham? In what way would this urge gentiles to be “pro-Jewish”? Why would these same authors urge followers of Jesus to submit to the Roman government and other pagan rulers if their efforts were motivated by an “anti-Roman theology”?

None of it makes a bit of sense because the theory is reactionary and emotional in nature. It’s cultivated and spread by those who know little to nothing about Christianity, its history and theology. It sounds persuasive only to those who lack the acumen to dig deeper and ask serious some serious questions about it.

Christian Zionist, Pastor John Hagee