But... I thought Jesus called them (the Jews) a Synagogue of Satan?

 

That's what they said. They were Wrong. 

What Jesus truly said was:

...those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. 

 Yes, it's a red-letter quote.  Jesus is revealing this to the Apostle John several decades after His resurrection, and that timing is significant. The church that Jesus had prophesied (cf Matthew 16:18) was now at least 35 years old. Back when Jesus was walking around Israel's northern mountains in His human body, He had also said that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His church— now we see evil attempting to use slandering and blaspheming in an effort to subdue the church, either to put it under the devil's control, or to rid it from the face of the Earth forever! 

Many of those doing the slandering would have had the DNA of descendancy from Jacob, father of the twelve tribes. They were ethnic Jews by blood. So why would Jesus say they claim to be Jews but are not?  The short answer:  Jesus is saying that anyone who does not keep the Torah is not an authentic Jew. He is not using "tribal subgroups" as His measuring rod; He is using faith as His unit of measure. Jesus is saying they make their claim based on human linage, not by faith. [Beginning with the first Feast of Pentecost after the Resurrection of Christ, linage of the Church was now dependent upon a New Birth Faith.] 
  That short answer gave a bit of insight into Jesus's differentiating between physical-body Jews and spirit-hearted Jews, but it carries none of the deeper understanding that explains Jesus' anger behind the statement. Why the invective criticism? There's more to unpack.       

The Backstory

 Out in the wilds of social media, you're likely to come across a few shills, often believers in replacement theology, who try to convince anyone who will listen that Jesus has rejected the Jews en masse and called them a "synagogue of Satan."  In my experience, about 90% of these are simply hate-controlled people whose character gets offended by truths they have no use for.  

But once in a while, I come across a 'deluded idiot' (a kinder word is naïve) who parrots whatever someone he/she likes taught him/her.  Such was the inspiration for this blog post:  A low-informed post that claimed Jesus called all the Jews a 'synagogue of Satan' because they had rejected Him.  

My Reply 

Jesus wasn't angry because they had rejected Him. (He is more likely saddened by rejection because He knows what they are choosing to forego, and what they will receive instead.) He was angry because they were defaming the Church. 
(The reference to a 'Synagogue of Satan' is first introduced in Revelation 2:9 when the church of Smyrna was being slandered by this cultist group. The term is later repeated in Revelation 3:9, when Jesus promised that the same kind of attackers at the church at Philadelphia will be put in submission.)
Regarding the believers in Smyrna, Jesus tells the Apostle John what to write and tell the Church there. Jesus tells John that He's very angry at a very specific Jewish opposition, an opposition which led to Jesus' followers being persecuted.
So, yeah, Jesus is angry that these old Jews (possibly from the legalistic cult of the Pharisees, although the text doesn't specify. But whether or not they were, they) are the same kind of old "deep state" operatives who once persecuted Jesus when he walked on Earth and are now persecuting the Church that Jesus, in conjunction with the Holy Spirit working through disciples, had established.
The scene here is a case where John, at Jesus' leading, is angry at his fellow Jews (ethnically) for persecuting the other Jews who moved on to embracing Jesus as the messiah. 
The anger here is very specifically focused on the Jews who were persecuting the Church— not limited to mocking and name-calling, but persecuting to the point of having them killed! They were making false allegations to Roman authorities that they knew would lead to arrest and the possibility of death.  Jesus' anger is toward this subculture that's doing the persecuting of His church, not a blanket anger at all Jews. Jesus is not condemning the Jews who aren't following Him. God has given mankind the personal¹ authority of self-determination, and Jesus respects each person's right-to-choose Who He Is.

Jesus is angry at the Jews who claim to follow the Torah² but are not. According to the Torah, Jews were supposed to treat their fellow Jews with justice; that's the Law!
This is a case of Jews persecuting fellow Jews who recognized the Messiah. That is not a principle of "doing justice to your countryman." It is not a 'justice' designed to protect their Jewish community— they were out to punish everyone who didn't think like them! [Note: That behavior-type describes the intent and purpose of the Democrat Party and Obama's Deep State more closely than it describes any random ethnic Jew today. These are elitist subcultures, and most people are not members.] They had begun following satan when they rejected their own law and went after their own people.

The "synagogue of satan" then, was violating the same Torah they claimed to believe in, first by oppressing, then soon intensified to attacking, and had now escalated to killing other Jews! (So much for Jewish nationalism! They hated their own native-born countrymen!) This 'synagogue' was an elitist deep state within the Jewish community! They were turning their fellow brethren with whom they had this theological disagreement over to the Romans for persecution and death.
You can surely see the real parallel here: This "synagogue of satan" were traitors to their own people! THAT is HOW they aligned with evil. THAT is WHY Jesus was angry. THAT is why Jesus called them liars and not real Jews. 

— And Yes, they had rejected Jesus as Messiah, but that was a free choice. Free choice does not break the Torah Law.  But persecuting and killing their own countrymen who simply made a different choice about who Jesus is does break the law.
• That's the real context of the Synagogue of Satan.
Not "all" Jews belong to synagogue of satan. But "all Deep State-ers" who traitorously oppress, imperil, and kill their own countrymen simply for having philosophical or theological disagreements with them do have memberships in a type of synagogue of satan. The Apostle John called it a "synagogue" because the persecution was being carried out by Jews. Today's Deep State includes strange undocumented ethnicity (Obama) and luciferian theologies (Hillary); these are not particularly Jewish  so the word synagogue might be more aptly called a league, guild, brotherhood, coterie, or my personal choice: a "syndicate of satan."

The "synagogue of satan," in context, was specific to Jews breaking Jewish law to persecute the newly founded church. But the wider application is evil people who do not follow their Own Law (hypocrites) and proceed to persecute and kill people who are not breaking that law. 

The parallels in the "religion" of the Left today should be obvious. Just as the Synagogue of Satan believed the Torah law did not apply to them, (and since they were not following the Torah, Jesus did not consider them to be Jews), those who act above the law and believe that the Constitution does not apply to them—Using the same line of reasoning, they are no longer Americans but are traitors: a Congress of Corruption.

Endnotes    

—¹ personal; used here because YHWH does not recognize personal authority over other persons, notable exceptions are parents of minor children and legal guardians for wards.

— Pop-culture Christianity often claims that there are only two "races" of people: the Saved and the Unsaved. That works in a binary world, but 1 Corinthians 10:32 separates the Unsaved into two parts, and that factors in here.  That verse cautions, "Do not become a stumbling block, whether to (1) Jews or (2) Gentiles or (3) the Church.  That is three groupings. The two unsaved groups are not equally alike. This is why the Old Testament and its multiple covenants between God and varied groups of men is still relevant.  The Church has not "replaced" the Jews. The 'deluded idiot' mentioned in the 'Backstory' section is a believer in replacement theology. It is pretty easy for those who get swept up in that heresy to lump all Jews as satanic, but neither Jesus nor scripture teaches that.

— ² Torah; the Amplified Bible translation of Revelation 2:9 can be helpful in showing that the Jews who were attacking the Church were (hypocritically) not following their own Torah (which is the first five books of the Old Testament) Law.  It is very important to recognize that the even the earliest Talmudic writings of rabbinic Judaism would not come for another couple hundred years.  The Talmud was compiled over several centuries, with the Babylonian Talmud being completed around the 5th to 6th centuries AD and the Jerusalem Talmud compiled earlier, likely in the late 4th or early 5th century AD.  Jesus' revelation to John cannot be applied to modern Talmudic Jews.  

"I know your suffering and your poverty (but you are rich), and how you are blasphemed and slandered by those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan [they are Jews only by blood, and do not believe and truly honor the God whom they claim to worship]." - Rev. 2:9 AMP

    

From an 'Episcopal church Family' post on Facebook — and a reponse.

Sourcing with hyperlinks removed — 
Episcopal church Family (the Facebook group) 
Ruth Kristian, Moderator
otnrSdspeo0511fM20u082nt2 fue:5gmht1h7uifu969uP3 3a u icaJ00  

  ·

**Pope Leo XIV Responds After Donald Trump Calls Him “An Insult to Jesus”**

Donald Trump recently took aim at Pope Leo XIV, labeling him “an insult to Jesus” and accusing him of being “beyond woke” while claiming he promotes ideas that challenge traditional values. The remarks were meant to spark political controversy — but instead, they led to one of the most talked-about public responses of the year.

Speaking before a packed gathering at the Vatican, Pope Leo XIV addressed the comments with an unusually calm but deeply moving tone.

“The president of the United States just said that I insult Jesus,” he said. “You want to know what truly insults Jesus? Watching the sick and the poor cry out for mercy while wealth and power are placed above human dignity.”

He didn’t stop there. The Holy Father turned the moment into something bigger, speaking directly about poverty, migration, war, and the responsibility of those who govern.

“You want to know what else insults Jesus?” he continued. “Turning away the stranger who comes seeking hope. Separating families. Sending young people into wars that never seem to end, then calling it justice. Hiding painful truths while asking everyone else to remain silent.”

The spiritual leader of more than a billion Catholics, known for his humility, compassion, and unwavering call for peace, transformed the criticism into a powerful reflection on faith and conscience.

“I am not standing before you pretending to be perfect,” Pope Leo XIV said quietly. “There was only one perfect Son of God — and He willingly carried the cross for all of humanity.”

Then came the line that reportedly left the entire hall in complete silence.

“Christ taught us to love one another as He loved us. So tell me — can you imagine hatred in heaven? Can you imagine racism in heaven? Can you imagine children suffering from hunger in heaven? Then why do we continue to accept these things here on Earth?”

What began as an insult quickly became a moment of spiritual (the op cut off at this point) 

=======

I find myself wishing that our President had said, "an insult to Jesus' Word" instead. It's a subtle difference, in one regard Jesus *is* His Word, but every Christian has their own unique relationship with Jesus, He reveals himself a little differently to each of His creations whereas the canon of scripture is more fixed. It's much easier to see "woke" deviations from scripture than to make accurate guesses about someone else's relationship with Jesus.

 

There are two things I'd like to comment on toward an end of less division, more reconciliation— But first, the Jesus I know doesn't really get *insulted.* He does not take offense. The Jesus I know gets "grieved." Jesus is grieved by the levels of deception that "wokeness" uses and exploits. 

 

• The Pope would be right about "Turning away the stranger who comes seeking hope" being something that grieves Jesus. But Wokeness will try to portray mass immigration and open borders as a godly virtue when it is not. Jesus is Lord over Nations. He sets boundaries; this is the truth of the Tower of Babel and the listing of nations in Genesis 10 and Deuteronomy 32. Jesus is a nationalist and will inherit a throne to rule over nations, 𝘤𝘧 Psalm 2:8. The truths are that (a) Illegal immigration is always illegal, (b) The "hope" of many who crossed our border illegally is a wicked and destructive hope of greed and corruption, not a god-given hope for liberty in Christ, and (c) The "woke" crowd has copied the blueprint the devil used to tempt Jesus in the wilderness: it takes scripture and twists it. The example I have seen most frequently involves twisting the the meaning of "sojourner" to apply to all foreigners. The Israelites were instructed to be kind to sojourners because they had once been foreigners too; but a sojourner is a temporary visitor who pays their own way; many of them came as traders and merchants, did business, and then went home. Correct exegesis (analysis) of scripture will bring clarity, not division.

• The second point is not even directly addressed in the article, but is a program that runs in the background of all Western culture: Pope Leo XIV's papacy aligns with the Catholic Church's general acceptance of theistic evolution.

To quote: "𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘩𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘵."   𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘦: 𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤(.)𝘤𝘰𝘮

I have been studying the creation/evolution conflict all my adult life. The Catholic Church has recognized evolution as consistent with its teachings since at least 1950, longer than I have been alive. Today, more than half of Protestant churches agree there is no immanent (fundamental) conflict between faith and *scientific* evolution. The Coming Great Deception (𝘤𝘧 2 Thessalonians 2) will be a period of widespread spiritual delusion that will lead many away from God, especially during the last days. I am convinced that the Adversary has rooted his deception in evolution. 

I will spare you my ever-lengthening list of reasons, but go back and look at the article again— it speaks to poverty, migration, war, and earthly troubles. Where is the concern over Jesus' redemptive power? It's not there because evolution distracts from and leaches faith from Creation in the image of God. Left unchecked, it blinds the spiritual eyes to truth.

The article claims that the President's remarks were meant to spark political controversy. I disagree; I don't think the President cares a flip about sparking "political" controversy at this point. He cares deeply about the lies, the fraud, the theft, and the cheating that has impoverished patriotic America's middle class, financially, morally, and spiritually. 

 

If you start hearing that ancient aliens "seeded" the human race on Earth instead of the Creator, run!   Because the introduction of evolutionary teaching since the mid-1800s has been the long-game to eventually enslave your soul.    

Trump on Greenland

 

Greenland is back in the news this first week of 2026.

I originally made draft below around the time that President Trump was beginning his "47" term:   

 

When President Trump trolled the idea of buying Greenland, it had nothing to do with his ego.  It's strategic for both North America's and Europe's BORDER PROTECTION. The fact that Greenland and its waters have nice mineral deposits is what could make any deal a double-win, mutually beneficial.  But primarily, it involves legal rights that would help both Europe and us protect our borders from the Russian and Chinese fleets that have been doing damage to infrastructure.  

If Greenland became a territory of the US (similar to Puerto Rico), then we would have the legal right to have a base there to PREEMPTIVELY protect the waters and patrol shipping lanes. As of now, there would be red tape in getting NATO's agreement before we could legally react—if we did not wait, then the World Court would accuse us of triggering an act of war. However, if Greenland is our territory, we have the right to protect and defend it.

This is not a mythical, imaginary threat. Trump isn't crazy. It's not all about "ego."  Russia regularly has ships and subs in those waters; and China, just as it has bought ports in the US and bought its way into the Panama Canal, also has its eyes on Greenland's harbors. It's common sense.

A Quick Response to "America isn't a Christian nation because the Founders were all deists!"

the examples were intentionally prior to the War for Independence for three reasons: 1. those who know God will see His plan over time, and 2. those who don't need to see the US didn't happen randomly, and 3. there's so much evidence of the Christian world view of out Founding Fathers between 1770 and the ratification of the Constitution that I cannot cram it into an FB reply. Jefferson and Paine have similar biographies in this regard: They held a predominately Christian worldview in their youth. Jefferson was young and still espousing Christian principles when he penned the Declaration of Independence. It was while serving as ambassador to France that he began turning more ecumenical. Most of the "proof" that is used to tell you he was deist is "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth," which he completed in 1820 by cutting and pasting, with a razor and glue, numerous sections from the New Testament. Yes, that "redacted" the miracles but not all the other claims of Christ. That was 44 years after he influenced the Declaration. Among his personal notes, the early indications that he was beginning to lose faith in the supernatural miracles of the Bible are dated in the early 1800s, three decades after America's founding. As for Thomas Paine, his Christian faith fell after the war when life was still tough and did not live up to the glory he imagined as a youth. There are many indications that Washington was a Christian from youth and for the remainder of his life, however, he often chose to take a softer approach publicly for political reasons; he had fought and suffered for the Republic and did not want to alienate citizens who believed in Natural Law, which is very compatible with basic Christian principles, although it does not acknowledge a Savior. Any study of Washington's recorded prayers backs this up: publicly he used words like "Providence" while his private journals "implored God." Benjamin Franklin was one of those "Natural Law" believers for much of his life, although even there, his writings show he was very impressed with the Anglican/Methodist evangelist George Whitefield (sometimes spelled Whitfield), whom he heard preach in Philadelphia; seeds were planted then that seem to have grown over time. In a reversal of the spiritual flow in Paine's life, Franklin's writings became more spiritual as he aged.

I could go on with examples of how God needs only a few to accomplish much, and He often uses nonbelievers to accomplish His end. God does not rule by democracy. The premise that God needed a majority of Christian Founders in order to form a Christian nation is deeply flawed. God planned for America to be a Republic that took/takes His living word to the world. He had enough people covenant in agreement to establish America as a nation founded on the teaching of Christ.

 

Time travel & geolocating during Jesus' Transfiguration

 Regarding Jesus mission in Two Realms, seen and unseen 

 

  The verses you asked about Wednesday night are found in Matthew 17:10-13

¹⁰𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘴𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘏𝘪𝘮, “𝘞𝘩𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘴 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘌𝘭𝘪𝘫𝘢𝘩 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵?”

¹¹𝘑𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘥, “𝘌𝘭𝘪𝘫𝘢𝘩 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴. ¹²𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘐 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘌𝘭𝘪𝘫𝘢𝘩 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘦 𝘩𝘪𝘮, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘪𝘮 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥. 𝘐𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘺, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘔𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘶𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴.”

¹³𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘏𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘑𝘰𝘩𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘢𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘵.

 

  It was originally prophesied in Malachi 4:5&6, which probably has a double fulfillment (the spirit of Elijah will/may be a forerunner for both the first and second coming of Jesus).

 The gospel of Mark references this, but with less detail, 9:12&13.

 Luke 1:17 talks about Malachi's prophecy from a spiritual, rather than physical point-of-view.

 

  And somewhat related, after 'Palm Sunday' but before His arrest, Jesus was preaching one of his final messages in the Temple courtyard when the chief priests and elders challenged his authority to do that. (They were likely looking for a way to arrest him right then on the spot and save the 30 pieces of silver) Jesus answers them with a question His accusers cannot answer, but the reader can determine that the answer is: Both! This is another instance when the spirit/heaven parallels the physical/earth.  This is found in Matthew 21:23-27, Mark 11:27-33, and Luke 20:1–8.

 

  The point we hope came across during the devotion was that both spiritual and physical were aligned when (time) and where (space) Jesus made His confrontational declaration, "On this rock I will build MY church..."  (taking authority back)

  The gates of hell will not prevail against her, His bride.

 

More Notes Added 

How could we possibly know what the Spirit realm is like?

Paul tells us we can presently see a hazy outline of it. At the time he was writing, mirrors were polished metal; his analogy was that we have a reflection here of what the spirit realm is (1 Corinthians 13:12). We can know, at least in part, because God created us in His own image (Genesis 1:27). There is similarity. The concept is repeated in Ephesians 4.  Even though we cannot know it completely; we can know in part because we are God-imagers; we were damaged by rebellions, but the potential for restoration/reconciliation still allows a limited view.

The Bible never says that the Earth is a copy of what God has in heaven. Where did you get that?

That's not completely true. Hebrews 8:5 tells us that the plan for the Tabernacle is a copy of Heaven's Temple AND that the duties/service performed by the priests were a typical representation and a shadow of the heavenly things. When they were on Mt. Sinai God commanded Moses, "See that you make all things after their pattern." The heavenly sanctuary is the archetype, the earthly one a copy. There's definitely a pattern being copied as regards the temple, plus, all the festivals and feast days were Earth-provisory shadows of God's Spiritual plan for redeeming mankind, Colossians 2:17, and there are also many other examples where Earth copies Heaven. Spread throughout the Bible, one could construct a lengthy list of similarities:  from musical instruments, to gardens, to horses, to rivers and trees, to streets and houses….

Two assignments/instructions that Jesus gave his disciples show a close connection between Heaven and Earth—that God's intent is to have them reflect each other. They were to pray "On Earth as it is in Heaven" Matt 6:10, and "whatever you may bind on earth will already be bound in the heavens, and whatever you may loosen on earth will already be loosened in the heavens," Matt 16:19.

More patterns and copies? The marriage covenant is an earthly picture of the heavenly reality of God’s relationship with his people. 

Of course there are differences, (a) Heaven worships One God while on Earth there are "many “gods” and many “lords” 1 Cor 8:5.  And (b) some Roles in the Spirit Realm are carried out only on Earth. For example, Exodus 15:3 "The Lord is a mighty warrior. Jehovah is his name," and Zephaniah 3:17 "The LORD your God is with you, the Mighty Warrior who saves." This spiritual warfare is carried out on Earth, because that is where the enemy of God is. But the similarities are great: Earth is to reflect God's Glory.