OP, while I agree with the general theme of your thread, I take issue with 2 things, as a matter of friendly debate on these topics:
(1) The Khazarians were the ancestors of many modern jews, NOT zionists. Zionists are made up largely of jews, but also non-jews. A zionist is merely anyone who wants a jewish government in the land of Palestine. So, "Khazarian Zionist" is not an accurate term -- unless you specifically mean zionist jews and not zionists in general.
(2) The Bible passage you quoted was not about jews. It was about Israelites. The Israelites of the Bible were NOT the ancestors of today's jews. That is a jewish lie that has been used to infiltrate and distort Christianity. Jews are the enemy of Christianity, not the Bible's heros. They are NOT "God's Chosen People."
Here are some translations demonstrating this:
New International Version: When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.”
New Living Translation: As they approached, Jesus said, “Now here is a genuine son of Israel—a man of complete integrity.”
English Standard Version
Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!”
If you are using a Bible that has "jew" in place of "Israelite," you should consider looking at other translations.
So many of our English translation Bibles have hundreds or thousands of mistranslations. It is to the point that most Christians today cannot really understand it. That is by design.
1,000-1,500 years ago, the Roman Catholic Church had their doctrine, and it did not matter if it was consistent with the original texts of the scriptures or not. You went along with the doctrine, or were guilty of heresy. Any translator who saw that the original Hebrew or Greek was NOT in agreement with church doctrine, was faced with a difficult choice when translating into latin: either translate it correctly and be charged with heresy, or find a way to translate it in accordance with church doctrine.
The penalty for heresy was being burned alive at the stake. Naturally, many translators would have translated it according to church doctrine, and not in a way that would be accurate to the original text.
Combine that with jewish infiltration, and today we have a mish-mash of falsified scripture. This is one good example.
What Jesus really thought of the people known as jews today is more like:
[Jesus speaking to the ancestors of modern jews] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. -- John 8:44
I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. -- Rev 2:9
Note: That passage from Rev 2:9 is one of those mistranslations. It is from the King James Version, which is full of mistranslations. The word "jew" here (and all throughout the modern Bible) is a mistranslation, because Jesus was referencing those who pretended to be Judahites (Israelites) when they were not. They were living in the Roman province of Judea, and thus were Judeans, but not of the tribe of Judah nor of Israel.
These passages are far more in line with what we know of jews today and how they behave and what they believe, as you showed via the Talmud.
I apologize for not giving a response in full, but I just wanted to touch on the NIV, NLT, and ESV bibles that were quoted, and compare with the KJV as example.
Every translation needs to be looked at and compared with one another, like the greatest and most rewarding fitting together of pieces that one could ever hope to complete.
There are many verses omitted from the NIV, NLT, and ESV that are in the KJV, for example, but let's take these three changed verses from Timothy as example:
KJV:
Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
1 Timothy 2:7
The Lord Jesus Christ be with thy spirit. Grace be with you. Amen.
2 Timothy 4:22
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
1 Timothy 3:16
ESV, NIV, NLT
For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.
1 Timothy 2:7
The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you.
2 Timothy 4:22
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:
He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels,
proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
1 Timothy 3:16
This relates to the second half of your comment. What word do you notice that is missing or changed when comparing these three verses? What is the significance of this? Why are they trying to remove Jesus Christ from the Bible?
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his
power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
Hebrews 1:2-3
What a powerful verse; in one message, Jesus Christ is Creator, Jesus Christ is God, and Jesus Christ is Salvation.
Every translation needs to be looked at and compared with one another
Although that can be helpful, what if they are ALL wrong in meaningful ways because they ALL came from the SAME (or similar) mistranslations?
I think it is far more important to go back to the original Hebrew and Greek, where possible, and find out what those original scriptures actually said.
The translators of 1,000 or more years ago had a problem. If they did not follow Roman Catholic Church doctrine, they were dead men, with a very brutal and painful execution. So, they probably mistranslated on purpose, even if they did not want to, because Church doctrine was NOT about following the original texts. It was about what the men who ran the Church wanted it to be.
Food for thought: Why is the Book of Enoch left out of the modern Bible, when some of the apostles referenced it themselves? Because mortal men decided what "The Bible" is SUPPOSED to say, not what it actually says, necessarily.
Going back to the originals is valuable.
I do not have those skills (knowledge of ancient Hebrew, etc.) but there are people who have done that, and the end result is that most modern versions of the Bible, including KJV, are in many important areas wrong.
Add to that, 99% of modern pastors do not want to even mention -- much less understand and discuss -- certain "inconvenient" parts of the Bible, which talks about how Jesus hated the jews (for good reason).
Modern pastors want to push lollipops and rainbows, and make everyone leave Church on Sunday floating on a happy cloud. They are not much interested in a truthful discussion of original scripture text and accurate translations.
But that creates the problem of modern Christians not understanding their own religion, and leads to the abomination of mixing Judaism with Christianity and calling it "Judeo-Christian" which, in reality, is absurd.
Jews hate Christians, and also hate the Old Testament that they pretend to follow.
OP, while I agree with the general theme of your thread, I take issue with 2 things, as a matter of friendly debate on these topics:
(1) The Khazarians were the ancestors of many modern jews, NOT zionists. Zionists are made up largely of jews, but also non-jews. A zionist is merely anyone who wants a jewish government in the land of Palestine. So, "Khazarian Zionist" is not an accurate term -- unless you specifically mean zionist jews and not zionists in general.
(2) The Bible passage you quoted was not about jews. It was about Israelites. The Israelites of the Bible were NOT the ancestors of today's jews. That is a jewish lie that has been used to infiltrate and distort Christianity. Jews are the enemy of Christianity, not the Bible's heros. They are NOT "God's Chosen People."
Here are some translations demonstrating this:
https://biblehub.com/john/1-47.htm
If you are using a Bible that has "jew" in place of "Israelite," you should consider looking at other translations.
So many of our English translation Bibles have hundreds or thousands of mistranslations. It is to the point that most Christians today cannot really understand it. That is by design.
1,000-1,500 years ago, the Roman Catholic Church had their doctrine, and it did not matter if it was consistent with the original texts of the scriptures or not. You went along with the doctrine, or were guilty of heresy. Any translator who saw that the original Hebrew or Greek was NOT in agreement with church doctrine, was faced with a difficult choice when translating into latin: either translate it correctly and be charged with heresy, or find a way to translate it in accordance with church doctrine.
The penalty for heresy was being burned alive at the stake. Naturally, many translators would have translated it according to church doctrine, and not in a way that would be accurate to the original text.
Combine that with jewish infiltration, and today we have a mish-mash of falsified scripture. This is one good example.
What Jesus really thought of the people known as jews today is more like:
Note: That passage from Rev 2:9 is one of those mistranslations. It is from the King James Version, which is full of mistranslations. The word "jew" here (and all throughout the modern Bible) is a mistranslation, because Jesus was referencing those who pretended to be Judahites (Israelites) when they were not. They were living in the Roman province of Judea, and thus were Judeans, but not of the tribe of Judah nor of Israel.
These passages are far more in line with what we know of jews today and how they behave and what they believe, as you showed via the Talmud.
I apologize for not giving a response in full, but I just wanted to touch on the NIV, NLT, and ESV bibles that were quoted, and compare with the KJV as example.
Every translation needs to be looked at and compared with one another, like the greatest and most rewarding fitting together of pieces that one could ever hope to complete.
There are many verses omitted from the NIV, NLT, and ESV that are in the KJV, for example, but let's take these three changed verses from Timothy as example:
KJV:
ESV, NIV, NLT
This relates to the second half of your comment. What word do you notice that is missing or changed when comparing these three verses? What is the significance of this? Why are they trying to remove Jesus Christ from the Bible?
What a powerful verse; in one message, Jesus Christ is Creator, Jesus Christ is God, and Jesus Christ is Salvation.
Although that can be helpful, what if they are ALL wrong in meaningful ways because they ALL came from the SAME (or similar) mistranslations?
I think it is far more important to go back to the original Hebrew and Greek, where possible, and find out what those original scriptures actually said.
The translators of 1,000 or more years ago had a problem. If they did not follow Roman Catholic Church doctrine, they were dead men, with a very brutal and painful execution. So, they probably mistranslated on purpose, even if they did not want to, because Church doctrine was NOT about following the original texts. It was about what the men who ran the Church wanted it to be.
Food for thought: Why is the Book of Enoch left out of the modern Bible, when some of the apostles referenced it themselves? Because mortal men decided what "The Bible" is SUPPOSED to say, not what it actually says, necessarily.
Going back to the originals is valuable.
I do not have those skills (knowledge of ancient Hebrew, etc.) but there are people who have done that, and the end result is that most modern versions of the Bible, including KJV, are in many important areas wrong.
Add to that, 99% of modern pastors do not want to even mention -- much less understand and discuss -- certain "inconvenient" parts of the Bible, which talks about how Jesus hated the jews (for good reason).
Modern pastors want to push lollipops and rainbows, and make everyone leave Church on Sunday floating on a happy cloud. They are not much interested in a truthful discussion of original scripture text and accurate translations.
But that creates the problem of modern Christians not understanding their own religion, and leads to the abomination of mixing Judaism with Christianity and calling it "Judeo-Christian" which, in reality, is absurd.
Jews hate Christians, and also hate the Old Testament that they pretend to follow.