, ,

Jews for Jesus and Jonathan Eybshutz – Part 2


Is it credible that the Megaleh Amukot was really a secret xtian?

(You can read Part 1 HERE)

In the last post, I brought some lengthy snippets of some correspondence penned around the 1770s, by one Simon Ashkenazi, a secret ‘Jew for Jesus’ within the Moravian Jewish community, who spoke of a secret society of similar ‘Jews for Jesus’ operating out of Amsterdam.

In that text, this ‘Simon’ states that the modern ‘Jews for Jesus’ movement basically started with Jonathan Eybshutz’s great-grandfather, Natan Nata Spira, aka the Megaleh Amukot.

That’s a very explosive claim to make.

But does it stand up, in the real world?

Let’s find out.


At the end of that document, which you can read for yourselves HERE, orthodox Jewish historian Sid Leiman adds in a number of notes, on the factual accuracy of the information.

Here’s a quick run down of what he says:

  • In 1988, historian Yehuda Liebes noted that the Megaleh Amukot died long before 1680, and so couldn’t have been the founder of this Jewish-xtian sect in Amsterdam.
  • Liebes identified this sect as ‘Sabbatian’ instead – and Leiman apparently concurs with this opinion.


Essentially, he argued that when the sect became disillusioned with Sabbatianism, especially with the death of its hero—R. Jonathan Eibeschuetz—in 1764, it adopted Christianity.

  • Another historian, Pawel Maciejko claims, “(without citing evidence) that the “Herrnhut documents are a contemporary eighteenth-century forgery.”
  • These documents were found in 1890, around 120 years after they’d been written, in 1890, in the central archive of the Moravian Brethren in Hernhut. 
  • The ‘Jew for Jesus’ Simon identified a number of people in his text. Many of these people actually existed in the ‘real world’, in the time and place he located them. These include:
    • The ‘Rabbi Porios‘ who was meant to be at the deathbed of Jonathan Eybshutz, in the text, is identified by Leiman as follows:

“Almost certainly, Rabbi Porios is to be identified with a disciple of R. Jonathan Eibeschuetz, R. Moses Isaiah b. R. Judah Porios, who served as dayyan (rabbinic judge) of Nikolsburg and was a vigorous defender of his teacher during the Emden-Eibeschuetz controversy.”


  • The missionaries mentioned by ‘Simon’, Burgmann and Latrobe were protestant ministers who were trying to convert Jews to xtianity”

Burgmann had served as a missionary to the Jews in Amsterdam prior to his assuming the post of pastor at St. Mary’s German Lutheran Church in London in 1768. Thus, it was no accident that Simon of Amsterdam came to Burgmann for aid…. Similarly, Latrobe was head of the Moravian Church in London from 1755 until his death in 1786.

(Ed. note: that makes Burgmann and Latrobe contemporaries of Dr Samuel Chaim Falk, the demon-conjuring Baal Shem of London, who was also Jacob Frank’s father-in-law.)


  • ‘Simon’ mentions one “R. Chayim Ashkenaas” who apparently managed to convert a lot of Jews over to xtianity / Sabbateanism, and then later serves as the rabbi of Kreutz in Hungary. This ‘Chayim’ is also Simon’s grandfather. Leiman identifies him as follows:

R. Hayyim b. R. Jacob Ashkenazi of Prossnitz served as chief rabbi of Deutschkreutz from 1710 until 1748.

(Ed. note: This Chaim Ashkenazi could also be the ‘Haim Malach‘ who was known as a very successful ‘prophet’ for the Sabbatean movement.)


I’m going to quote another lengthy snippet from Leiman again here, because I want you to really understand the import of what we’re being told here:

In the history of the society, we are informed that Simon left Hungary and came to Schwerin in Mecklenburg.

In Schwerin, he met with the chief rabbi on the eve of Yom Kippur and confessed to him that he had secret Christian leanings.

The chief rabbi was sympathetic and advised Simon to visit R. Jonathan Eibeschuetz.

Before taking leave of the chief rabbi of Schwerin, Simon learned that his name was Prossnitz and that he was a relative of Simon’s grandfather, R. Chayim Ashkenaas of Prossnitz.

Here, too, it is possible to check the record books.

The chief rabbi of Schwerin in the 1760s was R. Meir b. R. Jacob Prossnitz,a disciple of R. Jonathan Eibeschuetz. According to R. Jacob Emden, R. Meir Prossnitz was a notorious Sabbatian who belonged to the circle of Wolf Eibeschuetz [Jonathan Eybshutz’s son, and a known ‘Sabbatian prophet].

Indeed, Emden placed R. Meir Prossnitz under the ban in 1766.


  • Leiman believes this document was written in 1773.
  • Leiman doesn’t believe there was an “international Jewish-Christian sect” operating in the 18th century, and so feels it is unlikely that it was being headed up by Jonathan Eybshutz.

I have to say, on that last point I’m really coming to the conclusion that he’s wrong.

But maybe it wasn’t so much an ‘international Jewish-Christian sect’, but more a secret society that combined demonic practices and black kabbalah with an outwardly ‘pious’, Jewish-xtian exterior.

Exactly as we’ve set out at length in THIS article, about Shmuel Chaim Falk’s involvement in Rosicrucianism’s ‘Order of the Golden Dawn’ and the Asiatic Brotherhood.


Here’s some of the pertinent info from that post:

  • Falk’s main backers were the Sabbatean ‘Boas’ family in Amsterdam – the same city where this ‘secret sect’ is meant to be operating from.
  • Falk has close family in both Altona and Hamburg – the stamping grounds of Jonathan Eybshutz.
  • Falk spent the last 5 years of his life on developing a ‘Judeo-Christian Freemasonry’, where Jews wouldn’t be pressured to convert to Christianity – probably identical to the ‘Egyptian Rites Freemasonry’.
  • Falk has connections with Zinzendorf, aristocratic head of the ‘Moravian Brotherhood’ – the same organisation where these writings of ‘Simon’ are found, in 1890. Zinzendorf also creates an antinomian, immoral, totally deviant ‘inner circle’ for his movement called “the German Pilgrim Section or Der Pilger,” which acts very similarly to the Sabbatean-Frankists.
  • While in Hamburg, Eybshutz is connected to: “Elias Artista (Johannes Muller), the Rosicrucian patron of Swedenborg in Hamburg.“

Falk created a “new mystical religion, which would…transcend all sectarian divisions.”


  • Falk and Eybshutz had a ‘mutual adoration’ club going, that was also attended by relatives of Meir Eisenstadt, the Meir Panim. Meir Eisenstadt is explicitly named by ‘Simon’ in his writings as a secret xtian, and known in the Jewish world to have been a not-so-secret Sabbatean.


This snippet is from the letter of one of Falk’s adherents that I quoted HERE, that sets out a few more people ‘connected’ to the Sabbatean-satanist Dr Falk, aka ‘Rebbe’ Chaim Shmuel Falk, the Baal Shem of London:

Afterwards, [Falk] commanded this Moshe and another member of this holy Chevra, Rabbi Yaakov, grandson of R. Meir Eisenstadt (author of Panim Meiros), and they each lit a large candle. Then he commanded that the group enter barefooted into his room, and behold, we saw the holy man sitting on a throne, dressed like an angel…

The godly Kabbalist Rabbi Moshe David, known as Rabbi Moshe Ba’al Shem, wrote a letter to our master Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz, the famous Chief Rabbi of Hamburg, and told him all these great things and wonders regarding this holy man (=Falk). So R. Yonasan applied to him the words from the Tikkunim, that Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai said, זכאה דרא דהאי רזי עיתגלי ביה, “This generation is fortunate to have such mysteries revealed.”

The letter continues:

“I am grateful that I have been received into this Brotherhood, who by their piety can hasten the advent of the Messiah…my son, be very circumspect, and show this only to wise and discreet men. For here in London, this matter has not been disclosed to anyone who does not belong to our Brotherhood.”


In one of his footnotes, Leiman also brings some more information about Count Zinzendorf and the Moravian Brotherhood.

There, it says this: [T]he founding father of the reconstituted Moravian Brethren, Nikolaus Ludwig Graf von Zinzendorf (1700-1760), wrote as follows: “We believe in general, that the Time of the Heathen is not yet come. For it is believed in our Church that the Conversion of the Jews, and of all Israel must needs [sic] go before, ere the proper Conversion of the Heathen can go forward.”


Long story short….. so many of the real names and the real facts in ‘Simon of Amsterdam’s’ account actually fit in ‘the real world’, that it’s not so simple to just discount that he was plain wrong about the Megaleh Amukot being a secret xtian just because he got the dates wrong.

It’s not impossible that he was ‘massaging’ the year 1680 – the date of Eybshutz’s birth – to fit his story better about Eybshutz being the prophesied ‘savior’ of the Jewish people. When you are dealing with false messiahs, this type of fake PR stuff is typical.

For sure, there is an admixture of truth and lies in ‘Simon’s’ account, the whole problem here is trying to figure out what is what.


When we add in what we know about Falk, and Jacob Frank, and the Order of the Golden Dawn, the tale starts to become more credible.

So the main question, for me, is this:

Did the xtian world ‘seed’ the Sabbatean movement, by pushing the ‘Jews for Jesus’ idea and handpicking the false messiah Shabtai Tzvi and promoting him all over the place, to get the Jews back to Eretz Yisrael to fulfill their own xtian prophecies about when ‘the end times’ would come?

And then ‘Sabbateanism’, right from the start, was actually just another ‘xtian-zionist’ project?

Or, did the Sabbatean movement grow out of a pre-existing, secret, heretical ‘Jewish-gnostic-xtian’ sect that had carried on within the Jewish community for 2,000 years, and was always looking for ways to subvert Torah-true Judaism from within?

I.e., it was just the continuation of the Sadducee-Karaite-fake-Kohen-Khazars-Erev-Rav?

Or, are the people trying to sabotage the Jewish community from within actually descendants of the Erev Rav – the magicians who left Israel, relatives of Bilaam, the grandson of Lavan himself, who have always been trying to kill and corrupt us?

And then ‘Yoshki’ himself was just one on a long line of ‘false messiahs’ who were actually just pawns for this bunch of evil, demon-conjuring magicians?

I don’t know.

But in the next post, we’re going to do a deep dive on the ancestry of ‘Natan Nota Spira’, the Megaleh Amukot, to see if we can shed some more light on this.


Here’s why this matters so much:


THIS comes from the Daily Expose – a reputable investigative journalism site that’s done some sterling work fact-checking the stats on Covid 19 deaths, amongst other things, in the UK.

If we Jews don’t do this birur properly and fast…. I dread to think how all this is going to be ‘spun’ as the Jews’ fault, when the truth of what is going on here finally starts to go mainstream.

So, the race is on to get the truth ‘out there’, before all those xtians – and everyone else – just start spinning their own pack of lies to try and dodge the uncomfortable truth about who Yoshki himself really was….

It doesn’t get bigger than this.



You might also like this article:

4 replies
  1. JR
    JR says:

    As I’ve said before, many sects concoct their origin stories. (Some) freemasons “claim” that Nimrod was a Freemason- the tower was the work of masons. I put “claim” in quotes, because I suspect that they themselves don’t believe and are only talking metaphorically. If this sect, assuming it actually existed, they make claims of being “visited” by the מגלה עמוקות. This is obviously untrue, since the מגלה עמוקות was long dead. That leaves three posibilities:
    1) That story, or the visitation of the מגלה עמוקות part of it, is a fabrication
    2) They experienced a vision, perhaps a delusion, and interpreted what/whom they saw as the מגלה עמוקות but were deceived. Deceptive visions do occur & have been reported in the past.
    3) They experienced a real vision of a dead man coming to them.

    Given that there is zero evidence that the מגלה עמוקות was a heretic, and he has been universally been held as a צדיק, why should we believe these sect members? Why should they be given any credibility? Why cast aspersions on a גדול? Do you realized how great the מגלה עמוקות was?

    • Rivka Levy
      Rivka Levy says:

      Once, I had the misfortune of having to interview a ‘rational Jew’ who had studied philosophy at university.

      We got into a massive fight, because he told me I couldn’t prove to him that he himself existed….

      It seems that people with very narrow vision, and very small minds, can’t fit a lot of new information into their fixed ‘world view’.

      I learnt from that meeting that there is no point debating stuff with people – especially ‘rational’ people – who don’t even believe you can conclusively prove that they themselves exist.

      • JR
        JR says:

        “It seems that people with very narrow vision, and very small minds, can’t fit a lot of new information into their fixed ‘world view’.”

        Do you actually believes these עבודה זרה cultists? Do you find them more credible than generations of rabbonim who had no problems with the מגלה עמוקות?

        • Rivka Levy
          Rivka Levy says:

          There are Jewish Demon Scholars – who learn Torah to aggrandise themselves, not for it’s own sake, and who fool Am Yisrael with their ‘Torah’ and actually just pull them away from God and working on their middot (i.e. fixing their souls.)

          Rebbe Nachman, Likutey Moharan 12:1:

          מַה שֶּׁאָנוּ רוֹאִים, שֶׁעַל־פִּי הָרֹב הַלּוֹמְדִים חוֹלְקִים עַל הַצַּדִּיקִים, וְדוֹבְרִים עַל הַצַּדִּיק עָתָק בְּגַאֲוָה וָבוּז, זֶהוּ מְכֻוָּן גָּדוֹל מֵאֵת הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ. כִּי יֵשׁ בְּחִינַת יַעֲקֹב וְלָבָן; יַעֲקֹב הוּא הַצַּדִּיק, הַמְחַדֵּשׁ חִדּוּשִׁין דְּאוֹרַיְתָא וְלוֹמֵד תּוֹרָתוֹ לִשְׁמָהּ, וְטוּבוֹ גָּנוּז וְשָׁמוּר וְצָפוּן לֶעָתִיד, כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה: לְמָחָר לְקַבֵּל שְׂכָרָם (עירובין כב.); וְעַל שֵׁם שֶׁשְּׂכָרוֹ לְבַסּוֹף, עַל שֵׁם זֶה נִקְרָא יַעֲקֹב, לְשׁוֹן עָקֵב וָסוֹף, שְׂכָרוֹ לְבַסּוֹף. וְלָבָן הוּא תַּלְמִיד־חָכָם שֵׁד יְהוּדִי, שֶׁתּוֹרָתוֹ לְהִתְיַהֵר וּלְקַנְטֵר, וְתַלְמִיד־חָכָם כָּזֶה נְבֵלָה טוֹבָה הֵימֶנּוּ (מ”ר ויקרא א, עיין מתנות כהונה):

          That which we see among most of the learned who go against the Tzaddikim and speak about the Tzaddik wantonly with arrogance and scorn, is specifically planned from G-d. For there is the relation of Yaakov and Lavan; Yaakov is a Tzaddik who creates original (Torah) ideas and studies the Torah for its own sake and his reward is stored, guarded and kept for the future, as our sages of blessed memory state: “The next day they will claim their reward” 2 (Eiruvin 22). Because his reward is in the end he is thus called “Yaakov”, a language of delay and end, his reward is for the end. As for Lavan, he is a wise scholar שד יהודי(?), whose Torah (study) is done to glorify himself and to provoke, and a dead animal is better than a wise scholar like this.


Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Solve : *
12 − 11 =

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