PDA

View Full Version : Jesus Was Not a Jew!



Taras Bulba
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 01:16 AM
http://www.holywar.org/txt/christnot.html

CHRIST NOT A RACIST ZIONIST!
Due to lying jewish propaganda an jewish infiltration of the seminaries of practically all of the major religious denominations and sects, many sincere people erroneously and sacriligiously think that our Lord Jesus Christ is a jew. To overcome that big lie, we call your attention to the following facts from the Holy Bible.

Jesus Christ is the Son of God and therefore was in existence before the creation of the world and before any races were created and therefore could not be a jew.
St. Mark I:1-11 "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wildernes, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptize of repentance for the remission of sins. And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins. And John was clothed with camel's hair, and with a girdle of a skin about his loins; There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him: And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased."
Our Lord Jesus Christ called His apostles from Galilee, except for the jew Judas Iscariot who betrayed Him. There were no jews in Galilee. Only Gentiles and a few Israelites lived in Galilee because, at the time of an earlier generation, King Sargon I of Assyria conquered Palestine and removed most of the Israelites from Galilee and settled them in another part of his farflung empire. He brougth in Gentiles from another part of his empire and settled them in Galilee along with few Israelites that he allowed to remain there. That is why the Bible calls it Galilee of the Gentiles. St. Matthew, 4:12-19 says: "Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee; And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, GALILEE OF THE GENTILES; The people with sat in darkness saw great ligth; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death ligth is sprung up. From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers. And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men."
Some false preachers say that Jesus Christ is a Jew because of being a descendant of King David. However, Jesus Himself positively denies being a son of David in St. Lukes 20:41-44 and also in the Gospel according to St. Mark, 12:35-37 which is as follows: "And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, til I make thine enemies thy footstool. David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then his son? And the common people heard him gladly."
Some false preachers claim that our Lord Jesus Christ is a jew by claiming that Abraham is His father. Of course, Abraham was not a jew, he was a father of many nations as proven by Genesis 17:5 which says, "Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee."
Then, Jesus proves that He is the Son of God, in existence before acient Abraham, and in existence before the jews or any race, and therefore Not a Jew, according to St.John 8:57-59: "Then said the jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I sayunto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going througt the midst of them, and so passed by." That is how evil the jews are. They attempted to stone Our Lord Jesus Christ to death because He told them the truth. Our Lord Jesus Christ said even more in St.John. Read Chapter 8, verses 42-55: "Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even bacause ye cannot hear my word. 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. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because YE ARE NOT OF GOD. THEN ANSWERED THE JEWS, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? Jesus answered, I have not devil; but I honor my Father, and ye do dishonor me. And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth. Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. THEN SAID THE JEWS UNTO HIM, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead and the prophets; and thou sayest, If man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death. Art thou greater than our father Abraham which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing; it is MY FATHER THAT HONOURETH ME; OF WHOM YE SAY, THAT HE IS YOUR GOD; Yet YE HAVE NOT KNOWN HIM; but I kown him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying."
This quotation from the Holy Bible could not be any clearer. Jesus Christ, the Son of God Himself, says that the jews are the children of the devil. He says that the jews are murderers because the lusts of the devil they will do. He says that the devil, the father walking around on two feet. The jews and their present day Judas Iscariots who have infiltrated many churches, preach the big lie that the jews are God's chosen people; it is blasphemy to call the jews God's chosen people when the Son of God Himself calls the jews the children of the devil. Jesus, as quoted above from the Bible, says to the jews: "ye are not of God." That settles the matter for any Godfearing Christian. The jews are so evil that they are trying to change the Holy Bible. They want to take out the many passages that place the blame for the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ on the jews.
The Bible says clearly that the jews killed our Lord Jesus and they please not God and that His wrath is come upon them to the uttermost, therefore, it is impossible for the jews to be God's chosen people and it is clear that Jesus Christ is NOT a jew. For proof, open the HOLY BIBLE and read I Thessalonians 2:14-16: "For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of THE JEWS: who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and they are contrary to all menn: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost."
There you have the truth. You now know that is your Christian duty to defend Christianity against the Jews, against the international SATANIC RACIST ZIONIST MAFIA.

TO BE CHOSEN YOU MUST BELIVE IN JESUS CHRIST!

Stríbog
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 01:23 AM
So what race do you think Jesus was?

Awar
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 02:02 AM
I think Jesus was a black dude ;-)

Doesn't matter what race he was, doesn't really matter what HE believed in, the important thing is what Jesus is NOW, especially to the ones that believe in him.

Everything else will forever be just a speculation.

Saoirse
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 04:19 AM
The thing with CIer's is that they say they are the real Jews, but say jesus hated Jews. They talk about jewish propaganda ect, but then want to be that scum of the earth.

NormanBlood
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 04:23 AM
LOL!!! Oh please, this is the kind of "Jesus was white" crap that pisses the hell out of me. And then you christians go on to use the bible and other such religiously bias texts to try and "prove your point". The bible in reality was written year and yyearrss after the death of Jesus (if he existed at all) so using verses of the bible to prove "Jesus was white" is just ridiculous.

As a matter of fact other than the bible there is no proof that a man named Jesus even existed. The only "proof" we have are Roman records which talk about a rebel in the same time "Jesus" supposedly lived. This rebel was then crucified and that is the end of that.

It was quite ridiculous to think that Jesus was not jewish or overall semetic. The inhabitants of the region at that time were semetic peoples. Unless Jesus was some kind of genetic fluke I highly doubt he was anything but a jew. Even so...what other race could he have been? An Arab? A misplaced east Indian? Surely no way in HELL a European. Therefore he is not "our lord" or anything such thing..in fact he was most likely nobody's lord but merely a rebel with an idea. An attempt to liberate his region from oppressive jewish rule. Extremists after his death (perhaps even during his life seeing that if he indeed did exist it is even less probable that he was literate in any way) most likely twisted the MAN'S words into their own ideas. Either way this "Jesus" is not our "lord", nor is a religion born in a damn dessert "our religion". A "European" christian is nothing but an agent of the jewish race and their atrocities.

Evolved
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 05:35 AM
Jesus was not a Jew!

You're right, in fact I read in the Qur'an the other day that Jesus was a Muslim, as were Adam, Abraham, Moses, etc... http://www.forums.skadi.net/images/icons/icon12.gif

Taras Bulba
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 07:18 AM
The thing with CIer's is that they say they are the real Jews, but say jesus hated Jews. They talk about jewish propaganda ect, but then want to be that scum of the earth.

This isn't from a Christian Identity site but from a more Catholic oriented website.


LOL!!! Oh please, this is the kind of "Jesus was white" crap that pisses the hell out of me.

If you actually read the thing(which I guess you didn't), you would notice that all it claims was that Jesus was a Gentile, ie a non-Jew. It makes no mention of Jesus being white.



It was quite ridiculous to think that Jesus was not jewish or overall semetic. The inhabitants of the region at that time were semetic peoples. Unless Jesus was some kind of genetic fluke I highly doubt he was anything but a jew. Even so...what other race could he have been? An Arab? A misplaced east Indian? Surely no way in HELL a European.

I love how you overbloated anti-Christians pull all sorts of BS from any pro-Christian text. notice it states:


There were no jews in Galilee. Only Gentiles and a few Israelites lived in Galilee because, at the time of an earlier generation, King Sargon I of Assyria conquered Palestine and removed most of the Israelites from Galilee and settled them in another part of his farflung empire. He brougth in Gentiles from another part of his empire and settled them in Galilee along with few Israelites that he allowed to remain there. That is why the Bible calls it Galilee of the Gentiles.

All it ever states was that Jesus was a Gentile, not that he was European. Learn to read!

Although it should be noted that traditional Jewish texts do claim that Jesus was European, in that he was the bastard child of a Roman legionary. So even the Jews claim that Jesus was not Jewish.




Therefore he is not "our lord" or anything such thing..in fact he was most likely nobody's lord but merely a rebel with an idea. An attempt to liberate his region from oppressive jewish rule. Extremists after his death (perhaps even during his life seeing that if he indeed did exist it is even less probable that he was literate in any way) most likely twisted the MAN'S words into their own ideas. Either way this "Jesus" is not our "lord", nor is a religion born in a damn dessert "our religion".

So you oppose Christianity because of its origins rather than its theology? I guess in your eyes, Christianity isn't "kosher" enough for the European people. I love how you claim to oppose the Jews yet adhere to their world-view.

"In Christ, the embodiment of all manliness, we find all that we need. And if we occasionally speak of Baldur, our words always contain some joy, some satisfaction, that our pagan ancestors were already so Christian as to have indications of Christ in this ideal figure."
--Dietrich Eckart



A "European" christian is nothing but an agent of the jewish race and their atrocities.

bwahahahahaha! Then please explain to me why the Jews have targeted traditional Christianity as a major part of their agenda. Jewish leaders are pissed that Mel Gibson wants to make a movie based on the Gospels about Jesus's death. Yeah we're the agents of the Jews, what F*cking BS! In fact Jesus and the early Christians were the first ever to expose the Jews for what they are! You lack any knowledge of traditional Christianity!

Saoirse
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 07:47 AM
http://www.jesusisajew.org

Evolved
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 08:05 AM
This isn't from a Christian Identity site but from a more Catholic oriented website.

It sounds like Christian Identity to me. The layout and material reminds me of Radio Islam (www.abbc.com/), perhaps it is the Christian companion site. That site is useful, but makes Christianity and Islam look like they are religions based on hatred for Jews. It complains of Jewish racism toward others but then is racist against Jews. For instance, what is the point of this (http://www.holywar.org/txt/gallery.html)? Yeah, we know jews tend to be ugly, have big noses, wear funny-looking hats and sissy hairdos. Am I the only one here who doesn't believe every Jewish individual is inherently evil? Would I miss them if they all died? No. But that doesn't mean I want them all dead. I want their influence in world affairs to be destroyed.

Taras Bulba
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 08:09 AM
http://www.jesusisajew.org

Nice try, but upon looking further into the evidence, it's all wrong. As for being a decendent of Abraham and David, that still does not mean Jesus was Jewish in the sense that we know. Need we forget that it was during the Babylonian capitivity, the Israelites basically bastardize their blood and religion and thus the origins of Talmudic Judaism. The Judaism as practiced by these bastardized Jews was so off course that Jesus came to earth to bring them into line. In John 8:44 he even denies the claim of the "Jews" to being the true decendents of David and Abraham but being that of the Devil.

St. Paul in his epistiles also declares that not everybody claiming to be a Jew is a decendant of Abraham and David, but literally are bastards pretending to be them.



http://www.jesusisajew.org/Jesus_is_a_Jew.htm

He was mocked, spat on and beaten by the Roman soldiers as 'King of the Jews' (Mk. 15:16-20) and when they crucified Him, their charge was 'King of the Jews' (Matt. 27:37).

Obviously the person who wrote this doesn't realize that they were mocking and degrading Jesus by claiming he was "King of the Jews". I seriously wonder if the Romans called Jesus a goat-f*cker, this idiot would write about how Jesus loved to have intercourse with goats. What's even interesting is that the Jewish leaders were appalled by the Romans making such remarks, and even asked Pilate to remove the sign declaring him king of the Jews off the cross.

I like how the site doesn't mention which version of the Bible they used to find these verses. Because the more recent Bible translations are the most f*cked pieces of crap ever written. Need we forget, they now want to change the "Holy Son" to "Holy Child", which flies right into the face of Christian tradition as declared at the 1st Ecumenical Council at Nicea.

So yes many of the post 1945 translations try so hard to claim Jesus was Jewish, yet more traditionally oriented translations do not.


It sounds like Christian Identity to me. The layout and material reminds me of Radio Islam (www.abbc.com/), perhaps it is the Christian companion site. That site is useful, but makes Christianity and Islam look like they are religions based on hatred for Jews.

Why is it that being both against the Jews and being a Christian automatically makes you Christian Identity? Read the works of the Church fathers(which Christian Identity hardly ever refer to) were against the Jews. Traditional Catholic and Orthodox teachings claimed that Jesus was not Jewish and that Judaism stands in firm opposition to Christianity. In fact the Orthodox Church declared any attempts of Judaising Christianity and claiming Jesus was Jewish heresy in the 15th century. Martin Luther was a staunch anti-semite, as one can read in his "On the Jews and their Lies" (http://reactor-core.org/secret/on-the-jews-and-their-lies.html). All this before Christian Identity ever came into existance! In fact before 1945, it was rare to find a Christian theologian who had many positive things to say about the Jews.

http://www.romancatholicism.org/jews.html

The Jews knew that Christ was the son of David. And even now they hope for His Coming. It is hidden from them that He has come, but it is hidden because they willed it so. For, not acknowledging Him on the cross, the knowledge of Him reigning in glory should not be theirs ... Why are the Jews hoping for what has already come, and not fearful for what is to come? For Our Lord Jesus Christ ... referred Himself as "the Stone" (Matthew xxi.44), that whoever stumbles upon it shall be bruised; but upon whom it shall fall, it will grind to powder ... Lying on the ground, it shakes whoever falls over it; coming from on high, it crushes the proud. The Jews have already been shaken by their previous stumble. What awaits them is to be crushed by His Coming.
~ St. Augustine

Many shall come from the East and West and sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of Heaven, but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into the exterior darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. ~ St. Matthew viii.11-12

There is need of constant prayer lest we defect from the heavenly kingdom, as have the Jews to whom it was first promised. This the Lord makes unmistakably clear by saying: "Many will come from East and West and recline at the banquet table with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of Heaven, whereas those born to the kingdom will be driven into the darkness outside, there to wail and gnash their teeth" ... Our Lord shows that the Jews were formerly children of the kingdom, but after the name "Father" disappeared from among them, so did the kingdom. The Jews have remained in darkness for having forsaken the light. ~ St. Cyprian

The "exterior darkness" is that of the Jews, who have heard truth but not believed. ~ St. Thomas Aquinas

Jews prefer to persist in their stubbornness rather than to recognize the words of their prophets and the mysteries of the Scriptures and thus arrive at a knowledge of the Christian faith and salvation. ~ Bl. Pope Gregory X

The faithlessness of the Synagogue is an insult to the Savior. Therefore, He chose the barque of Peter and deserted the boat of Moses; that is, He rejected the faithless Synagogue and adopted the believing Church ... Of these two ships, one is left at the shore, idle and empty; the other, loaded filled, is launched into the deep. For the Synagogue is left idle on the beach. Because of its own fault, it has lost Christ along with the warnings of the prophets. But the freighted Church is taken out into the deep, because it received the Lord together with the teaching of the Apostles. The Synagogue, I say, remains on the land, held fast as it were to earthly things. The Church is called forth to the deep, as though to search into the profound mysteries of Heaven.
~ St. Ambrose

Tautalos
Friday, December 12th, 2003, 12:48 PM
So you oppose Christianity because of its origins rather than its theology?

Correct.
Concerning religion, the idea that «origin doesn't matter» is typical of Christians. In opposition, one can see that in Athens, for instances, Socrates was condemned to death penalty under the accusation of promoting the worship of foreign Gods. I do remind you that the people from Athens were neither Jewish nor of any other Semitic stock, but basically Jonian, i.e., Hellenic, which is Indo-European.

For conceptions about the Divine world, the Greeks have Philosophy. There is no need to mix Philosophy with Religion.





I guess in your eyes, Christianity isn't "kosher" enough for the European people. I love how you claim to oppose the Jews yet adhere to their world-view.

Actually, such type of wordlview is not private property of the Jews. The Roman philosopher Celsus, anti-christian, and slightly hostile to the Jews as well, stated that each Folk was suppose to have it's own God(s), and that was the most natural and healthy option. «Let the Jews have their Jehova, let the Christians have their Jehova and Jesus, and let us, Romans and Greeks, have our own Gods».
Later, Julian, the pagan emperor, said the same.





Then please explain to me why the Jews have targeted traditional Christianity as a major part of their agenda.

One may say that Jesus was for the Jews what Buda was for the Hindus.
But Buda was not seriously persecuted, contrary to what happen to Jesus.
And that is because Jews were religiously intolerant, and, besides, they depended on their religion as a national token of unity - therefore, Jesus represented a division of the Jewish folk. Do take note that the first Christians were of Jewish ethnicity, and the Romans considered them as «just another Jewish sect».

Jesus is an universalist prophet and his doctrine would represent the dissolution of the Jewish Folk in the world population - Jesus claimed that he was bringing a truth for everybody, without distinction of ancestry, and, if the Jews accepted this, they would lose the idea of «Chosen(by Jehova) People».

And so, the Christians always tried to absorb the Jews, by forced conversion if necessary.

Evolved
Saturday, December 13th, 2003, 05:55 AM
So you oppose Christianity because of its origins rather than its theology? I guess in your eyes, Christianity isn't "kosher" enough for the European people. I love how you claim to oppose the Jews yet adhere to their world-view.

To me it is the exact opposite. I oppose the theology. I couldn't care less about it's "semitic" origin. People should believe in whatever feels right to them in their heart or mind, even if it is foreign to their particular ethnic backgound.

Milesian
Saturday, December 13th, 2003, 11:15 AM
To me it is the exact opposite. I oppose the theology. I couldn't care less about it's "semitic" origin. People should believe in whatever feels right to them in their heart or mind, even if it is foreign to their particular ethnic backgound.

I almost thought that was a Vatican II quote or a quote by John Paul II LOL!
Freedom of Conscience? - I hadn't taken you for a liberal, LG ;)

Taras Bulba
Saturday, December 13th, 2003, 09:26 PM
For conceptions about the Divine world, the Greeks have Philosophy. There is no need to mix Philosophy with Religion.

Then you deny a major aspect of philosophy.



Actually, such type of wordlview is not private property of the Jews. The Roman philosopher Celsus, anti-christian, and slightly hostile to the Jews as well, stated that each Folk was suppose to have it's own God(s), and that was the most natural and healthy option. «Let the Jews have their Jehova, let the Christians have their Jehova and Jesus, and let us, Romans and Greeks, have our own Gods».
Later, Julian, the pagan emperor, said the same.

Ah yes, moral relativism. Certainly each folk can have their own religious pratices, in fact Christianity promotes this. But to claim each peoples Gods are equal is ridiculas. Considering that the Greeks believed Zeus was King of Heaven, the Egyptians believed Ra(then later Amon-Ra or Amon-Re) was king of heaven. So which is it? You're really just adhering to a primitve world-view.



Jesus is an universalist prophet and his doctrine would represent the dissolution of the Jewish Folk in the world population - Jesus claimed that he was bringing a truth for everybody, without distinction of ancestry, and, if the Jews accepted this, they would lose the idea of «Chosen(by Jehova) People».

True Jesus was universalstic, but if you're going to argue that Jesus did not accept distinct national differences; than you're ignorant of his message and of Christian theology. For Christian theology itself states that God created distinct nations as part of his divine plan for humanity.

And as for origins, it should be noted that many Greek thinkers admired and absorbed thoughts from other cultures. Most famous of them was Prythagoras(I hope I spelled that correctly).

Tautalos
Sunday, December 14th, 2003, 05:35 PM
Then you deny a major aspect of philosophy.

No, I do not. Philosophy deals with metaphysics, and, in a general way, any metaphysic idea can be applied to any pagan religion. That does not have, as a consequence, the submission of that pagan religion to a given metaphysic conception.

Religion, is ritual and connection with ever-living Powers.

Philosophy, is to think about the world, including the above mentioned religious reality.

And so, Philosophy may depend on Religion, in some cases, but Religion can never depend on Philosophy.

In that way, the pagan religions are compatible with any philosophy, and, specially, with the philosophical freedom of thought. That does not happen with Christianism.





Ah yes, moral relativism

Better than moral imperialism and authoritarianism.




Certainly each folk can have their own religious pratices, in fact Christianity promotes this

No, it does not. Christianity promotes, either the abandone or the absortion of all religious practices of the world in favour of one single religion.




But to claim each peoples Gods are equal is ridiculas

No, it is not. To claim the contrary, THAT'S what is ridiculous and obscene. To claim that all the pagan Gods are false, or demons, and that only one folk received the revelation of the one true God, is a childish and outrageous insult to all the other nations of the Earth.




> Considering that the Greeks believed Zeus was King of Heaven, the Egyptians believed Ra(then later Amon-Ra or Amon-Re) was king of heaven. So which is it?

Both. For the Greeks, it is Zeus. For the Egyptians, it is Ra. No reasonable person would suggest that the Greeks just had to abandone Zeus in favour of Ra for the sake of... what? «Universal understanding»? And why wouldn't the Egyptians change their religion in order to worship Zeus and not Ra?, that's the question that any real Hellene would legitimally do.



> You're really just adhering to a primitve world-view.

No. My world-view is respectful, contrary to yours, which is imperialistically jewish.



> True Jesus was universalstic, but if you're going to argue that Jesus did not accept distinct national differences; than you're ignorant of his message and of Christian theology.

I did not read the entire Bible. I am not even sure if I readed the entire New Testament... but, what comes from that, is that the only true way to God is the one dictated by Jesus; and that one of it's prophets, was another jew, Moses; and that God's name is Jehova, who protected one folk against all the others. There is no mention, in that book, of Zeus, Iuppiter, Odin, Lug, Perkunas, Perun... so, why would any westerner accept it?

As a matter of fact, you, by your own words, demonstrate that Christianism is not compatible with the worship of national Gods, when you consider ridiculous the diversity of Deities according the diversity of ethnicities.

And the pope says that the same as you say.

Therefore, there is no room for Christianisty in a nationalist Europe, with the exception of one or two individuals; but not a single nation.



> For Christian theology itself states that God created distinct nations as part of his divine plan for humanity.

Yes. But Christian theology itself does not states that God created disctint nations WITH distinct Gods. That means that, according Christian theology, all the folks of the Earth are suppose to abandone their own Deities in favour of a foreign Entity. Not acceptable at all.



> And as for origins, it should be noted that many Greek thinkers admired and absorbed thoughts from other cultures.

Yes... that's up to them. That did not COMPROMISE their own folks.

Because, in Greece, and in Rome, there was that European luxury of mind, unknown by some folks, that is... freedom of thought.

Taras Bulba
Sunday, December 14th, 2003, 07:04 PM
No, I do not. Philosophy deals with metaphysics, and, in a general way, any metaphysic idea can be applied to any pagan religion. That does not have, as a consequence, the submission of that pagan religion to a given metaphysic conception.

Ok religion deals with metaphysics as well. In fact thats the whole basis of religion.


In that way, the pagan religions are compatible with any philosophy, and, specially, with the philosophical freedom of thought. That does not happen with Christianism.

Pagan religions are compatible with any philosophy. Thats so nice to know, so therefore it lacks any real intellectual development and basically is whatever one makes of it. No wonder so many "pagans" are so supportive of Marxism and Liberalism, the two ideologies that seek to destroy the very foundation of civilization.



Better than moral imperialism and authoritarianism.

Truth is either exclusive or else its not true. Moral relativism is only a virtue to those who don't believe in anything.



No, it does not. Christianity promotes, either the abandone or the absortion of all religious practices of the world in favour of one single religion.


BWAHAHAHA! Just prove you wrong, heres a website about my faith of Eastern Catholicism.

http://home.nyc.rr.com/mysticalrose/eastern.html

All the rites of the Catholic Church also hold the same dogmas; they are unequivocally united in faith and moral teachings, for they are all part of one Holy Mother Church. Yet their policies and practices often differ according to custom. This is a good and healthy thing; it shows that the One Truth of God can be celebrated in many different ways by various cultures.

Any study of Christianity knows that Christianity adopts itself to the native culture. Any historian can tell you this about the Christianization of Europe.



No, it is not. To claim the contrary, THAT'S what is ridiculous and obscene. To claim that all the pagan Gods are false, or demons, and that only one folk received the revelation of the one true God, is a childish and outrageous insult to all the other nations of the Earth.

Jesus claimed his mission was first to the Israelites, but his message was for the world. So your claim that only one nation recieved the truth is bogus.



Both. For the Greeks, it is Zeus. For the Egyptians, it is Ra. No reasonable person would suggest that the Greeks just had to abandone Zeus in favour of Ra for the sake of... what? «Universal understanding»? And why wouldn't the Egyptians change their religion in order to worship Zeus and not Ra?, that's the question that any real Hellene would legitimally do.


bwahahahaha so what Ra only rules part of the universe while Zeus rules another part?



No. My world-view is respectful, contrary to yours, which is imperialistically jewish.

Right here you've proven your ignorance of Christian theology and Christian history. Christianity is a refutation of Judaism. Even Jews admit this! I just love how you people know so much more about Judaism and who is and who isn't a Jew than the Jews themselves.



I did not read the entire Bible. I am not even sure if I readed the entire New Testament... but, what comes from that, is that the only true way to God is the one dictated by Jesus; and that one of it's prophets, was another jew, Moses; and that God's name is Jehova, who protected one folk against all the others. There is no mention, in that book, of Zeus, Iuppiter, Odin, Lug, Perkunas, Perun... so, why would any westerner accept it?

Because it teaches the universal truth. And your BS about Jesus being a Jew is getting f*cking ridiculas. Plus you seem to follow the Protestant "scriptures only" approach which is highly primitive. Try reading the works of the Church fathers as well.



As a matter of fact, you, by your own words, demonstrate that Christianism is not compatible with the worship of national Gods, when you consider ridiculous the diversity of Deities according the diversity of ethnicities.

There is one god. That god created many nations, so nations are the creation of God. So having one god is not incompatible with nationalism.

Plus it should be noted that much of the worship of pagan national Gods was replaced by the veneration of national Christian saints.



Therefore, there is no room for Christianisty in a nationalist Europe, with the exception of one or two individuals; but not a single nation.


BWAHAHAHAHA! Oh stop! I'm dying of laughter here, considering the fact that the major nationalistic movements in Europe's history and even today are/were Christian based. In Ireland, the vast majority of Irish prefer St. Patrick as their national icon to any Celtic god. In Russia, the main source of nationalistic revival under the Communist was the Orthodox Church. Pagan movements are nothing but fringe groups who have no mass support and largely made up of members of the elite. Yet nationalism is populist by its very nature.

Even Alain de Benoist and other members of the New Right admit that their thought has been influenced by Catholic social doctrine and even cooperate with Christian nationalists all the time. This while Benoist believes in a revival of paganism. In fact many pagans even argue that Christianity's are irrelevant now considering that all the major figures in Christianity's history were white Europeans and that Christianity played a major role in Europe for 2000 years.
so basically the staunch anti-Christianity that so many pagan nationalists espouse is not even shared by the major leaders of their movement.

> For Christian theology itself states that God created distinct nations as part of his divine plan for humanity.


Yes. But Christian theology itself does not states that God created disctint nations WITH distinct Gods. That means that, according Christian theology, all the folks of the Earth are suppose to abandone their own Deities in favour of a foreign Entity. Not acceptable at all.

Foreign? If God created all nations, how the F*ck is he foreign. You're talking nonsense!

Thanks, I really needed a good laugh! :lol

Nordhammer
Sunday, December 14th, 2003, 07:24 PM
To me it is the exact opposite. I oppose the theology. I couldn't care less about it's "semitic" origin. People should believe in whatever feels right to them in their heart or mind, even if it is foreign to their particular ethnic backgound.

And I suppose you couldn't care less about the origin of ancestry either? People should mate with whatever "feels right" to them? If it "feels good" do it? LOL

I think the origin of things is important, it puts things in perspective. For instance, I have some Jehova's Witness relatives, who I think are nuttier than a fruitcake in regards to their religion and what they believe. They're good people besides this, but sometimes it's really frustrating. Like, the wife will say things like, "you know, Christmas is pagan." Yeah, European tradition is pagan and evil, how horrible. That ideology is so twisted and backwards. Ancient European tradition is as non-pagan as it gets. Christianity and all of its sects are more pagan and foreign.

Razmig
Monday, December 15th, 2003, 07:21 AM
It is well known that Jesus was a Philistine (Phelestini). It even mentions it in the bible. I'm sure you can use http://bible.gospelcom.net/ to search for it. The philistines were a non-semetic people originating from the Balkans, of Dinaric or Armenoid (which ever you prefer) herritage. The palestinians of today are supposedly their ancestors, but Arab domination has most likely darkened them. They are the original settlers of Palestine, the Jews then fled into Israel from Egypt. Jews= mixed slaves.

Tautalos
Monday, December 15th, 2003, 03:34 PM
Ok religion deals with metaphysics as well. In fact thats the whole basis of religion.

But in a different way: ritually. I.e., religiously.




Pagan religions are compatible with any philosophy. Thats so nice to know, so therefore it lacks any real intellectual development

Quite the contrary. The issue here, that you obviously do not understand, is that Religion IS NOT ABOUT discussing the meaning of life, etc.. One can not blame religion for not developing a specific metaphysical theory, as well as one can not blame religion for not developing a theory about Chemistry or Mathematics.

The Christians, on the other hand, are limited to the philosophy and dogmas dicatated by their spiritual owners, the Bible, the Church, etc..




and basically is whatever one makes of it

No, it is not. Not in the religious aspect, obviously.



No wonder so many "pagans" are so supportive of Marxism and Liberalism, the two ideologies that seek to destroy the very foundation of civilization.

Actually, there are Christians supporting Liberalism and Leftist ideologies, two ideologies that seek to destroy the very foundation of civilization.

As a matter of fact, Christianism, with it's equalitarian, dogmatic, internationalist and universalistic moral, is the origine of Left itself, for the Left is, essentially, Christianism without God.



Truth is either exclusive or else its not true

But there is more than one way to reach it. Moral authoritarianism do not accept that and thus wants to force upon everything and everybody their own way. That not only originates revolt, but also atheism, when those who have no alternatives, just refuse the imposed, and, in some cases, proved wrong, exclusive «path».





All the rites of the Catholic Church also hold the same dogmas; they are unequivocally united in faith and moral teachings, for they are all part of one Holy Mother Church. Yet their policies and practices often differ according to custom. This is a good and healthy thing; it shows that the One Truth of God can be celebrated in many different ways by various cultures. [/b]

Yes, it is pure BS. They tolerate «many different ways by various cultures»... as long as those cultures reject their own true Gods and accept the obscene dogma that the only existing God revealed himself to only one folk before the birth of a given jew, who died nailed to a cross.




any study of Christianity knows that Christianity adopts itself to the native culture

Yes, of course. That is named USURPATION. The Christians just try to destroy whatever they can, and to absorb what can be useful to settle amongst a given folk.





Jesus claimed his mission was first to the Israelites, but his message was for the world.

That is, IF the world wants to receive it.



So your claim that only one nation recieved the truth is bogus

No, it is not, because the God of Jesus, Jehova, revealed Himself only to the Jews, prior to Jesus. That means that, to any Christian, Jehova is real, and was real when, for instances, ordered the genocide of Amalec, but Iuppiter is not real.
So, YOUR argument is, indeed, bogus.




so what Ra only rules part of the universe while Zeus rules another part?

I do not know. They might even be the same Deity, with different names, it does not matter for this case.
What I know is that the Greeks have absolutely no reason to change their own religion. Or would you say the contrary?




Right here you've proven your ignorance of Christian theology and Christian history. Christianity is a refutation of Judaism

Right here you've proven your lack of capacity to understand what you read. I did not say the contrary of that. Learn to read properly.
Christianism is an outspring of Judaism, and does not deny that «the only true God is Jehova». Christianism does not deny Moses. Christianism does not deny the Old Testament, or else that would not be a part of the Christian religion.

And the Romans considered the Christians as a new sect of Jews.
And the first Christians, were, indeed, of Jewish origin.


And Jesus was a jew, indeed. That is written in your own scriptures.





Because it teaches the universal truth

It teaches the Christian VERSION of universal truth. Which does not have any sort of priority upon any other.



And your BS about Jesus being a Jew is getting f*cking ridiculas

No, YOUR BS about Jesus not being a Jew is indeed quite ridiculous, from the start, specially when you, a simple kid, want to teach it to whole world.
Pushkin and the pope, who is right about Jesus?
Take a pill and go to sleep.




There is one god.

Yes. One, two, three, four, thousands.




That god created many nations, so nations are the creation of God. So having one god is not incompatible with nationalism.

Having one God is not incompatible with Nationalism; having one God FROM ANOTHER NATION, that IS incompatible with Nationalism.
Having one God is not incompatible with Nationalism; having one God that puts UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD upon family ties, IS, indeed, incompatible with Nationalism.




Plus it should be noted that much of the worship of pagan national Gods was replaced by the veneration of national Christian saints.

Christian saints that are submitted to the authority of Jehova/Jesus. That is an obscene substitution: to mutilate and subordinate the real Gods of the West.
Moreover, the ethic, at the bottom, is still universalist.




I'm dying of laughter here, considering the fact that the major nationalistic movements in Europe's history and even today are/were Christian based

Laughter? It is not a matter to laughter about, it is very serious. The fact that so many western nationalists are still Christian, and, in some cases, devotdly Christian, is a bad omen for Europe.
Yet, some nacionalists already started to see how much of a Troy's horse Christianism is.




In Ireland, the vast majority of Irish prefer St. Patrick as their national icon to any Celtic god

In Ireland, the vast majority of Irish oeople prefer St. Patrick as their national icon to any Celtic God, because, probably, most of the Irish do not know any Celtic God, or, more probable, most of the Irish were brainwashed from birth within the Christian faith.



In Russia, the main source of nationalistic revival under the Communist was the Orthodox Church. Pagan movements are nothing but fringe groups

Perhaps. You are Russian, not me. But... aren't you afraid of the growing, even if it is slow, of the Pagan Nationalism in Russia?:)
I've read a report on that... of how that worries the self-proclaimed «democrats»...




Even Alain de Benoist and other members of the New Right

Alain de Benoist was one the main anti-christian influences within the New Right movement. Alain de Benoist urged the Europeans to return to Iuppiter and Odin. And, tough he does not claim to be pagan, nowadays, there are other individuals, within the New Right, that oppenly worship the ancient Deities of their ancestors.



admit that their thought has been influenced by Catholic social doctrine and even cooperate with Christian nationalists all the time

Of course. So what? It is a matter of «real politik»: political need.




> Foreign? If God created all nations, how the F*ck is he foreign.

I did not say «God» - I said the JEWISH-CHRISTIAN God. His name is Jehova, or, let's say, the Holy Trinity, of which the Father is Jehova.
And Jehova, as well as Jesus, is certainly foreign to Greece, no matter how much do the Jews and Christians insist that Zeus never existed, and that the real God was Jehova, all the time, etc..



Thanks, I really needed a good laugh! :lol

Good for you. But don't forget the lessons you've learned.

Taras Bulba
Monday, December 15th, 2003, 04:20 PM
I think the origin of things is important, it puts things in perspective.

Origins is important, but you can't base everything on it. Truth is true no matter where it comes from. If a Jew saids the world is round, does that mean Europeans must believe it's flat? Of course not.

But truth cannot be interpreted the same way in every case. For example, Christianity around the world is not the same(despite what what paranoid pagans believe). Christianity adopts itself to native cultures and traditions. This is even true within a distinct Christian tradition, such as Orthodoxy. The Greek Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church are similar in many ways, but differ according to national customs and traditions.

So this nonsense put forth by some pagans that Christianity is incompatible with European nationalism is pure nonsense, both from a historical and even theological point of view. Luckily, there are some pagans who have more common sense and actually see us Christian as fellow European nationalists rather than enemies.

I have nothing against paganism per se except on a theological perspective.
I just have strong opposition to this fringe movement that believes only the destruction of Christianity can liberate Europe and that Christianity is non-European. I am(and many other Christian nationalists are) willing to let paganism have the right to exist, will you pagan nationalists reconize our right to exist as well? If yes, then there's no real need for conflict. If no, you'd better expect us to down hard on your asses.

This is my last post in my debate with Tautalos. His stupidity is becoming too ridiculas to take seriously anymore!



But in a different way: ritually. I.e., religiously.

Whatever. Every religion involves a particular view of how the universe works and how the divine works. This is metaphysics and theology.



Quite the contrary. The issue here, that you obviously do not understand, is that Religion IS NOT ABOUT discussing the meaning of life, etc..

You're an idiot, thats one the main purposes of religion.



The Christians, on the other hand, are limited to the philosophy and dogmas dicatated by their spiritual owners, the Bible, the Church, etc..

The Greeks and Romans were the only pagan Europeans who were ever able to produce any great thinkers. Please name any great pagan thinkers from the Celtic and Germanic tribes before the arrival of Christianity that had any impact equal to St. Thomas Aquinas, Thomas Hobbes, Martin Luther, and so on.



As a matter of fact, Christianism, with it's equalitarian, dogmatic, internationalist and universalistic moral, is the origine of Left itself, for the Left is, essentially, Christianism without God.

Bullshit! The Germanic tribes were far more equalitarian than Christian Europe ever was! In fact both the Jacobins and Communists looked to the Germanic people as described in Tacitus's "Germania" as their model, not Christian Europe.



But there is more than one way to reach it.

So you accept theres one truth? This contradicts what you said before.



Yes, of course. That is named USURPATION. The Christians just try to destroy whatever they can, and to absorb what can be useful to settle amongst a given folk.

Oh yes and the pagan Romans never destroyed anything right? They didn't destroy temples and destroyed religious traditions. Tell that to the Druids.



That is, IF the world wants to receive it.


Yes, man has free choice. Europe made its choice; it chose Christ.




No, it is not, because the God of Jesus, Jehova, revealed Himself only to the Jews, prior to Jesus. That means that, to any Christian, Jehova is real, and was real when, for instances, ordered the genocide of Amalec, but Iuppiter is not real.
So, YOUR argument is, indeed, bogus.

Jesus rejected the notion that God only revealed himself to only one nation, but should be embraced by all nations. Thats a fundemental difference between Christianity and Judaism. Learn your theology.



I do not know.

Then you shouldn't be arguing on this topic at all!




Right here you've proven your lack of capacity to understand what you read. I did not say the contrary of that. Learn to read properly.
Christianism is an outspring of Judaism, and does not deny that «the only true God is Jehova». Christianism does not deny Moses. Christianism does not deny the Old Testament, or else that would not be a part of the Christian religion.

And the Romans considered the Christians as a new sect of Jews.
And the first Christians, were, indeed, of Jewish origin.


You're a f*cking moron! The Jews under Moses are not the same as the Jews during Jesus's time or even today. During the Baylonian capitivity, the Jews bastardized their blood and their religion by mixing it with elements of Babylonian paganism. This is the origins of Talmudic Judaism. By the time of Jesus, Judaism at that time was so perverted and way off line from the original Jews(Israelites) praticed. Christianity upholds true Judaism, not Talmudic Judaism.




And Jesus was a jew, indeed. That is written in your own scriptures.

Maybe in your f*cked up interpretation of it, but in the original scriptures he is not.



It teaches the Christian VERSION of universal truth.

Well duh! Just like Platonism teaches Plato's version of universal truth or that Stoicism teaches the Stoic version of truth. Good job brainiac!




No, YOUR BS about Jesus not being a Jew is indeed quite ridiculous, from the start, specially when you, a simple kid, want to teach it to whole world.


Call me a kid all you want, it only proves how much of an idiot you truely are for I just turned 21. Please provide hard-core evidence that Jesus was Jewish. Scriptures denies he's Jewish, Christian tradition upholds he wasn't Jewish, Jewish tradition upholds he wasn't Jewish, even anti-Christians like Alfred Rosenberg and Henrich Himmler denied he was Jewish. So where is this evidence that Jesus was jewish besides f*cked up interpretations of scriptures and the liberal media?



Pushkin and the pope, who is right about Jesus?

Pushkin since he actually adheres to Catholic tradition.



Take a pill and go to sleep.

You should follow your own advice since you aren't making any sense.



Having one God is not incompatible with Nationalism; having one God FROM ANOTHER NATION, that IS incompatible with Nationalism.

Ok the Christian God lives in heaven, what nation did he come from? What heaven is now a nation?



Having one God is not incompatible with Nationalism; having one God that puts UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD upon family ties, IS, indeed, incompatible with Nationalism.

That's in a metaphysical sense idiot! Besides, Alexander the Greek was more universalistic in his view of Greek religion than the Christians ever were.



Laughter? It is not a matter to laughter about, it is very serious. The fact that so many western nationalists are still Christian, and, in some cases, devotdly Christian, is a bad omen for Europe.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHA This is so f*cking ridiculas I'll just laugh some more. Nevermind that the whole notion of a Europe, white race, and even modern notions of nations grew out of Christian thinking. The pagan Greeks and Romans found more affiminity with the Egyptians and Libyans than they ever did with the Celts and Germans. That only came with the coming of Christianity.




In Ireland, the vast majority of Irish oeople prefer St. Patrick as their national icon to any Celtic God, because, probably, most of the Irish do not know any Celtic God, or, more probable, most of the Irish were brainwashed from birth within the Christian faith.

So now the vast majority of Irish people are stupid huh? Or better yet the vast majority of European/white people? It's amazing the amount of arrogance some people will employ to make up for their inferiority complexes.



Perhaps. You are Russian, not me. But... aren't you afraid of the growing, even if it is slow, of the Pagan Nationalism in Russia?:)
I've read a report on that... of how that worries the self-proclaimed «democrats»...

Actually the "democrats" are more worried about the Orthodox Church and its support for the nationalist right. I have government reports talking about that. The pagan nationalists are really just a fringe movement are even heavily ridiculed within the Russian nationalist movement. Sorry, but our identity is found with the Orthodox Church. If you West European pagans don't like that, well..........tough sh*t.




Alain de Benoist was one the main anti-christian influences within the New Right movement. Alain de Benoist urged the Europeans to return to Iuppiter and Odin. And, tough he does not claim to be pagan, nowadays, there are other individuals, within the New Right, that oppenly worship the ancient Deities of their ancestors.

Wow............thanks alot even though I ALREADY KNEW THAT! That's why I mentioned de Benoist to begin with.



Of course. So what? It is a matter of «real politik»: political need.

And I'm to take your word over his own? His gives his own reasons, and his reason is his admiration for Catholic social doctrines and the devotion of many Christians to their respective nations.



I did not say «God» - I said the JEWISH-CHRISTIAN God.

Yeah just study the Jewish concepts of God and compare them to the Christian conepts. You'll notice significant differences.



His name is Jehova, or, let's say, the Holy Trinity, of which the Father is Jehova.

You do know that Jehova is a word that simply means "God". Just like Allah is simply arabic for God. So trying to claim Jehova as the name of the Christian is very childish and pathetic, for our God has no name. Right here, you've proven yourself an idiot once again!



And Jehova, as well as Jesus, is certainly foreign to Greece, no matter how much do the Jews and Christians insist that Zeus never existed, and that the real God was Jehova, all the time, etc..

You yourself claimed you don't know whether any god exists yet you know for certain that Zeus exists?



Good for you. But don't forget the lessons you've learned.

If that's what you call lessons, I'd say you need to get your teachers liscence re-certified.


http://www.berdyaev.com/berdiaev/berd_lib/1909_158_4.html

"The idea of salvation was not foreign to the pagan world, it was promulgated by the nature religions, but therein it was altogether different than in the Christian consciousness. The natural pagan religions were unable to arrive at the consciousness of true life. They looked upon God and the gods as means for the attaining of earthly happiness, as an help for their own purposes. True religion however requires the free assimilation of likeness to God. “The striving of man towards the justification of his existence upon the earth, amidst that hostile to the God-like life, gives rise to a juridical relationship to God and by this it directly and decisively negates the truth of religion, and the possibility of morality, since that in the grip of this relationship religion is transformed for man into a simple deal with God, and like an ordinary worldly deal, it necessarily becomes subordinated to the principle of the happiness of life”. 11 Such is the idea of salvation in natural religion. And this juridical theory was carried over also into the Christian world. In Catholicism (indeed in Protestantism also) the juridical understanding predominates. The (radical) surmounting of it comprises the chief service of Nesmelov.

The pagan salvation is a seeking of help and the fulfilling of wishes, and the pagan relationship to the Divinity is a juridical contract with Him, a deal. Christian salvation is a transforming of man, the attaining of perfection, the realisation of God-likeness."
--Nikolai Berdyaev "Attempt at a Philsophical Justification of Christianity", 1909


It is well known that Jesus was a Philistine (Phelestini). It even mentions it in the bible. I'm sure you can use http://bible.gospelcom.net/ to search for it. The philistines were a non-semetic people originating from the Balkans, of Dinaric or Armenoid (which ever you prefer) herritage. The palestinians of today are supposedly their ancestors, but Arab domination has most likely darkened them. They are the original settlers of Palestine, the Jews then fled into Israel from Egypt. Jews= mixed slaves.

Thank you for this info! There's no evidence whatsoever that Jesus was Jewish. Unless those who claim he was must have access to some secret document from antiquity that proves otherwise?

Tautalos
Monday, December 15th, 2003, 08:53 PM
This is my last post in my debate with Tautalos. His stupidity is becoming too ridiculas to take seriously anymore!

In other words, Pushkin is preparing his escape from a situation in which he is being severly defeated, due to his argumentative inepcy and imbecile arguments.


Let's see how:


Whatever. Every religion involves a particular view of how the universe works and how the divine works.

It may evolves that, but it is not mandatory, and not essential.




You're an idiot, thats one the main purposes of religion

No, stupid kid, YOU are an idiot. Maybe that is the purpose of Christianity, but not of all the religions in the Earth.




The Greeks and Romans were the only pagan Europeans who were ever able to produce any great thinkers

Perhaps. Anyway, they were pagans. And so, they had freedom of thought.
And their metaphysics became a base for a lot of Christian thought, for what would be of St. Augustine without Plato?




Please name any great pagan thinkers from the Celtic

That world is not well known. Yet, the wisdom of the Druids was mentioned by classic authors, and it was even said that Pythagoras learned with them.





Bullshit! The Germanic tribes were far more equalitarian

Not on the ethnic aspect, and that is what I am talking about.

The Christian faith, on it's side, always spoke about universal fraternity, but did not abolish slavery when, in the fourth century, the Christians reached the political power.
Quite the contrary: Paul even said that the slaves should remain as slaves.

Another great and «very western» contribute of Christianity to European culture... the perpuation of slavery.



So you accept theres one truth? This contradicts what you said before.

No, it does not. The fact that you do not understansd what you read does not mean that I am contradicting myself. Go learn to read, before talking to me.




Oh yes and the pagan Romans never destroyed anything right? They didn't destroy temples and destroyed religious traditions. Tell that to the Druids.

The destruction of Druidic woods had a political goal, not a religious one.
Actually, many Romans adopted, individually, local celtic Deities as their own.
That happened in Iberia, where many of the worshippers of the indigenous Endovélico were Roman.




Yes, man has free choice. Europe made its choice; it chose Christ

Yes, tell that to the massacred pagans in Saxony, and in Greece, and in the Baltic area, not forgetting all those who were killed, all over Europe, for being loyal to their own Ancestral Deities. Christianism was imposed by the force of arms. But that anti-natural imposition could not last long, and so, the Renaissence came... but, because the Christians had imposed a prohibition of the ancient Gods, the only way for the European man was... down. Into materialism. In that way, the Christianity is undirectly responsable for the rise of atheism in modern Europe.

But Europe did not die. And thus, Europe chooses again. That's why the pagan cults are rising, from Russia to Portugal, from Greece to Island, where Asatru is recognized, oficially, as one of the national religions, along with Christianism, since 1973.



Jesus rejected the notion that God only revealed himself to only one nation, but should be embraced by all nations

And the God that he was standing for was the Jewish one. Not a single time did he refer to Iuppiter or Zeus, and such Gods were known in the area.
So, His God is Jewish, semitic, and not western at all.



Learn your theology.

YOU learn your own theology, since you don't even know that properly without falling again and again in wrong statements.



Then you shouldn't be arguing on this topic at all!

I argue based on what I know. And nothing that I said so far was false, contrary to what happens to you.




You're a f*cking moron!

Keep your childish insults to yourself when you see yourself at the mirror, you asinine creature. Do not let your despair spoil this conversation so quickly.



The Jews under Moses are not the same as the Jews during Jesus's time or even today. During the Baylonian

The Jews of ALL times accept Moses as a major prophet. Cut the crap, kid.




Maybe in your f*cked up interpretation of it, but in the original scriptures he is not.

Actually, he is.

And all the Christians are spiritually semitic, as a given POPE said.





Well duh! Just like Platonism teaches Plato's version of universal truth or that Stoicism teaches the Stoic version of truth

That's right. So, why would the Christian version be the only true one?
THINK before writing, kid.




Call me a kid all you want, it only proves how much of an idiot you truely are for I just turned 21

That's bad, because if you, being 21, speak like that, then you are slightly mentally retarded.



Please provide hard-core evidence that Jesus was Jewish. Scriptures denies he's Jewish,

No, they don't. The New Testament presents his geneology until David.
Go read your own sacred book with the primary anti-semitism that hides intelligence from you.




Pushkin since he actually adheres to Catholic tradition.

And you expect not be considered a mentally retarded kid?
Go take a pill and sleep, boy.




Ok the Christian God lives in heaven, what nation did he come from?

Each Nation haves it's own conception of the sky and it «Inhabitants». The Christian God is for the Christians and Jews.




That's in a metaphysical sense idiot!

The metaphysical sense is fundamental, you imbecile. It is because people like you that the leftist forces gained so much power in Europe: because the work made by the Christian Troy's horse had it's effects.



Besides, Alexander the Greek was more universalistic in his view of Greek religion than the Christians ever were.

And yet, the Greeks continued to worship their own Gods, and not all the Deities of the world.
Also, Aristotle, even having the merit of educating Alexander, did never achieve Athenian citizenship, since he was of foreign origin.




Nevermind that the whole notion of a Europe,

Europe was a geographical notion far before Christianity came to Europe, and Herodotus recognized the common point - the defense of freedom - between Greece and the «Western barbarians» (Celts, etc..).



white race,

Now, the white race was created by Christians, you childish asshole?



and even modern notions of nations grew out of Christian

The sense of ethnic group is as old as man. That's why only the sons of Athenian fathers could be Athenian citizens.The modern notion of nation» is just a stage of it.




The pagan Greeks and Romans found more affiminity with the Egyptians and Libyans than they ever did with the Celts and Germans

The pagan Tacitus, a Roman, was more found of Germanic spirit than of oriental mentality. As for the rest, read about Herodotus, as said above.




So now the vast majority of Irish people are stupid

Learn to discuss without trying to use dishonest arguments, kid. Learn, at least, that part. The fact that the Irish were, as all the other European folks, brainwashed against their own religious heritage doesn't make them stupid. It makes YOU stupid for trying to distort my words.



It's amazing the amount of arrogance some people will employ to make up for their inferiority complexes

Already speaking about your inferiority complexes, kid? Thus this lesson that I've been teaching you hurts your juvenile ego so much?




And I'm to take your word over his own?

Go read for yourself... if you can. Read his arguments against Christianism, and then tell to everybody how «friend of Christianism» he is.




Yeah just study the Jewish concepts of God and compare them to the Christian conepts

Christian concepts were influenced by Platonism. And yet, the God is the same: Jehova.




You do know that Jehova is a word that simply means "God"

No, stupid jerk. «Jehova» means «The One Who Is». Do I have to teach you even the fundamental aspects of your own religion?
For the Gods(the real Ones) sakes!



So trying to claim Jehova as the name of the Christian

Trying to use that «argument» as an escape, is quite a sign of utter stupidity. Even if that could be used, even then the fact would be that ALL THE CHRISTIANS believe that their own God ordered the genocide of Amalec, and the mass murder of thousands of innocent Egyptians children, but not the Gods of the Iliad.




You yourself claimed you don't know whether any god exists

No, I did not. I believe that They exist, and even signs from Them.




yet you know for certain that Zeus exists?

Why would Zeus be false and Jehova be real?




If that's what you call lessons, I'd say you need to get your teachers liscence re-certified

Perhaps all I need is an actualization: a little study on how to deal with mentally retarded pupils like you.



"The idea of salvation was not foreign to the pagan world, it was promulgated by the nature religions, but therein it was altogether different than in the Christian consciousness»

The idea of salvation is non-existent, or at least non-important, to the traditional European pagan traditions.




The natural pagan religions were unable to arrive at the consciousness of true life

Imbecile arrogance. The natural pagan religions had always the consciousness of true life.



They looked upon God and the gods as means for the attaining of earthly happiness, as an help for their own purposes

Yes. Because, for them, the Sacred was everywhere. Nature was not dessacralized yet.


“The striving of man towards the justification of his existence upon the earth, amidst that hostile to the God-like life, gives rise to a juridical relationship to God and by this it directly and decisively negates the truth of religion,»

No, it does not. The truth of religion is there, in the pagan cults, all the time.



«and the possibility of morality, since that in the grip of this relationship religion is transformed for man into a simple deal with God,»

Blatantly false argument, since the Gods were in many cases guarantees of the folks moral, such as the respect for one's word and respect for Justice, and for their own folk, including the capacity to sacrifice one's life for the defense of the Folk.

On the other hand, Christian «salvation» turns the man into a slave of un-natural moral (giving the other cheek, treating all the word in the same way), fearing his own mind, afraid of committing a sin in thought.

Taras Bulba
Tuesday, December 16th, 2003, 07:44 AM
In other words, Pushkin is preparing his escape from a situation in which he is being severly defeated, due to his argumentative inepcy and imbecile arguments.

Yeah I know you're so insecure in your own position you have to make the appearance of being big and tough. Oh well, whatever gets you through the night.



No, stupid kid, YOU are an idiot. Maybe that is the purpose of Christianity, but not of all the religions in the Earth.

Please name one religion that doesn't operate like that. Even Buddhism(which at its original core is more a philosopical school of thought as opposed to a religion) operates on this level.



Perhaps. Anyway, they were pagans. And so, they had freedom of thought.
And their metaphysics became a base for a lot of Christian thought, for what would be of St. Augustine without Plato?

Yes Christianity based much of its theological thinking of Grecco-Roman thought. You do realize that this proves that Christianity became very much Europeanized, despite whatever "Jewish" origins it had as you claimed.



That world is not well known. Yet, the wisdom of the Druids was mentioned by classic authors, and it was even said that Pythagoras learned with them.


Pythagoras primarily studied Eastern philosophy and mysticism.



The Christian faith, on it's side, always spoke about universal fraternity, but did not abolish slavery when, in the fourth century, the Christians reached the political power. Quite the contrary: Paul even said that the slaves should remain as slaves.

Christians didn't abolish slavery untill they reached political power. Gee I wonder why they didnt do it before? Gee why didn't the National Socialists pass the Nuremberg Laws before coming to power? Hmmmn.....the mysteries of the universe!



Another great and «very western» contribute of Christianity to European culture... the perpuation of slavery.

Slavery was praticed by both the pagan Greeks and Romans, in fact theres records of Jews owning white slaves in the Roman empire. That stopped abruptly once Christianity took power, when Jews became the bottom of the social ladder. I guess in your eyes Christianity was so bad in abolishing slavery, especially Jewish enslavement of whites. *sigh*




The destruction of Druidic woods had a political goal, not a religious one.

And that somehow makes it all better now? Plus much of destruction you whine about the Christians doing was done for political reasons.



Yes, tell that to the massacred pagans in Saxony, and in Greece, and in the Baltic area, not forgetting all those who were killed, all over Europe, for being loyal to their own Ancestral Deities. Christianism was imposed by the force of arms.

And yes and you pagans didn't persecute Christians. Besides massacre of the Saxons was done for political reasons by Charlamenge and instilling the Christian faith helped bring unity to the European continent. Even the anti-Christian William Pierce admits that the arrival of Christianity helped unite the European people against their common foes of the Arab Muslim and Mongol invadors. A unity of this kind was not possible under paganism!

Also the arrival of Christianity helped make wide-spread a suspicion and hatred for the Jews throughout Europe. So Christianity was vital to the development of anti-semitism, as many atheists and other anti-Christians admit. Pagans never had any deep hatred for the Jews, and in fact were tolerant of them much in the way modern Liberalism is.



But that anti-natural imposition could not last long, and so, the Renaissence came... but, because the Christians had imposed a prohibition of the ancient Gods, the only way for the European man was... down. Into materialism. In that way, the Christianity is undirectly responsable for the rise of atheism in modern Europe.

Such a ridiculas notion is rejected every accredited scholar and historian!
Even the anti-Christian pro-pagan thinker Julius Evola would think this was pure nonsense. In fact he admired Medieval Christianity.


But Europe did not die. And thus, Europe chooses again. That's why the pagan cults are rising, from Russia to Portugal, from Greece to Island, where Asatru is recognized, oficially, as one of the national religions, along with Christianism, since 1973.

Yes, how ironic that once Christianity started to die and paganism began to rise; thats when cultural Marxism began to rule over the West and 3rd world immigration started and our birth rates collasped. Will Durant documents how paganism brought Rome down because the pagans were less likely to have children as Christians. You should also read about Antino Grmasci, who talks about how the destruction of Christianity was the very key to subverting Europe to a Communist takeover, and he talks about using a revival of paganism as a tool.

And as for your revival of paganism in Russia, it's nothing compared to the revival of Orthodox Christianity. In fact many Russian pagans in private admit their admiration for the Orthodox Church.



YOU learn your own theology, since you don't even know that properly without falling again and again in wrong statements.

I have studied my theology, it'd be nice if you studied Christian theology.



The Jews of ALL times accept Moses as a major prophet. Cut the crap, kid.

They're not all decendents of Moses idiot. Jesus even saids this in John 8:44, where he denies the claim of those claiming to be Jews are decendents of Abraham and the prophets. St. Paul also makes this argument.




Actually, he is.

Where does it say that he is? Please tell me where in the whole Bible does it say that Jesus was a Jew?


And all the Christians are spiritually semitic, as a given POPE said.

Well certainly you're not refering to any of these Popes:

"The Jews reject the One Faith of Jesus Christ."
Pope Gregory I

"The Jews are not "our dearest brothers."
Pope Innocent III

'"The Jews -- eternal insolent children, obstinate, dirty, thieves, liars, ignoramuses, pests and the scourge of those near and far . . . managed to lay their hands on . . . all public wealth . . . and virtually alone they took control not only of all the money . . . but of the law itself in those countries where they have been allowed to hold public offices . . . [yet they complain] at the first shout by anyone who dares raise his voice against this barbarian invasion by an enemy race, hostile to Christianity and to society in general."
Pope Pius IX

So please tell me why I should believe the words of one heretical pope over that of 2000 years of Catholic tradition?



That's bad, because if you, being 21, speak like that, then you are slightly mentally retarded.

And exactly how old are you kid? Cause you're talking like somebody who failed to do his homework on Christianity 101 but mostly bases his case against Christianity on what he hears from the Liberal media.




No, they don't. The New Testament presents his geneology until David.
Go read your own sacred book with the primary anti-semitism that hides intelligence from you.

St. Lukes 20:41-44 and also in the Gospel according to St. Mark, 12:35-37 saids he was not a decendent of David. Yes I read the Bible, unlike you!





And you expect not be considered a mentally retarded kid?
Go take a pill and sleep, boy.

Personally I couldn't give a rats ass what your opinion of me is. Even Njord admitted that I'm among the most intellectual posters on this forum, which is why they appointed me moderator for the Religion/Spirituality.




Each Nation haves it's own conception of the sky and it «Inhabitants». The Christian God is for the Christians and Jews.

The Christian god is for all nations. But I guess your feeble brain is incapable of understanding that. But then again, the Greeks thought their Gods belonged to every nation as well.

"Thus Alexander's conquests and ecumenical pursuits appear to have contributed toward religious syncretism, the popularization of astrology and the advancement of the notion of a universal brotherhood of man. This notion later became a central and distinctive feature of Christianity. According to W.W. Tarn, Alexander "declared that all men were alike sons of one Father, and when at Opis he prayed that Macedonians and Persians might be partners in the commonwealth and that the peoples of his world might live in harmony and in unity of heart and mind, he proclaimed for the first time the unity and brotherhood of mankind. . . He, first of all men, was ready to transcend national differences, and declare, as St. Paul was to declare, that there was neither Greek nor barbarian."

James C. Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity (New York, 1994), p.70

So some historians are now arguing that Christian universalism that you bitch about so much actually originated in pagan Greece.



The metaphysical sense is fundamental, you imbecile. It is because people like you that the leftist forces gained so much power in Europe: because the work made by the Christian Troy's horse had it's effects.

Actually the leftist forces didn't take over Europe untill the 18th century, which was a time of rejection of Christian theology. The Age Of Enlightenment is also commonly refered to as the "Neo-Classical" age, in which old Grecco-Roman pagan ways were being revived and glorified. How interesing, you pagans like to moan about liberalism being the bastard child of Christianity, when liberalism grew out of both a rejection of Christianity and a glorification of pagan Europe. As I said before, the Jacobins looked to the Germanic peoples and pagan Rome and Greece as their models, not Christian Europe. For proof, just read the works of Antione Saint-Just, where he talks about the French Revolution trying to create itself along the models of pagan Rome and Greece. Ironically it's also during this time that the Jews first get their "human rights" and are able to take control over European society. In Christian Europe, Jews were always outcasts and shunned.

In fact Alfred Rosenberg(an anti-Christian) admits in his "Myth of the 20th century" that the main reason why Jews hate the Aryan race is because of their hatred for Christianity. Without Christianity, White Europeans would never have known the dangers the Jews represent. In fact there's no evidence of any major form of anti-semitism before the birth of Christianity.




Now, the white race was created by Christians, you childish asshole?

The notion that Europe was a single identity on the world stage first emerges under Christianity. There was never such a concept under paganism. Neither the Greeks nor the Romans ever considered themselves "white" or "European".





The sense of ethnic group is as old as man. That's why only the sons of Athenian fathers could be Athenian citizens.The modern notion of nation» is just a stage of it.

Notice I said "modern" notions of nationalism you moron! Nationalism existed in pre-modern times, but it was only under Christianity did nationalism developed its own intellectual theories of what constitutes the nation and such.



Learn to discuss without trying to use dishonest arguments, kid. Learn, at least, that part. The fact that the Irish were, as all the other European folks, brainwashed against their own religious heritage doesn't make them stupid. It makes YOU stupid for trying to distort my words.


No, you're the one whinning and distorting facts because you can't accept the fact that most Europeans reject paganism and embrace Christianity.



Go read for yourself... if you can. Read his arguments against Christianism, and then tell to everybody how «friend of Christianism» he is.

Yes I have read de Benoist. He opposes Christianity on philosophical grounds, but he has admitted many times he admires many aspects of Catholic/Christian social doctrine. So he's no where near the fanatic you are!




Christian concepts were influenced by Platonism. And yet, the God is the same: Jehova.

I repeat, study Jewish concepts of God and they're fairly different from Christian concepts. Even the Liberal media admits this basic fact!




Trying to use that «argument» as an escape, is quite a sign of utter stupidity.

Excuse me, you're the one displaying great amounts of stupidity here.




On the other hand, Christian «salvation» turns the man into a slave of un-natural moral (giving the other cheek, treating all the word in the same way), fearing his own mind, afraid of committing a sin in thought.

bwahahaha, yeah we're so meek and little pussies. Yet we were still able to conquer the brave macho pagans. That or your pagan ancestors weren't as tough and strong as you claim. Besides the notion that Christians are pacifist weaklings are disproven both by scriptures(where St. Paul tells that a Christians duty is to take up arms to defend his country) and Medieval Christianity, which was probally the most warlike religion at the time. :lol

It's been fun, but I have more intellectually pressing matters to attend to. Debating you is basically repeating what I've already said 1000 times before to insecure pagan fanatics, who believe that Europe can only be saved once all the Churches have been destroyed. Luckily, there are some pagans with more common sense and more intelligence.

Tautalos
Tuesday, December 16th, 2003, 04:47 PM
Yeah I know you're so insecure in your own position

Since I've presented solid arguments against your bs, and since your answer was more bs. and name calling (the sign of the defeated and frustrated), itb is evident that YOU are the one who is quite insecure of your own position.

Actually, you are so insecure, and emotionally weakened, that you first said that you would not answer any more, and now, you answered..::))



«Please name one religion that doesn't operate like that»

Asatru, Religio Romana, Celtic Reconstructionism, Hinduism, Xinto, and all the national pagan religions, generally speaking.



«Even Buddhism(which at its original core is more a philosopical school of thought as opposed to a religion)»

After all, you seem to have a slight sense of what is the difference between Philosophy and Religion. Work on that, kid.



«Yes Christianity based much of its theological thinking of Grecco-Roman thought. You do realize that this proves that Christianity became very much Europeanized, despite whatever "Jewish" origins it had as you claimed»

Yes... it is a mulatto, the religion of Christ... one way or another, the core of it - Jehova, Jesus, the Old and the New Testaments - are, indeed, Jewish.



«Pythagoras primarily studied Eastern philosophy and mysticism»

And there are references to his journey amongst the Druids.



«Christians didn't abolish slavery untill they reached political power»

Correction: they did not abolish slavery AFTER they reach the power.
Actually, Constantinus made the condition of the slave to get worst, comparing to what was being made by the previous pagan emperors.



«Slavery was praticed by both the pagan Greeks and Romans, in fact theres records of Jews owning white slaves in the Roman empire. That stopped abruptly once Christianity took power,»

No, it did not. Christians had slaves. Slavery was not abolished before the nineteenth century, due to the classic background of European civilization.



«And that somehow makes it all better now?»

It makes it non-religious, contrary to what you wanted to make believe.



«Plus much of destruction you whine about the Christians doing was done for political reasons»

By religious reasons, in the first place.



«And yes and you pagans didn't persecute Christians»

No by religious reasons, but by political motives. The Christians were subversive, and the Roman pagan persecutions did never reach the necessary rigour in order to stop Christianity for good.

Quite naif, the Roman pagans.




«Besides massacre of the Saxons was done for political reasons by Charlamenge»

It was done by religious matters. CharleMagne made a war of religious conversion.


«and instilling the Christian faith helped bring unity to the European continent»

Not as much as that, since many bloody wars were fought due to differences within Christianism.



«Even the anti-Christian William Pierce admits that the arrival of Christianity helped unite the European people against their common foes of the Arab Muslim and Mongol invadors. A unity of this kind was not possible under paganism!»

Yes, it was. if, for instances, the religion of Mithras had won, the entire Europe could unite under the sign of this Solar Deity, without the bloodbaths that happened, brother against brother (as Jesus said that would happen, in the name of His word), since Mthraism was not incompatible with all the other pagan religions.




«Also the arrival of Christianity helped make wide-spread a suspicion and hatred for the Jews throughout Europe»

So what? Now, the Jews use that as a form of exploring the guilty complex of the Europeans, a guilty complex created by Christians.



«Pagans never had any deep hatred for the Jews,»

That's the way things should be. First, because all the folks have the right to exist, and that includes the Jews. Second, because that deep hatred just make the game of Jews: by placing them at the center of a hate system, the anti-semites are accepting the role that allows the Jews to consider themselves as «the martyr people», and, from «martyr people» to «chosen people», the distance is irrelevant.

Nothwithstanding, there were some pagans, before Christianism, that did not like the Jews at all. Read Tacitus, for instances.


But that anti-natural imposition could not last long, and so, the Renaissance came... but, because the Christians had imposed a prohibition of the ancient Gods, the only way for the European man was... down. Into materialism. In that way, the Christianity is indirectly responsable for the rise of atheism in modern Europe.

«Such a ridiculas notion is rejected every accredited scholar and historian»

No, it is not. And saying that, does count as an argument, kid.


«Even the anti-Christian pro-pagan thinker Julius Evola would think this was pure nonsense»

No, he would not. Hhe knew the responsibility of Christianity in what concerns the rise of materialism.



«In fact he admired Medieval Christianity»

Only due to it’s non-Christian elements.



But Europe did not die. And thus, Europe chooses again. That's why the pagan cults are rising, from Russia to Portugal, from Greece to Island, where Asatru is recognized, oficially, as one of the national religions, along with Christianism, since 1973.

«how ironic that once Christianity started to die and paganism began to rise; thats when cultural Marxism began to rule over the West»

No. Marxism is, in the first place, a bastard child of Christianity. It is just another abnormality originated on Jesus’ words. Moreover, it is when the western Folks are more threatened, that their inner being reacts, and the urgent voice of their archaic ancestors starts to soar.


«Will Durant documents how paganism brought Rome down because the pagans were less likely to have children as Christians»
That’s outrageous idiocy. Rome had many glorious centuries of power and might when it was ruled by pagans only. Moreover, there is nothing in the Roman pagan religions that prevent anyone from having children.
Also, Gibbon documents how Christianism brought Rome down because the Christians had no sense of national duty towards the city founded by the son of Mars.


«You should also read about Antino Grmasci, who talks about how the destruction of Christianity was the very key to subverting Europe to a Communist takeover, and he talks about using a revival of paganism as a tool»

Not the national and Roman paganism, for sure. For the religion of Janus, Jupiter, Mars, Juno, Venus, Vesta, and all the Others, included a sacred respect for the State and the Folk. Read about the meaning of the sacred flame of the State, feeded by the Vestals, priestesses of Vesta.

Since you recommend authors, try to read Louis Rougier about the conflict between Christianity and the ancient world.


«And as for your revival of paganism in Russia, it's nothing compared to the revival of Orthodox Christianity»

We will see about that.




The Jews of ALL times accept Moses as a major prophet. Cut the crap, kid.

«They're not all decendents of Moses idiot»

But they all accept Moses as their main prophet, imbecile. To deny that is just a despaired attempt to falsify History.



And all the Christians are spiritually Semitic, as a given POPE said.

«So please tell me why I should believe the words of one heretical pope over that of 2000 years of Catholic tradition?»

As usual, you did not understand. «Semitic» is not the same as «Jewish». To be a Jew, strictly speaking, is to follow Judaism. And, to follow any religion derived from the Semitic culture, either Jewish, or Arab, is to be spiritually Semitic.

Indeed, any person that accepts Jehova and His Jewish son, Jesus, is Semitic in spirit.
To that, you have no answer, except to babble about the possible non Jewish origin of Jesus. About Jehova, you remain silent.



«Cause you're talking like somebody who failed to do his homework on Christianity»

I know enough to detect your failures…now, imagine that I was an expert on the subject, what would happen to you…


«bases his case against Christianity on what he hears from the Liberal media»

What liberal media, kid. The entire Catholic Church is the liberal media? Grow up, you irreverent and naughty child.



And you expect not be considered a mentally retarded kid?
Go take a pill and sleep, boy.

«Personally I couldn't give a rats ass what your opinion»

If you give my your opinion about me, I give you my opinion about you. Simple, isn’t it?… Kid?…



Each Nation haves it's own conception of the sky and it «Inhabitants». The Christian God is for the Christians and Jews.

«The Christian god is for all nations»

The Christian God is for no Nation. It is a universal God, who preaches the lack of value of family ties when confronted with a moralistic and universalistic doctrine: this is the very essence of internationalism. The very essence of Left.
But I guess your feeble brain is incapable of understanding that.


«But then again, the Greeks thought their Gods belonged to every nation as well»

But recognized that the other Nations had different names and rituals for the «same» Gods.


"Thus Alexander's conquests and ecumenical pursuits appear to have contributed toward religious syncretism, the popularization of astrology and the advancement of the notion of a universal brotherhood of man. This notion later became a central and distinctive feature of Christianity. According to W.W. Tarn, Alexander "declared that all men were alike sons of one Father, and when at Opis he prayed that Macedonians and Persians might be partners in the commonwealth and that the peoples of his world might live in harmony and in unity of heart and mind, he proclaimed for the first time the unity and brotherhood of mankind. . . He, first of all men, was ready to transcend national differences, and declare, as St. Paul was to declare, that there was neither Greek nor barbarian."

And Alexander was not a real Greek, but a Macedonian, who wanted to forge an Empire. And, to forge an Empire, it was useful to proclaim such type of public statements. That did not change the way the Greeks see themselves, and, when Paul attempted to convert the Athenians, the people from Athens didn’t give him much credit «Return another day», they told him.


«So some historians are now arguing that Christian universalism that you bitch about so much actually originated in pagan Greece»
It could have an ancient origin in Greece, not only with Alexander, but with the Stoics as well; and yet, such idea was never a basic moral element of any pagan religion or code of moral conduct, contrary to what happens with Christianity.
But these differences are perhaps too complicated for your mind.


The metaphysical sense is fundamental, you imbecile. It is because people like you that the leftist forces gained so much power in Europe: because the work made by the Christian Troy's horse had it's effects.

«Actually the leftist forces didn't take over Europe until the 18th century,»

The leftist forces had their roots in that Christian thought. Leftist ideology was not born in a given moment, but formed throughout centuries.

« The Age Of Enlightenment is also commonly refered to as the "Neo-Classical" age, in which old Grecco-Roman pagan ways were being revived and glorified. How interesing, you pagans like to moan about liberalism being the bastard child of Christianity, when liberalism grew out of both a rejection of Christianity and a glorification of pagan Europe»

Liberalism haves it’s own parcel of European spirit, since Europe is, since ancient times, a land of free people.
The problem with Liberalism is it’s individualism. That individualism is inherited, partially, from classic Greece, but was feeded by the Christian individualism, since the religion of Jesus, being a faith of individual choice, lacks any sense of ethnicity and cares only for personal salvation.
Also, what I was talking about was Leftism, not Liberalism.


«As I said before, the Jacobins looked to the Germanic peoples and pagan Rome and Greece as their models,»

Of course, since, at the time, the restoration of the ancient religions were out of question. But they certainly did not look to all the aspects of the Greek, the Roman and the Germanic culture… not the fact that no foreign or son of foreigners could be a national citizen in Athens, not the fact that Plato was an enemy of atheism, not the Roman religiousness, not the despise for money and the love of war typical of the Germanics.


«Ironically it's also during this time that the Jews first get their "human rights" and are able to take control over European society»
Actually, according an authority in Judaism, Israel Shahak, the most radical Jews lost a lot of power with such open-mindedness of the European world, because they suffered as well a lost of religious power upon many Jews.
Moreover, if the right to citizenship was as limited as in ancient Athens, the Jews would never, ever, seize anything important in Europe.


«In fact Alfred Rosenberg(an anti-Christian) admits in his "Myth of the 20th century" that the main reason why Jews hate the Aryan race»

The Jews hate the Aryans as much as they hate any other folk. They hate whoever dares to confront them.

«because of their hatred for Christianity»

That does not make the Aryans stronger in any case.


«Without Christianity, White Europeans would never have known the dangers the Jews represent»

Of course that white Europeans knew the danger that the Jews represent, without having to accept Christianity. Read Tacitus, read Celsus, learn about the opinion that the emperor Marcus Aurelius had about Christians and about Jews.




Now, the white race was created by Christians, you childish asshole?

«The notion that Europe was a single identity on the world stage first emerges under Christianity»

By historical coincidence, not due to Christian’s doctrine..


«There was never such a concept under paganism»

False argument, because such concept could not exist – beside the valuation of freedom, common to Germanics, Celts, Romans and Greeks – in a world where everybody was at war.


«Neither the Greeks nor the Romans ever considered themselves "white" or "European"»

Because such concepts were not needed, in a world where the vast majority of the known people was white.



The sense of ethnic group is as old as man. That's why only the sons of Athenian fathers could be Athenian citizens. The modern notion of nation» is just a stage of it.

«Notice I said "modern" notions of nationalism you moron»
In this case, it is the same, imbecile.


«Nationalism existed in pre-modern times, but it was only under Christianity did nationalism developed its own intellectual theories of what constitutes the nation and such»

Not due Christianity, but due to the ancient classic philosophical spirit of rational definition.




Learn to discuss without trying to use dishonest arguments, kid. Learn, at least, that part. The fact that the Irish were, as all the other European folks, brainwashed against their own religious heritage doesn't make them stupid. It makes YOU stupid for trying to distort my words.

«No, you're the one whinning and distorting facts»

YOU are distorting the facts, kid, as was and is being demonstrated.


«because you can't accept the fact that most Europeans reject paganism and embrace Christianity.»

That «rejection» and «acceptance» were produced by the force of arms and the force of politics. Some kings converted to the faith of Jesus because that was the religion of Rome; and, in those times, the people had the duty to follow their own king. And so, thousands of people were converted to Christianity without knowing what was it about.



Go read for yourself... if you can. Read his arguments against Christianism, and then tell to everybody how «friend of Christianism» he is.

«Yes I have read de Benoist. He opposes Christianity on philosophical grounds, but he has admitted many times he admires many aspects of Catholic/Christian social doctrine»

Only in what concerns the classic, pre-Christian aspects that Christianity sacked from the ancient world… big deal!…



Christian concepts were influenced by Platonism. And yet, the God is the same: Jehova.

«I repeat, study Jewish concepts of God and they're fairly different from Christian concepts»

Both Christians and Jews believe that their Jehova did what the Bible says He did, including the choice of the Jews as an elected people; both Christians and Jews accept that He is the only existing God – and everybody knows that the God is the same.



Trying to use the same arguments that we have been using, as an escape, is quite a sign of utter stupidity.



On the other hand, Christian «salvation» turns the man into a slave of un-natural moral (giving the other cheek, treating all the word in the same way), fearing his own mind, afraid of committing a sin in thought.

«yeah we're so meek and little pussies. Yet we were still able to conquer the brave macho pagans»

Because you counted with the help of countless slaves. A numeric advantage – quite a deed of a macho, oh yesJ.
Also, most of the Christian soldiers knew next to nothing about Jesus; and, besides, the fanaticism of the few Christian missionaries gave them force to advance.

«Besides the notion that Christians are pacifist weaklings are disproven both by scriptures(where St. Paul tells that a Christians duty is to take up arms to defend his country)»

But Jesus Himself tells their flock to turn the other cheek.


«It's been fun, but I have more intellectually pressing matters to attend to»

Here he goes, trying to escape again… hey kid, this is just an academic discussion, not need to get so nervous and upset just because your arguments have failed.
And I do not say that Christianity most be destroyed – it is enough to reduce it’s power, and to replace it as «national» religion of many countries.

Taras Bulba
Tuesday, December 16th, 2003, 05:27 PM
Yes... it is a mulatto, the religion of Christ... one way or another, the core of it - Jehova, Jesus, the Old and the New Testaments - are, indeed, Jewish.

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article4803.htm

The Myth of a Judeo-Christian Tradition

The following article from New Dawn Magazine No.23 Feb-March 1994.

This is an age in which news has been superseded by propaganda, and education by brain-washing and indoctrination. From the advertising used to sell poor quality goods, to the classes in schools designed to make children into conditioned robots of the State, the art of persuasion has displaced the simple virtue of truth.

Since the end of the Second World War we have been bombarded from all sides with references to the Western world's "Judeo-Christian religion," and "our Judeo-Christian heritage." We are told by both church leaders and scholars that our society is based on a supposed "Judeo-Christian tradition".

The notion of "Judeo-Christian religion" is an unquestioned -- almost sacrosanct -- part of both secular and church thinking. American Christian leader Prof. Franklin H. Littel, a vocal supporter of the Zionist state, frankly declared that "to be Christian is to be Jewish," and that consequently it was the duty of a Christian to put support for the "land of Israel" above all else. Pat Boon, the North American singer and evangelist, said there are two kinds of Judaism, one Orthodox and the other Christian.

Yet such a decidedly Christian Zionist outlook is to say the least, wildly simplistic and profoundly ahistorical. As the astute Jewish writer, Joshua J. Adler, points out, "The differences between Christianity and Judaism are much more than merely believing in whether the messiah already appeared or is still expected, as some like to say."

The comments of Jewish author Mr. S. Levin may well explain the Christian's need for the Judeo-Christian myth. Writing in the Israeli journal Biblical Polemics, Levin concludes: "'After all, we worship the same God', the Christian always says to the Jew and the Jew never to the Christian. The Jew knows that he does not worship the Christ-God but the Christian orphan needs to worship the God of Israel and so, his standard gambit rolls easily and thoughtlessly from his lips. It is a strictly unilateral affirmation, limited to making a claim on the God of Israel but never invoked with reference to other gods. A Christian never confronts a Moslem or a Hindu with 'After all, we worship the same God'."

Back in 1992 both Newsweek magazine and the Israeli Jerusalem Post newspaper simultaneously printed extensive articles scrutinising the roots of the sacrosanct Judeo-Christian honeymoon!

The statement heading the Newsweek article read: "Politicians appeal to a Judeo-Christian tradition, but religious scholars say it no longer exists." The Jerusalem Post article's pull quote announced: "Antisemitism is a direct result of the Church's teachings, which Christians perhaps need to re-examine."

"For scholars of American religion," Newsweek states, "the idea of a single Judeo-Christian tradition is a made-in-America myth that many of them no longer regard as valid." It quotes eminent Talmudic scholar Jacob Neusner: "Theologically and historically, there is no such thing as the Judeo-Christian tradition. It's a secular myth favoured by people who are not really believers themselves."

Newsweek cites authorities who indicate that "the idea of a common Judeo-Christian tradition first surfaced at the end of the 19th century but did not gain popular support until the 1940s, as part of an American reaction to Nazism . . ," and concludes that, "Since then, both Jewish and Christian scholars have come to recognize that -- geopolitics apart -- Judaism and Christianity are different, even rival religions."

The Jerusalem Post accused the Christian Church of being responsible for the Holocaust. The French Jewish scholar Jules Isaac was quoted as saying: "Without centuries of Christian catechism, preaching, and vituperation, the Hitlerian teachings, propaganda and vituperation would not have been possible."

"The problem," concludes the Jerusalem Post, "is not, as some assert, that certain Christian leaders deviated from Christian teachings and behaved in an un-Christian manner; it is the teachings themselves that are bent."

Joshua Jehouda, a prominent French Jewish leader, observed in the late 1950s: "The current expression 'Judaeo-Christian' is an error which has altered the course of universal history by the confusion it has sown in men's minds, if by it one is meant to understand the Jewish origin of Christianity . . . If the term 'Judaeo-Christian' does point to a common origin, there is no doubt that it is a most dangerous idea. It is based on a 'contradictio in abjecto' which has set the path of history on the wrong track. It links in one breath two ideas which are completely irreconcileable, it seeks to demonstrate that there is no difference between day and night or hot and cold or black and white, and thus introduces a fatal element of confusion to a basis on which some, nevertheless, are endeavouring to construct a civilisation." (l'Antisemitisme Miroir du Monde pp. 135-6).

What is the Truth?
Is there then any truth in this term, "Judeo-Christian"? Is Christianity derived from Judaism? Does Christianity have anything in common with Judaism?

Reviewing the last two thousand years of Western Christian history there is really no evidence of a Judeo-Christian tradition and this has not escaped the attention of honest Christian and Jewish commentators.

The Jewish scholar Dr. Joseph Klausner in his book Jesus of Nazareth expressed the Judaic viewpoint that "there was something contrary to the world outlook of Israel" in Christ's teachings, "a new teaching so irreconcilable with the spirit of Judaism, " containing "within it the germs from which there could and must develop in course of time a non-Jewish and even anti-Jewish teaching."

Dr. Klausner quotes the outstanding Christian theologian, Adolf Harnack, who in his last work rejected the hypothesis of the Jewish origin of Christ's doctrine: "Virtually every word He taught is made to be of permanent and universal humanitarian interest. The Messianic features are abolished entirely, and virtually no importance is attached to Judaism in its capacity of Jesus' environment."

Gershon Mamlak, an award-winning Jewish Zionist intellectual, recently claimed that the "Jesus tradition" is essentially the ultimate extension of ancient Greek Hellenism and is in direct conflict to Judaism's "role as the Chosen people".

Dr. Mamlak, writing in the Theodor Herzl Foundation's magazine of Jewish thought, Midstream, maintains that the prevailing theory that Christianity originated in the spiritual realm of Judaism "is anchored in a twofold misconception: 1) the uniqueness of Judaism is confined to its monotheistic God-concept; 2) the 'parting of the ways' between the Jesus coterie and Judaism is seen as the result of the former's adaptation of the doctrines of Christology."

The first misconception means: "When the affinity of the Jesus coterie with Judaism is evaluated by common faith in the One, severed from the believer's duty to execute the Law of the One and to acknowledge the Chosen Nation of Israel as His instrument-faith in the One becomes anti-Judaism par excellence!"

In Gershon Mamlak's view, "The conflict between Judaism and the Jesus tradition goes beyond the confines of theology. [The Jesus tradition] was the cosmopolitan renunciation of the national phenomenon in general and extreme hostility to Israel's idea of a Chosen Nation as the divine instrument for the perfection of the world."

Evidently the concept of a common Judeo-Christian tradition has more to do with post 1945 politics and a certain amount of 'public relations' than it does with historical and Biblical reality. Never the less a number of modern Christian polemicists have managed to rest certain New Testament verses in the drive to give a Scriptural basis to their argument.

Confusion over the origin of Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity is the root of the Judeo-Christian myth.

Biblical scholars Robert and Mary Coote clearly show in their book Power, Politics and the Making of the Bible that neither is Christianity a patched up Judaism, nor is Rabbinic Judaism automatically synonymous with the religion of Moses and the old Hebrews.

The Cootes' illustrate the religious climate in Judea two millennia ago: "The cults, practices, and scriptures of both groups, rabbis and bishops, differed from those of the temple; thus we reserve the terms Jew, Jewish, and Judaism for the rabbis and those under their rule and use Judean, contrary to custom, for the common source of Judaism and Christianity...."

"Despite the ostensible merging of Judean and Jew even in certain New Testament passages and by the rabbis who became rulers of Palestine in the third century and continued to use Hebrew and Aramaic more than Greek, [bthe roots of Christianity were not Jewish. Christianity did not derive from the Judaism of the pharisees, but emerged like Judaism from the wider Judean milieu of the first century. Both Christians and Jews stemmed from pre-70 Judean-ism as heirs of groups that were to take on the role of primary guardians or interpreters of scripture as they developed on parallel tracks in relation to each other." (Power, Politics, and the Making of the Bible).

The few New Testament 'proof texts' utilised by Christian Zionists and secular proponents of the modern Judeo-Christian myth are the product of poor translation. Messianic Jewish writer Malcolm Lowe in his paper "Who Are the Ioudaioi?" concludes, like Robert and Mary Coote, that the Greek word "Ioudaioi" in the New Testament should be translated as "Judeans", rather than the more usual "Jews". The Israeli scholar David Stern also came to the same conclusion when translating the Jewish New Testament.

Few Christians are aware that the translators of Scripture often mistranslated the word "Jew" from such words as "Ioudaioi" (meaning from, or being of: as a geographic area, Judean). The word Judean, mistranslated as "Jew" in the New Testament, never possessed a valid religious connotation, but was simply used to identify members of the native population of the geographic area known as Judea.

Also it is important to understand that in the Scriptures, the terms "Israel", "Judah" and "Jew" are not synonymous, nor is the House of Israel synonymous with the House of Judah. The course of history is widely divergent for the peoples properly classified under each of these titles. Accordingly, the authoritative 1980 Jewish Almanac says, "Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a Jew or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew."

A writer for The Dearborn Independent, published in Michigan back in 1922, summarised the problem thus: "The pulpit has also the mission of liberating the Church from the error that Judah and Israel are synonymous. The reading of the Scriptures which confuse the tribe of Judah with Israel, and which interpret every mention of Israel as signifying the Jews, is at the root of more than one-half the confusion and division traceable in Christian doctrinal statements."

Jesus Christ and the Pharisees
The New Testament Gospels reveal an intense conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees, one of the two principal Judean religious sects (see Matthew chapter 3, verse 7; Matthew chapter 5, verse 20; Matthew chapter 23, verses 13-15, 23-29; Mark chapter 8, verse 15; Luke chapter 11, verse 39). Much of this controversy was centred on what was later to become the foundation and highest authority of Judaism, the Talmud. In the time of Jesus Christ, this bore the name of "The Tradition of the Elders" (see Matthew chapter 15, verses 1-9).

The Judean historian Josephus wrote: "What I would now explain is this, that the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the laws of Moses . . ."

While the Pharisees recognized the laws of Moses, they also claimed that there was a great body of oral tradition which was of at least equal authority with the written Law - and many claimed that the Tradition was of greater authority. By their tradition, they undertook to explain and elaborate upon the Law. This was the "Tradition of the Elders", to which the name of Talmud was later given. It had its beginning in Babylon, during the Babylon captivity of the people of Judah, where it developed in the form of the commentaries of various rabbis, undertaking to explain and apply the Law. This was the foundation of Rabbinic Judaism.

This Judaism was very different from the religion of the ancient Israelites. The late Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, who was the Chief Rabbi of the United States, expressed this conclusively when he said: "The return from Babylon, and the adoption of the Babylonian Talmud, marks the end of Hebrewism, and the beginning of Judaism." The Jewish Encyclopedia tells us that the Talmud is actually "the product of the Palestinian and Babylonian schools" and is generally referred to as "the Babylonian Talmud".

Dr. Boaz Cohen in Everyman's Talmud states the Talmud is the work of "numerous Jewish scholars over a period of some 700 years, roughly speaking, between 200 and 500 [A.D.]."

Rabbi Louis Finkelstein in Volume 1 of The Pharisees, the Sociological Background of their Faith says, "Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Medieval Rabbinism, and Medieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes of name, inevitable adaption of custom, and adjustment of Law, the spirit of the ancient Pharisee survives unaltered."

According to The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. VIII, (1942) p.474 : "The Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent, without a break, through all the centuries, from the Pharisees. Their leading ideas and methods found expression in a literature of enormous extent, of which a very great deal is still in existence. The Talmud is the largest and most important single member of that literature."

Moshe Menuhim explains that the Babylonian Talmud embodied all the laws and legends, all the history and 'science,' all the theology and folklore, of all the past ages in Jewish life -- a monumental work of consolidation. In the Talmud, Jewish scholarship and idealism found their exclusive outlet and preoccupation all through the ages, all the way up to the era of Enlightenment. It became the principal guide to life and object of study, and it gave Judaism unity, cohesion and resilience throughout the dark ages.

The Talmud, more than any other literature, so defined Judaism that Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser admitted,[b] "Judaism is not the religion of the Bible." (Judaism and the Christian Predicament, 1966, p.159) It is the Talmud that guides the life and spirit of the Jewish people.

"The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart's blood of the Jewish religion. Whatever laws, customs, or ceremonies we [Jews] observe -- whether we are Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or merely spasmodic sentimentalists -- we follow the Talmud. It is our common law." (A History of the Jews, Solomon Grayzel).

Both Jewish and Christian scholars agree that it was Jesus Christ's flagrant rejection of this "Tradition of the Elders" and his open confrontation with the powerful Pharisees that created the climate that led to his death. Historically, Christian thinkers argued that the Talmud was directly responsible for the rejection of Christ.

In their view these "traditions" blinded the eyes of the people to a true understanding of the prophecies which related to the coming of the Messiah.

Defining Christianity
If, as we have seen, the Pharisees and the Talmud forever defined Judaism, then most certainly the writings of the post-Apostolic Christian church leaders help us in understanding the relationship of the early Christian faith to both paganism and Judaism.

Justin Martyr (c100-165 A.D.) was indeed the earliest and most significant of these post-Apostolic church apologists. Following in the theological footsteps of Paul, who taught that the Gospel was the fulfilment of Moses and the Prophets, Justin argued that the Gospel was in the mind of God from the beginning and it was given to Abraham and the righteous Patriarches long before Judaism existed. This is in keeping with the Gospel teaching that the Hebrew Scriptures find their 'flowering' in the life, purpose, and accomplishments of Jesus the Christ.

Hence, the Christian faithful have traditionally understood the Old Testament through the New Testament.

In his Dialogue with Trypho Justin seeks to persuade a Jew of the truth of Christianity. Unlike the other apologists, he focuses mainly on the nature and meaning of Christ. Christ was the Logos who inspired the Greek philosophers and is present in all men as the Logos spermatikos (seminal reason or word). Through Him, the best of the philosophers were able to produce significant works of theology and philosophy. Their ideas could serve as beacons of truth just as much as could the inspired writings of the Old Testament Hebrews. Those who lived according to the Logos, even before Christ, were Christians. In the Old Testament it was the Logos who was revealed as God, because the transcendent Heavenly Father could not thus speak to man.

Justin wrote in Apology:
"We have been taught that Christ is the first-born of God, and we have declared above that He is the Word [or reason] of whom all mankind partakes. Those who lived reasonably [with the Word] are Christians, even though they have been called atheists. For example: among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus and men like them; among the barbarians [non-Greeks], Abraham...and many others whose actions and names we now decline to recount, because we know it would be tedious."

Christianity, seen through Justin Martyr's writings, takes on a 'cosmic' breadth:

"I both boast and strive with all my strength to be found a Christian...Whatever things were rightly said by any man, belong to us Christians. For next to God we worship and love the Word, who is from the unbegotten and ineffable God, since He also became man for our sakes, that by sharing in our sufferings He might also bring us healing. For all those writers were able to see reality darkly, through the seed of the implanted Word within them." (2 Apology).

Jesus Christ had come, argued Justin, to restore true religion and to denounce the hypocrisy of the religion of Judea. For that crime Jesus had been crucified. Consequently, Christianity is not a form of Judaism or simply Jewish prophecies fulfilled but 'the true philosophy'.

Justin's Christianity was eventually reducible to three major principles: (1) worship of God, mostly through private prayer and communication of being; (2) belief in an after-life with rewards and punishments for one's actions in this world; and (3) the importance of leading a virtuous life in imitation of Christ and in obedience to His commandments.

The Romans killed Justin for his religion. He was ever known as Justin Martyr, and not as St. Justin. His works defined Christianity as a culminating religion and a "universal" faith incorporating the essential and perennial truth of the pre-Christian religious tradition. Christianity was the restatement of a very old doctrine encompassing the Old Testament and the grand verities of the ancients. Two centuries later Augustine again clarified the Christian faith in these terms when he wrote:

"That which is now called the Christian religion existed among the ancients, and never did not exist from the planting of the human race until Christ came in the flesh, at which time the true religion which already existed began to be called Christianity."

Justin not only showed that Christ is the culmination and completion of all the partial knowledge of truth in Greek philosophy, He is also the culmination of the history of ancient Israel. According to Justin Jesus Christ is Israel and because of Him the church now bears the name of Israel.

This is to say, therefore, that the central message of the Old Testament has been fulfilled in the New Testament. It must be understood that this was the position of Christendom for at least 1900 years. It was the position, not only of Justin Martyr, but of such Stalwart saints as Irenaeus and Hippolytus; a position embraced by Martin Luther and John Calvin, the two towering figures of the Protestant Reformation.

Here we have not only a clear separation of Christianity and Judaism, but a direct challenge to Judaism's core dogma of a Chosen Nation. A point which has not been lost by Jewish writers.

We read in Zionist author Uri Zimmer's Torah-Judaism and the State of Israel: "The Jewish people, Rabbi Judah Halevy (the famous medieval poet and philosopher) explains in his 'Kuzari', constitutes a separate entity, a species unique in Creation, differing from nations in the same manner as man differs from the beast or the beast from the plant...although Jews are physically similar to all other men, yet they are endowed with a 'second soul' that renders them a separate species."

Fraud
Traditionally Jewish scholars, as we have shown, were highly critical of the Judeo-Christian myth. There are many others, under the influence of modernism and secular Zionism, who do see some advantage in it.

Rabbi Martin Siegel, reflecting a Messianic zeal, was quoted in the 18 January 1972 edition of New York Magazine as declaring: "I am devoting my lecture in this seminar to a discussion of the possibility that we are now entering a Jewish century, a time when the spirit of the community, the non-ideological blend of the emotional and rational and the resistance to categories and forms will emerge through the forces of anti-nationalism to provide us with a new kind of society. I call this process the Judaization of Christianity because Christianity will be the vehicle through which this society becomes Jewish."

While historic Christianity has looked to the eventual triumph of the Kingdom of God throughout the earth, according to the Zionist leaders Talmudic Judaism is zealous in the "drive to perfect man's earthly habitat" (Gershon Mamlak, Midstream, Jan., 1989, p.31).

Dr. Mamlak admits that "many Jews have filled the ranks of the various revolutionary movements" (op. cit., p.32) in order to satisfy this urge.

Rabbi Michael Higger, renowned Talmudic scholar, in his book The Jewish Utopia, discusses the reshaping of the world into a Jewish Eden. The victory of this Utopia is inexorably tied to the coming of the Jewish Messiah.

"And the Messianic Age," argues the eloquent Jewish Zionist author Leon Simon, "means for the Jew not merely the establishment of peace on earth and good will to men, but the universal recognition of the Jew and his God. . . For Judaism has no message of salvation for the individual soul, as Christianity has; all its ideas are bound up with the existence of the Jewish nation." (Studies in Jewish Nationalism).

Driven by political agendas compromising Jews and compromising Christians began, only in this century, to disseminate the [b]theretofore unheard of doctrine that Christianity originated from Judaism and that the two share a common worldview.

Dr. Gordon Ginn, an American Christian scholar, made a very valid point when he noted: "It is most interesting, indeed, that rabbis as well as Jewish scholars such as Mamlak and White agree with orthodox, historical Christianity that 'Judeo-Christian' is a contradiction in terms, even though that truth is yet to be discovered by contemporary evangelical and fundamentalist Christians" (Smyrna, August, 1993).

Christianity and Judaism are two distinct religious inheritances, despite all the superficial attempts by modern scholars to manufacture a naive "Judeo-Christianity." The very term "Judeo-Christian" is a mischievous misnomer without historical or Scriptural validity.

The religions of the world are the product of progressive revelation to a diverse humanity, separately expressing as they do the great metaphysical realities of life. Attempts to distort or eliminate these unique, ancient and divinely ordained patterns, through non-divine syncretism and politically-motivated concoctions, is both anti-traditional and truly diabolical.

Appeals to a nonexistent historical unity and calls for a banal, modernist theology do nothing for religious understanding and mutual respect. "Judeo-Christianity" should be seen for what it is - another secular twentieth century fraud, manufactured for narrow political ends, that is supremely disrespectful to all true believers.

Any fundamental unity that does exist between world religions cannot be appreciated by ignorant and secular scholarship, but only through knowledge of the great primordial and universal truths.

As Luc Benoist aptly wrote, "Our age is seeking a universal understanding which men of vision can already foresee and which is the longing of all great souls. There is ample evidence that the world's economic problems can be solved without the different religions having to abandon their unique spiritual insights; after all, brotherly agreement does not prevent the individual growth of each member of the family, bodily separate, but united in heart and mind." (The Esoteric Path).




Here he goes, trying to escape again… hey kid, this is just an academic discussion, not need to get so nervous and upset just because your arguments have failed.


Whatever gets you through each day of your pathetic life! :lol

Evolved
Friday, January 2nd, 2004, 10:46 AM
And I suppose you couldn't care less about the origin of ancestry either? People should mate with whatever "feels right" to them? If it "feels good" do it? LOL

I was talking about spirituality, not mating.

I don't need a racist God or an Aryan Jesus. I don't need Ben Klassen's theories on 'creators' and 'mud races.' I don't need every area of my life to be centered on racial politics. I don't look at the world that way, with a one-track mind, and I feel sorry for people who do. I think it is a sign of insecurity.

Well, most people are going to do what they want on whichever idiotic whim strikes them.


I think the origin of things is important, it puts things in perspective.

So European origin intrinsically makes (thing A) better than (thing B) of foreign origin? I don't buy that for a second.

Deling
Monday, April 19th, 2004, 02:06 PM
"Thank you for this info! There's no evidence whatsoever that Jesus was Jewish. Unless those who claim he was must have access to some secret document from antiquity that proves otherwise?"

There is no need for some secret document. In my Swedish version of the bible, it's clearly stated that Jesus is a Jew - Johannes (John), chapter 4, verse 9

My translation: "The samarite woman said: How can you, who're a Jew, ask me for water? I'm a samarian woman."

But I don't know how the original text looks like...

hchalice
Monday, May 10th, 2004, 03:18 AM
YES and NO

The mystery of the incarnation is that Jesus was fully God and fully man simultaneously. The God-man, some say. This would imply that his spirit was not Jewish but his body and outward appearance was Jewish. Both his mother and father has lineages to David, thus the name "the son of David"

But then again, does it really matter?

Milesian
Monday, May 10th, 2004, 10:30 AM
Correct, in that he was actually God in human form.
It was neccesary that he come to earth as a Hebrew as the ancient prophecies had to be fulfilled, before the Jewish religion ended. It should also be remembered that he also came to wrap up the Jewish religion, end the Old Covenant, remove the "Chosen" status from a small group of people living in the Middle East and establish the New and Everlasting Covenant for all. Until the establishment of the New Church, the Jewish faith was still the true faith (although it wasn't really practised in it's proper form by the majority of the people.) During his life, Jesus made it clear that the people had deviated (having already fell into what would become Talmudism).

Therefore he was God and technically outside and above the Jewish faith, but during his time as a man on earth, he adhered to it's outward rites until the time came when he declared it obsolete, the Jewish people as having lost their status and extended Salvation to all.

hchalice
Tuesday, May 11th, 2004, 05:11 AM
Milesian,

nice to see a scripturally sound analysis

I'm 'Protestant' BTW

Japetos
Wednesday, May 12th, 2004, 07:58 PM
I think Jesus had aryan origins.
Some non-christians like Kelsos wrote that his father was a Roman soldier.
In fact,we'll never be sure. :|

Prince Eugen
Wednesday, May 12th, 2004, 08:31 PM
I think Jesus had aryan origins.
Some non-christians like Kelsos wrote that his father was a Roman soldier.
In fact,we'll never be sure. :|
You mean Panthera?

Turificator
Wednesday, May 12th, 2004, 08:44 PM
No, I do not. Philosophy deals with metaphysics, and, in a general way, any metaphysic idea can be applied to any pagan religion. That does not have, as a consequence, the submission of that pagan religion to a given metaphysic conception.

Religion, is ritual and connection with ever-living Powers.

Philosophy, is to think about the world, including the above mentioned religious reality.

And so, Philosophy may depend on Religion, in some cases, but Religion can never depend on Philosophy.

In that way, the pagan religions are compatible with any philosophy, and, specially, with the philosophical freedom of thought. That does not happen with Christianism.

Thank you Tautalos, I couldn't have phrased the argument better myself.

As for Pushkin, I got bored trying to debate with him about the Jewish roots of Christianity some time ago. He is so utterly indoctrinated by his monotheistic cult he'll believe whatever he needs to believe, regardless of how absurd it may seem to outsiders.

Quod bonum et faustum sit tibi!

- T.

Japetos
Wednesday, May 12th, 2004, 08:49 PM
Panthera is called by jewish Talmud.Who knows? ;)

Taras Bulba
Wednesday, May 12th, 2004, 09:12 PM
As for Pushkin, I got bored trying to debate with him about the Jewish roots of Christianity some time ago. He is so utterly indoctrinated by his monotheistic cult he'll believe whatever he needs to believe, regardless of how absurd it may seem to outsiders.

In other words, you couldn't refute any of my arguments(and I used quite alot of different sources to back up my views up) and now you're here whinning about how I'm "indoctrinated". Nice ad hominem, but it still does not further your case. :eyes

Krampus
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 04:43 AM
Was Jesus a Jew?

Jesus never existed, thus the character spoken of couldn't of been anything other than what he was, a myth.

Deling
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 11:18 AM
Myth or not: according to the Bible Jesus was Jewish, if then Jesus was a fictive or real Jew is irrelevant.

norda
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 11:38 AM
Judging by local pictures I've always seen Its hard to believe he was a Jew.
Moreover there is always snow in Bethlehem. :D
http://www.sluzebniczkinmp.pl/images/Jezus.jpg
http://muurkrant.org/service/archief/image-ki/2003/jg6-wk24-jezus.gif

Taras Bulba
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 11:18 PM
Jesus never existed, thus the character spoken of couldn't of been anything other than what he was, a myth.

Really? Then please explain why there are at least two sources outside the Bible(Tacitus and Josephus) that talk about such a man? :eyes

Krampus
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 11:56 PM
Pushkin

Really? Then please explain why there are at least two sources outside the Bible(Tacitus and Josephus) that talk about such a man?


Both the Josephus reference and Tactius are forgeries by the Christian Church. Christians themselves have admitted that these were simplistic forgeries totally incongruent with the rest of Josephus's writings.The problem rest on the fact that an earlier Christian writer Origen, contradicts Eusebius who added his own forgery to the mix 100 years later. Tactius lived a full two decades after the supposed death of Christ which presents issues in and among itself. I'll explain in more depth later on tonight when I have more time.

Taras Bulba
Friday, May 14th, 2004, 12:20 AM
Pushkin

Both the Josephus reference and Tactius are forgeries by the Christian Church.

Care to provide any evidence of this?



Christians themselves have admitted that these were simplistic forgeries totally incongruent with the rest of Josephus's writings.

What Christians are these? Even non-Christian scholars admit Josephus made references to a Jesus of Nazareth.


Tactius lived a full two decades after the supposed death of Christ which presents issues in and among itself.

Which is really irrelevant. So I guess Plutarch and other Classical historians must be discounted because they wrote about events that happened not just decades and even centuries before their own time. Indeed lets throw out almost any historians' account of any event that occured decades before their time. :eyes

BTW, Josephus was alive during the period when Jesus was alive.


I'll explain in more depth later on tonight when I have more time.

Go right ahead.

Krampus
Friday, May 14th, 2004, 03:52 AM
Care to provide any evidence of this?


About this time lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed be should be called man. He wrought miracles, and was a teacher of those who gladly accept the truth, and had a large following among the Jews and pagans. He was the Christ. Although Pilate, at the complaint of the leaders of our people, condemned him to die on the cross, his earlier followers were faithful to him. For he appeared to them alive again on the third day, as god-sent prophets had foretold this and a thousand other wonderful things of him. The people of the Christians, which is called after him, survives until the present day.

Do these sound like the words of an Orthodox Jew? This passage I quoted does not appear in Origen's second-century version of Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews. It only appears in the 4th Century version translated by Bishop Eusebius.

Pushkin-
BTW, Josephus was alive during the period when Jesus was alive.

How so? Even if you believe Jesus to have been a real person Josephus was born 37 AD, his Father would of been placed at the same time this character Jesus supposedly lived, but Josephus would not have.

James Still, "Biblical and Extrabiblical Sources for Jesus"-

"Probably the most damning evidence against the Josephus passages is that the two interpolated passages do not seem to appear in Origen's second-century version of Antiquities. Origin was locked in a fierce debate with the Platonic philosopher Celsus over the merits of Christianity in Origen Contra Celsum (Origen against Celsus) and although Origen quotes freely from Antiquities to support Christianity, he never once used either of these passages instead remarking that 'Josephus did not believe that Jesus was the Christ.'"

Marshall J. Gauvin, "Did Jesus Christ Really Live?" -

"For more than two hundred years, the Christian Fathers who were familiar with the works of Josephus knew nothing of this passage. Had the passage been in the works of Josephus which they knew, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen and Clement of Alexandria would have been eager to hurl it at their Jewish opponents in their many controversies. But it did not exist. Indeed, Origen, who knew his Josephus well, expressly affirmed that that writer had not acknowledged Christ [Comment. in Matth.] This passage first appeared in the writings of the Christian Father Eusebius, the first historian of Christianity, early in the fourth century; and it is believed that he was its author. Eusebius, who not only advocated fraud in the interest of the faith, but who is known to have tampered with passages in the works of Josephus and several other writers, introduces this passage:"

There are in fact NO Roman or Jewish contemporaries who documented anything about anyone named Jesus. Certainly if the earth opened up and dead people were walking around during the time of the crucifixion I think someone else surely would of took notice. Romans were well known for documentation.

What of the Tactius reference? It doesn't appear until the 15th Century. Not even Eusebius who "documented" or rather forged Pagan and Jewish references to Jesus mentioned the Tactius reference.

Turificator
Friday, May 14th, 2004, 09:43 AM
An interesting (albeit not entirely scholarly) work was published on the subject a few years ago: 'The Jesus Mysteries' by T. Freke. You might have read it.

Whatever view we might personally have, there is little doubt that the existance of a man named Jesus Christ rests on very scanty literary evidence...

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Tuesday, May 25th, 2004, 03:03 AM
Pushkin, aer yuo ei j00? :psycho (http://www.forums.skadi.net/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=185#):zombie (http://www.forums.skadi.net/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=185#)

Haet too brake ti too yuo, but yuo don't grasp teh dier straits we aer all inn.:insane (http://www.forums.skadi.net/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=185#):idiot (http://www.forums.skadi.net/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=185#)
Haev yuo lost yuor marbels? :dork (http://www.forums.skadi.net/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=185#) :retard (http://www.forums.skadi.net/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=185#)

Please don't institute Europe's own undoing. Learn to accept the faiths and perceptions of those you claim to be your brethren, or you will be the only person around to hear your words. Screaming aloud like Jesus, nevertheless will not strike up friendship with anybody but the meek and impoverished of mind.

Evolved
Tuesday, May 25th, 2004, 07:56 AM
Jesus is like Santa Claus, he is meant to appeal to all people and he can appear in whatever form you want him to be. That is probably why he is not described physically in the Bible, so not one race can claim him.

Saoirse
Tuesday, May 25th, 2004, 09:32 AM
Matthew, Chapter 2

2:1
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,

2:2
Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.

Aquila Aquilonis
Tuesday, May 25th, 2004, 10:45 AM
Matthew, Chapter 2

2:1
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,

2:2
Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
The fact itself that three Aryan Magi (who certainly knew more about the Aryan tradition than some people who claim to represent it here) came to honor the Savior tells a lot.
Jesus Christ and all of his Apostles but Judas Iscariot came from Galilee of the Gentiles, populated by Aryan Greeks (Decapolis) and Aryan Scythians, who came there in the 7th century BC (the capital of Decapolis was called Scythopolis). His mother was descended from David, but look at his description in 1 Sam. 16:12: "Now he was ruddy [some translations say "blond"], and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to." Also mind 1 Sam. 27-28 says he sided with the Aryan Philistines to fight the Jews.

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Tuesday, May 25th, 2004, 04:43 PM
Dude, let's make this the "No Spin Zone". Stop the BS and wake up. We don't need that crap any more than we need the Jews!

Glenlivet
Saturday, May 29th, 2004, 02:51 PM
Jesus was not a jew. How could he have been? When he most likely never existed at all. There's not one single independent proof for his existence. He's a litterary creation.

One thing is for sure, christendom is a jewish religion, an alien religion that do not belong in Europe.

It's main purpose is probably to confuse dumb goyim.

Johannes de León
Saturday, May 29th, 2004, 03:50 PM
Learn to accept the faiths and perceptions of those you claim to be your brethren
Stop the BS and wake up. We don't need that crap
you contradict yourself very often! :D (just to make some fuss, but it's true! ;))

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Saturday, May 29th, 2004, 10:34 PM
you contradict yourself very often! :D (just to make some fuss, but it's true! ;))Heh, it's easy to be objective in mind, but my approach is subjective. :~( I try in a half arsed manner. :D

jesusfreak
Monday, June 7th, 2004, 08:36 PM
If Jesus never existed, then why the hell is it the world's largest religion?:P I am a firm believer in Jesus and I can prove abou anything anyone says against him wrong. Jesus(his God part) was a supreme being and therefore was not Jewish. His Human side(when he came to earth) WAS BORN OF MARY AND MARY WAS JEWISH!!! Therefore, Jesus's human side WAS JEWISH

Skando-naivian-Girl
Tuesday, June 8th, 2004, 12:20 AM
And the Pope isn't Catholic.:P

Saoirse
Tuesday, June 8th, 2004, 06:05 AM
If Jesus never existed, then why the hell is it the world's largest religion?

Islam is the largest religion, Christ-Insanity coming in second.

jesusfreak
Tuesday, June 8th, 2004, 06:08 AM
Christianity has over a billion more paople than Islam

Evolved
Tuesday, June 8th, 2004, 06:12 AM
Yep, Christianity is more popular but Muslims are popping out more kids.

jesusfreak
Tuesday, June 8th, 2004, 06:17 AM
well, I suppose that's all that matter isn't it. How much sex they have..........................:|

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Wednesday, May 30th, 2018, 01:39 AM
The fact itself that three Aryan Magi (who certainly knew more about the Aryan tradition than some people who claim to represent it here) came to honor the Savior tells a lot.
Jesus Christ and all of his Apostles but Judas Iscariot came from Galilee of the Gentiles, populated by Aryan Greeks (Decapolis) and Aryan Scythians, who came there in the 7th century BC (the capital of Decapolis was called Scythopolis). His mother was descended from David, but look at his description in 1 Sam. 16:12: "Now he was ruddy [some translations say "blond"], and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to." Also mind 1 Sam. 27-28 says he sided with the Aryan Philistines to fight the Jews.

This is what I would say now. God used the form of Christ to appeal to people from the most central population and region of the Old World. That's just a matter of convenience and it pulled the rug out from underneath Jerusalem. If Christ was Jewish, then why destroy the Temple and undo practically everything that Moses invented? Contrary to popular belief, Christianity doesn't call for the 10 Commandments, just 2 common sense rules about how to relate with God and with man. Did Paul not stress enough the abolition of the Law? No kosher, no circumcision, no sacrifice. What's Jewish?

Rodulf
Saturday, April 13th, 2019, 08:57 PM
The entire Christ myth comes from an amalgam of Aryan Sun myths, see Archarya S "Suns of God". The myths were Judaized in the Fifth Century to serve the needs of a dying Roman Empire filled with slaves. It's the perfect religion-mind control system for that task. Hail Odin!

SaxonPagan
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 12:32 AM
Of course he was. What else could have have been, born in that part of the world?

Not that I really care.

Elizabeth
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 01:20 AM
Jesus was a Jew.

Huginn ok Muninn
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 03:09 AM
Correct, in that he was actually God in human form.
It was neccesary that he come to earth as a Hebrew as the ancient prophecies had to be fulfilled, before the Jewish religion ended. It should also be remembered that he also came to wrap up the Jewish religion, end the Old Covenant, remove the "Chosen" status from a small group of people living in the Middle East and establish the New and Everlasting Covenant for all. Until the establishment of the New Church, the Jewish faith was still the true faith (although it wasn't really practised in it's proper form by the majority of the people.) During his life, Jesus made it clear that the people had deviated (having already fell into what would become Talmudism).

Therefore he was God and technically outside and above the Jewish faith, but during his time as a man on earth, he adhered to it's outward rites until the time came when he declared it obsolete, the Jewish people as having lost their status and extended Salvation to all.

Yep. When modern Christians, corrupted by modern Jewry, say Jesus was a Jew, and that Jews are still "God's Chosen People," call them out on it and ask them to recite the Nicene Creed:


I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

You see, Jesus may have been born to a Jewish woman, but according to the primary statement of faith of the Christian Church, he was NOT a Jew. He was/is GOD. As such, he could not have had the soul of a Jewish man. European Christians have never worshiped Jews. They worshiped God.

Then you can recite for them John 8:44, wherein Jesus is quoted addressing the Pharisees, from whom modern Judaism has sprung:


You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Then tell them the truth... that they are a bunch of misguided dispensationalist heretics who worship an evil sect which Jesus Himself condemned. If you say Jesus was a Jew, you cannot be a Christian... THE END.

Terminus
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 05:36 AM
Guess I'll play devil's advocate again and make the strongest possible case for Jesus' existence and non-Jewishness. I want to clarify that I am not a Christian and I will never identify as such, but I wish to make a gesture towards the Christians of this board.

As I once stressed to a certain Strasserite (https://forums.skadi.net/threads/153451-Was-Hitler-the-Man-of-the-Catholic-Church/page2):

1. Jew's hatred for Jesus. It's interesting to go through "anti-Christian" Alfred Rosenberg's unbelievably generous investigation into this matter in the book The Track of the Jew, where he traces hatred for Jesus in Jewish word-plays. For instance, Joseph Panthera alludes to the panther, which was apparently despised by the Jewish community since it was revered by Bacchus worshipers.

2. Jesus' anti-Semitism. The Catholic Church has never dared to build on his condemnations, they've merely parroted it. His vocabulary includes vipers, moths, vermin, robbers, and thieves. He grappled not only with Pharisees, Sadducees/scribes, synagogues, but also with the Essenes (as seen in his woes). In other words, a wholesale condemnation of the Jewish race. His indictment of the Jewish race is just as modern as it ever was.

A quote from an unabashedly Jewish poster on an anthropologist forum should illustrate this:

114668

Matthew 23:29-32
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!

Who would even go so far to fabricate all these condemnations of the Jewish people? Some vicious priest, a pagan anti-Semite, or a self-hating Jew? Certainly not Eusebius.

3. Jewish testimony of Jesus' non-Jewishness: a Samaritan (John 8:48), a Galilean (John 7:52), the son of a Roman soldier (Celsus' Jewish witness), son of a whore (Celsus' Jewish witness, Toledot Yeshu). Also, he was purported to be the son of a Latin and Danaite (according to Rosenberg's representation of St. Ephrem). He regularly visits mountains to pray in solitude (Luke 5:16, Luke 6:12, Matthew 14:23, John 6:15) like a Samaritan (John 4:19) and teaches that people should pray in secret whereas Jews prayed at Jerusalem in plain sight (Matthew 6:5).

John 4:19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”

Herodotus - The customs which I know the Persians to observe are the following: they have no images of the gods, no temples nor altars, and consider the use of them a sign of folly. . . . Their wont, however, is to ascend the summits of the loftiest mountains, and there to offer sacrifice to Jupiter, which is the name they give to the whole circuit of the firmament.

John 4:23-24 Yet a time. . . . has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

4. Those who would argue that Jesus' existence is strictly furnished by hearsay overlook that almost all pre-modern religious founders' histories have been mythologized, are almost exclusively based on hearsay. IIRC there are at least six contradicting reports of Pythagoras' death. Those who would argue that the gospels can't be relied upon overlook that other religions are also founded on their histories. It's unjust to dismiss Christian history (however falsified it has become) and overlook the rest.
What distinguishes NS from the rest is that it does not place emphasis on it's history. It's teachings are based on observation of the senses and Nature.

5. You can prove the existence of other people from antiquity as long as the pertaining literature is still around. No one would know anything about Celsus if Origen hadn't penned a rebuttal. Does that mean Celsus would cease existing in history?

6. A person lives on in his teachings. Who was the author of the NT gospel ethics if not "Jesus"? The "Golden Rule" may be found in many preceding civilizations but where in antiquity was there ever such an emphasis on socialism/brotherly love? It was found lacking in Apollonius' time (1st century; which is incidentally when Jesus was alleged to live). It was especially absent in Julian's time (4th century; Letter 22, To Arsacius).

Philostratus, Life of Apollonius:
You see how the sparrows care for one another and delight in communism, but we are far from approving of it...

7. Matthew 5:29-30 plainly indicates a non-jewish custom (cutting off one's right hand), as elaborated by the great Grecian orator Aeschines and admitted by Josephus. How was Jesus, who supposedly spent 30 years confined to Palestine aware of this concept? Furthermore, I would point out that Jesus most certainly did not exist in the 1st century (obvious interpolations in Suetonius, Tacitus, Longinus, Pliny, no contemporary witnesses. Early Christians systematically destroyed pagan literature, not vice versa) so he could not have received such an impression from Josephus.


Then you can recite for them John 8:44, wherein Jesus is quoted addressing the Pharisees, from whom modern Judaism has sprung:That quote is quite harmless in it's context, which was not addressing Pharisees or even all Jews, but strictly Jews who had believed in him (John 8:31), which makes no sense. I'll even type it out: "To the Jews who had believed him..." If the narrative was true, then this amounts to saying that even jewish proselytes to Christianity are non-genuine! He's basically excluding the whole Jewish race from his religion, which undermines his teachings of brotherly love.

John 8:44 must be read in the context of climate. Then it makes sense. In harsh climates, they are forced to strictly develop their mental faculties. The lie in politics and religion begins with sheer intelligence. They developed it just as naturally as people have to wear warm clothing in the winter. Hence, "father of lies." And let's not forget Schopenhauer's maxim, "Greater master of the lie."

Goebbels (Diaries), May 13, 1943:
The Jew was also the first to introduce the lie into politics as a weapon. Aboriginal man, the Fuehrer believes, did not know the lie. . . The higher the human being developed intellectually, the more he acquired the ability of hiding his innermost thoughts and giving expression to something different from what he really felt. The Jew as an absolutely intellectual creature was the first to learn this art. He can therefore be regarded not only as the carrier but even the inventor of the lie among human beings.

schwab
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 04:39 PM
@Terminus.............
So, who was Jesus? Did he ever exist? Is there any existing genealogy of him?
The Scriptures always have all the answers...........

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ 1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 3 and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram,[a (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1%3A1-25&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23148a)] 4 and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon, 5 and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of David the king.
And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, 8 and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, 9 and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 10 and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos,[c (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1%3A1-25&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23155c)] and Amos the father of Josiah, 11 and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.
12 And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel,[d (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1%3A1-25&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23157d)] and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, 13 and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, 14 and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, 15 and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, 16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.
17 So all the generations from Abraham to David were [B]fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations.

Mööv
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 05:16 PM
Now, that is one big list of Jewish names,... yuck :puke

SaxonPagan
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 08:10 PM
Obviously a load of fiction though ;)

There were no possible means at that time to have recorded 42 generations from Abraham to Jesus.

Even today, with written documents available, try tracing your own ancestors back more than a dozen generations and see how you get on!

Huginn ok Muninn
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 10:23 PM
@Terminus.............
So, who was Jesus? Did he ever exist? Is there any existing genealogy of him?
The Scriptures always have all the answers...........

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ

1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 3 and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram,[a (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1%3A1-25&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23148a)] 4 and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon, 5 and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of David the king.
And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, 8 and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, 9 and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 10 and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos,[c (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1%3A1-25&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23155c)] and Amos the father of Josiah, 11 and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.
12 And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel,[d (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1%3A1-25&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23157d)] and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, 13 and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, 14 and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, 15 and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, 16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.
17 So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations.



Which all means nothing to the Christian faith, and has meant nothing for centuries, since, according to the council of Nicea, which framed the primary statement of faith, Jesus was


[B]the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.

So Joseph was only his adoptive father, his flesh was "incarnate of the Virgin Mary," and his soul was that of God Himself. Though his flesh was created though a Jewish woman, his soul was not; so, while his appearance was that of a Jew, his soul was not Jewish, therefore Jesus was not a Jew. That should be the end of the argument for any right-thinking, believing Christian.

Rodulf
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 10:25 PM
Obviously a load of fiction though ;)

There were no possible means at that time to have recorded 42 generations from Abraham to Jesus.

Even today, with written documents available, try tracing your own ancestors back more than a dozen generations and see how you get on!

Doesn't matter. People that want to believe this will find a rationalization. As for me, I left this Judeo-crap behind years ago and embraced the Gods of the Blood, the Divine Universe as my ancestors viewed it. And I have come to realize that the vast majority of the White race will not leave Christianity. They are too programmed to fear the consequences of Jehova's wrath. The best we can hope for is a Christianity with ALL the Jew psycho-babble removed, racially invigorated and more focused on life here, rather than on a false promise of Heaven. Odinism could be the religion of an intellectual/spiritual elite, with the masses practicing an Aryan Christianity. This would not be my ideal but it may be the best we can hope for.

Mööv
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 10:39 PM
with the masses practicing an Aryan Christianity


No need for that. Masses always play it safe. If you wield the hammer over them they will forget about christianity quicker than you can blink.

Elizabeth
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 10:41 PM
My ancestors were Christians of various denominations. I believe the bible/old testament is a book of Jewish/Hebrew mythology/fables/history and applies to only them. I guess I'm in between being a Heathen and a Christian. I don't believe Jesus was god incarnate. I'm not an atheist though. I do believe we and everything on earth and in the heavens were created by God.

Rodulf
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 11:37 PM
No need for that. Masses always play it safe. If you wield the hammer over them they will forget about christianity quicker than you can blink.

I don't know... looking at the typical White American, their inner minds are shaped by their religion. I also would not forcibly covert people to Odinism. I don't think our Gods want slaves...thet want heroes.

Astragoth
Sunday, April 14th, 2019, 11:59 PM
I guess I'm in between being a Heathen and a Christian.

Pick one.

SaxonPagan
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 12:26 AM
This perfectly sums up your "those who are not with us are against us!" mentality.

Mööv
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 12:59 AM
I also would not forcibly covert people to Odinism. I don't think our Gods want slaves...thet want heroes.


Eh, Odinism... as I understand it, it is an attempt to make a religion out of our old ways... Smells like christianity with different names. I wholeheartedly reject that!

schwab
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 01:30 AM
We cannot serve 2 masters...................

Astragoth
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 01:46 AM
We cannot serve 2 masters...................

Bingo.

This perfectly sums up your "those who are not with us are against us!" mentality.

No I just came to realize its pointless reaching out to people that hate us. It's you who are against us.

Rodulf
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 02:34 AM
Eh, Odinism... as I understand it, it is an attempt to make a religion out of our old ways... Smells like christianity with different names. I wholeheartedly reject that!

Uhhh....okay....guess I'm confused why you describe your religion as "heathen".....

Elizabeth
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 05:17 AM
Pick one.


Since I don't believe Jesus was god incarnate I can't be a Christian. But if I had to choose between the three Abrahamic faiths I'd choose Christianity. I admire good Christians but I also admire good-hearted people whatever they may be.

I think the current Christian stance of encouraging mass immigration into Europe is wrong. I am for preserving Europe and my race.

I don't like the term "heathen" because it is derogatory.

I googled "What does it mean when someone calls you a heathen?"
noun. The definition of a heathen is someone who does not belong to an accepted religion or is someone who is lacking in morals or principles. An example of aheathen is a person who is uncivilized and not religious. An example of a heathen is a person who lies, cheats and does other immoral things.

I don't lack morals or principles. I don't lie, cheat, or do other immoral things.


I also don't believe in original sin. So the whole part of Jesus dying for our sins is pointless.

I guess I'll update my profile to put "Heathen" then.

SpearBrave
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 10:26 AM
No I just came to realize its pointless reaching out to people that hate us. It's you who are against us.

Oh, you poor Christian victims [sarcasm]


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opikJuVXYR4



Playing the victim all the time is weak, and it reminds me of another Abrahamic faith(jews). In these times we don't need weakness and victimhood we need strength and belief in our own people.

Rodulf
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 11:55 AM
Since I don't believe Jesus was god incarnate I can't be a Christian. But if I had to choose between the three Abrahamic faiths I'd choose Christianity. I admire good Christians but I also admire good-hearted people whatever they may be.

I think the current Christian stance of encouraging mass immigration into Europe is wrong. I am for preserving Europe and my race.

I don't like the term "heathen" because it is derogatory.

I googled "What does it mean when someone calls you a heathen?"
noun. The definition of a heathen is someone who does not belong to an accepted religion or is someone who is lacking in morals or principles. An example of aheathen is a person who is uncivilized and not religious. An example of a heathen is a person who lies, cheats and does other immoral things.

I don't lack morals or principles. I don't lie, cheat, or do other immoral things.


I also don't believe in original sin. So the whole part of Jesus dying for our sins is pointless.

I guess I'll update my profile to put "Heathen" then.

Thank you! I think "Traditionalist" is also an accurate term.

Mööv
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 01:13 PM
Uhhh....okay....guess I'm confused why you describe your religion as "heathen".....


Being a "heathen", "odinist", "asatruar",... etc... are different things.
I stated heathen under religion simply because stating irreligious or something like that would make it sound like some neo-marxist-atheist thing. But yes, I am very much irreligious. Religion was an unknown concept to our ancestors, until the arrival of christianity.

Elizabeth
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 01:33 PM
I've been asked on another forum if I'm very religious. I don't know how to answer that. Some people assume good people are religious. I'm just a good person. To me, religious means well-behaved and I am that, so yes in that way I am religious, but at the same time I am not because I don't follow a religion.

Elizabeth
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 01:34 PM
Thank you! I think "Traditionalist" is also an accurate term.

Thank you, Rodulf.

SaxonPagan
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 04:00 PM
So Elizabeth has chosen to self-describe as a Heathen due to the behaviour of Skadi’s Christian Fundamentalists. A good move!

Proselytisng zealots always turn folks away in the end, and (on an astrological note) intimidation tactics are seldom effective against Arians ;)

schwab
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 04:28 PM
Oh, you poor Christian victims [sarcasm]




Playing the victim all the time is weak, and it reminds me of another Abrahamic faith(jews). In these times we don't need weakness and victimhood we need strength and belief in our own people.

True Christians are not weak but celebrate strength..........
So, again, who is that Jesus?

Easter is upon us. Easter is about death and resurrection. It is about eternal life. Who else can promise that?

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.”

—John 11:25 (https://inbound.harvest.org/e2t/c/*W4c6YV48_Kn9QVlZsL01Kdcfr0/*W257hpC77w0l7W46qQkl6qfdlm0/5/f18dQhb0Sjvk6BGy-KW91sBQ-4T_wDdW4Y8__464zLNMVscWqR1VbPj2W53DQ4N7s 5LskW5lsR9x31J0t5W4dQ24W6NrY7DV-vHBy3L2sxkV_5Fpw7_jbGPN7d-tJnQJ99nW8tsRDT3N1BZ4VZvX8W5wLwvHW8rC4h7 7qdKx7W5x5KNk7-XB_5W67g-th7PstJlW49z-4P2MV0XLVb1KnQ8W1JLSW2KSKyQ80BvvyW7cvxVf 8q5qBxVVQf4X5vDhXCW97kCjB3bX_fCW1qN3DS1l kjZdW28BxxK96BZCHW8q_BP63Hm3vqVRCmtG96zz LrN23rq11SlBdXN3MxCwnNCSTmW6Q8Wlt7flJm4N 3H5VgSYwQSpV8HS4t4Z7rWFW4ry6cM95BvbQW9bG L4K8GclM4VPNpm23Cdk0dW3wv7Sm6x-BWYW2Kmvqr2PmH9rW1X140W7v5M4-W3kR9R41ny5pjN8StMJXrmFDtW4GnR_K2489qfW8 PK6LJ26JWxKW9fVDhb2FLMVVW4Q-5SV4HzlZzf2ycxC311)

Easter is not about brightly colored eggs, wearing pastels, or enjoying a big meal, although it could include these. Easter is about the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
For some, Easter will be a great day, spent surrounded by family and friends. But for others, it will be a sad day, because Easter is a reminder of a loved one who has died and is now desperately missed.
Death seems so cruel, so harsh, and so final. That is what the disciples were feeling when they saw their Lord, whom they had left everything to follow, hanging on the cross. They were devastated. Death had crushed them. But if they would have gone back in their memories, they would have recalled an important event and statement Jesus had made.
They would have remembered Jesus standing at the tomb of His close friend Lazarus. They would have remembered that Jesus did something completely unexpected: He wept (see John 11:35). Jesus wept, because He knew that death was not part of God’s original plan. Humanity was not meant to grow old, to suffer with disease, or to die. But because of the sin of Adam and Eve, sin entered the human race, and death followed with it. And death spread to all of us. Jesus wept, because it broke His heart.
But standing there at Lazarus’ tomb, Jesus also delivered these hope-filled words: “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live” (John 11:25). Death is not the end. And the Resurrection of Jesus Christ proves it.
If you have put your faith in Christ, then Easter means that you will live forever in the presence of God. Easter brings hope to the person who has been devastated by death.

John Smithwick
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 07:51 PM
He was a fictional Jewish character created by the ancient Roman government (a pacifist Roman collaborator Jewish messiah figure as opposed to the traditional militant one whom the Jews still worship to this day (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=moshiach)):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmEScIUcvz0

We need the Church overhauled to compartmentalize/supplement Christianity - see my signature:

Mööv
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 08:11 PM
see my signature:


"European nationalism" (whatever that means) may work in the colonies but within Europe it is a stupid concept, as Europe is made of various nations, it is not a nation by itself.

John Smithwick
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 08:31 PM
"European nationalism" (whatever that means) may work in the colonies but within Europe it is a stupid concept, as Europe is made of various nations, it is not a nation by itself.Yeah,... in the thread, I state each country would have its own faith i.e. the British Faith, the German Faith, the French Faith, etc. We're going to get rid of that old Roman program of universalist Jewish folklore-messiah stuff, and turn our churches into the equivalent of synagogues for our people and nations. It really isn't rocket science and it's a travesty it hasn't been done already. Your country, Germany, was actually the first to take serious steps in this direction, but Hitler ruined it, like he did everything (see Hauer's German Faith Movement). (https://forums.skadi.net/threads/183633-European-Nationalist-Faith?p=1254858&viewfull=1#post1254858)

We'll eventually get'er done. I've renamed it "Ethno-Nationalist Faith" in my signature based on your critique. Thanks. :)

Rodulf
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 11:11 PM
Being a "heathen", "odinist", "asatruar",... etc... are different things.
I stated heathen under religion simply because stating irreligious or something like that would make it sound like some neo-marxist-atheist thing. But yes, I am very much irreligious. Religion was an unknown concept to our ancestors, until the arrival of christianity.

Then I am still confused about the point of your original post.

SaxonPagan
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 11:16 PM
So anyway, are we finally agreed then that JC was a kike?

Rodulf
Monday, April 15th, 2019, 11:35 PM
So anyway, are we finally agreed then that JC was a kike?

I would think a thin veneer of Judeo-BS laid over various Sun Deities. I will go so far as to say if all of the jewishness were removed, and a healthy racial awareness were added, that I would support such an Aryanized Christianity for the masses. As I stated before, Odinism is a path for a spiritual elite.

Uwe Jens Lornsen
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 01:21 AM
He was a fictional Jewish character created by the ancient Roman government (a pacifist Roman collaborator Jewish messiah figure as opposed to the traditional militant one whom the Jews still worship to this day (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=moshiach)):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmEScIUcvz0

We need the Church overhauled to compartmentalize/supplement Christianity - see my signature:


"Learning New Every Day" : Newly learned "Moshiach" , Mose the Messiah
breaking the chains of the evil native Egyptians...

Then he will be a Leo , and not a Satan Claas from the deepest valley...

But the Leo might be in the deepest valley in (360/12)*72 years * 3 or 4 signs .

So , Moi-Shiah might be to expected in 6900 years , something ....


4000-2000 BC , the Leo had been the summer peak sun sign ,
a device , as large as a calf ...

Uwe Jens Lornsen
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 01:23 AM
I would think a thin veneer of Judeo-BS laid over various Sun Deities. I will go so far as to say if all of the jewishness were removed, and a healthy racial awareness were added, that I would support such an Aryanized Christianity for the masses. As I stated before, Odinism is a path for a spiritual elite.

What is "Odinism" ?

You sound , like you would need a "psychiatrist"

SpearBrave
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 02:12 AM
So anyway, are we finally agreed then that JC was a kike?

Ja, Yes, Yup, Yeah, and Definitely

Rodulf
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 02:45 AM
What is "Odinism" ?

You sound , like you would need a "psychiatrist"

What is a "philosophical archaic Christian"? You sound like YOU need a reality check..

Mööv
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 06:29 AM
What is "Odinism" ?



A cult centred around Odin. And so a first step towards monotheism.

Uwe Jens Lornsen
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 08:00 AM
What is a "philosophical archaic Christian"? You sound like YOU need a reality check..


A cult centred around Odin. And so a first step towards monotheism.

Where is that "cult" to be found ?
Where are the "priests" if Odin ?
Are the Free Masters ( Freemasons ) the real "Odinists" ?


What are the other Germanic "Gods" then ? Furniture of
some science fiction fantasy library titled "Edda" ?


Why do poeple occassionally wear a "Torah's Hammer" ?
What are these then ? Jews , Israelites , Workers ?

Rodulf
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 08:51 AM
Where is that "cult" to be found ?
Where are the "priests" if Odin ?
Are the Free Masters ( Freemasons ) the real "Odinists" ?


What are the other Germanic "Gods" then ? Furniture of
some science fiction fantasy library titled "Edda" ?


Why do poeple occassionally wear a "Torah's Hammer" ?
What are these then ? Jews , Israelites , Workers ?

I'm trying to be respectful...but I don't know what the hell you're talking about...

Primus
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 08:54 AM
The entire Christ myth comes from an amalgam of Aryan Sun myths, see Archarya S "Suns of God". The myths were Judaized in the Fifth Century to serve the needs of a dying Roman Empire filled with slaves. It's the perfect religion-mind control system for that task. Hail Odin!

Big LARPin. You "heathens" who hate on Christians only do this: you perpetuate Jew propaganda and nothing else.

Christ's Advent is an entire rejection of the Jew and the system of the Jew.

If Christianity is a Jew-derived religion, why then do the Jews spend so much time hating on Christ and the Virgin Mary in the Babylonian Talmud? Why did the Popes order Jew books, like the aforementioned evil Talmud, to be burned? Why did a Catholic queen, Isabella, expel all Jews, even the Jew converts to Catholicism, from Spain?

Oh, Odin told Isabella to expel the parasite from Spain. Pfff.

SpearBrave
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 10:18 AM
Big LARPin. You "heathens" who hate on Christians only do this: you perpetuate Jew propaganda and nothing else.

Christ's Advent is an entire rejection of the Jew and the system of the Jew.

If Christianity is a Jew-derived religion, why then do the Jews spend so much time hating on Christ and the Virgin Mary in the Babylonian Talmud? Why did the Popes order Jew books, like the aforementioned evil Talmud, to be burned? Why did a Catholic queen, Isabella, expel all Jews, even the Jew converts to Catholicism, from Spain?

Oh, Odin told Isabella to expel the parasite from Spain. Pfff.

Christianity is a jewish based religion:
https://www.biblica.com/resources/bible-faqs/do-jews-and-christians-basically-have-the-same-religion/

that is just one source, there are many more.

In your line of thinking...why do Christians in America fly the jewish flag at their churches?, why do Christians believe jews are their god's "chosen people"? Why do Christian politicians kiss jewish asses every election?

Terminus
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 11:17 AM
Christ's Advent is an entire rejection of the Jew and the system of the Jew.Christians know this and yet they still uphold the OT (even when they dismiss it's relevance, they always come back to it when they're itching for war i.e. Cromwell's bible).


If Christianity is a Jew-derived religion, why then do the Jews spend so much time hating on Christ and the Virgin Mary in the Babylonian Talmud? Christianity is not the teaching of Jesus.

As for Virgin Mary, she supplied a substitute for the idols the Jewish-Christians destroyed. Jews didn't like that. They laud everyone (i.e. Krishnamurti) who circumvents the Gentile's devotion/feeling for god.


Why did the Popes order Jew books, like the aforementioned evil Talmud, to be burned? And yet when pagan leaders have historically done the same, they get called out as heathens and devils.

The Church took up the struggle against Jewry, but they did not understand the struggle, whereas the empires before them did to a greater extent.


Why did a Catholic queen, Isabella, expel all Jews, even the Jew converts to Catholicism, from Spain?Same reason why the Roman emperors did. This historical antipathy was not a merit of Christianity.

Huginn ok Muninn
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 11:31 AM
Jews hate Christ because he told them their entire world view was a lie. They have hated Christianity since because its continued existence reminds them of this truth. Is it any wonder that they took the path of subversion that cultural marxism showed them and tried to subvert Christianity to their own ends?

While the Jews around him, and particularly Saul/Paul are suspect, generally the words of Jesus himself resist criticism when put in proper context. I therefore have an open mind toward him and a respect for the very Europeanized faith that grew around his memory. The outward trappings of Christianity changed to fit US, not the other way round, and it was a fit faith for us until (((the enemy))) began to purposely subvert it.

Now we have anti-white communists in cassocks like Welby or Bergoglio telling us to worship not Christ, but the multi-cult. It seems modern churches only care about feeding Africans and promoting homosexuality, with the kindness of Christ as the excuse. Traitors reign at the very heart of our culture.

Rodulf
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 12:09 PM
Christianity is a jewish based religion:
https://www.biblica.com/resources/bible-faqs/do-jews-and-christians-basically-have-the-same-religion/

that is just one source, there are many more.

In your line of thinking...why do Christians in America fly the jewish flag at their churches?, why do Christians believe jews are their god's "chosen people"? Why do Christian politicians kiss jewish asses every election?

You tell him, Spear Brave!

Huginn ok Muninn
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 12:10 PM
In your line of thinking...why do Christians in America fly the jewish flag at their churches?, why do Christians believe jews are their god's "chosen people"? Why do Christian politicians kiss jewish asses every election?

150 years ago, this was not so. Even as recently as the 1950s, Jews were known as "perfidious" in right-thinking churches. The Jews who subverted the faith changed that right quick. All it takes to subvert a politician (who is essentially a whore) is money. The Rothschild patriarchy was smart enough to figure that out, then promote "democracy" so that monarchs, whose tradition was based in honor, would not be able to oppose them.

John Smithwick
Tuesday, April 16th, 2019, 07:23 PM
I'm trying to be respectful...but I don't know what the hell you're talking about...Exactly. Same here with respect to his reply to me:

"Learning New Every Day" : Newly learned "Moshiach" , Mose the Messiah
breaking the chains of the evil native Egyptians...

Then he will be a Leo , and not a Satan Claas from the deepest valley...

But the Leo might be in the deepest valley in (360/12)*72 years * 3 or 4 signs .

So , Moi-Shiah might be to expected in 6900 years , something ....

4000-2000 BC , the Leo had been the summer peak sun sign ,
a device , as large as a calf ...Nothing he wrote had anything to do with my post. It's like he's a schizophrenic or a German federal disinformation officer simply here to spam the board to make it look ridiculous, ... or he's trying to be funny and make friends.

Uwe Jens Lornsen if you're bored and trying to be entertaining then state that at the beginning of your post mate. Otherwise, get a grip or if you're a fed, get lost.


So anyway, are we finally agreed then that JC was a kike?Agreed, except we should add: he was a fictional one (i.e. Jesus was a Jew living in Judea, as much as Odin was a German living in ancient Germania, as much as Jupiter was a Roman living in ancient Italy, as much as Zeus was a Greek living in ancient Athens, etc.). On another note, there's no point in being rude i.e. using the word "kike". We're trying to build bridges. I'd like to see Christianity all but removed from our churches, so that they become White Anglo-Saxon congregation centers (WAS centers aka WASP without the P lol).

We'll need "our Christians brothers and sisters" on side for that to happen :).


Christ's Advent is an entire rejection of the Jew and the system of the Jew.Christianity was originally created for the Jews alone by the ancient Roman government during the First Roman Jewish War.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmEScIUcvz0

That's why it was illegal to be a Christian outside the Near East until the Council of Nicea.


If Christianity is a Jew-derived religion, It's called the Tanakh. It's their book (The Old Testament).

We shouldn't have anything to do with it nor them.


why then do the Jews spend so much time hating on Christ and the Virgin Mary in the Babylonian Talmud?Because they think that it's ridiculous we follow a derivation of their religion - that we follow a pacifist version of their Messiah invented by the ancient Romans. They feel that Christianity, in part, led us to behave very irrationally towards them and ourselves hence why we had so much warfare in Europe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_Europe). No one is taught to think in a church nor act as a community - we're taught to be complacent sheep (that used to be shepherded by our Monarchs like a cattle to a slaughterhouse in routine massive international war over the most trivial pretexts i.e. the King was having a feud with his cousin King in the neighboring country over whose balls were bigger).


Why did the Popes order Jew books, like the aforementioned evil Talmud, to be burned? Why did a Catholic queen, Isabella, expel all Jews, even the Jew converts to Catholicism, from Spain?The Jews were a tool used by the Popes and Royalty as part of the Christian program. The Jews would act as their money lenders, and sometimes things would go foul, and they'd kick them out or punish them in some other way, but they were always given slack and allowed back in later. It was a better system from the elites' perspective than the prior Pagan system. In the Pagan system, the state would act as the "money lender", and if there was a backlash, the rage would be directed towards the Pagan leadership (i.e. the ancient Roman government), instead of a convenient outgroup (the Jews).

Terminus
Wednesday, April 17th, 2019, 05:48 AM
150 years ago, this was not so. Even as recently as the 1950s, Jews were known as "perfidious" in right-thinking churches. The Jews who subverted the faith changed that right quick. All it takes to subvert a politician (who is essentially a whore) is money. The Rothschild patriarchy was smart enough to figure that out, then promote "democracy" so that monarchs, whose tradition was based in honor, would not be able to oppose them.When you look at how far some people will go to uphold their honor, it's probably better to be without any "honor". The crafty man wins in this world. Jesus said to be as crafty as serpents, not just innocent as doves.

"All it takes to subvert a politician is money." This is a generalized statement with no regard for their situation. Most people who enter into politics start off as naive idealists or zealous know-it-alls who think they possess what it takes to make a change. They think they can beat the system through the system, from within the system.
Little do they know, if there are any politicians who are genuine or incorruptible, they will be systematically weeded out and denied a chance to come into power.
Hammarskjold was one rare exception (who the democratic-minded said was a mistake that wouldn't happen again), he seemed to be the office dwelling, compliant, bureaucratic type, completely harmless. He set about to make real changes. He partially transformed the monstrous UN which had been conceived as a chain to hold down Germany into something tolerable.

The corruption process is not immediate ("bought and paid for"), but gradual, they are gradually "initiated" into the democratic world of politics, a world of slander, toxicity, blackmail, scandals, Christian hypocrisy, pandering to demographics, begging for voters and money, etc. Worst of all is when they hold galas and celebrations behind public eyes and the worst bitter enemies embrace each other off-stage. Since all other paths to seeing how politics could and should be are closed off, they obviously come to love this sort of life. The danger. The bickering. The sensationalist, worldwide attention.

That you ascribe detective work to the Rothschilds is almost an insult to Germanics. Jews aren't the only ones who notice these things. Money has always been recognized as a corrupting influence.

I've always said in private circles that all it takes to destabilize the whole political world is introducing one genuine Hitler type (preferably in Germany). That means knowing everything there is to know about him and how he came to be. Unlock the mind of Hitler and the Jewish variety of political chaos can be substituted with something greater.