PDA

View Full Version : Racial Make-up Of Jesus Christ.



Mythos
Wednesday, February 11th, 2004, 09:29 PM
Please explain the racial origin of jesus christ, is he a jew?

And if so, how does it fit into Christianity.

A clear and basic argument please.

Taras Bulba
Wednesday, February 11th, 2004, 09:57 PM
Jesus was not a Jew in the ethnic sense. He was a Galileen, which were a mixture of Cannanites, Phonecians, Greeks, Syrians. Galileens were not Jews as the New Testament itself refers to Galilee as a land of Gentiles.

Loki
Wednesday, February 11th, 2004, 10:00 PM
Jesus was not a Jew in the ethnic sense. He was a Galileen, which were a mixture of Cannanites, Phonecians, Greeks, Syrians. Galileens were not Jews as the New Testament itself refers to Galilee as a land of Gentiles.

Jesus was not a Galilean. He only lived in Galilea later in his life. He was born in Bethlehem.

Taras Bulba
Wednesday, February 11th, 2004, 10:06 PM
His family's decent was from Galilee.

Saoirse
Wednesday, February 11th, 2004, 10:13 PM
Fighting over something that never existed.

Loki
Wednesday, February 11th, 2004, 10:21 PM
Fighting over something that never existed.

I do believe Jesus existed. But he was not "the Son of God" or whatever. He was merely an Essene zealot who managed to accumulate a trusted following, who believed in him so much that they hallucinated things.

Mythos
Thursday, February 12th, 2004, 08:23 PM
Please tell me how Odinism or Paganism is in any way more realistic than TRADITIONAL !! Christianity.

Kel`Thuz
Thursday, February 12th, 2004, 09:28 PM
Please tell me how Odinism or Paganism is in any way more realistic than TRADITIONAL !! Christianity.

Because Paganism recognizes the Iron Laws of Nature, whereas Christianity doesn't? "Thou shalt not kill", "Turn the other cheek" - so much for realism in this rotten ideology.

Saoirse
Thursday, February 12th, 2004, 09:40 PM
Because Paganism recognizes the Iron Laws of Nature, whereas Christianity doesn't? "Thou shalt not kill", "Turn the other cheek" - so much for realism in this rotten ideology.

Christianity is in conflict with Nature. CIer's want to be Jews and Semitic also. It's digusting.

Taras Bulba
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 03:54 AM
Kel, first off it's "Thou Shall not Murder", even the Talumudists admit that. Also "turn the other cheek" does not mean one should not defend themselves. Jesus was using a common cliche of the region where being struck on the right cheek meant a personal insult. So when Jesus saids "turn the other cheek", hes telling the people not to respond to personal insults.

Jesus was no pacifist but unlike you pagans he did not feel killing solved everything. Jesus wants a stable civil society, he does not want people killing each other left and right just because they pissed you off. Jesus makes clear distinction that sometimes violence is ok and even necessary and sometimes its not. Sometimes you just have to suck it in and "turn the other cheek".

He said one should not use violence to solve their personal problems, but instead seek vengence through the state. St. Paul himself talks about how a Christian's duty is to take up arms to protect his country.

And this Christianity is in conflict with nature, I don't know where the hell this comes from. Christianity has absolute respect for nature as is proven in the words of Jesus himself and the works and practices of christians throughout the ages. I only have to mention St. Anthony to show the amount of respect Christians have shown towards nature.

Scoob
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 04:32 AM
I am currently reading Nietzsche's "Anti-Christ." His assessment of the New Testament is that Jesus' original doctrine was of a state of being. It was anti-religious in that the "Kingdom of God" is something found in the self, in the heart, and is available to all - no rituals or church structure neccessary.

Of course this kind of feeling is NOT suited for any "establishment" type of person. At least as N characterizes it, it's almost like being a Taoist: aloof from society. All values are defined by what's inner, nothing by what "the world" thinks.

Paul coopted Jesus' true message to make a messianic movement based on the pagan idea of an arisen savior. Whereas Jesus' message is that the Kingdom of God is not found through any man, but inside the self. Paul adopted the message to appeal to the worst degenerates of Rome - who then made it a religion of the rabble - a rebellion against worldly success, wisdom, science, accomplishment, beauty, and enjoyment.

Taras Bulba
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 04:54 AM
Scoob, what Paul said was continuation of the teachings of Christ. As for being a religion for degenerates, I believe Jesus once said that he did not come to save the rightegous, for they have no need for salvation; he came to save the degenerated. Now some say Christ was wrong in that, but what is so wrong in telling a man to become more than what he seems, to transform himself into a new better person.

Simply taking the degenerate out back and shooting him doesn't do much really; its a short cut that gets nowhere.

Scoob
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:59 AM
Scoob, what Paul said was continuation of the teachings of Christ. As for being a religion for degenerates, I believe Jesus once said that he did not come to save the rightegous, for they have no need for salvation; he came to save the degenerated. Now some say Christ was wrong in that, but what is so wrong in telling a man to become more than what he seems, to transform himself into a new better person.

Simply taking the degenerate out back and shooting him doesn't do much really; its a short cut that gets nowhere.

Shooting degenerates can be good for society - but best of all is to make society where all prosper, and degenerate types do not appear. Best formula for that (without influence of anti-social elements, such as most Blacks are in the USA now) is socialistic society where general affluence creates feeling of well-being and integration of individuals with the collective good.

Nietzsche, however, was not a society-oriented thinker - he has little to contribute to that standpoint. Although I think his analysis of morality can add a lot to a dialogue or thought process about society and collectivism.

The problem with anything -anity is that people make it in their own image. E.G. - when I quote Nietzsche, it's selectively - I quote what I like. I'm making him in my own image, even if I am fair to him. Same goes for any thinker, including Jesus. Jesus has been hailed as everything from a warlord, weakling, racist, race-mixer, Jew-hater, Jewishness-promoter, revolutionary, and supporter of political regimes. Except I quote only a quote/opinion, not a phrase that I claim is representative of a whole coherent religion that is "the Truth."

Mac Seafraidh
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 09:59 AM
I do not believe in jesus in a religous nature. If he was around he was only a plebicite. It is all just Judeo-Mythology. I am glad I gave up Catholicism.

Taras Bulba
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 04:50 PM
Shooting degenerates can be good for society.

On a limited scale it can. But if thats your only solution to the problem, then it's just a short-cut that'll do more damage than good in the long run.

Moody
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 05:34 PM
Pushkin, do you deny that Paul was a Jew too?

Surely it is obvious that Nordic/Celtic paganism is Aryan in its totality, while Christianity is not?

Taras Bulba
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 05:57 PM
Pushkin, do you deny that Paul was a Jew too?

So what if he was a Jew? His teachings were firmly non- and anti-Jewish. By all accounts he was a Greek Jew, so his thinking was more influenced by Plato and Aristotle than by the Talmud.



Surely it is obvious that Nordic/Celtic paganism is Aryan in its totality, while Christianity is not?

Then please explain to me why theres is such heavy Greek influence in Christianity since its early days? As I have said many times, theres heavy Greek influence in the Gospels, and the Gospel of Luke is even believed to have been written by a Greek christian.

Christianity's greatest following and most influential leaders were European; to deny this is to deny historical fact. Christianity never had a strong following among Jews, and its record among Semitic peoples in general is not that impressive either. Only Europeans have ever fully embraced Christianity.

One pagan I knew at OD even argued that this alone makes Christianity's origins irrelevant. The fact that Christianity was adopted by Europe and had a profound impact on European civilization is whats important. And the fact that many people who work for the presersvation of European civilization are Christians is whats important. Trying to bash Christianity as un-European is counter-productive and only cut the movement off from a potential source of supporters. All this argued by a staunch pagan!

Milesian
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:08 PM
Pushkin, do you deny that Paul was a Jew too?

Surely it is obvious that Nordic/Celtic paganism is Aryan in its totality, while Christianity is not?


Of course Paul was a Jew, he freely admits that himself, in fact he was a fanatically Anti-Christian at one point. Not as fanatical as some people on Skadi...but then who is ;)

I'm glad my ancestors had the good sense to give up paganism and enter their Golden Age :P

Saoirse
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:08 PM
Greek Jew? So you admit worshiping a kike?

Taras Bulba
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:12 PM
We don't worship St. Paul, we venerate him. And Greek Jew refers to the form of Judaism that was more influenced by Greek philosophy than by Talmudic tradition. So even by trying to argue St. Paul or the early Christians were Jews, so still have to deal with the fact that intellectually they were influneced by Europe not Judaism.

Milesian
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:14 PM
Greek Jew? So you admit worshiping a kike?

Can we have a quota on this particular question, please?
Seriously, how many times has this erroneous question been asked and answered?

Please read previous replies, thereby saving the conversation going in circles.

Taras Bulba
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:16 PM
Yes, I've noticed the pagans here love repeating themselves in their questioning; no matter how many times we've refuted their claims.

Milesian
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:21 PM
Yes, I've noticed the pagans here love repeating themselves in their questioning; no matter how many times we've refuted their claims.


Of course, it's been well remarked ;)
Also, we must not afford them the respect of falsely identifying them with our ancestors. Most are Neo-Pagans rather than actual Pagans, in as although there may be some, I haven't heard one who actually believes in an actual being named Odin or Thorburn or whatever. Instead they try to equate thse dieties whom our ancestors actually believed in as some kind of manifestation of a thought or concept or some other philosophical abstraction, in order to mask their glaring athiesm. In a way, I feel it is a kind of mockery of the Paganism of old

Taras Bulba
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:35 PM
I agree. I have nothing against Paganism per se, I just hate the pathological anti-Christian beliefs of many so-called "pagans". I've met many pagans who are decent people. I've already mentioned Trisk at OD, whose a pagan yet makes statements like these:


http://forums.originaldissent.com/showpost.php?p=65195&postcount=27

To the question "Was Christianity Created by the Jews to Destroy Rome" I would say it doesn't matter in the least. The reason being that Christianty is a collection of faiths held by a very large portion of Occidentals and attacking it on fundimental grounds is a political dead end even in Northern Europa. What matters is that racialists that adhere to some form of Christainity find a way to promote Eurocentrism within their own churches. Globally attacking Christianity is a perfect way to keep the folkish agenda remote from the natural allies of National Renewal. What matters is if an institution/beleif/organization can either be brought over to the life affirming cause of the Organic gestalt or at least help in confronting the enemies of Traditionalistic Christian tendancies which is good for our people as a whole.


http://forums.originaldissent.com/showpost.php?p=65209&postcount=29

As to Christianity i'd say that is obviously part of the Occidental heritage. How could it be other wise given that every theologian worth mentioning has been a European and that Christianity is far and a way the most common faith system in Europa and has been dozens of generations. It's roots simply don't matter any longer. What does concern me is that almost all Christian Churches are actively anti-Occidental, some pathologically so, and have been for over two generations. What matters is remaking those churches into bastions of pro-Occidental thought. Those that care about their faith and their people should do everything possible to change that situation.

I hold the same views about paganism. I and many other Christians accept paganism's right to exist as a European religion, but sadly many "pagans" don't extend the same right to us. Instead they constantly talk about killing all Christians, destroying all churches, and a host of pathetic knee-jerk remarks. If Europe's original pagans were anything like this, no wonder Christianity was so harsh on them.

Ironically while many of Europe's top pagan intellectuals like Alain de Benoist criticise Christianity on philosophical grounds; not once has he claimed he's directly anti-Christian. In fact he and other leaders of the New Right work constantly with Christian nationalist and Benoist himself admitted many times his views have been influenced by Catholic social doctrine.

So if the pagans want to promote pre-Christian religions, fine. But basing your entire religion on negative views of Christianity won't get you anywhere. Christianity is anti-Judaism, yet our leaders never made that the topic of every theological argument.

Milesian
Friday, February 13th, 2004, 06:44 PM
Trisk seems to be very reasonable, I've heard you mention him before.
Of course, it is Catholic Social Doctrine that people shouldn't be forced to be Christian, it is obviously counter-productive. Maintaining the Tranquility of the State is far more important, as is the social cohesion of the nation.

At the end of the day, all the energy wasted on smearing and ridiculing a religion under which our people flourished for thousands of years is not only pointless, but prevents us from uniting to fight off our real enemies.
No wonder the Jew-Controlled media revels in it's blasphemies and denigration of Christianty.

Divide and Conquer, right enough.