← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · ErikD
Thread ID: 10961 | Posts: 41 | Started: 2003-11-03
2003-11-03 22:58 | User Profile
My theory (and the theory of Nietzsche, as well as Ben Klassen of the COTC), is that the Jews merely take advantage of the inherent weaknesses in White minds created by the universalist "love your enemies" message of Christianity, a religion the Jews concocted and spread to destroy Rome and weaken and destroy gentiles.
Those who say the Jews aren't the main problem are correct... the problem is that that White man's thinking is all screwed up due to a Jew-created religion. I was raised a Christian, but after examining the evidence, the truth is obvious. Here are some links to supporting literature from Marcus Eli Ravage (Jewish biographer of the Rothschilds), Nieztsche, Revilo P. Oliver, and Ben Klassen:
Marcus Eli Ravage:
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/leaflts/ravage/ravage1.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/leaflts/ravage/ravage2.htm[/url]
Nietzsche:
[url]http://www.intellex.com/~rigs/page1/nietz.htm[/url]
Revilo P. Oliver:
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/booksonline/oliver/x05.htm[/url]
Ben Klassen:
[url]http://24.202.198.116:8001/holybooks/ner-1-17.html[/url]
[url]http://24.202.198.116:8001/holybooks/credo43.html[/url]
[url]http://24.202.198.116:8001/holybooks/ner.html[/url]
[url]http://24.202.198.116:8001/holybooks/wmb.html[/url]
2003-11-03 23:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=ErikD]but after examining the evidence, the truth is obvious.[/QUOTE]
Is it now, Erik?
:wacko:
2003-11-04 05:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Is it now, Erik?
:wacko:[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it couldn't possibly be in the interest of the Jews to trick us into worshipping a jew as god-incarnate (jesus). And "love your enemies", "turn the other cheek", and "hate your family" is excellent New-Testament advice. What was I thinking?
Better yet, what were Nietzsche and Revilo Oliver thinking?
Universities hired a lot of wackos back then.
2003-11-04 06:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=ErikD]Better yet, what were Nietzsche and Revilo Oliver thinking? [/QUOTE]
Nietzsche the philo-semite: The entire problem of the Jews exists only within national states, inasmuch as it is here that their energy and higher intelligence, their capital in will and spirit accumulated from generation to generation in a long school of suffering, must come to preponderate to a degree calculated to arouse envy and hatred, so that in almost every nation--and the more so the more nationalistic a posture the nation is again adopting--there is gaining ground the literary indecency of leading the Jews to the sacrificial slaughter as scapegoats for every possible public or private misfortune.
That the Jews, if they wanted it--or if they were forced to it, which seems to be what the anti-Semites want--could even now have preponderance, indeed quite literally mastery over Europe, that is certain; that they are not working and planning for that is equally certain.
.....
Jesus Christ: Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
2003-11-04 07:14 | User Profile
[Quote=ErikD] but after examining the evidence, the truth is obvious.[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Is it now, Erik?
:wacko:[/QUOTE] As a professor of mine once said, when someone has nothing more to say than "something is obvious" it usually means it is not obvious at all, that in fact the only "obvious" thing is that the speaker doesn't know the first thing about what he's talking about.
2003-11-04 07:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]As a professor of mine once said, when someone has nothing more to say than "something is obvious" it usually means it is not obvious at all, that in fact the only "obvious" thing is that the speaker doesn't know the first thing about what he's talking about.[/QUOTE]
That's self-evident, of course. :dry:
2003-11-04 16:02 | User Profile
when someone has nothing more to say than "something is obvious" it usually means it is not obvious at all
My Diff. Eq. professor said this a lot. Actually, most of that stuff wasn't obvious, or I wouldn't have been taking the class!
Uh, as far as the Jews tricking Gentiles into worshiping Jesus, I think that is false. If you'll note, Jewish theology is quite hostile to Jesus, putting it mildly, and then there's that whole "his blood be on us and our children" thing. What I will agree with you on is that Jews have been pretty instumental in turning Christianity as practiced in the West from a moral framework with responsibilities and proscribed behavior into a fuzzy, feel-good all-encompassing system that enables and excuses all types of behavior under an umbrella of unconditional forgiveness. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think it works that way!
Much like the Constitution, the Scriptures seem to be regarded as a "living" document, meaning simply that they mean whatever the mucety-mucks say they mean at any given time, depending on prevailing social trends, which, oftimes, are set by Jewish cultural influence. How in the heck do you explain the Episcopalians finding justification for an openly homosexual bishop anywhere in Scripture? It truly boggles the mind. Therefore, I don't think you should blame the instrument, but rather the hand that guides it. We need to wrest control of the faith away from the Robertsons, the Falwells and the other assorted goy front men and crazies and return it to something resembling sanity, no mean feat in these nutty times.
2003-11-04 23:54 | User Profile
Tex,
My point in posting those Nietzsche quotes was to show that, in the last (or next to last) book he ever wrote, Nietzsche believed that the Jews had created and spread Christianity as a way to undermine the Roman Empire and psychologically weaken White people (or "Aryans" as Nietzsche called us).
I never claimed Nietzsche was an anti-Semite, so your claims that he was a philo-Semite at one point in his life are not really applicable to the issue at hand. However, I would be interested to know which of his books you got that quote from, and if it was written before his book "The Antichrist". If so, a case could be made that his views on Jews changed over time.
Nevertheless, my only point was to show that Nietzsche believed that Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul) was not a true convert, and that he changed the religion and spread it amongst gentiles to destroy Rome and weaken gentiles, as Marcus Eli Ravage claims in his articles. Nietzsche's opinion supports Ravage's thesis... that much is clear. If you read the articles and quotes, you will see that they coincide perfectly.
Marcus Eli Ravage:
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/leaflts/ravage/ravage1.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/leaflts/ravage/ravage2.htm[/url]
Nietzsche:
[url]http://www.intellex.com/~rigs/page1/nietz.htm[/url]
This theory is also supported by what Sir Edward Gibbon had to say when he pinpointed the four main causes of the destruction of Rome:
Four causes of destruction: After a diligent inquiry, I can discern four principal causes of the ruin of Rome, which continued to operate in a period of more than a thousand years. I. The injuries of time and nature. II. The hostile attacks of the Barbarians and Christians. III. The use and abuse of the materials. And, IV. The domestic quarrels of the Romans.
[url]http://www.ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/volume2/chap71.htm#Causes[/url]
And, as I mentioned before, Revilo Oliver stated in his book "Reflections on the Christ Myth":
And if the stupid goyim could be made to believe that a Jewish god was the animus mundi of the Stoic monotheism, and that he had sent his Jewish Son into the world to bring Salvation to the lesser breeds "outside the Law," this notion could be made the basis of a theology that would sap the virility and rationality of the more intelligent goyim and destroy their ability to detect and resent the depredations of their parasites and their own gradual descent into slavery.
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/booksonline/oliver/x05.htm[/url]
So, there are more than a few well-respected intellectuals that claim it likely or certain that Jews created and spread Christianity to the gentiles as a way to destroy Rome, and weaken us to make us easier prey.
Ben Klassen among them:
"In short: the Jew invented Christianity, perpetuated it upon the White Race in order that he could turn him into a perfect "goyim," his term for submissive cattle.
[url]http://24.202.198.116:8001/holybooks/ner-1-17.html[/url]
Tex, I think the fact that you are probably a Christian is clouding your objectivity on the issue.
2003-11-05 00:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]As a professor of mine once said, when someone has nothing more to say than "something is obvious" it usually means it is not obvious at all, that in fact the only "obvious" thing is that the speaker doesn't know the first thing about what he's talking about.[/QUOTE]
That's a very special quote you've got there Okie, but it doesn't apply to me in this case for a two reasons:
1) I do have something more than that to say.
and
2) I've been studying religion intensely for 15 years and have a large number of references and citations to support my claims.
So, if you have anything more to add to this issue besides irrelevant quotes that substitute for your inability to debate logically, I'd love to hear it.
2003-11-05 00:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=ErikD]Tex, I think the fact that you are probably a Christian is clouding your objectivity on the issue.[/QUOTE]
Well they say hindsight's 20/20, and I could just as easily say that the fact that you are probably an anti-Christian is clouding your objectivity on the issue.
Therefore, it seems we are at a stalemate and left to our own subjective interpretation of what Christianity truly is or is not.
2003-11-05 00:31 | User Profile
ErikD,
Nietzsche did say that Christianity was the dying gasp of the Roman Empire.
-Z-
2003-11-05 01:24 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Well they say hindsight's 20/20, and I could just as easily say that the fact that you are probably an anti-Christian is clouding your objectivity on the issue.
Therefore, it seems we are at a stalemate and left to our own subjective interpretation of what Christianity truly is or is not.[/QUOTE]
Tex, I can see how you would think that, but I was actually born and raised a Christian, and only came to these conclusions after years of reading and researching the issue.
I've also studied the Dead Sea Scrolls with a friend of Robert Eisenman (one of the worlds foremost scroll scholars). Those scrolls are the original literature of the first Christians, known as the "Essenes", and those scrolls also support Marcus Eli Ravage & Nietzsche's claims.
The scrolls refer to a "Spouter of Lies" who purposely perverted and changed the teachings of the "Teacher of Righteousness", specifically by changing the requirement that adherents follow Jewish Law (dietary, etc), to make the creed more appealing to gentiles.
The "Spouter of Lies" is widely accepted among scroll scholars to be Saul of Tarsus, aka "Saint Paul", who preached to the gentiles even though Jesus specifically told his disciples NOT to do any such thing:
"These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. - Matthew 10:5-6
Following is a quote from a book "Dead Sea Scrolls Deception":
*The scrolls told their own story, at the centre of which was a single protagonist, the ‘Teacher of Righteousness’- an exemplar of the same virtues associated with James. Like James, the ‘Teacher’ was the acknowledged leader of a ‘sectarian’ religious community whose members were ‘zealous for the Law’. And like James, the ‘Teacher’ had to contend with two quite separate and distinct adversaries.
One of these was dubbed the ‘Liar’ an outsider who was admitted to the community, then turned renegade, quarrelled with the ‘Teacher’ and hijacked part of the community’s doctrine and membership. According to the ‘Habakkuk Commentary’, the ‘Liar’ ‘did not listen to the word received by the Teacher of the Righteousness from the mouth of God’.22 Instead, he appealed to ‘the unfaithful of the New Covenant in that they have not believed in the Covenant of God and have profaned His holy name’.23 The text states explicitly that ‘the Liar . . . flouted the Law in the midst of their whole congregation’.24 He ‘led many astray’ and raised ‘a congregation on deceit’.25 He himself is said to be ‘pregnant with [works] of deceit’.26 These, of course, are precisely the transgressions of which Paul is accused in Acts – transgressions which lead, at the end of Acts, to the attempt on his life.
And Eisenman stresses Paul’s striking hypersensitivity to charges of prevarication and perjury.27 In 1 Timothy 2:7, for example, he asserts indignantly, as if defending himself, that ‘I am telling the truth and not lie’. In II Corinthians 11:31, he swears that: ‘The God and Father of the Lord Jesus . . . knows that I am not lying.’ These are but two instances; Paul’s letters reveal an almost obsessive desire to exculpate himself from implied accusations of falsity."
(Pp. 194-195, The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, Summit Books, New York, N.Y., 1991, ISBN: 0671734547)*
[url]http://www.mostmerciful.com/scrolls.htm[/url]
The Dead Sea Scrolls themselves support the claims of Ravage and Nietzsche, that Saul of Tarsus (aka "St. Paul"), was a liar, and not a true convert.
2003-11-05 02:10 | User Profile
Tex, what's with the new title of this thread? I don't think I've seen Alex post anywhere here, and I'm certainly not him. I'm me.
2003-11-05 02:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=ErikD]Tex, what's with the new title of this thread? I don't think I've seen Alex post anywhere here, and I'm certainly not him. I'm me.[/QUOTE]
Great minds (LOL) think, and often talk, alike. I figured you'd be more at home on a thread with and about your fellow cross-basher than posting off-topic remarks on a Sam Francis thread.
(I would have said cross-burner, but I figured you might take offense at being confused with the excessively tolerant and Christophilic Klan organizations.)
2003-11-05 02:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Frederick William I]Great minds (LOL) think, and often talk, alike. I figured you'd be more at home on a thread with and about your fellow cross-basher than posting off-topic remarks on a Sam Francis thread.
(I would have said cross-burner, but I figured you might take offense at being confused with the excessively tolerant and Christophilic Klan organizations.)[/QUOTE]
LOL... Thanks for the complimentary (imo) Linder comparison, however I just wouldn't want anyone to get confused.
"cross basher"... I like that. : )
2003-11-05 23:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Frederick William I]Great minds (LOL) think, and often talk, alike. I figured you'd be more at home on a thread with and about your fellow cross-basher than posting off-topic remarks on a Sam Francis thread.
(I would have said cross-burner, but I figured you might take offense at being confused with the excessively tolerant and Christophilic Klan organizations.)[/QUOTE]
While I'm philosophically on your side, FW, I don't understand how you could consider your approach here to be productive. The rhetoric is approaching the level of a Sean Hannity broadcast, if you'll excuse the comparison.
Let the guy make his points; right or wrong, he's obviously informed, although by no means is that an endorsement of his stance. I'm interested in what he has to say, so why not keep the cheap shots confined to differences of opinion over you damn Yankees vs. us proud Southerners and the like.
Besides, dissenters can always be taken out and shot, hung, stomped and otherwise dealt with at our leisure- a task made even more simple should we adopt either full-on Nazi-style National Socialism or, on the other hand, Rushdoony's Christian Reconstructionism. Quite a comforting thought, that: We've got all the bases covered.
2003-11-06 07:48 | User Profile
Thanks Weisbrot,
Unfortunately, my being informed about the origins and history of Christianity has gotten me banished to page 15 of the Linder Anti-christian rant thread... well out of sight of any tender Christian minds who might inadvertantly be led astray by my words.
I enjoy this Original Dissent forum, but it's apparent that only approved forms of dissent will be tolerated, and Christianity is not up for discussion, though paradoxically everything else of Jewish origin is.
Strange indeed.
2003-11-06 07:58 | User Profile
Most, but not all Christian's are deluded anti white, but as a group being unread in general,they swallow what ever the Falwell's and pro invasion,Homo P.C. churche's tell them.. Who is the World Concil of Churche's? I am being funny, but I am NOT anti- Christian. My Mother is Southern Baptist, and Father was a Catholic pre 1964 type, and he has passed now.. Listen, I gave, an article from the [url]www.ussliberty.org[/url] and another from [url]www.vdare.com[/url] about AFRICAN'S being brought in the U.S. by the Hebrew Brother's,the Catholic's, and the Luthuran's etc., to a couple of local Four Square Cult types, and they not only tried to CONFRONT me a week later in a nasty way, but tried to complain that those articles were anti American.. Some of the most disfuctional, {dangerously"?"} deluded anti, founding father's type of people we face today are Christian Funny Mentalist's, because they are used against U.S. They are deluded and ignorant, they are used by the enemy as Cannon Fodder by the force's that control our govt./media. These deluded, but well meaning will believe a Medfart, a Savage idiot, or Dope addict Rush head, before they will believe an American patriot or any document or book. This is what happen's when your country has 100 years of war, heritage is demonized and your schools are dumbed down, and you DO NOT Control your own media. Plus, I recently read how 300 churche's have removed Church crosse's from out side the churches so as not to offend any one in an agreement with "WHO?" N.P.R. has alway's highlighted anti-White Churche's twenty years ago, All things B.S. considered was on almost nightly ranting about how glorious the Santuary Churche's were for harboring illegal invader's... Bottom line is the Most Christian's are very anti white.... One group that is identified by a three letter word, and the Schofield Bible is a big part of it.. Christian I.D. at least is pro white, and I respect them, as much as I respect the men who fought for Freedom in their Southern HOME LAND'S from April 12, 1861 to 1865. U.S.M.C. Lt. Gen. Lewis Walt wrote a book titled " The Eleveth Hour" 1979 Carolyn Press, out of print. I paid $30 for a book from Amazon the sold new in Hard Cover for $9.95 Here was a Christian and Patriot Combat VET, who named the TREASONOUS DOG'S and his reward was no fourth star and he was forced out of the Marines. I Know a retired Navy Captain who stated that Genearal Walt was Highly respected through out his career and Service. The treason is so bad, that they can now flood the U.S. with NON WHITES as we are at war, and get CHRISTIAN'S to help destroy U.S. Demonizing U.S. patriot's who do care and speak up.. Ron Paul of Texas is not brought up in CHRISTIAN BROADCAST'S. We are living under an ever growing punitive govt, who see all citizen's who question, as the enemy? Yes, No?
2003-11-06 08:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=weisbrot]While I'm philosophically on your side, FW, I don't understand how you could consider your approach here to be productive. The rhetoric is approaching the level of a Sean Hannity broadcast, if you'll excuse the comparison.
Let the guy make his points; right or wrong, he's obviously informed, although by no means is that an endorsement of his stance. I'm interested in what he has to say, so why not keep the cheap shots confined to differences of opinion over you damn Yankees vs. us proud Southerners and the like.
Besides, dissenters can always be taken out and shot, hung, stomped and otherwise dealt with at our leisure- a task made even more simple should we adopt either full-on Nazi-style National Socialism or, on the other hand, Rushdoony's Christian Reconstructionism. Quite a comforting thought, that: We've got all the bases covered.[/QUOTE] Thanks for posting Lindbergh's great quotes! My guess is he died heart broken in 1975 near Hanna Maui Hawaii, where he is buried there next to a small cottage or at least it was there in early 76 when I viewed it.. My guess is he was fully aware that the monster that got U.S. into WW2 would never be satisfied, and in 73? or 72 he flew from Ill. to CA. in a small plane when he found out he had Cancer if I recall correctly.. Only un-read idiotic cannon fodder head's can bad mouth him..
2003-11-06 09:41 | User Profile
[QUOTE=ErikD]Thanks Weisbrot,
Unfortunately, my being informed about the origins and history of Christianity has gotten me banished to page 15 of the Linder Anti-christian rant thread... well out of sight of any tender Christian minds who might inadvertantly be led astray by my words.
I enjoy this Original Dissent forum, but it's apparent that only approved forms of dissent will be tolerated, and Christianity is not up for discussion, though paradoxically everything else of Jewish origin is.
Strange indeed.[/QUOTE] Bitch Bitch Bitch. I thought you liked the Linder comparison, and would enjoy being in his company.
Your comments are no less visible really in this forum at the end of a long thread than at the beginning of a short one, maybe in fact more so. If your comments were that original, I'd think you'd enjoy jumping on the end of an existing thread.
I don't really know how to take that comment on my intolerance. Considering Nietzschiens all say tolerance is a decadent outgrowth of Christian slave-morality, I can only assume you are secretely disappointed in my leniancy.
If that is the case, I can arrange to have you flogged in proper Nietzschien/Nazi fashion. It will cost you a health OD contribution though. I may have the slave morality, but I exercise a capitalists pecuniariness and do not torture people * free gratuis;)*
As to Weisbrot, he visits this forum infrequently nowadays, now that his old friend Todd Brenden Fahey doesn't show up anymore. If people like him were more involved the Christianity bashing threads might be more tolerable. I still don't understand how he gets onto me - I'll apologize to you, as long as he first apologizes to Todd and promises to take several doses of LSD to loosen up.
2003-11-06 18:11 | User Profile
My rational discussion with references and citations is not a "rant" by any stretch of the imagination.
The fact that you viewed them as analagous is indicative of an unconscious tendency to lump together lines of discussion you don't agree with.
I perceived it as intolerance, but it is more likely a form of unconscious bias.
The reality is, my posts are not rants, and it is unfair to lump me in with them.
Weisbrot clearly sees the injustice here.
2003-11-06 19:16 | User Profile
Bring to mind some of our other great OD threads of holy war,
[url=http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=9141]Paganism and Politically Correct Blood Sacrifice[/url]
and [url=http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=8064]My Essay at VNN[/url]
ErikD has asked that we start a new thread on the subject. Based on my experience with the previous threads, I feel the subject has become somewhat repetitive here, and do not of course understand the reasoning of those heathen WN's who, of all the things that could be done to advance our cause, put the highest priority on working alongside the Jews as Alan Dershowitz and such semitophiles as Nietzsche to undermine and destroy our western world's Christian heritage.
However, as this weariness is not shared equally even by those on my side of the issue, and since because of our change in format many of the previous links such as those above are if not completely destroyed very hard to read, I reluctantly start a new thread on the subject per ErikD's, weisbrot's, and other's requests.
Attention gladiators - draw your swords and let the games begin!
[QUOTE=ErikD]Thank you Frederick. I will do as you ask.
If you could title it "Christianity created by Jews to destroy Rome", that would be great.
2003-11-06 19:28 | User Profile
:sleep: :yawn:
2003-11-06 19:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]:sleep: :yawn:[/QUOTE]
lol... thank you gentlemen.
2003-11-06 20:40 | User Profile
Frederick William I wrote:
I feel the subject has become somewhat repetitive here, and do not of course understand the reasoning of those heathen WN's who, of all the things that could be done to advance our cause, put the highest priority on working alongside the Jews as Alan Dershowitz and such semitophiles as Nietzsche to undermine and destroy our western world's Christian heritage.
Well, in a semi-defense of ErikD, many WNs are not attacking old-style Christianity, they are instead attacking what passes for Christianity today, i.e. JudeoChristianity, aka Marxism ["all humans are eekwal, you evil racist, you!"] and philo-Semitism ["we must save Israel! Jesus was a Jew!"] posing as a religion. That is what the WNs are attacking. And in my opinion, rightly so.
How is Suzie Creamcheese, cute highschool cheerleader and future Republican mayor of Fat Boolie, New Jersey -- who should instead stay home and bake cakes like a reg'lar gal -- ever gonna dislike The Joos if'n her pastor keeps telling her that The Joos are "just like us, but better since they are Chosen!"?? See? Modern Christianity cranks out philo-Semites just as fast as we WNs can create anti-Semites. Faster, actually. The silly JudeoXtians undo our work.
Again, as I have said before, if all Christians were Father Coughlins and Gerald L.K. Smith-types,, we would not be in the horrid mess that we are in today.
2003-11-06 20:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Frederick William I]As to Weisbrot, he visits this forum infrequently nowadays, now that his old friend Todd Brenden Fahey doesn't show up anymore. If people like him were more involved the Christianity bashing threads might be more tolerable. I still don't understand how he gets onto me - I'll apologize to you, as long as he first apologizes to Todd and promises to take several doses of LSD to loosen up.[/QUOTE]
Tell you what- I'll promise to have a cold malted beverage, then call up my folks to apologize for the adolescense from hell. Fair enough? Man, the things some people expect you to do...
Speaking of hell- if you're here, who's doing the moderating in that place now?
[quote=Frederick William I]...I reluctantly start a new thread on the subject per ErikD's, weisbrot's, and other's requests.[/QUOTE]
Pants on fire! Where did I do that? I just suggested lifting the rhetoric above the Hannity level. The guy can be confronted and his arguments refuted, but an argument is always weakened by ad hominem tactics and the like (that is, unless you own all the media and control both sides of every political debate, and are de facto/legally above criticism...)
[QUOTE=ErikD]Weisbrot clearly sees the injustice here.
Leave Weisbrot out of it, heathen asshole.
2003-11-06 21:12 | User Profile
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.
2003-11-06 22:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=triskelion]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.[/QUOTE]
At least we have a pagan who acknowledges Christianity as part of Europe's heritage!
Much of the things being discussed on this thread are almost the same that I've been debating over at Skadi against pagans, especially our old buddy Friederich Braun(who spends more time insulting me as opposed to thinking up arguments). It's getting pretty boring because the pagans keep repeating the same arguments over and over again even after I refuted them.
Whats interesting is that they deny Christianity because of its "Jewish origins" but yet resort to a Jewish-like mentality to defend their own faiths. In other words, Christianity isn't "kosher" for the European people and must be opposed. This is why I often denounce many(but not all) pagans are nothing more than Euro-centric Jews. They attack Christianity because of "origin" as opposed to because of theology.
As for ErikD, when Jesus tells us to turn our cheeks when struck, he means that we should not retaliate out of vengeance. We leave vengeance to God, who works his vengeance on the evildoer through the State’s use of the sword. Christians are called upon to support the State, which has been ordained by God just for the purpose of using the sword to establish and maintain justice (Rom. 12–13).
Christianity is not nor has it ever been a pacifist faith(well except for the f*cked up modern versions of it). Need we forget the first Roman convert to Christianity is a soldier, and the baptism is done by Peter(the "Rock" on which Jesus wanted to build the church).
2003-11-07 00:10 | User Profile
Hello Perun,
First I should say that I prefer the term Heathen (a broad label) to pagan and that if one wishes to be specific one could say i'm an exoteric Odalist which is in someways like the folkish Asatru tendancies in all Nordic lands which have simelar counterparts in the Baltics, Slavic, Keltic and Southern European nations.
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.
As to Skaldi net I note it's dominated by Americans to the same extent as is Stormfront (as are all English language forms save a few run by Britians) so it shares some of those problems on sees so much of at Storm Front. The people that run Skaldi.net are fine people although I have no idea who runs the forum.
If one spend much time in ENR circles one will note that most Heathens are far from the strident anti-Christians one sees at American sites like VNN (although they are also not Heathens either). In fact, plenty of agnostics and Heathens are quite active in promoting the economics and social aspects Catholic social doctrine and it's numerous off shoots anthough they obviously do so because they like the folkish aspect of those schools rather then the theology behind it. My dear friend Dr. Stueckers and the various groups he helps promote do like wise. I've been active, with a great many others, in promoting all kinds of efforts to have Eurocentrics of different religions work to geather and they meet with real success.
We all have our own ideas about cosmology and such matters but to let them prevent co-operation intended to save our nations is folly. Not much else need be said on the matter as far as i'm concerned.
2003-11-07 02:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=triskelion]Hello Perun,
First I should say that I prefer the term Heathen (a broad label) to pagan and that if one wishes to be specific one could say i'm an exoteric Odalist which is in someways like the folkish Asatru tendancies in all Nordic lands which have simelar counterparts in the Baltics, Slavic, Keltic and Southern European nations.
This is true. I even debated this on Skadi that Christianity and Odalism are completely compatible and one only has to read the works of the 19th century Slavophiles to find that out. The Slavophiles were both devout Orthodox Christians but were also blood and soil nationalists.
As for Heathen instead of pagan, I'll try to remember that and please correct me if I make that mistake in the future.
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.
I agree here. I'm not entirely opposed to European heathenism either, on a purely cultural level. It's as much a part of Europe's heritage and it should be preserved. I've even confessed here many times of my secret admiration and fascination with Europe's heathen heritage.
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.
Well I'm of the Eastern Christian branch, so my church isn't pro-Occidental per se either, but it isn't pro-Marxist/pro-multi-culturalism as many Western churches are nowadays. The Eastern Church believes that universal does not mean uniform but actually holds an ethno-pluralist stance; in that each culture has its own unique way of celebrating the universal truth and that this is indeed healthy for the universal Church.
As to Skaldi net I note it's dominated by Americans to the same extent as is Stormfront (as are all English language forms save a few run by Britians) so it shares some of those problems on sees so much of at Storm Front. The people that run Skaldi.net are fine people although I have no idea who runs the forum.
I don't know who runs it either, but I know one administrator has a habit of breaking the forum's rules. You're not supposed to continually post one-liners and/or insults yet this administrator is the biggest violator of that rule I've seen. Some decent people are on there, but overall I'm very disappointed.
We all have our own ideas about cosmology and such matters but to let them prevent co-operation intended to save our nations is folly. Not much else need be said on the matter as far as i'm concerned.[/QUOTE]
I agree.
2003-11-07 20:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=ErikD]The scrolls refer to a "Spouter of Lies" who purposely perverted and changed the teachings of the "Teacher of Righteousness", specifically by changing the requirement that adherents follow Jewish Law (dietary, etc), to make the creed more appealing to gentiles.
The "Spouter of Lies" is widely accepted among scroll scholars to be Saul of Tarsus, aka "Saint Paul", who preached to the gentiles even though Jesus specifically told his disciples NOT to do any such thing:
"These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. - Matthew 10:5-6 [/QUOTE]
Now that is rather interesting.
2003-11-07 20:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=ErikD]
I enjoy this Original Dissent forum, but it's apparent that only approved forms of dissent will be tolerated, and Christianity is not up for discussion, though paradoxically everything else of Jewish origin is.
[/QUOTE]
You might be better received if you stopped trying to convince Christians that their religion is completely wrong and they should leave it behind. I think that the religion needs a reform of sorts, but that is an entirely different matter IMO.
2003-11-07 21:08 | User Profile
As to Christianity's "Jewish origins" I provide this interesting article from Yggdrasil.
** From Yggdrasil's White Nationalist Library Deep Cultures - Part III - Christ the Tiger! "In the juvenescence of the year came Christ the Tiger."
Gerontion T. S. Eliot
As I demonstrated in earlier posts entitled "Deep Cultures - Part I" and "Deep Cultures - Part II," the Jews have a rather powerful fear of Christianity.
Many young White Nationalists have developed a contempt for Christianity. They view it as passive, weak and ineffective. They argue that it is a "semitic religion" designed to weaken us.
They turn instead to Christian identity or paganism.
Ironically, while the Jews are frightened of Christianity, White Nationalists view it as too wimpy and passive. Who is right?
In the spirit of Easter, it is time to ask whether T.S. Eliot's poetic image is accurate. Do we really have "Christ the Tiger?"
In part, we have become the victims of our own declining literacy. Few Christians understand that all modern Jews are "Pharisees," believers in the "oral law" passed down in the Talmud.
Christ the Tiger had a few words about the Talmud and Talmudic (Halachic) reasoning.
Let's review them:
"Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples,
"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach."
Could Christ the Tiger give a more clear warning about double dealing and saying one thing while doing another? Must Christians ignore his words?
"Woe to you teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in mens faces. You yourselves do not enter nor will you let those enter who are trying to."
Doesn't Christ the Tiger clearly say that the Pharisees do not enter heaven themselves and prevent the faithful from entering as well?
"Woe to you teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to make a single convert and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are."
Talmudic Rabbis sons of hell? - Strong words Christ!
"Woe unto you blind guides!
"You say, if anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath! You blind fools: which is greater, the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? You also say, 'if anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gift on it, he is bound by his oath. You blind fools! Which is greater, the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred? Therefore he who swears by the altar, swears by it, and by everything on it. And he who swears by the temple, swears by it and the one who dwells in it."
Apparently Christ the Tiger doesn't like halachic logic. Probably would not like the Marxist incarnation of it either. He is telling you that Talmudic reasoning is just complexity that enhances rabbinical power and twists the commandments of God into their opposites.
"Woe to you teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of greed and self- indulgence. Blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.
"Woe to you teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness."
Again it is hard to conceive of words that more clearly command us to be on the alert for hidden agendas and double meanings. Any hint here that Christ the Tiger wants his followers to be gullible and stupid?
Would Christ the Tiger feel comfortable at a dinner meeting of the Conference of Christians and Jews?
"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 been in the days of our forefathers, 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. Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers!
"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation.
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets, and stone those sent to you. How often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. Look, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'"
Indeed it is hard to imagine language that more clearly un-chooses the Talmudic Jews. "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?"
It is a major rant!
Indeed Christ the Tiger spends many more words warning us away from the dangers and deceptions of Talmudic Judaism than he does of, for example, pre-marital sex.
In those bibles that print Christ the Tiger's words in red, you will see that it fills an entire page.
Most modern clergy are so busy attending banquets of the Conference of Christians and Jews that they have little taste for attending the words of Christ the Tiger. Indeed, Matthew 23 is an embarrassment to them.
I am afraid that many of you hot-heads who are turning away from Christianity are reacting to cowardly modern clergymen.
But if you look closely, you may see a Tiger lurking.
Yggdrasil- **
2003-11-07 22:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=perun1201]I even debated this on Skadi that Christianity and Odalism are completely compatible and one only has to read the works of the 19th century Slavophiles to find that out. The Slavophiles were both devout Orthodox Christians but were also blood and soil nationalists.
I agree here. I'm not entirely opposed to European heathenism either, on a purely cultural level. It's as much a part of Europe's heritage and it should be preserved. I've even confessed here many times of my secret admiration and fascination with Europe's heathen heritage.
Well I'm of the Eastern Christian branch, so my church isn't pro-Occidental per se either, but it isn't pro-Marxist/pro-multi-culturalism as many Western churches are nowadays. The Eastern Church believes that universal does not mean uniform but actually holds an ethno-pluralist stance; in that each culture has its own unique way of celebrating the universal truth and that this is indeed healthy for the universal Church.
[/QUOTE]
Perun,
Yes I would say that all forms of Folkish Christendom and Heathenry are compatible and even complementary. Iââ¬â¢d say that because in order for either to exist National Restoration is required. In terms of the public policy outcomes of our respective belief systems we also have a high degree of commonality. Both oppose sexual deviancy/depravity and hold the nuclear family as the sole basis of societal health, both also hold the primacy of society over state and both fundamentally reject on principle multi-racialism and jewish control over Occidental nations. In terms of public policy disputes Iââ¬â¢d say that as long as no one pushes a state sanctioned church (the wisdom of the American model in this regard is noted) and no one promotes wars religious wars of conquest Iââ¬â¢d say all the vital issues have been covered. Differences in terms of the consequences of theology will remain obviously but I donââ¬â¢t see them as inhibiting societal cohesion in a dangerous fashion.
I too see much to admire with the Orthodox faith. Your comments else where about the Germanic basis of Western Christendom were ill founded I think. In part because Western Christendom was, at one time, vigorously opposed to Modernity in all itââ¬â¢s guises as the Eastern Church ever was. Itââ¬â¢s down fall has nothing to do with itââ¬â¢s Germanic component of ancient times or equally remote Mithraic, jewish or Zoroastrian influences have to do with what Christianity became after it moved to Europa. I do think that those facets of itââ¬â¢s origins impacted the imperialistic zeal of the old Church but that was also very much a product of the politics of the era and the rise of capitalism. Instead, I think the explanation of the degeneration of Christianity is of little consequence while the matter of strategies to used in re-making Christendom into force for national renewal is paramount.
Also, thanks for the very fine article.
2003-11-08 03:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=triskelion] I too see much to admire with the Orthodox faith. Your comments else where about the Germanic basis of Western Christendom were ill founded I think. In part because Western Christendom was, at one time, vigorously opposed to Modernity in all it’s guises as the Eastern Church ever was. It’s down fall has nothing to do with it’s Germanic component of ancient times or equally remote Mithraic, jewish or Zoroastrian influences have to do with what Christianity became after it moved to Europa. I do think that those facets of it’s origins impacted the imperialistic zeal of the old Church but that was also very much a product of the politics of the era and the rise of capitalism. Instead, I think the explanation of the degeneration of Christianity is of little consequence while the matter of strategies to used in re-making Christendom into force for national renewal is paramount.
Well I was responding to Madrid Burns posting the article talking about how the Germanization of Christendom saved Christianity from itself(ie its liberal tendencies). To which I replied that the Eastern churches were never Germanized are today far more traditionalist than the churches that were Germanized. So to claim that Germanization saved Christianity is simplistic and wrong in my opinion.
I have nothing against Medieval Western Christendom, there is much I admire about it. Even many anti-Christians like Evola spoke in praise of it!
Also, thanks for the very fine article.[/QUOTE]
Which one? The one about secularism or the "jesus the tiger" one?
2003-11-08 05:12 | User Profile
excuse me ? why are you even discussing Nietzche like a quotable person ? The man was a maniac and sick as a mass murderer. He died when seeing a horse flogged, He has nothing to offer, never did, was just a lunatic writhing vitriol and grant the printing press you foolsd even quote him, so strange, to even think he is relevant. Incredulous and an insult upon all. I mean that. Truly. Worse than a Jew. You can do what you want. You can live as you want. If you want to quote or seek after this, you are in my call beyond idiocy. I am only concerned with my own relationship with God from now on. I don't waste my heart spilling pearls before swine. Tune into [url]http://www.overcomerministry.com[/url], or [url]http://www.infowars.com[/url] listen to shortwave
2003-11-08 15:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=weisbrot]Pants on fire! Where did I do that? I just suggested lifting the rhetoric above the Hannity level. The guy can be confronted and his arguments refuted, but an argument is always weakened by ad hominem tactics and the like (that is, unless you own all the media and control both sides of every political debate, and are de facto/legally above criticism...)
[quote=darthweisbrot]1. Tell you what- I'll promise to have a cold malted beverage, then call up my folks to apologize for the adolescense from hell. Fair enough? Man, the things some people expect you to do...
Speaking of hell- if you're here, who's doing the moderating in that place now?
I guess you just meant lifting it from the Hannity level to the Fahey level :lol:
I like you weissy, but sometimes I really do think you must have took some of that stuff Todd's on.
If we had a "classics" section for OD posts, this would rate up there. :clap:
2003-11-09 03:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Frederick William I]I like you weissy, but sometimes I really do think you must have took some of that stuff Todd's on.[/QUOTE]
I plead guilty to (poorly) attempted irony.
But I refuse to plead guilty to being Fahey's long-lost father.
2003-11-09 03:58 | User Profile
ErikD, it is only as America and Europe enters a post-Christian era that we have decided, as a race, to commit suicide.
Bush and other Christian zionists are not Christians.
Loving our enemies does not mean hating ourselves, nor does it mean loving God's enemies.
2003-11-24 06:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Exelsis_Deo]excuse me ? why are you even discussing Nietzche like a quotable person ? The man was a maniac and sick as a mass murderer. He died when seeing a horse flogged, He has nothing to offer, never did, was just a lunatic writhing vitriol and grant the printing press you foolsd even quote him, so strange, to even think he is relevant. Incredulous and an insult upon all. I mean that. Truly. Worse than a Jew. You can do what you want. You can live as you want. If you want to quote or seek after this, you are in my call beyond idiocy. I am only concerned with my own relationship with God from now on. I don't waste my heart spilling pearls before swine. Tune into [url]http://www.overcomerministry.com[/url], or [url]http://www.infowars.com[/url] listen to shortwave[/QUOTE]
Upon first reading your post, I was tempted to throw my hands around a horses neck and go insane in Nietzschean fashion, as a man can only take so much of the kind of irrational squawking contained in your post. Where do I begin?
Ok, very simply... if you are so convinced that Nietzsche has "nothing to offer", why did you feel the need to resort to possibly over a dozen ad-hominem attacks in various forms instead of just refuting his writings in a logical fashion?
The tone of fear in your missive was unmistakable. What is it that you are so afraid of that you feel the need to rely on smears and thought-stopping labels like "sick" as a substitute for rationally discussing the ideas on the table?
2003-11-24 07:08 | User Profile
All in all, this is an issue of which I have deep knowledge and strong opinions, but realistically, as long as someone can figure out how to get the damn jews and muds out of my country, I don't care if you do it while worshipping jew-jesus or krusty the ****ing clown. I really don't care.
That being said, the question of jew-worship still makes for interesting intellectual exercise, so if anyone has anything coherent to add, I'm all ears.