← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Franco
Thread ID: 11232 | Posts: 23 | Started: 2003-11-23
2003-11-23 22:07 | User Profile
"We said in our letter that: 'Racism is a sin.'"
[url]http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/opinion/7320980.htm[/url]
Maybe I should take back my offer to reach out to Christians...
2003-11-23 22:44 | User Profile
To "JudeoChristians," that is...
[edited]
2003-11-23 22:50 | User Profile
[I]"Racism is a sin." That sin is manifest in many ways, not just blatantly by burning crosses or by verbal slurs, but also by stony stares at biracial families, by listening to and repeating a racist joke or by failure to support legislation guaranteeing racial justice. We stand resolutely by our teaching that "racism is an offense against God."[/I]
It is always understood in these pronouncements that the [I]racism[/I] in question is White racism. Never will you hear these [I]witnesses[/I] denounce the racism of Blacks raping weak Whites in prison or the fact the Black violence against Whites is 40 times as great as White violence against Blacks.
2003-11-24 04:15 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu][I]"Racism is a sin." That sin is manifest in many ways, not just blatantly by burning crosses or by verbal slurs, but also by stony stares at biracial families, by listening to and repeating a racist joke or by failure to support legislation guaranteeing racial justice. We stand resolutely by our teaching that "racism is an offense against God."[/I]
It is always understood in these pronouncements that the [I]racism[/I] in question is White racism. Never will you hear these [I]witnesses[/I] denounce the racism of Blacks raping weak Whites in prison or the fact the Black violence against Whites is 40 times as great as White violence against Blacks.[/QUOTE] Well in a technical sense generally you're right, they certainly don't bring up "racism" in an anti-black sense. However that doesn't mean all the preaching is overtly anti-white or blatantly ignores any black problems. In the more conservative mileau's especially it wears a veneer of, neutrality, apoliticism, and otherwordly piety to the untutured ear, although it shows its secular multicultural theory's anti-white bias fairly clearly.
2003-11-24 04:23 | User Profile
Okie --
I think that is another way of saying, "the Church barely mentions race." Is that what you are trying to say?
Man, we Whites gotta get to be pals with the Orthodox types and get them to spread our racial message NOW. Not later. Now! I am open to wild bill, perun and others doing that....I can provide key material if they want to do that at their own churches...WNs creating a link to the churches, so to speak...
2003-11-24 04:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Okie --
I think that is another way of saying, "the Church barely mentions race." Is that what you are trying to say?
Man, we Whites gotta get to be pals with the Orthodox types and get them to spread our racial message NOW. Not later. Now! I am open to wild bill, perun and others doing that....I can provide key material if they want to do that at their own churches...WNs creating a link to the churches, so to speak...[/QUOTE]
In the Bible race was never an issue, so why should they bring it up now. If Jesus didn't declare racism a sin, then on what authority do Churches claim it a sin.
2003-11-24 05:10 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ron]In the Bible race was never an issue, so why should they bring it up now. If Jesus didn't declare racism a sin, then on what authority do Churches claim it a sin.[/QUOTE] Authority is of an Apostasy church only.
2003-11-24 05:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Okie --
I think that is another way of saying, "the Church barely mentions race." Is that what you are trying to say?
Man, we Whites gotta get to be pals with the Orthodox types and get them to spread our racial message NOW. Not later. Now! I am open to wild bill, perun and others doing that....I can provide key material if they want to do that at their own churches...WNs creating a link to the churches, so to speak...[/QUOTE]Understand that the mentality of Christianity and the western tradition derived from it is the "veil of ignorance" derived from it, closely tied in with its moral imperative.
The implication is that Western societies are subject to invasion by non-Western cultures able to manipulate Western tendencies toward reciprocity, egalitarianism, and close affectional relationships in a manner that results in maladaptive behavior for the European-derived peoples who remain at the core of all Western societies. Because others' interests and perspectives are viewed as legitimate, Western societies have uniquely developed a highly principled moral and religious discourse, as in the arguments against slavery characteristic of the nineteenth-century abolitionists and in the contemporary discourse on animal rights. Such discourse is directed toward universal moral principles--that is, principles that would be viewed as fair for any rational, disinterested observer. Thus in his highly influential volume, Theory of Justice, John Rawls (1971) argues that justice as objective morality can only occur behind a "veil of ignorance" in which the ethnic status of the contending parties is irrelevant to considerations of justice or morality. (Kevin MacDonald - Culture of Critique)
Quite obviously of course such a veil of ignorance is anachronistic if not anathema to racial determinists of all sorts, whether from a multiculturalist or radical White Nationalist perspective. (Hence perhaps another paralelism between the jewish multiculturalist left and dogmatic racialist right, talk of which irritated Trisk so much that he ran off.)
2003-11-24 05:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ron]In the Bible race was never an issue, so why should they bring it up now. If Jesus didn't declare racism a sin, then on what authority do Churches claim it a sin.[/QUOTE]Well technically they can get it from passages like Gal 3:26
You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized in Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
However this is often misinterpreted by its advocates. Taken literally, for instance, it would also prescribe androgony, which is clearly not its intent.
The bible clearly says that hatred of non-whites and jews is a sin, and loving non-whites and jews is a virtue, just as it says hatred of whites and gentiles is a sin, and love of whites and gentiles is a virtue.
2003-11-24 13:57 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ron]In the Bible race was never an issue, so why should they bring it up now. If Jesus didn't declare racism a sin, then on what authority do Churches claim it a sin.[/QUOTE]
The term [I]racism[/I] is a neologism. Ive heard Trotsky invented the term in his spare time between brainstorming the revamping of the soviet concentration camp system.
2003-11-24 16:24 | User Profile
If racism is a sin, which verse says so?
legislation guaranteeing racial justice
Translation: You're a racist if you don't support racist laws that demand racial preferences for non-whites, laws that deny us the freedom and the constitutional right of freedom of association, laws that strip us of property rights, and thought-crime laws.
the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
Given that King was such con-artist and slimeball, only a panderer would envoke his name.
Franco, as far as I'm concerned, ARCHBISHOP HARRY J. FLYNN is an ATHIEST. His theology comes from men, not God.
2003-11-24 17:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]The term [I]racism[/I] is a neologism.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, Bardamu. We need to make it crystal clear that we categorically reject the term 'racism' as well as its meaning or manner in which it is used to frame the context of an issue or argument. We should never allow the color-blind egalitarians to frame the debate with their loaded terms and definitions.
Since this priest is a Catholic, he's probably a Marxist who preaches liberation theology. I pray the Catholic Church can run these sorts out on a rail.
2003-11-24 17:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]The term [I]racism[/I] is a neologism. Ive heard Trotsky invented the term in his spare time between brainstorming the revamping of the soviet concentration camp system.[/QUOTE]
I had to look this one up.
1 : a new word, usage, or expression 2 : a meaningless word coined by a psychotic
:Merriam-Webster
You're right about Trotsky I think. I'd heard this one too on these forums a number of times.
The Trotsky wing of the Communists were the ones to pick up the left-wing utility of the word racism and the use of race, and this of course has been picked up by its successors, the 4th international, the Frankfurt School, the New Left, and postmodernism/multiculturalism/deconstructionism.
2003-11-25 01:24 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Okie --
I think that is another way of saying, "the Church barely mentions race." Is that what you are trying to say?
Man, we Whites gotta get to be pals with the Orthodox types and get them to spread our racial message NOW. Not later. Now! I am open to wild bill, perun and others doing that....I can provide key material if they want to do that at their own churches...WNs creating a link to the churches, so to speak...[/QUOTE]
Let me be clear about my characterization of the Orthodox Church. Please don't assume by my comments that it is a "rightwing" church in the sense that some people might think. In some ways it seems that way, but mainly since everything else has gone liberal to one degree or another and the Orthodox Church has resisted these kinds of changes more than the others. Even Roman Catholicism had its controversial Vatican II that brought in non-traditions and liberalism, but no such thing has happened to Othodoxy. Then we also have the problem of liberal Catholics wanting either proselytize the Third World or bring them here.
I don't want to offend anyone since I know there are some good churches besides Orthodox out there, and there are many good people in churches that may not agree with me, but to be absolutely blunt and speaking as a white nationalist well-versed on race and the Jewish question, the Orthodox Church is the only place I can go with out being subjected to heresies or liberal subversion. IOW, I can concentrate purely on worship instead of constantly destecting the various areas where subversion has entered the Church. This is a great relief to me.
If any of that is worth anything to anybody, my recommendation is that white nationalist Christians should simply join the nearest Orthodox Church and try it out. I think this makes more sense that hoping for a few of us to convert the average parish members to our perspective.
Regards, Wild Bill
2003-11-25 04:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]I had to look this one up.
I meant it simply as a new word, or concept. Race and racism is such the obsession in our propasphere it is easy to forget it is a brand new concept.
neologism (nê-òlôe-jîzôem) noun 1. A new word, expression, or usage. 2. The creation or use of new words or senses. 3. Psychiatry. A meaningless word used by a psychotic. 4. Theology. A new doctrine or a new interpretation of scripture. - neolôogist noun - neolôogisôtic or neolôogisôtical adjective
I would like to know if Leon Trotsky really did coin the term. I don't suppose an OED would tell? I guess it will just remain one of those gulag legends.
2003-11-25 05:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]You're right about Trotsky I think. I'd heard this one too on these forums a number of times.
The Trotsky wing of the Communists were the ones to pick up the left-wing utility of the word racism and the use of race, and this of course has been picked up by its successors, the 4th international, the Frankfurt School, the New Left, and postmodernism/multiculturalism/deconstructionism.[/QUOTE] According to the OED, Trotsky coined either "racist" or "racism". Doesn't much matter which.
2003-11-25 05:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE]legislation guaranteeing racial justice[/QUOTE] The concept of "racial justice" is nonsensical. If one takes it seriously, one is faced with the prospect of social engineering designed to halt (or reverse) natural selection so that those less suited for life in technologically advanced societies do not suffer the consequences of their non-adaptedness. But what is the baseline against which the results are to be judged? What status quo (or status quo ante) is to be preserved? There are ten times as many Africans as there were 100 years ago, but the blathering about "racial justice" appears even more farcical when one asks tougher questions: how do we reincarnate the tribes exterminated by the Israelites? How do we resuscitate the Neanderthals?
2003-11-25 07:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=wild_bill]If any of that is worth anything to anybody, my recommendation is that white nationalist Christians should simply join the nearest Orthodox Church and try it out.[/QUOTE]
What Evangelicals Should Know About Eastern Orthodoxy (attached)
2003-11-25 13:38 | User Profile
How about the dark cloud of pedophilia. Is the good priest giving attention to that as well? There's a big diff between unjustified hatred towards a person, and displeasure at being treated like dirt. What many whites are projectiing now is displeasure at being treated like dirt and jerked around in whatever direction some "oppressed" members of society decide. Not onlt does the bible not condemn this...it supports resistance against those who would have men bow down tho false gods. Diversity/multiculturalism is a false god that the weak-minded and greedy bow down to.
2003-11-25 23:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust] ...................
The bible clearly says that hatred of non-whites and jews is a sin,........ .............. [/QUOTE]
WHOOOPS!
Quote scripture and verse from the New Testament please!
2003-11-26 09:15 | User Profile
[QUOTE=golfball]WHOOOPS!
Quote scripture and verse from the New Testament please![/QUOTE]Gal 3:26 (See post 9)
2003-11-26 11:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=All Old Right]How about the dark cloud of pedophilia. Is the good priest giving attention to that as well? There's a big diff between unjustified hatred towards a person, and displeasure at being treated like dirt. What many whites are projectiing now is displeasure at being treated like dirt and jerked around in whatever direction some "oppressed" members of society decide. Not onlt does the bible not condemn this...it supports resistance against those who would have men bow down tho false gods. Diversity/multiculturalism is a false god that the weak-minded and greedy bow down to.[/QUOTE]
The people who try to use the Bible and Christianity to condemn "racism" display the same mindset and tactics as the Abolishionists of the 1800s. Back then they talked endlessly about how the Bible supposedly condemned slavery, when in fact it did no such thing. To the contrary, the New Testament mentions slaves and servants numerous times and nowhere condemns the practice. Furthermore, the Scriptures command slaves to obey their masters. For example, in Colossians servants are advised to "obey in all things [your] masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God." Also, in Christ's first miracle of turning water into wine, we see the Mother of God ordering servants to follow Christ's orders: "His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do [it]."
In regard to "racism", not only do we have the Old Testament making differentiations between the Israelites and others, but in the book of Matthew Jesus Christ Himself refers to the Canaanite woman as a dog: "Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast [it] to dogs." Every commentary I've read agrees His comment was based on the woman's ethnicity. So I suppose Christ committed a hate crime by calling the woman a dog?
The most often NT passages used to support the anti-racist position are Colossians 3:11: "Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond [nor] free: but Christ [is] all, and in all." and Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." In both instances the reference is to members of the Church. Yet even assuming that point, it doesn't say Christian masters free your servants who are Christians, since you are equal. So why would this passage mean that race doesn't exist or all people are made biologically equal? No, they are equal "in Christ" - in terms of morality and spirituality.
Even beyond those points, the issue of Christians of different races and ethnicities within the Church is actually a separate subject than what these anti-racists are talking about since there's no mention of persons of other races outside the Church. Both passages are specifically referring to Christians, not populations at large. So, I think these two lone scriptures are clearly stretched quite a bit to cover all the ground over which these people use it.
For a supposed "sin" which is worthy of such condemnation, conspicuously, Christ never deals with or even remotely condemns "racism." Therefore I think there's obviously misrepresentation when liberals claim the Bible "clearly condemns racism", since it clearly does not.
I think there's definitely an issue of "hate" involved - self-hate on the part of the anti-racists! This is evident by the fact that in all their clamoring about racism, they only talk about "white racism." Never do you hear them ever mention the tremendous amount of black-on-white crimes that occur every year. You never hear them complain about discrimination against whites. If they talked about this, one might think they were sincere. But given the facts which prove otherwise, I can conclude only that these people are just liars and self-haters.
Regards, Wild Bill
2003-11-26 23:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Gal 3:26 (See post 9)[/QUOTE]
Okay, let's see this in the context of the whole chapter:
Galatians 3
Verse 26 does not indicate that hatred of non-whites and jews is a sin. Galatians were not spear chucking cannibal negro heathen either. At this particular time and point in history, negro heathen practiced cannibalism daily.
The context of this passage is the message as dispensed to the Galatians and their relation to Christ's Blessing. In other words, negro heathen were not present during the time the message was shared with the Galatians.
Now the closest verse in the book of Galatians that would identify hatred as "of the flesh" is located at Galatians 5 19. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20. Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21. Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
It is also pertinent to understand when we stand up for our race and protect our kin that seeks us, that is not hatred. When a negro buck rapes a white woman, that is a form of hatred. When Whites inform a White woman about the dangers of the predatory negro, that is not hate. When non-whites attempt to steal the blessings of our white children, that is hatred.
It is important to supply the context of the scripture in order that there be no misinterpetation given.