The jews abhor it, first and foremost - it is just another wrestling match between Esau and Jacob, where they split is the heart of Christendom and are not truly one in the same, as modern rabbinic judaism would emerge around 500 years later from the same lineage of the pharisees that Jesus so aggressively criticized, to the point where within their very own talmud they mock him with the very same grotesque schoolyard humor that you see on television today. There might have been friction and various speculations throughout the early 1900's since that was also the philosophical chamber-talk of the day, but even the NSDAP understood that they couldn't do away with Christendom and that to do so would divide the nation in moment when cohesion was most important. Adolf of course takes note of this, and his falling away from the Catholic church makes some sense due to what we're seeing now, which is complete subversion of the doctrine.
I agree with the idea that "true" Christianity is suicide in a sense (it's been said again and again throughout history, though it is difficult to contend what is or isn't true Christianity, which has historically been a point of immense speculation of context and scriptural justification), look at the anabaptists and the number of times they've been persecuted. They essentially depend on entities keeping their word not to fuck them over. Early Christians too were caught up in all kinds of riffraff and essentially had to live as proto-anarchists cut off from the synagogue or in complete secrecy. The fact that Christianity survived and proliferated the way it did is a miracle in and of itself. It's easy to see why they (the Germans) were growing impatient with it.
If any there are honest Christian Nazis, they simply live their truth - not for the church, not for anyone's approval, but simply because they see the 25 points of NSDAP as the only peaceable way to live in conjunction with their faith and needn't wear some background opinion's perfectly tailored black leather gloves and fuck-me boots.
In reality, Christianity is constantly standing in the way of establishing a white only ethnostate through its constant appeals to morality, enduring suffering for the sake of God and the numerous passages that can be interpreted as encouraging social justice and immigration, which liberals have now craftily taken up as a way to guilt trip white conservatives into supporting social justice, multicultularism and ineffective immigration controls.
The main bone I have to pick with this is that multiculturalism isn't how you're going to avoid the adjacent iniquities that it proposes to absolve - it assures constant conflict between the various racial groups. The liberals will point the finger and twist anything, but let me be frank - the conservatives have worked to conserve absolutely nothing. They both wear the same yoke.
As far as social justice is concerned, I think it important among a homogenous people that it is upheld. I think the reality as far as an ethnostate goes is that Christians lack vision - morally, can anyone justify multiculturalism based on what goes on between the races alone? I think it outrageous, but I find it difficult to morally justify anything our country does - America runs off contracts and imports. It is rotten to the core and is on its way to being the next Weimar republic and I think that demands one thing that has always been central to the doctrine: rebukement. If that has to happen violently, so be it. There is a time for everything according to Eccesiastes and an imperative to at times both live and die by the sword.
The first chapter of Isaiah describes in fine detail what the spiritual rot of a nation looks like, and it is the exact multicultural hellscape we live in right now - Jerusalem was compared to Sodom and Gomorrah. Jesus does not abide Sodom and Gomorrah as desirable outcomes, yet here we are.
The main reason Christianity has such a devout following among Europeans is probably that a Roman emperor was convinced to convert to it, forced his subjects to do that, Romans invaded places like England and forcibly converted the pagans, and people in the West associate Christianity with more prosperous times of the 19th to 20th century (before the time of the sexual revolution and "free" trade deals shipping jobs offshore).
Yes, I am familiar with Emperor Constantine and the Holy Roman Empire. I still find it strange, the kind of tooth and nail world it was back then should have killed them off completely, yet it didn't and no one had to be a Christian. You would have completely benefitted by either being a jew or a regional Pagan denomination. Instead they were hunted and killed mercilessly, by choice.
If someone believes "true" Christianity is suicide, then the Bible is very clear, such people are divided between the world and God's Word, and one cannot serve two masters (Matthew 6:24), so God would rather spew the lukewarm believers (such as Cultural Christians) out of his mouth that praise him but do not act in accordance with his Word (Revelation 3:15-16, Matthew 15:18-19)
That's how it ought to be, though people will always interpret doctrine to their own tailored needs. That is my main problem with Christianity. The waters have been so muddied, juxtaposed, and twisted that you can justify most things if you're willing to put some words on the shelf or read some other translation. As far as I am concerned, personal experiences guide my way through scripture, which are still vague.
That's the main reason Jews abhor Christianity, they view it as a false usurpation and bastardization just like Christians view Islam.
I think it's a lot more than that, otherwise they would have just scratched Jesus out of the scribes journal and have been done with it - Christianity was also spoken word up until necessity called for it to be written, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to have just let it go and continued killing them off.
I see a much more complex scenario playing out between Christianity and rabbinic judaism, which swept over all other jewish groups that would have otherwise been neutral. This is some edomite seething that continues to this day - and lo, they were cast out into the wilderness AGAIN, subject to all the nasty bullshit God said they'd be subjected to.
Abrahamic religion compare to other religions is good for enforcing monogamy, that's another reason why so many guys that can't lock down women like it and why nazis (who supported racial eugenics and definitely believed not everyone should breed) were also against it, portraying Abrahamic religion as a dysgenic force.
I think Islam does it better, and if it weren't for such wavering beliefs in the nuclear family and if the world permitted that we exchange daughters and married before whoredom sets in, then things would be manageable. Should everyone marry? Perhaps not, I don't think that's a new thought either. Nevertheless I think the old American system worked well enough, boundaries were intact and respectability within the household meant you avoided marrying a dysgenic shitbag, but then every institution got infiltrated. Even Hitler and the might of the third reich couldn't save mother Europa from that same fate.
Abrahamic religion has done a lot of a damage to the world and atheists, pagans and polytheists have been right about that. Support for funding the state of Israel no matter what wouldn't exist if not for Judaism and Christianity. Islamic terror wouldn't occur if the basis hadn't been laid with the prior foundations of Christianity and Judaism, which Islam borrows heavily from and which justified a lot of messed up things through supposed revelation from angels, something other religions didn't focus so much on.
I think this would have happened one way or the other given the nature of humans and their political interminglings and the Abrahamic religions are far from the first to conflict with others - pagans and polytheists have absolutely no room to talk, they've warred a great deal too such that carnality is almost universal among them. Atheists are difficult to categorize because of their lack of a belief, but I think that to be poor form because religion in my opinion is an extension of biology (which is why the bible is very particular about geneolgies), that member is replaced with corporate doctrine and tithes to a very wealthy web of kikes, I think you know where that shekel goes.
I think it's because they were the first to be co-opted (Christianity is in a way basically co-opting Judaism). I also think a trick many philosemites in Christianity pulled was to insert one or two passages about the "synagogue of satan" to appeal to gentiles (who are naturally suspicious of jews) and try to make it seem like passages in the Old Testament where jews were scolded seem suspicious of jews, when really in the context, the jews were only being scolded because they either didn't simply accept Jesus as the Messiah or because they did not turn to Yahweh and lusted after "false" polytheistic gods.
By the example of one prominent jewish scholar (Gershom Scholem) there are three stages of a religion; the primal, the distance between oneself and the sublime, and the bridge that connects - jews haven't been able to do this because their beliefs are ornamental, their covenant is dead according to Christianity and everything that has happened since has shown that worldly circumstance has been aggressive towards them as they take on these other gods, namely the manifestation of money to whom children are gleefully sacrificed. We know them by their fruits.
What I go off of primarily is how they act now when they're afraid of something.
Many Americans have always unknowingly mixed non Biblical superstition with their Christian beliefs. I don't care if Obama said it, when he said America was never a Christian religion, I think he was just speaking of what was. America was never a Christian theocracy, and when most people try to claim America was a Christian nation, that's why they try to imply, that it closely followed the word of god.
Perhaps not. The only people who follow the word anywhere near what is baseline demanded are the Amish and the Mennonites.
There's already a way to go about that: just be religious but not spiritual. There is plenty of support for this even in the comparatively short <300 years of American history. Thomas Jefferson didn't necessary like Christianity. The Founding Fathers were theistic rationalists, not "Christian Nationalists" like some in the media are trying to meme into existence.
I think a theistic rationalist or a deist is a fair assessment for anyone. I simply live my own truth as it has been shown to me.
The jews abhor it, first and foremost - it is just another wrestling match between Esau and Jacob, where they split is the heart of Christendom and are not truly one in the same, as modern rabbinic judaism would emerge around 500 years later from the same lineage of the pharisees that Jesus so aggressively criticized, to the point where within their very own talmud they mock him with the very same grotesque schoolyard humor that you see on television today. There might have been friction and various speculations throughout the early 1900's since that was also the philosophical chamber-talk of the day, but even the NSDAP understood that they couldn't do away with Christendom and that to do so would divide the nation in moment when cohesion was most important. Adolf of course takes note of this, and his falling away from the Catholic church makes some sense due to what we're seeing now, which is complete subversion of the doctrine.
I agree with the idea that "true" Christianity is suicide in a sense (it's been said again and again throughout history, though it is difficult to contend what is or isn't true Christianity, which has historically been a point of immense speculation of context and scriptural justification), look at the anabaptists and the number of times they've been persecuted. They essentially depend on entities keeping their word not to fuck them over. Early Christians too were caught up in all kinds of riffraff and essentially had to live as proto-anarchists cut off from the synagogue or in complete secrecy. The fact that Christianity survived and proliferated the way it did is a miracle in and of itself. It's easy to see why they (the Germans) were growing impatient with it.
If any there are honest Christian Nazis, they simply live their truth - not for the church, not for anyone's approval, but simply because they see the 25 points of NSDAP as the only peaceable way to live in conjunction with their faith and needn't wear some background opinion's perfectly tailored black leather gloves and fuck-me boots.
The main bone I have to pick with this is that multiculturalism isn't how you're going to avoid the adjacent iniquities that it proposes to absolve - it assures constant conflict between the various racial groups. The liberals will point the finger and twist anything, but let me be frank - the conservatives have worked to conserve absolutely nothing. They both wear the same yoke.
As far as social justice is concerned, I think it important among a homogenous people that it is upheld. I think the reality as far as an ethnostate goes is that Christians lack vision - morally, can anyone justify multiculturalism based on what goes on between the races alone? I think it outrageous, but I find it difficult to morally justify anything our country does - America runs off contracts and imports. It is rotten to the core and is on its way to being the next Weimar republic and I think that demands one thing that has always been central to the doctrine: rebukement. If that has to happen violently, so be it. There is a time for everything according to Eccesiastes and an imperative to at times both live and die by the sword.
The first chapter of Isaiah describes in fine detail what the spiritual rot of a nation looks like, and it is the exact multicultural hellscape we live in right now - Jerusalem was compared to Sodom and Gomorrah. Jesus does not abide Sodom and Gomorrah as desirable outcomes, yet here we are.
Yes, I am familiar with Emperor Constantine and the Holy Roman Empire. I still find it strange, the kind of tooth and nail world it was back then should have killed them off completely, yet it didn't and no one had to be a Christian. You would have completely benefitted by either being a jew or a regional Pagan denomination. Instead they were hunted and killed mercilessly, by choice.
That's how it ought to be, though people will always interpret doctrine to their own tailored needs. That is my main problem with Christianity. The waters have been so muddied, juxtaposed, and twisted that you can justify most things if you're willing to put some words on the shelf or read some other translation. As far as I am concerned, personal experiences guide my way through scripture, which are still vague.
I think it's a lot more than that, otherwise they would have just scratched Jesus out of the scribes journal and have been done with it - Christianity was also spoken word up until necessity called for it to be written, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to have just let it go and continued killing them off.
I see a much more complex scenario playing out between Christianity and rabbinic judaism, which swept over all other jewish groups that would have otherwise been neutral. This is some edomite seething that continues to this day - and lo, they were cast out into the wilderness AGAIN, subject to all the nasty bullshit God said they'd be subjected to.
I think Islam does it better, and if it weren't for such wavering beliefs in the nuclear family and if the world permitted that we exchange daughters and married before whoredom sets in, then things would be manageable. Should everyone marry? Perhaps not, I don't think that's a new thought either. Nevertheless I think the old American system worked well enough, boundaries were intact and respectability within the household meant you avoided marrying a dysgenic shitbag, but then every institution got infiltrated. Even Hitler and the might of the third reich couldn't save mother Europa from that same fate.
I think this would have happened one way or the other given the nature of humans and their political interminglings and the Abrahamic religions are far from the first to conflict with others - pagans and polytheists have absolutely no room to talk, they've warred a great deal too such that carnality is almost universal among them. Atheists are difficult to categorize because of their lack of a belief, but I think that to be poor form because religion in my opinion is an extension of biology (which is why the bible is very particular about geneolgies), that member is replaced with corporate doctrine and tithes to a very wealthy web of kikes, I think you know where that shekel goes.
By the example of one prominent jewish scholar (Gershom Scholem) there are three stages of a religion; the primal, the distance between oneself and the sublime, and the bridge that connects - jews haven't been able to do this because their beliefs are ornamental, their covenant is dead according to Christianity and everything that has happened since has shown that worldly circumstance has been aggressive towards them as they take on these other gods, namely the manifestation of money to whom children are gleefully sacrificed. We know them by their fruits.
What I go off of primarily is how they act now when they're afraid of something.
Perhaps not. The only people who follow the word anywhere near what is baseline demanded are the Amish and the Mennonites.
I think a theistic rationalist or a deist is a fair assessment for anyone. I simply live my own truth as it has been shown to me.