The Dutch monk Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466-1536) is considered one of the greatest philosophers in Europe. He was a renowned scholar and was entrusted with the education of Charles V, the future German Emperor, King of Spain and Sicily, and Lord of the Low Countries. There are numerous respectable institutions named after him, like the University in Rotterdam, and he is hailed for his supposed ‘cosmopolitism’ and ‘tolerance’ in an age of religious conflict. Looking closer at his writings, there appears another Erasmus, which is neither multicultural nor tolerant. Contra Johannes Reuchlin Was Erasmus really an ardent defender of religious freedom and civil rights for all? In the beginning of the 16th century the dissident theologian Johannes Reuchlin was the light bearer advocating equal civil rights for Jews. Erasmus was not in favour of this: “I am no Reuchlinist… never have supported him, he would not even have wanted that” (Jonathan I. Israel, The Dutch Republiek 1477 – 1806, p.50). It has been suggested by the Erasmus Center for Early Modern Studies that Erasmus’ aversion of Jews was caused by personal disputes against people he disliked: “Several anti-Jewish statements of Erasmus are known. Invariably, these are aimed at specific persons whom he disliked in particular. There is absolutely no evidence of any systematic or political-ideological hatred of the Jews — which we might, then, anachronistically term anti-semitism.”  Is that true? Erasmus traveled throughout most of Western Europe during his lifetime (Italy, France, England, Germany and the Low Countries). However, he did not visit Spain because “it was crawling with Jews” — to put it in its own words, and he declined many invitations for this reason. On the other hand, he hailed France, because “it was not infected by Jews and marranos [i.e., crypto-Jews who pretended to be Christian].” Erasmus in other words disliked Judaism and even the presence of Jews was to be avoided. The Culture of Critique The most interesting parts of Erasmus’ writings on Jews are the numerous references to crypto-Judaism and Jewish undermining of Christian morality. Erasmus was dismissive of Jewish religion and practices, stressing its obscuring nature: “I see the Jews as a people filled with the wordy fabrications that cover everything with a mist: Talmud, Kabbalah, Tetragrammaton, gates of light — nothing but words.” He dismissed Judaism as a higher form of morality—a common posture of Jews, especially since the Enlightment. In fact, Jews were people “for whom religion consists of rituals and observations of corporeal things.” Erasmus was suspicious about the conversion of Jews to Christianity. This was the major issue of the Inquisition: Did Jews who professed to be Christian actually retain their Jewish identity? Erasmus did not believe that these “converts’ had lost their Jewish identity. He describes the famous Jewish convert Joseph Pfefferkorn as a crypto-Jew: “If you cut him open, 600 Jews will jump out.” That also explains his reference to Jews in Spain, although they were officially expelled since 1492, and his dislike of crypto-Jewish marranos. He made his attitude clear: “I have a temperament such that I could love even a Jew, if only he were well-mannered and friendly, and did not mouth blasphemy on Christ in my presence.” The Great Turk In 1529 Sultan Suleyman, also called the Great Turk, captured Budapest and was bound to conquer Europe. The fear for the Turks engulfed Europe and it also grasped Erasmus, who wrote a book called Considerations for a War against the Turks. In this book he describes the Turks as “a bunch of barbarians from a dark source whom God has sent us like He once send the frogs to scourge Egypt.” Erasmus saw the Turks as an ordeal for European Christianity. He thought that Christians should renew their faith to make them prepared for the Turkish onslaught. In a way he was a visionary, because the decisive victory over the Turks at Lepanto in 1571 was attributed to the praying of the rosary all over Europe. Just as the case with Judaism, Erasmus despised Islam and not only on religious grounds: “What to say about them who prefer the malefic and criminal human Mohammed over Christ?” Celibate himself, Erasmus was even quite frank about the Muslim way of conquest and the way to counter it in his book The Virtue of Marriage: “Still, the warm advocates of virginity are no opponents to the war against the Turks, who are a majority due to their big families. If their vision is right, they should be making children to deliver soldiers for war, unless they think that cannons, artillery and ships don’t need manpower.” Conclusion Erasmus was a celebrated scholar during his lifetime and he travelled most of Western Europe to spread his ideas. In his time he was a man of the world, but he was no multiculturalist or cosmopolitan. He saw Christianity as the core of European civilization and Judaism and Islam as a threat to the dominance of European Christianity. He was a peaceful man, but advocated war against the Turks. He was a man of wisdom, but rejected Jewish teaching. Although he was in favour of the Greco-Roman Renaissance (the appreciation of sources of antiquity), he fervently opposed the Hebrew Renaissance in order to thwart resurgence of Judaism. He saw Judaism and Islam as alien and incompatible with European Christianity. The difference between Judaism and Islam is that Muslim Turks were foreign invaders, while the Jews were the enemy from within, opposing and criticising Christianity. |
Top of Form
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
Woo Hoo! Erasmus rocks!
Thanks for this interesting article and similar ones you’ve wrote in the past. It’s nice to see a fellow Dutchman contribute to this great website. I’m curious how you became aware of the Jewish question, Peter. If you like you could drop me an e-mail at vanspeijk [at] gmail.com.
This article was interesting for me because I’ve considered Erasmus the better path to European religious reform that was not taken, the more moderate, practical approach that got sidelined by the harsh conflicts of the Reformation.
On the basis of the information in this article it seems Erasmus was indeed practical: a substantial movement of Christians following in his footsteps would not have been disarmed against external (Muslim) or nationally internal (Jewish) enemies.
They would only have been less likely to take up the sword against their fellow Christians and Europeans, less likely to seek and sharpen radical theoretical cleavages at every opportunity, and more warmed by the good influences of the Renaissance.
If you read chapter 7 of E. Michael Jones’ book, “The Jewish revolutionary spirit and its impact on world history”, a rather different Erasmus emerges….
Could you please give us the gist of it, Mr. Jamieson? Thank you in advance.
Desiderius Erasmus seems to be a bigot. Why he avoided to visit Spain which was already cleansed of Jews (170,000) and great majority of 3-5 million Muslims?
Had he been a true follower of Christ, he would have known that Christian Bible is nothing but an extension of Jewish Bible (OT). Jesus himself is quoted in NT that he only came to the ‘House of Israel’.
Islam which came 600 years after the so-called ‘Crucification’ of Christ – pays more respect to Jesus and Holy Mary in Holy Qur’an than all the Christian Scriptures put together. Christian Bible (NT) has 27 books and none of them is named after Jesus or his mother Mary. Contrary to that Holy Qur’an has one of it longest Chapter (Surah) named after Holy Mary (Al-Marriam). Jesus is mentioned by his name ‘Isa’ more than the name of Muhammad.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/nothing-wrong-being-a-radical-muslim/
Perhaps some Muslims should take this under advisement and consider converting to Christianity, particularly those that seek to dwell in the West.
What Rehmat says [March 7, 2011 - 8:27 pm] is correct. This concords with my own research. The number of “thumb downs” his comment has attracted is more than excessive.
Anglo Saxon: Here I find myself in respectful disagreement with you. Rehmat gets a handful of trivial details right but misrepresents the core matters. The Christian Bible is “an extension of [the] Jewish Bible” only in the sense that Christians acknowledge both Testaments’ books as the authentic word of God Himself. The New Testament is so called, of course, because it plainly embodies the new and—as Christ put it—eternal covenant between God and man. Pace the claims of Jewish triumphalists and Christians who pander to them, the covenantal dimension of the OT became the deadest of dead letters with the advent of Christ’s earthly ministry. Since the covenantal dimension of the NT will persist to the end of time, I would say to Rehmat that his breezy linkage of the testaments on any but a literary level is either a willfully grave distortion or a profoundly grave error.
Even on the rather silly matter of the number of books named for Jesus—as if this were an adolescent pissing contest—for him to write that no book of the Christian Bible “is named after Jesus” leads one to wonder whether he has ever opened a Bible. As virtually every Christian and countless millions of non-Christians know, the four most critical NT books—for the reading of whose words Christians at Mass and other worship services still rise to their feet—bear the name the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Is Rehmat really blithely ignorant of this fact? Since he seems to be, ought we to give any credence, let alone respect, to anything he writes on matters relevant to Christ, Christians, and their faith? I see no reason why one should.
As for Spain, every serious pre-Vatican II Catholic historian of that country lamented the fact of its vast and dangerous fifth column of crypto Jews. Likewise, for the past fifty years and more, every Jewish or otherwise Christophobic historian of Spain has rejoiced to precisely the same extent and for the very same reason.
The article about Erasmus in the century-old Catholic Encyclopedia (easily accessible on the New Advent website) expresses well the reservations about his life, writings, and character that most traditional Catholics still hold to. Yet it hardly seems debatable that, on the issue that provoked Rehmat to witlessly term Erasmus a bigot, the great Dutch scholar spoke nothing but the plain and unvarnished truth.
@ Pierre de Craon …
A qualitatively excellent and politely forceful riposte Pierre. συγχαρητήρια !
Yes, I stand corrected. Superficially, I could still immodestly claim I was correct. But upon closer analysis that isn’t good enough. You drawing a proper distinction between the so-called ‘Old Testament’ (the Hebrew fairy stories) and the ‘New Testament’ (the true bedrock of authentic Christianity) is to be greatly lauded. It was music to my ears.
Consider the words of John W. Nevin, a German Reformed author, from 1846:
The religion of the Old Testament went not beyond the character of a “report,” to be received only by “the hearing of the ear.” The revelation was always relative only, never absolute. It came not in any case to a full manifestation of the truth in its own form. But in the church of the New Testament, all is different. A new order of revelation entirely bursts upon the world, in the person of Jesus Christ. He is the absolute truth itself, personally present among men, and incorporating itself with their life. He is the substance, where all previous prophecy, even in its highest forms, had been only as sound or shadow.
It is possible I am regarded by some visiting this TOO Website as “anti-Christian” because of my oft-stated respect for, and the high valuation I attach to, the pre-Christian beliefs of native Europeans (falsely labelled as ‘Pagan’). But, this is an inaccurate or inadequate interpretation of my actual position, which is far more nuanced … so nuanced in fact that I don’t have the time to elucidate it in the here and now.
The New Testament is a wonderful book, and I would really like to see it separated permanently from the so-called “Hebrew Bible”, with the latter dumped in the trash can. I really don’t see why Christians should tolerate the presence of Esther or Solomon (and the like) in their holy canon. Religious books are not the place for lauding blood thirsty trash or for honouring plotting prostitutes.
The Qu’ran is not an evil book, but I would say it is a book for simpletons, authored by plagiarists. I am not antipathetic towards Muslims because I have spent many years living amongst them and (with a few exceptions) have been treated with the utmost kindness and respect by all I have met. Shopping amongst the traditional Suks of the Arab world really is a delight that no-one should miss! But, at its core, early Islam was little more than a violent reaction to Judaism. While it has great emotional depth, Islam has little to offer in the way of intellectual depth.
Rehmat is doubtless a sincere and good man, so we should be mindful to moderate our criticism of his thoughts on this issue. We should also be cognizant of the fact that 95 percent of even so-called practising Christians are utterly ignorant about what their faith really means and what it is supposed to stand for.
Hear Hear Pierre – another very well written piece. You are just the kind of man the cause needs.
I am certainly not one of those who think you anti-Christian, honored Anglo Saxon! Far from it, in fact. Furthermore, I agree with virtually every word in your comment above. It saddens me more than I can say that I agree with your final sentence most of all. Nonetheless, it’s a truth that badly needs saying—and repeating. How else will the situation ever be remedied?
May I add that I haven’t seen that noble Greek word you use since I was in college. Thank you for brightening my day with it.
Scooter, I don’t want to seem ungrateful, but I fear that I give the cause very little . I am old (midsixties), chronically ill, and worst of all, childless. The cause needs smart and principled men (and women) in the vigor of late youth and middle age. Most of all, it needs these people to be parents, parents with the courage and resolution to raise a large generation of children who learn with their mother’s milk that their country and culture are under foreign occupation, that vast numbers of their nominally white Christian neighbors and relatives are either willing or witless collaborators of the occupiers, and that these neighbors have swapped the noble heritage of the West for the illusion of prosperity and virtually unlimited access to inexpensive pornographic “entertainment.” What a trade!
The only virtue I’d claim for myself at this point is that I am no longer sleepwalking. Despite the fact that the evidence of my senses was screaming for decades at my brain that the entirety of American society had been subverted from within, I—like countless others, I fear—might still be sleepwalking were it not for Professor M.’s books. Whatever disagreements, trivial or grave, I have or shall have with him, I hope I shan’t ever forget that it took his plain but eloquent exposition of the facts and the process of cultural and societal subversion to open my eyes.
Jesus or Yeessa was born to Samaria(NORTH) province…but in the rush to convert judean from Judea(south) in the aftermath(after he was ceased and crucified) the evangelists gave him a fabricated genealogy till David..but eventhough the House of David is DIRECTLY linked to Solomon…and Solomon himself is son of a PHOENICIAN woman from whose name derived the nowadays LEbanese capital BEIT RUTH(meaning House of Ruth)….and by no means that the judean ones can be considered descendent from Solomon…so this symbolizes ultimately the interconections among the tribes all over the eastern mediterreanean seashore…but mainly that even if Jesus is from a place like that he is from a HEBREW mother…meaning that the actual palestinians(that means that they were converted initially to christians and utimately to Islam even if you cry fool…it is a FACT…) are in fact his relatives not the Judean ones…this is probably an overwhelming truth given the fast track hatred reaction to his teachings as well judgement and posterior crucification by the Judean branch…because in FACT HE WAS AN OUTSIDER…A HEBREW ONE BUT FROM DESPISED NON JUDEAN TRIBE….
“Erasmus was a bigot!”
Well if you think so, then what are you doing here? Go live with those that are NOT “bigots”- go live with the islamics in any of theri countries, or live in israel, and see whether there is bigotry there?
It’s evident in all place around the world, that multiculturatism or multi-religiosity does NOT work!
DOWN WITH ISLAM!
DOWN WITH JUDAISM!
AND DOWN WITH CHRISTIANITY, WHOSE POPIOLA IS EXCUSING JEWS IN ALL THEIR SINS
Well, what are
It’s funny how some things never change.
I am totally in favor of anyone who challenges these rabid cultists. It is completely unethical to want to kill or enslave entire groups of people (especially when that includes me!) 600,000 good American men died ostensibly to end African slavery. We did not die merely to bolster big business and empower Jewish ambitions to do more of the same. I cannot believe this is true.
If you’re in an elite institution, you’ve slipped through their grasp.
I don’t think any major Western thinker had anything good to say about Jews prior to the 20th century,
@ Athanasius
Yes, I am terrified. I feel like the Fedayeen. They know who I am, too. One more excuse and I get expelled.
Unfortunately for Christians they are forever tied to the Jewish root of their faith and are therefore doomed to perpetual blindness. When the Judeo-Christians destroyed the Roman Empire they not only destroyed a thriving and freedom-loving civilization, they replaced it with an inferior Abrahamic cult that worshiped a Jewish man-god. Gone was the Greco-Roman grandeur, the love of philosophy, the noble ideals of the Roman aristocracy, and the love of all things beautiful and natural and true. In came the delusional superstition of the Jews, their sadism, their paranoid obsession with heresy, their hatred of nature, their fear of “idols” (what we call sculpture today), their neurotic obsession with sex and circumcision, and their prejudice against science and reason. It is thanks to this Judeo-Christian revolution that Europe was dragged through its least auspicious period: The Dark Ages. Edward Gibbon’s classic “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” seems to support this view. So does Goethe:
“Upon my renewed studies of Homer I feel deeply what an inexpressible misfortune the Jewish trash has caused us. if we had never learned to know the actions of the Sodomites and the Egyptian-Babylonian whims, and if Homer had remained our Bible, what a different aspect humanity would have had!” (Letter to Boettiger)
I take exception to Gibbon. He was a pretty good philologist, and a great prose writer, but he didn’t have all the sources we have now, and he was also blinded by the prejudices of this time.
His understanding of the Eastern Empire (“Byzantine”) was very flawed.
E. Michael Jones has a chapter Reuchlin v. Pfefferkorn in his Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, in which he shows that Pfefferkorn was a true convert.
Pfefferkorn (1469-1523) was a true convert who knew of Jewish treachery first hand. He warned Catholics that the Talmud contained blasphemies against Jesus, Mary, and the apostles. He crusaded against the Jews and crypto-Jews writing pamphlets detailing their practices.
He wanted to convert Jews and believed that their writings were a major cause of their perfidious conduct. He convinced Emperor Maximillian I (Holy Roman Emperor 1459-1519) to collect the Jewish books and if found to be anti-Christian to destroy them.
If you check out the Wikipedia articles on Reuchlin and Pfefferkorn you will see who Wiki favors and that should be all you need to know. Pfefferkorn was a formidable adversary of the Jewish hatred of Christian society.
Pfefferkorn also informed Catholics on how the Jews operated. Little has change from then until today. Money is their main weapon. They lend money at high interest rates. Compound interest would drives up a debt after 30 years to “106 tons of gold”.
They see the man’s weakness and cater to that. Money is the main weapon. In court they bribe witnesses and officials. They use alcohol to undercut the peasants industriousness, and sex to attack the monks’ vow of chastity.
Jews today are totally into finance, pornography, and the liquor business. It’s a tradition.
“They see the man’s weakness and cater to that.”
A major reason to be highly suspicious of everyone who lauds free and unfettered markets. Unfettered and free markets in a society bereft of its moral underpinning will always lead to self-enslavement to passions, widespread mistrust and ultimately the society’s own destruction.
the war was not to liberate blacks from slavery, but rather to preserve the north’s tariff regime and mercantilism, threatened by southern secession. “ostensibly” is spot on.
“In his time he was a man of the world, but he was no multiculturalist or cosmopolitan. He saw Christianity as the core of European civilization and Judaism and Islam as a threat to the dominance of European Christianity.”
I hope the word gets out to all those young, impressionable winners of Erasmus scholarships here in Europe
Ironically, Rotterdam today is the first European city with an immigrant (mostly Muslim) majority. And it will not be the last one… Erasmus would have never guessed that the Muslim conquest finally would succeed in a peaceful way. Likewise Islam and Judaism are alive and kicking, while Christianity is in severe decline.
The situation is either desperate or it is not. I suggest that it is desperate.
I suggest furthermore that if you goyim don’t get your act together and take swift remedial action, the future that awaits you and your children will be unbearable.
You will be reduced to servitude under implacable New Masters.
Your New Masters won’t be bashing you over the head with Qur’ans, they’ll be bashing you over the head with Talmuds.
You’re not going to win this deadly war:
(a) if you don’t know you ARE at war, and
(b) if you waste your time and energy attacking your natural ally, the Muslim, and forget who your real enemy is — the Jew.
As a Jew, I see this all too clearly and therefore give you warning. Islamophobia is for suckers. This is manufactured hatred, created by the Jews and spread by the Jews as black propaganda.
Christians and Muslims would do well to join forces against their common enemy: the Jew.
The Jew is out to get both of them.
It was Mossad and the neocons who did 9-11, not Al Qaeda.
The thought that Muslims are an ally in the area of foreign policy may be true, but as immigrants they are invaders. They will set up their own culture and eventually displace Europeans. And most of them are there because of misguided immigration policy engineered by hostile elites, including especially the organized Jewish community. Kevin
Kevin …
The most basic error many cogent spokesmen like your goodself tend to make, is to overlook the need to make a distinction between abstract monolithic groupings, such as “the Muslims”, and the specific genetic groups that together, actually comprise the Muslim world.
Malaysian Muslims are not fond of Arab Muslims … and Arab Muslims consider Malaysian, Indonesian, or especially Southern Filipinos, as ‘dilute’ Muslims who are inferior to them (the Arabs). I have actually heard this kind of language spoken first hand.
Therefore, we don’t have a Muslim immigration problem. We in truth have a Pakistani immigration problem, or a Bangladeshi immigration problem, or an Afghani immigration problem, etc.
I once dated a Shia Muslim girl (with an Iranian background) in Malaysia, and she was fantastic. Beautiful, elegant, modest, and disciplined. Everything we would wish all ethno-European girls to be.
Life in Kuala Lumpur is really very good on the eye. Young Malaysian Muslim girls prefer to wear headscarfs, but you will more often than not see them wearing those colourful scarfs with tight jeans or tight fitting, full length skirts. It is a very, very sexy combination as these girls usually keep themselves trim and shapely. These scarfs mainly serve to keep their long hair tidy and clean (as well as identify themselves as Muslim).
Although an image of Islam being a monolithic block — the Ummah — is extolled by the Qu’ran … since 1990 this concept has been greatly exaggerated and hysterically expounded by alarmist, Jew-sponsored neocon websites such as Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch.
In reality, there is no Ummah. Believe it or not, racial discrimination is actually rife even in Mecca during the Hajj.
I would agree with this, but only with the following qualification. Muslim immigrant communities are being forced to form cultural & religious ghettoes in response to the moral depravity being publicly practised by the majority white populations. If our womenfolk (and young men) were more modest (as they were 50 years ago) then Muslims would have less reason to build barriers, or to “circle their wagons” so to speak.
The Jew, along with his Zionist sycophants plus Banksters, are the only enemies of all mankind.
@ Kevin MacDonald
The thought that Muslims are an ally in the area of foreign policy may be true, but as immigrants they are invaders.
I agree with you up to a point, Kevin…but I think the word “invaders” is a wee bit harsh. These immigrants are being used as cat’s paws by the Jews. As instruments to punish the goyim with. Their presence in large numbers is admittedly intolerable, but they are themselves (I believe) totally unaware they are being used as pawns in an elaborate chess game masterminded by the Jewish Puppetmasters.
It seems to me, moreover, that a cultivated Islamophobia in America and Europe has to be totally incompatible with any profession of sympathy for the Palestinian cause.
If Westerners start disliking Muslims as a matter of policy, because they don’t like all these Muslim immigrants, then they ought logically to start regarding the Palestinians with animosity too — since the Palestinians are Muslims.
It would be extremely ironical, to say the least, if Western Islamophobes should start backing the state of Israel one day against the innocent Muslims of Palestine — only to find out, later, that they themselves had been duped by the Jews, their new and implacable Masters.
* * * * *
Too many immigrants are bad; but rather than blame the immigrants, most of them ignorant and apolitical Third Worlders, it would surely be better to blame the architects of Immigration policy, i.e., organized Jewry, the chief promoters of multiculturalism.
Which is worse: the poison or the Poisoner?
Now Miriam K is giving White activists pointers? Just a couple of months ago she was advocating enslaving the White race and formulating laws on how to ban any criticism of the Jewish people. How utterly bizarre.
@ John
Maybe Miriam was pulling your leg the first time and you fell for it. Alternatively, she could have a split personality.
I’m going to go with she’s probably slightly insane. Maybe you should read some of her old posts and come back to me.
Yes, we get it. TOO is against Jews and Islam. But are you for Romanticism, without question the highest expression and acheivement of Western man, ie; the White man?
I haven’t come across one person here who knows anything about it. Including MacDonald, Johnson, O’Meara, etc.
They ought to be able to tell us something.
And yet, dead silence.
This is a huge part of our problem.
“I haven’t come across one person here who knows anything about it [romanticism].”
You might consider thumbing TOO’s pages a bit more assiduously, Dedalus. That, at least, is what my mind’s ear hears Michael Colhaze and Lasha Darkmoon calling out to you.
Reading Miriam K’s previous posts she seems to vacillate, but on these posts she is correct.
@ Matthias
I will only point out one thing. Erasmus did attack Pfefferkorn , who was a sincere convert and involved in exposing the Talmud and Reuchlin’s judaizing ideas. Indirectly thus, Erasmus did support Reuchlin, the author of ” De Arte Caballistica” . It’s worth getting the book. In spite of some shortcomings, it offers a vast panorama of complex issues with the backing of numerous sources and quotations.
Miriam K: “Your New Masters won’t be bashing you over the head with Qur’ans, they’ll be bashing you over the head with Talmuds.”
The history of Greeks and Turks, particularly the Turkish invasion of Cypus in 1974, doesn’t support the idea that Muslims are our natural allies and that we never need fear displacement by or hostilities from Muslims.
“Still, the warm advocates of virginity are no opponents to the war against the Turks, who are a majority due to their big families. If their vision is right, they should be making children to deliver soldiers for war, unless they think that cannons, artillery and ships don’t need manpower.”
Surprisingly perceptive! But has religion ever been the main factor behind the reluctance to have a big family; moderately well off whites don’t have more than two kids but seriously rich whites do have big families. That suggests financial calculations about parental investment have always been a big part of the cause.
Babies Win Wars
It has been pointed out that the post 1500 baby boom was strongest in (Protestant) England and Holland. The reason is suggested to be a shift to family-based cottage industry in an expanding market economy. The workforce was expanded by having a bigger family
The motives for the high fertility of Mormons (who now outnumber Jews in the US) seems to be entirely religious though.
I agree that Arabs do not make good neighbors. They are basically loud, violent tribal warriors who will cut off your head to make a point. But they make great allies against the Jews. That’s why we are killing them. Anyone who has spoken out against Israel has been public enemy #1 for America.
Saddam Hussein calls for jihad against Israel. 40,000 American goyim dead or wounded later we kill him. Osama Bin Laden calls for a jihad against Israel. We invade Afghanistan.
It’s pretty simple. We don’t even really need their oil. We can get plenty from Alaska and our own oil producing states.
@ elite institution coward
You are right on target this time. It is obvious that the chosen ones are captains of our ship of state.
Pierre de Craon – When was the last time you read the Christian Bible (NT), dude!
NT has FOUR books of Jewish Bible (OT) fully included with all the pornography including the permission from prophet Moses to have sex with a 3-year-old-plus baby girl.
If you, like me, haad graduated from a Catholic Mission – I would have discussed the Biblical message in detail – but after reading your rant – I have come to the conclusion that having dialogue with you will be as unprodutive as me convincing a Jew that Christ was really the ‘Promised Messiah’.
Searching for Jesus (as), eh!
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/searching-for-jesus-as-eh/
“Pierre de Craon – When was the last time you read the Christian Bible (NT), dude!”
Yesterday.
And be good enough not to address me as “dude.”
@ Rehmat
Really? How exciting! I must ask my dear Papa to lend me his copy of the New Testament so I can check out all these juicy details for myself.
Moses in the New Testament recommending sex with 3-year-old baby girls, eh? Wow. What a perv!
I never did like men with bushy beards. Moses and Marx are alike in this respect. Men with such beards are obviously trying to hide something apart from their mouths.
In Europe Muslim-bashing is quite common, but I think Muslims also can be a very useful group to get rid off of lefties. Franco used Maroccans against the communists, and with great success. Leftist don’t seem to realize that they will be first on the row if Muslims ever grab the power, see Iranian revolution of 1979.
There is no “Jewish Root” to the Christian faith, and if one believes such to be the case that misconception is due to both successful programming by those ionterested in promulgating that falsehood and by incredibly poor pontificating by woefully ignorant priests and preachers from the pulpit.
Let us take the Judaist/Talmudist at his word on this subject, granted that being a somewhat dangerous act, but I believe to be safe in this particular case. I shall quote from the 1905 “Jewish Encyclopedia” to support my assertion: “It would be a mistake to assume that our roots are of the Israelites of the Old Testament, but, rather, our roots are in Phariseeism.” If one reads “The 1984 Jewish Almanac”, the above cited passage is repeated almost word for word in a Chapter titled, “Identity.”
The Old Testament God is the New Testament God, and Christianity’s roots are of the Old Testament, and of the Israelite peoples. The Talmudist’s make clear that their roots are from Babylon, from their own Rabbinical/Phariasitical writings such as the Talmud and the Kabbalah, and their reference to the Pentatuch, if anything, is little more than a fig leaf to conceal the truth of which Jesus Christ accused them of, that being of “The Synagogue of Satan” and “Of your father, the devil.” In the Talmud itself it is taught that no writing in the Pentatuch takes legal precedence over the opinions of the Rabbi’s who penned its entries.
These so-called “Jews” have put themselves over God. (See Michael Hoffman’s 1,102 page Opus, “Judaism Discovered.”) And lest you forget Rev. 2:9 and 3:9, “Those who say they are Jews and are not.” These creatures are imposters.
Christians, cleanse yourself of this Babylonian Talmudic lie. The God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob is the Christian God, and His son Christ came to redeem (to buy back) His people and to provide the possibility of salvation for others. God will not be mocked.
This is just about the most intelligent thing I have seen posted about “Jews” since I have been on this site.
I have several Hebrew Christian friends. They are not “Jews”. They are children of God.
@John “There is no ‘Jewish Root’ to the Christian faith…”
It’s not my intention to burst any bubbles but if reading the bible doesn’t convince you of the Jewish origins of Christianity, I don’t know what will. The ethnicity or even the actual existence of the historical Jesus is up for debate, but the political organizers of early Christianity, not to mention the authors of the Old and New Testaments, were undoubtedly Jewish. Perhaps the most succinct presentation of this historical narrative can be found in “Hitler’s Table Talk”. For the record, I don’t endorse everything AH said or did. But when he speaks on the subject of religion, his powers of observation are unsurpassed. The following excerpts are taken from “Hitler’s Table Talk”:
The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity. Bolshevism practices a lie of the same nature, when it claims to bring liberty to men, whereas in reality it seeks only to enslave them. In the ancient world, the relations between men and gods were founded on an instinctive respect. It was a world enlightened by the idea of tolerance. Christianity was the first creed in the world to exterminate its adversaries in the name of love. Its key-note is intolerance.
Yet Rome today allows itself to reproach Bolshevism with having destroyed the Christian churches! As if Christianity hadn’t behaved in the same way towards the pagan temples.
It’s striking to observe that Christian ideas, despite all St. Paul’s efforts, had no success in Athens. The philosophy of the Greeks was so much superior to this poverty-stricken rubbish that the Athenians burst out laughing when they listened to the apostle’s teaching. But in Rome St. Paul found the ground prepared for him. His egalitarian theories had what was needed to win over a mass composed of innumerable uprooted people.
Whilst Roman society proved hostile to the new doctrine, Christianity in its pure state stirred the population to revolt. Rome was Bolshevised, and Bolshevism produced exactly the same results in Rome as later in Russia.
Christianity set itself systematically to destroy ancient culture. What came to us was passed down by chance, or else it was a product of liberal Roman writers. Perhaps we are entirely ignorant of humanity’s most precious spiritual treasures. Who can know what was there?
In our parts of the world, the Jews would have immediately eliminated Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Kant. If the Bolsheviks had dominion over us for two hundred years, what works of our past would be handed on to posterity? Our great men would fall into oblivion, or else they’d be presented to future generations as criminals and bandits.
What is this God who takes pleasure only in seeing men grovel before Him? Try to picture to yourselves the meaning of the following, quite simple story. God creates the conditions for sin. Later on He succeeds, with the help of the Devil, in causing man to sin. Then He employs a virgin to bring into the world a son who, by His death, will redeem humanity!
Pure Christianity – the Christianity of the catacombs – is concerned with translating the Christian doctrine into facts. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely wholehearted Bolshevism, under a tinsel of metaphysics.
While we’re on the subject, let’s add that, even amongst those who claim to be good Catholics, very few really believe in this humbug. Only old women, who have given up everything because life has already withdrawn from them, go regularly to church. All that’s dead wood – and one shouldn’t waste one’s time in concerning oneself with such brains.
It is a great pity that this tendency towards religious thought can find no better outlet than the Jewish pettifoggery of the Old Testament. For religious people who, in the solitude of winter, continually seek ultimate light on their religious problems with the assistance of the Bible, must eventually become spiritually deformed. The wretched people strive to extract truths from these Jewish chicaneries, where in fact no truths exist. As a result they become embedded in some rut of thought or other and, unless they possess an exceptionally commonsense mind, degenerate into religious maniacs.
If Hebrew Christians are the “Children of God” – what are the rest of the 1.7 billion – “Childrenof St. Paul”?
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/10/11/is-islam-religion-of-peace/
In reply to the argument posited by the individual who refers to himself/herself in the lower case as “standing”, I will correct my argument only as follows – I referred to the first five books of the Old Testament as the Pentatuch, a correct reference in Christian terms. This was a regrettable but avoidable error. Since I was referring to the Talmudists use of those books, I should have used the term applicable from their their lexicon, “Torah.”
The word “Jew” in biblical terms has different meanings given its historical applications. As an example, many argue that the U.S. is a Republic, which on paper, old paper, it is. The current reality make a mockery or such an assertion.
Throughout the Old Testament the word Israelite, not “Jew”, is used to define who are the descendants of Jacob. At best, the term Jew, which did not appear until after the division between the ten northern tribes, the House of Israel, and the two southern tribes, the House of Judah, describes only members of the House of Judah. After the Assyrian captivity in 750 B.C. and the subsequent movement of those peoples across the European continent during the following centuries, the word “Jew” meant only those members of the House of Judah, nothing more.
After the 70 -year long Babylonian captivity of the southern tribes in 550 B.C., some members of the House of Judah returned to their former lands. Located at a crossroads of several civilizations, it was populated by some Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, later by the remnants of Alexanders Greeks, and eventually the Romans. There were also some Israelites as well as members of the House of Judah. From the Babylonians and some fallen members of the House of Judah came Talmudism, a belief system with no commonality to that which was held by the Israelite peoples prior to the Babylonian captivity. During that latter period the area was known as Judea.
During the time of Christ, anyone who lived in Judea was known as a Jew regardless of particular religious belief. The situation was little different than today’s New York. You arrive from Pakistan and a year later you are a taxi-driving “New Yorker.” If you live in Texas, you are referred to as a Texan.
If you were a resident of Judea, you were a Jew. Thus when some people toss out the argument that “Jesus was a Jew”, they are technically correct. Where they are in error is that the statement argues the the status of the presently common and incorrect interpretation and usage of the term “Jew.” Jesus was no Talmudist, which is the then Pharisees and their followers, as well as the modern “Jew.” This clear distinction is clearly evidenced by his repeated tongue-lashings exercised upon the Pharisees. Rather, He was an Israelite denouncing everything the Talmudist stood for then and stands for now.
It is imperative to understand that Judea at the time of Christ was a “cosmopolitan” place populated by diverse peoples governed by an Edomite (a descendant of Esau) governor named Herod who served under Roman authority. At that time the leading religion in Judea happened to be Babylonian Talmudism whose spokesmen in both the political and religious realm were the Pharisees. As a somewhat topical analogy, if transported back in time upon arrival there, former Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker would have commented on the strange amalgamation of religio-ethnic groups and then both properly and incredulously asked, “Where did these people come from?”
Indeed. The reality on the ground was far different than that depicted in some Cecil B. DeMille “classic”, nor “The Life of Brian.”
Since you have evidenced some interest in history, for contemporary evidence of the existence of Jesus, peruse the pages of “The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus”, a Talmudist historian who lived in Judea at the time of Christ. Since he was hardly an apologist for the existence of Christ due to his religious affiliation, you may find yourself somewhat enlightened by his record of events. I do wish to burst your bubble, for if Jesus was not there, the Talmudist Josephus would not have written of his presence.
I must add that in reading your commentary that I cannot tell where Hitler ends and you begin, given the lack of quotations to delineate the separation. Regardless, what is obvious is that Hitler has identical misconceptions about the roots of Judaism and the roots of Christianity that afflict both you and most of western civilization. My admonition, “Christians, cleanse yourself of this Babylonian Talmudic lie” still stands.
And I must add the following. For those of you who have spent time in the pagers of the Bible, God promised Abraham (see his own change of name) that he would be the father of many nations and that his progeny would be of such quantity that they would be effectively impossible to count. When it comes to the Talmudists ( Babylonian Jews), they have never had a nation until 1948. That’s one (1). They have stolen, killed, and destroyed others, but have had but one. When we think of the dispersion of Israelite from Assyria across Europe and then both North America, South Africa and Australia, I see a promise fulfilled to Abraham through his descendants, the Israelites. For those who have never read it, the wording in the Scottish Declaration of Independence after Robert The Bruce temporarily rid those peoples of English rule is somewhat telling. They refer to themselves in that document as the “Sons of Israel”, and Judaists they were not.
You argued (or perhaps it was Hitler?) that “The philosophy of the Greeks was so much superior to this poverty-stricken rubbish that the Athenians burst out laughing when they listened to the apostle’s teaching.” There is no citation provided to support this assertion, but even if true, by the time Paul showed up the Greeks had pretty well gone to stumbling around looking at the decaying and collapsing remains of past glories. After all, by then the Greeks were no different that the residents of Judea in that they were under to boot-heel of the Romans. and regardless of whether this assertion is from you or Hitler, should Hitler have, in admiration of the Greeks, thusly disbanded Bismarks masterpiece and returned it the Greek City-State like Dutchy status which was prevalent prior to 1870?
Either you and/or Hitler argue, “What is this God who takes pleasure only in seeing men grovel before Him? Try to picture to yourselves the meaning of the following, quite simple story. God creates the conditions for sin. Later on He succeeds, with the help of the Devil, in causing man to sin. Then He employs a virgin to bring into the world a son who, by His death, will redeem humanity!”
Of course. Let’s us blame God for our failures, both individually and collectively. Is this what you offer? “I drink because God tempts me to do so. I fornicate and commit adultery because God provided attractive women. I steal from my neighbor and murder at my pleasure because God told me not to. Even though this ‘God’ forbade usury, I allow the Talmudist to charge me such because who is this ‘God’ to tell me I cannot take out a loan to get that new Chevy Suburban? And this ‘God’ who demanded that all debts be forgiven every seven years and every fifty declares a Jubillee? Of that I say nay, nay, for I know better and shall pay the usurer. I shall grovel before man rather than this ‘God’.”
And of this Christian “Bolshevism?” Where is an example? The 10% tithe to the Church? Where in the history of Christendom is an example? There are none. The closest we could even suggest has nothing to do with “Christianity”, but happened in Christian lands whose economic systems were overtaken by the Talmudic usurers. “Capitalism” is not an invention of God, and its evidenced natural outgrowth is monopolistic practices and a blending with “Big Government.” Fascism, which is what we have today, was defined by its founder Mussolini as “a blending of big business and government, better defined as corporatism.” There is the gift from Hitler and Mussolini to the “West”, and any objective observer of this country’s economic system must conclude that it is in fact fascist.
Outside of the mingling of races and the loss of what was western culture, do you actually have a sound complaint? Like it or not, prior to the last 100 years or or so years of Talmudic destruction, American culture and civilization was a product of Christian thought. Since then we’ve headed into a socialist hell hole. Like Hitler constructed for The Fatherland, we have a giant social safety net for the population. As with Hitler’s Germany, our major economic sectors and the government engage each other in a never-ceasing sweaty embrace. The moral behavior given to us by our religious heritage has been cast aside and we’ve now been programmed to embrace a universal martial attitude, now warring at will and without reason. Aside from the demographic and cultural disaster brought upon us by the Talmudists, you should be overjoyed! It’s “Hilter Lite.”
What is wrong in the “West” is not Christianity. It is that we have been invaded by an ages-old enemy who we formerly knew was an enemy. This time, through the patient gaining of the control of every lever of power – government, economic, entertainment. educational, and through the corruption of the religious institutions, this enemy used a Greek ploy, the Trojan Horse, to take control.
God stated, “My people perish for lack of knowledge.” There is nothing new under the sun.
“standing” –
It would have been slightly helpful if you had used quotation marks to delineate where your thoughts began and Der Furhers ended. Or vice-versa. Or all of the above.
Never-the-less, I shall pass on the taking of abberant and generally uncited history lessons, particularly from a grossly undereducated half-Jewish Austrian. The man understood the injustices of Talmudist reparations upon his country after WWI, their ownership of most of German businesses, the debauched filthy “entertainment” that they purveyed across every social stratum of Germanic society, as well as the quite real threat of Bolshevik (Talmudic) communism to western civilization. These were things readily seen. Even a fool could have come to similar conclusions.
Insofar as Hitlers understanding of the differing roots of Talmudic Judaism and Christianity, he was at as much of a loss as most current western Christians and their atheist co-citizens. He had no expertise at all on the matter, thus his views on the subject are irrelevant except to those who hold him in high esteem.
Regarding whether Jesus existed or not, I would direct you to “The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus”, a Talmudic historian who was a contemporary character in Judea at the time of Christ. Were Christ not present, He would not have been a subject of note in the works of Flavius. Certainly a Talmudist cannot be considered an apologist and defender of Christ as were the Apostles.
Again, being impossible to ascertain whether it was you or Der Furher penning, “What is this God who takes pleasure only in seeing men grovel before Him?”, there is no command in the Bible that demands one to “grovel” in front of God. I will say this – If one would take the time to read Deuteronomy 28-32, he/she will note that God promises blessings for obedience (not groveling) and curses for disobedience. Go ahead and read the section and make certain to carefully examine the section where the curses are.
Afterward, engage in a “compare and contrast” exercise by examining the general health of this country before the Talmudists gained control and the current state of affairs. Blessings or curses?
Have a pleasant and more informed day.
Anyone who imagines that JQ sympathy with Muslims such as Rehmat is owed by WNs must ponder the inevitable destination of the Israeli refugees in a lost war against Islam’s votaries.
It may be retrospective wishful thinking to believe that the Balfour Declaration was a valiant attempt to make UK Judenfrei but a Muslim – victory driven reversal of this edict would result in huge numbers of Israelis being granted right of abode in White homelands.
British Foreign Minister, Lord Balfour, the author of the notorious Balfour declaration was a Jew himself. It was Turkish Muslim ambassador to Paris who issued 100,000 visas to European Jews between 1938-1942 – while the leaders of World Zionist movement (Chaim Wiesman and David Gurion) were telling the governments in the US, Canada and Britain to let those European Jews go to hell unless the wants to migrate to the British mandate Palestine.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2008/10/11/how-the-west-got-fooled/
@John
To clarify –
Everything after the first paragraph was excerpted from Table Talk. I thought using quotation marks around every single excerpt would be redundant and I don’t know how to add italics. There were many more juicy quotes I left out because I didn’t want to rock the ark too much. Too late for that, apparently.
Interesting on Erasmus and the Jews, but it is a pity neither Erasmus nor this author understands how fundamentally different the Muslims are from the Jews. The Muslims have had responsibility for civilizations – often great ones. The Jews have never created a civilization, though they have of course exercised enormous influence, good and bad, on existing civilizations.
Anglo-Saxon writes:
“Muslim immigrant communities are being forced to form cultural & religious ghettoes in response to the moral depravity being publicly practised by the majority white populations. If our womenfolk (and young men) were more modest (as they were 50 years ago) then Muslims would have less reason to build barriers, or to “circle their wagons” so to speak.”
While this is true to a large degree, it is false as a criticism of Prof. McDonald’s remarks and it only reinforces the truth of Prof. McDonald’s observations.
If these Muslim immigrants would NOT be in Western countries, they would NOT have to “circle the wagons” as a defense against the immorality of the white indigenous population.
Instead of “circling the wagons”, why don’t they just go back home, where they belong?
They are peaceful invaders, occupiers and colonizers of lands that they could not conquer by brute force, due to Charles Martel, the Hungarian Army (until the Hungarians were defeated at Mohacs in 1526), the Battle of Lepanto and the Battle of Vienna.
The fact that it was the Jew who opened the door for them in order to destroy the white nation states does not make this less so.
While we’re on the topic of influential European clergymen, how about Martin Luther’s views on Jews and Judaism?
http://www.humanitas-international.org/showcase/chronography/documents/luther-jews.htm
Thank goodness Humanitas Intl. put that warning on the top of their page! :-\
The Vatican received the first copy of Holy Qur’an translated into Latin in 683 CE. Had the Church leaders been sincere toward their Lord Christ, they would have noticed that Islam is not anti-Christ and it has more praise for Jesus and his mother Holy Mary than NT. Even Holy Qur’an has mentioned that between the followers of Torah and Gospel – Muslims will find more tolerant people among the followers of Jesus (not the Paulin Christians, for sure).
However, the reason, the Church leaders did not accept Islam as the continuation of Jesus’ message – because Holy Qur’an hits the very core of Church. Islam doesn’t believe in religious establishment. It gives every follower the freedom to judge and follow its teachings on the basis that on the Day of Judgement, he/she will be solely responsible for his/her deeds in this life – and there will be no Jesus, Muhammad, Pope or Ayatullah to save him/her from the Hell fire based on his/her bad deeds in this life.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/searching-for-jesus-as-eh/
It sure is convenient that all Korans supposedly written prior to the 8th century have been destroyed!
“he/she will be solely responsible for his/her deeds in this life – and there will be no Jesus, Muhammad, Pope or Ayatullah to save him/her from the Hell fire based on his/her bad deeds in this life.”
This is an often misunderstood concept in Christianity, I think. The NT tells us that we may find the followers of Christ by their actions. If somoene leads a miserable life and does not “repent” to follow the teachings of Jesus, we may be pretty much assured that that person does not love God. Basically, you can’t do a lot of bad things and then expect Christ to forgive you because if you were a follower of Christ you would not have done those things to begin with. You can, however, be forgiven for past deeds and at any time decide to live for God. While people are murderers, thieves, and adulterers, they cannot also be Christians. But they can redeem themselves. Like the Fedayeen. But not necessarily through great sacrifice. Simply by giving up the past and pursuing God.
I am not a Christian teacher. Tell me if I am wrong.
When I said “redeem themselves,” I was trying to translate. Really I meant, they may at any time accept Christ’s forgiveness and follow him. Man cannot redeem himself! It is a divine redemption.
How can Jesus save someone, if he could not himself from the homicidal Jews?
In Christianity or atleast in Catholism the ‘Salvation’ comes by following the Church and not Jesus.
In your interpretation of followers of Jesus “would not have done” – border’s ones’ stupidity – because all those western leaders who murdered over 105 million innocent people – were proud to call them followers of Jesus. On Purim 2003, when that Israel-First moron ordered the slaughter of more than 500,000 Iraqi Muslims and Christians – he too claimed that “Jesus spoke to him”.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/western-wars-on-islamic-world/
I suspect your Levantine–your own Christian ancestors weep at your blindness.
First – I don’t recall my ancestors being Christians.
Second – My ancestors could have been Jews like Jesus and St. Pual.
Third – My Muslim parents were ‘tolerant’ enough to enrol me in a Catholic Mission from where I graduated – crying for the Jewish lies incorporated in the New Testament.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/virgin-mary-painting-irks-zionists/
Today, I discovered that a Palestinian student I met is being suspended until 2012. The Jews said it was because he was smoking marijuana. But EVERYONE here smokes that stuff, and he is the first I have ever met to be suspended for it.
Obviously your ancestors were Christians. Had, Theodore won the Battle of Yarmuk, you would be too.
It’s quite odd. In fact Jews should be thankful to that dude for smoking marijuana because he is a contributing to the very trade monopolized bythe Jews.
The great majority of American doesn’t know that one of the two reasons Dubya Bush invaded Afghanistan was ‘heroin’ and the other being oil pipeline from Caspian Sea to Pakistan via Afghanistan. It was neither al-Qaeda of Osama Bin Laden. The attack was planned several months ahead of 9/11.
The Jew have always been among the top merchants in drug trade. Gay Coourter in his book Flowers in the Blood tells the Indian Jews involved in drug trade under the British Raj in India. The longest jail sentence (100 years) in connection with trafficking drug is Shimon Dahan, an Israeli Jew, in Bangkok’s Bangkwong Central Prison. His three inmates, serving sentences for drug trafficking, are also his fellow Jews. Dahan was busted at Bangkok Airport for carrying US$2 million worth of the white-powder in 1993.
Most of drug trafficking is controlled by Russian Jews and Israel has been known as the Heaven for such criminals. Even Israeli government ministers have been involved in this lucrative trade. Captain Gonen Segev, the former minister of Energy and Infrastructure (1995) in Yitzhak Robin’s cabinet and member of Israeli Knesset – was arrested in April 2004 for smuggling of thousands of Ecstasy tablets from Amsterdam to Israel.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/02/13/afghanistan-occupied-for-drugs/
Rehmat, when you do not parrot Jewish terminology against the right of self-determination of the white race you can actually say some true things.
You are right: Jews are heavily involved in the Drug Trade.
Wherever there is quick money to be made you will find the Jew.
You are wrong: Jews do not monopolize the marijuana trade.
In fact the marijuana trade is the most wide open, non-exclusive trade to get started in. Just ask any teenager in America.
Here is the latest example of western ‘ignorance’ (I prefer to call it Islamophobia) of Islam which they have always used for political reasons.
Rixon Stewart, who runs the website ‘The Truth Seeker’ – posted an article entitled ‘Iran’s “End Times” Documentary and the “Last Messiah” ’ on April 2, 2011. Rixon Stewart tried to pin Rev. John Hagee’s religious views on the “End Times”, on Iranian leaders. John Hagee has told his Zionist idiots, on several occasions, that according to some biblical prophecy, Islamic Iran will attack Israel to bring in the “End Times” (watch video below).
Rixon Stewart’s article is full of his ignorance of Qur’anic prophecies and Iranian leaders’ views of the zionist regime, the US and the rest of the world. He claims his interpretations of Islamic take on Jesus (Isa), Al-Mahdi and Qiyamah (End Times) are based on the views of Reza Kahlili, a former member of the Revolutionary Guards who later spied for the CIA.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/iran-end-times-the-messiah-and-israeli-hasbara/
For someone who went to a Catholic school, you know next to nothing about Western Civilization. Not that I’m surprised–I’ve seen what they’re teaching at DePaul, Notre Dame, and Georgetown these days.
Athanasius – Stop whining like an Israeli propaganda pig. Do you know that DePaul, Notre Dame, and Georgetown and many other western universities are controlled by Jews and not Catholics? How about the US, Britain, France, Germany, Australia, Netherlands, Austria, etc. – why they have been under Israeli boots for the last 60 years?
Take a deep breath, calm down – and admit who you really are – as I did.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/02/22/dr-finkelstein-banned-in-berlin/
All academia is controlled by Jews. My point is merely that your parents put you in a Catholic school for the prestige, not to expose you to Catholic ideas, which probably only happened at a minimal level.
I’m very open about “who” I am. Are you?