The Revolutionary Excesses of Christian Humanism
Throughout the Western world, both State and Church have adopted Barth’s doctrine of “near and distant neighbours.” When we encounter “foreigners” or “strangers”—whether as citizens or Christians—we must not allow “being in one’s own people” to become “a prison and stronghold.” Every man must instead obey God’s command “to move out from his beginning and therefore seek a wider field.” The result has been that neither the State nor the Church works any longer to preserve and protect what even Barth conceded is our “divine disposition” to love kith and kin over both neighbours and strangers. On the contrary, political and religious leaders, alike, now act as if “our only impulse” should “be so to strengthen the inner forces of our own land and people that we can not only tolerate many foreign countries, and many foreigners who find a second home among us, but make them our own.” Barth denied that the church can “legitimate its own division along racial lines ‘because the community owes to the world a witness…to the mutual fellowship of human beings.”[1] In the years since his death, the “inner forces” pushing both State and Church to embrace the neo-communist program of open borders and mass Third World immigration have become so powerful that the national identity—indeed the very survival—of every Anglo-Saxon Protestant (and European Christian) country has been thrown into doubt. The universalist humanism invoked to justify the globalist program is based not upon reason but upon an “existential leap of faith” entailing a host of unknown and potentially dangerous consequences. Unless and until Protestant theology recognizes the ecclesiastical legitimacy of the Volkskirche, it may be impossible to avoid “excessive” reactions from the forces of ethnoreligious particularism demonized by Barth. Christian ethnopatriotism is down but not out.
Even Barth acknowledged that loyalty to one’s own people “does not exclude the recognition and respecting of other nationalities or the will to experience fellowship with them.” He also knew that it was “not wholly impossible to speak in rational and Christian terms with at least some” defenders of folk-centred, national churches. The need for many such conversations has become much more urgent since the abstract humanism of Barth’s theology has transgressed the boundaries within which he sought to confine it. Barth denied that the nation was an order of creation but he affirmed that there were at least “two distinct circles of natural fellow-humanity.” Unlike national identity which is inherently fluid and contingent, Barth maintained that the relationships between man and woman and parent and children are posited “irreversibly, inflexibly, and indestructibly” by the God-given nature of mankind.[2] Unfortunately, the ideological civil wars of the twentieth century did not come to a permanent end in 1945.
By the 1960s, the forces of cosmopolitan universalism had launched an ongoing cultural revolution that seems set to dissolve the last two orders of creation recognized by Barth. Relationships between men and women and between parents and children are becoming as fluid, reversible, and removable as national identity now that both the State and many ostensibly Christian churches “tolerate” feminism, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, abortion-on-demand, artificial insemination, illegitimacy, and single-parent “families” slavishly dependent upon the corporate welfare state. An incremental, creeping, toleration of incest, polygamy, and paedophilia is following not far behind. Already, Muslim colonies in the West have normalized cousin marriages; feminist journalists suggest that, all things considered, polygamy offers the best balance between autonomy and intimacy for today’s emancipated career woman;[3] and who knows what happens when fashionably transgressive homosexual couples invite “their” children into the privacy of Frankenfamily bedrooms?
Towards an Ethnotheological Critique of Barth’s Humanist Ecclesiology
In these circumstances, a critical re-assessment of Barth’s theology of the anti-nation is long overdue. Let us examine the tortured trajectory of Barth’s long campaign against the ideal of the Volkskirche. Barth asserts that no particular place or people can be holy. “God alone is holy.”[4] But he must acknowledge that God willed Old Israel to become a holy nation. To minimize the normative force of that concession, he contends that the covenant between God and Israel was only a provisional arrangement that was fulfilled by the advent of Christ and his suffering on the Cross. In other words, the central role in the economy of salvation is played by Christ. Ironically, Barth’s Christocentrism left him open to charges of supersessionism; i.e., the belief that Old Covenant Israel was superseded by the New Israel incarnate in the church.[5]
Struggling to resist the supersessionist logic of his Christology, Barth denied that the unbelief of Jews excludes them from “the community of God” because “its election…exists according to God’s eternal decree as the people of Israel (in the whole range of its history in past and future, ante and post Christum natum.)”[6] In effect, Barth provides theological support for the claim that the Jewish ethnonation is a unique order of creation—even though Jews still flatly deny that the coming of Christ changed everything. Of course, Barth does not want to promote the “direct or indirect renewal of Jewish nationalism (which is the prototype of all bad nationalisms).”[7] He does, however, situate contemporary Jews (and the modern State of Israel) in a direct line of descent from Old Israel. As a holy nation elected by God, Israel remains—despite its continued disobedience—the chosen people, an ontological status not open to non-Jewish nations.
According to Barth, neither in “the sphere of creation” nor “in the eschaton, in the light of the final revelation,” does Scripture advert to “the problem of nations.” He asserts that “we can read…the whole context of Genesis 1–9…without finding a single reference to the presence of individual peoples.”[8] A better view is that Genesis 1–9 represents a creation myth; it presupposes the existence of other peoples such as the Egyptians and the Babylonians; it also provides the Israelites, emerging from exile and ignorant of their own identity with a narrative that distinguishes their holy nation from the mythological origins of those other peoples.[9] Throughout Scripture, the sea and the land serve as recurrent metaphors for Jews and non-Jews, respectively. As God created his cosmic temple in Genesis One, the Israelites were set apart from the non-Jews on the third day; it was then that “the waters under the heavens” were “gathered together into one place” called the “Seas,” thereby allowing “the dry land” to appear (Genesis 1:9).[10] Contrary to Barth’s claim, therefore, the relationship between “nations” and “humanity” was foreshadowed in the sphere of creation.
Barth believes that a final solution to the naggingly persistent problem of national identity will come with the eschaton (i.e., the last days, or the Second Coming of Christ.) Only by appealing to an abstract, ahistorical, and passively futurist eschatology can Barth paper over the tension between his doctrine of Israel and his teaching on near and distant neighbours. As we have seen, Barth casually dissolves primordial biocultural distinctions between strangers and neighbours, out-groups and in-groups, into the lowest common denominator of “humanity.” He then declares grandly that an allegedly divine commandment of xenophilia is mandatory for every Christian people.
Barth also licences—in perpetuity—an obdurate, self-assertive, Jewish ethnonation whose identity is grounded firmly in the collective rejection of Christ as the Son of God. Accordingly, Barth was no more interested than the Deutsche Christen in continuing the Christian mission to convert individual Jews to the faith. His utopian vision of the collective conversion of Jews in the last days left him indifferent to “the role of personal choice in the matter of Jewish salvation.”[11] Only through the mysterious work of God, he believed, will Jews come to recognize the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Until the apocalypse, however, Jews remain their own Messiah with a self-proclaimed mission “to heal the world.” Barth insists that “the church” must “not dispute…the eternal election of Israel.” While expressing sorrow over “the nationalist legalistic Messiah-dream of the Synagogue,” Barth affirms that “the bow of the one covenant” still arches over both unbelieving Jews and faithful Christians. In Barth’s humanist ecclesiology, such contradictions and double standards—like the “possibility of unbelief, false belief, and superstition, of ignorance, indifference, hate, and doubt” forever dividing the visible from the invisible church—“all lie close at hand and will continue so to lie as long as time lasts, as long as the final revelation of the victory of Jesus Christ has not yet dispersed these shadows.”[12]
Conclusion
The key to understanding the Protestant deformation of Christian nationhood lies in Barth’s futurist eschatology, the belief that all the earthly divisions of race, class, and gender, between Jew and non-Jew, male and female, slave and free, will be overcome in the apocalyptic appearance of a new heaven and a new earth. In the present age, all the nations of the earth are separated from God in his heaven by an impassable gulf. Alienated from the incarnate Word of God, humans face the constant temptation to worship instead “the gods of power, wealth, nationality, and race that clamour for our allegiance.”[13] In the age to come, the elect will be taken up into the Kingdom of God, into a New Jerusalem where Christ will be seated on his throne with all the saints of Old and New Israel by his side. Barth’s highly refined brand of millennialism contributed to a broader ecumenical movement that led liberal Protestants to embrace mass Third World immigration while pointing conservative evangelicals, especially in the USA, toward Christian Zionism. Christian humanism is not alone in its addiction to millennial teleology. Every revolutionary movement in the modern era has invoked its own secularized version of the apocalyptic myth of the Second Coming. The religion of humanity simply translates the eschatological hopes of Christian believers into secular utopias and myths of human perfectibility. In concurrent campaigns to engineer the salvation of the chimerical abstraction they call “humanity,” both Christians and Communists committed countless excesses. In pursuit of the millennium, “progressives” of all stripes brought Christendom to the brink of extinction.
The good news is that futurist eschatology may lose its hold over the Christian social imaginary during the next Protestant Reformation. The neo-communist theology now peddled by Protestant divinity schools draws its emotional force from the as yet unrealised promise of Christ’s Second Coming. That promise is wearing thin, much like secular humanist hopes that the Bolshevik Revolution would usher in a worker’s paradise. For centuries now, atheists and sceptics have mocked the Christian creeds which look forward to the parousia; the New Testament, they say, clearly shows that first-century Christians were convinced that Christ was coming in their near future. In the Book of Revelation, Christ proclaims, “Behold, I am coming soon” (Revelation 22:7). During his lifetime, Jesus promised that “this generation will not pass away” before they see “the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and glory” (Matthew 24:30–34). Barth encouraged mainstream Christians to join with sceptics in assuming that first-century Christians were wrong, that their expectations were left unfulfilled. But what if they were right? What if the parousia did come before all those who had heard Jesus speak had passed away? What if Christ came back, as promised, on clouds of glory, in the first century AD? What if the evidence for such a startling proposition has always been present, in plain view, readily available to all with eyes to see in the Holy Bible?
One of the most interesting and potentially world-shattering developments in the history of Anglo-Saxon Protestantism is emerging, outside the theological seminaries and divinity schools, in a Bible studies movement known as preterism (from the Latin praeter meaning ‘past’).[14] Preterist pastors teach that Old Covenant Israel was destroyed, once and for all, with the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in AD 70. By any standard, that event was of world-historical significance; more than a million Jews died as a consequence. What might now be called the first holocaust did not come as a surprise to first-century Christians. Jesus had warned them to leave Jerusalem when the signs of its imminent destruction began to appear. He told his disciples that “not one stone” of the temple “will be left on another, every one will be thrown down.”(Matthew 24:2) Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian and eyewitness to the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70, reported that armies of angels were seen moving through the clouds as the gathering storm of destruction swept over the city.[15] The Old Covenant with Israel was superseded when a New Covenant came into force in which the church became the New Israel.
This teaching marks a return to Christian orthodoxy in which neither individual Jews nor the modern State of Israel are to be set upon a pedestal as avatars of the still-holy nation of ancient Israel. The parousia of Christ is in the past; it did not herald the physical end of planet Earth; nor will the Temple in Jerusalem be restored sometime in our future so that Jesus will at long last reign in glory over his Kingdom. Old Israel no longer exists. God is no longer bound hand and foot to the Old Covenant. The advent of Christ changed everything; in particular, it changed what it means to be a Jew. Until the New Covenant was consummated in AD 70, in other words, while every “jot and tittle” of the Law still remained in force, to be a Jew was to be a member of God’s holy nation; but, even during Christ’s lifetime, as can be seen most clearly in the Gospel of John, the meaning of the word “Jew” was changing, until finally after AD 70 it denoted a people whose collective, ethnoreligious identity was—and remains—rooted in its rejection of Christ. Christians, on the other hand, are duty-bound to pray for the conversion of the Jews—only by recognizing the Lordship of Jesus Christ can the “synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9) be saved from itself.
Once the New Covenant creation was inaugurated, the church was called to exercise and expand Christ’s spiritual dominion over a world without end. Barth, of course, explicitly rejected a theology of dominion:
The sign which [the church] is called to erect is a sign other than the sign of dominion. For this reason, it will not conceive its task to be the establishment of a rule of its own. It will not proceed to build a city of God in opposition to the cities of the world, a realm of the pious against the realm of the godless, an island of the righteous and blessed in the midst of the sea of wickedness.[16]
Barth designed a defeatist theology to accommodate the church to “post-Christendom.” The early church, by contrast, set forth to make disciples of every nation. Having been rejected by the Jews, and driven out of the Middle East by the Muslim conquest several centuries later, Christ found his only secure earthly habitation in the hearts and minds of the European peoples. It was in Old Europe that the first and greatest Christian nations came into being, thereby fulfilling Christ’s prophecy that the leaves of the tree of life will be “for the healing of the nations” (Revelation 22:2). Barth’s ever-so-nice Christian humanism threatens to undo that glorious achievement.
[1] Ibid., 291-294; Mangina, “Stranger as Sacrament,” 331.
[2] Barth CD III 4, 308, 288.
[3] Jessica Mack, “Women can be independent and intimate,” http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/22/women-intimacy-autonomy
[4] Ibid., 292.
[5] R Kendall Soulen, The God of Israel and Christian Theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996), 85-94.
[6] Barth, CD III 4, 292, 310, 197-200.
[7] Barth, CD II 2, 280-281.
[8] Barth, CD III 4, 310.
[9] Cf John H Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009).
[10] Norman Voss, “The Six Days of Creation,” Covenant Creation Conference, 2010, lecture available online at:
http://preteristhosting.com/ad70net/audio/CCC2010/CCC2010_Lecture_02_Norm_Voss_2.mp3
[11] Johnson, “Jewish Rejection of Jesus,” 238.
[12] Karl Barth, CD, II 2, 204-205; Gerhard Sauter, “Why is Karl Barth’s Church Dogmatics not a ‘Theology of Hope’? Some Observations on Barth’s Understanding of Eschatology,” (1999) 52(4) Scottish Journal of Theology 407; Barth, God Here and Now, 84.
[13] Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding, 5.
[14] A very good introduction to preterism is: Timothy P Martin & Jeffrey L Vaughn, Beyond Creation Science: New Covenant Creation from Genesis to Revelation (Whitehall, MT: Apocalyptic Vision Press, 2007).
[15] Paul L Maier, ed, Josephus: The Essential Writings (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1988), 365-369; Paul L Maier, tr. Eusebius: The Church History (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2007), 73-83.
[16] Cf., David Chilton, Paradise Restored: A Biblical Theology of Dominion (Horn Lake, MS: Dominion Press, 2007). Karl Barth, God in Action (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2005), 34:
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
Fraser should consider the colloquial meaning of “generation” at the time of the translation of the Bible into English.
“This generation shall not pass away” compared to Noah who was “perfect in his generations”.
As the etymology itself has more to do with “product” than “time frame” Jesus’ coming again with power and great glory may indeed mean that our Savior will swoop in, US Cavalry like, to save us from ourselves at the last minute before die off as a race.
Something else to ponder, from the universal Church by way of Cranmer’s incomparable legacy to the Anglosphere:
O MERCIFUL God, who hast made all men, and hatest nothing that thou hast made, nor wouldest the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be converted and live; Have mercy upon all Jews, Turks, Infidels, and Hereticks, and take from them all ignorance, hardness of heart, and contempt of thy Word; and so fetch them home, blessed Lord, to thy flock, that they may be saved among the remnant of the true Israelites, and be made one fold under one shepherd, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.
“But what if they were right? What if the parousia did come before all those who had heard Jesus speak had passed away? What if Christ came back, as promised, on clouds of glory, in the first century AD? What if the evidence for such a startling proposition has always been present, in plain view, readily available to all with eyes to see in the Holy Bible?”
Here’s a simpler idea: this is all bullshit, every bit of it. Just the insane rantings of a bunch of Jew psychopaths on the shores of the Dead Sea. The sooner all this is tucked away in the “Can you believe it” department along with the Babylonian and Assyrian antiquities, the sooner the White Race will recover.
“Christian” Zionism is a characteristic of Anglo-American Calvinism.
I don’t see such things among, for example, Hungarian Calvinists or Afrikaner Calvinists.
First of all love the Bach!
From 975 B. C., the Bible very carefully distinguished between the Southern, two tribed nation of Judah and the Northern, ten-tribed nation of Israel. This distinction is kept clear, both in the historical record of what is past and the prophetic record of what is to come. Both Israel and Judah were carried into captivity – but separately, and at different times, by different conquerors, and taken to different places. Thus the Assyrian deportation of Israel included the entire population of the northern Kingdom of Israel (by now in the millions!) and a considerable representative share of the southern Kingdom of Judah.
The Babylonian captivity of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi lasted 70 years and after the fall of Babylon, King Cyrus allowed all who wished to return to Palestine, beginning in 536 B.C. (See II Chron. 36:20-23.) Ezra I- 2 records that only 42,360 returned, and their descendants. Millions of the northern tribes descendents migrated to all the areas of Europe then to the Americas.
Christ said His sheep would hear his voice! God promised Judah to never be without a lawgiver or king and GB has never been without one.
Most of the Jews in Israel today admit to being of the Ashkenazi tribe that converted to Judaism and never even had a Hebrew ancestor!
Come on Christian brothers and sisters let’s get a little dose of reality here because time is short!
James,
Perhaps the day will come when Jesus Christ is debunked completely and totally and for all time.
And when the Sixth Commandment is subsequently repealed in all its derivatives and variations, you and I will have a little get together, to celebrate our emancipation from “ranting Jewish bullshit” as it were.
You should party like there’s no tomorrow.
Those of us who foolishly restrained our “urge to purge” all our lives … well there will be no time to party. There will be a lot of purging to be done and you annoying little atheistic geeks will be first in line. “And the first shall be last and the last shall be first” as they say.
See you in hell?
– Pilgrim
@James O’Meara: OK, but how are we going to convince all the fanatical Biblical “literalists” and “dispensationalists” in the U.S.?
Modern Christianity, really whether Catholic or reformist, no longer serves the interests of whites. It is that simple. The Catholic church is more interested in conscripting Mexicans and other Central Americans, while various Protestant sects understand their future to be an alliance with Zionist Jews as they wait out the “end times” (in the meantime attempting to “convert” as many Africans and Chinese as possible into their fold).
@m:
American Protestants aren’t trying to convert just Africans and Asians.
They are also sending missionaries to Eastern Europe, trying to convert local native Catholics and Orthodox.
I see these people almost every day, with their American accents, funny clothes, and Anglo-Saxon faces…
They are pretty much despised here by the local right-wing, and seen as foreign subverters of the native culture.
@William:
No moral person will like to be related to Judah, the oldest son of prophet Israel (Jacob). According to Bible, Judah had sex with his widowed daughter-in-law and produced two bastard sons who became the forefathers of Jews.
Hebrew did not accept Jesus as promised Hebrew Messiah because they were expecting the Messiah to be a powerful man like King David or King Solomon or Barack Obama.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/obama-jewish-president-messiah-or-g-d/
@m:
More than 70% of Latin Americans are Catholics. However, the head of Catholic Church and Protestant Church has always been White.
These days, the elites of Catholic, Protestants and all other Christian denominations – love Jews and Israel. Some of them have issued ‘fatwa’ that Jews did not kill Jesus.
On July 19, Christians United For Israel (CUFI) held their annual conference at the Convention Center in Washington DC. According to CUFI, over 5,000 Christians attended the meeting. Benji Netanyahu addressed the conference via satellite, telling the new Christian Crusaders: “When you support Israel, you don’t have to choose between your interests and your values; you get both. Our enemies think that we are you (Americans) and you’re us (Jews). And you know something? They’re absolutely right“…..
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/07/22/hagee-mr-ahmadinejad-dont-threaten-israel/
@James O’Meara:
The roots of Christianity among us European gentiles was more Platonic/neo-Platonic than anything else. The idea that there was a supreme God or supreme good was central to Greco-Roman Platonic thinking. Along came Christ, and he full filled the requirements of Platonic thought.
This is nothing new, all of the early Christian thinkers, many of whom were former pagans like Augustine saw it that way. You might as well blame the pagan Plato too.
I don’t see these Judeo-Christian/Christian-Zionists as Protestants. Their religious philosophy in my opinion is too look to the Jews for money & influence, and to look to the Roman Catholic Church to out Catholic the Pope. LOL. Not the sharpest tools in the Christian shed—if they are indeed Christians.
Happy New Year! I’m going to go have a beverage, and watch the ball drop. LOL. Best wishes to all, and to all a good New Year.
@ James O’Meara
Exactly. To paraphrase another James (Mason):
“The best thing to do with bullshit is to leave it. Let die where it stands. No more batting it around.”
@William:
Yair Davidy published in Israel The Tribes which is sub titled The Israelite Origin of the Western Peoples. I believe he followed it up with a few more books on the same subject. It seems that, as usual, “everyone” except us knows who we are. I even remember a Roman Catholic Filipino co-worker was stunned to learn that I knew who I was.
As a follow up to my post, it is not so much that Christianity looks toward the other in an effort to secure their salvation through Christ, it is that they then tell the other that they are politically equal, and invite them into the native countries with open arms. In their attempt to aggrandize their spiritual (and temporal) fortunes, these Christians are unconcerned over the resulting dispossession of whites. In fact, many seem to welcome it.
Also, not understanding the intrinsic difference in races, they unwittingly create bizarre offshoots of the mother church, as native populations embraces a distinctly Western form not indigenous and really amenable to the spirit of the other. This can be seen especially in Africa, or in churches such as the one Obama attended.
@Rehmat:
“However, the head of Catholic Church … has always been White”
In the early Church Popes were elected from North Africa as in the same region which produced St. Augustine who developed his synthesis with Plato. He and Pope Gelasius (for example) would probably have had a skin pigmentation similar to Gaddafi. The Church will once again turn to non-white popes in the future. Very few catholic ‘trads’ from Europe or the USA would object if Cardinal Ranjith of Sri Lanka was elected Pope Benedict’s successor.
@Remat & Sandy
God has a perfect plan for His obedient children.
Tamar had to pose as a harlot in order to get Judah to father an acceptable heir. I wouldn’t want to be descended from Esau either, Jacobs twin brother and first born of Isaac. Esau despised his birthright and sold it to his brother for bread and pottage. He took strange wives and has many descendants in the world that I am sure are as blind and disobedient as Judah. But God’s plan was carried out just the way He wanted by the people He wanted!
ISRAEL WAS TO HAVE A CHANGE OF NAME, WHILE THE JEWS’ NAME WAS LEFT TO THEM AS A CURSE. In Isaiah 65:13-15, God tells the Jews: “And ye shall leave YOUR name FOR A CURSE TO MY CHOSEN: FOR THE LORD GOD SHALL SLAY THEE, and CALL HIS SERVANTS BY ANOTHER NAME.” ((( CHRISTIANS ))) Similar fate was proscribed to Cain and his descendants! Is it any wonder this world is so wicked? Between the rich false Zionists and supplanted heirs there is an evil root!
When it is declared that the U.S. and Britain and other Nordic nations are Israelites and the chosen people of God, most of the modern day churches call it false and without foundation, but refuse to give any Scriptures to prove that we are wrong. They put us on the defensive by demanding proof of our claims, and in response we give evidence from Scripture, history, etymology, and heraldry.
There is a reason for the descendants of the these white Europeans who God gives eyes to see and ears to hear the Truth of His Word. WE WILL stand against Satan. Dilution of the gene pool which is the MO of the NWO produces blind compliant peoples that refuse to accept there could even be an evil influence that controls this material world! Jews whose eyes are opened are among the most zealous Christians!
Get some Truth dear White Christian brethren for the End times are at hand! May the LORD bless and open the eyes of those that love Truth!
Agape
@Rehmat: Try to make all Moslems aware of the following two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tYNIqwdFzY Dr. Alan Sabrosky on 9/11
http://www.defraudingamerica.com/author_bio.html Background of Rodney Stich
@James O’Meara:
Many of the most courageous Christians and Moslems take the attitude that their religion is not for sale. People fight to defend their families, their homes, their ways of life and their religions. Jews are a deceptive, manipulative and exploitative people who are geniuses at making money from other peoples’ misery.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzfbSsqES34 How the Jewish Lobby Works
As I said before, some problems very precious to Anglo-Americans (and to Barth) are only understandable from a Calvinist angle. That’s the case with the theology of covenants or “economies”, and as well with the “British Israelism” debated here. Even if it’s no more British, but extended to other Europeans – it won’t interest anyone who doesn’t share the Calvinist infatuation with the Old Testament.
Try instead Marcionism, for example, and you’ll see my point.
Many thanks to Mr. Fraser for the quotations (I never studied the Kirchliche Dogmatik myself).
By the way, who is Mr. Frazer? It would be interesting to know.
@monte:
I suspect he is an Austalian jounalist but I could be wrong …
Barth’s theology seems to have influenced German Catholic theologians including the present Pope. They turned up at the Vatican in 1962 and wrecked the Second Vatican Council. Their leader was Karl Rahner whom some of the better American bishops at the time (Griffin an auxiliary in New York and the then Bishop of Nashville) thought a complete weirdo.
The Pope’s latest book is still peddling Barth’s ideas on the Jews which proves, if nothing else, that these Germanic theologians are evidently loyal to one and other.
I have always wondered:
If Christ is such a millstone around the neck of Europeans, if it is so subversive and weakening to our people…
Why, in God’s name, does the mere mention of Christ freak Jews out?
A big, athletic, truly devoted white Christian like Tim Tebow scares the piss out of them…there is something to this beyond any “historical grievances”. It scares them to death.
@Eric Hale:
This is a fair point but it’s amazing to see how many TOO debates conclude with atheists arguing with Christians then, as a neat variation, Catholics take on the Protestants which is what Fraser’s piece will inevitably incite (for the record, I’m with Fraser).
The lack of unity among the white tribes of Europe continues. I sense an ethnic dimension to the current economic debates within the EU as in Nothern tribes v Southern.
Perhaps this could be a good song for us
http://www.youtube.com/user/ramzpaul?feature=watch#p/a/f/1/NIHJ9RMAVGI
We’ll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
And I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t get fooled again
Change it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fall that’s all
But the world looks just the same
And history ain’t changed
‘Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
And I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t get fooled again
No, no!
I’ll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I’ll get all my papers and smile at the sky
For I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?
There’s nothing in the street
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now the parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t get fooled again
No, no!
http://www.youtube.com/user/ramzpaul?feature=watch#p/a/f/1/NIHJ9RMAVGI
Neither Protestant nor Catholic is superior. Calvin, Luther, and the other Protestant “Reformers” did not practice “sola scriptura,” as they proclaimed. Rather, they went back to St. Augustine. There is still Calvinist-like theological strain in the Roman Catholic Church in a certain order (though not mainstream Catholic doctrine).
To learn the truth on Calvin and Augustin, go to You Tube and type in “Calvinism – Troubling and Reason Defiant.” You’ll immediately see why Christianity of this kind is bad for our race and civilization.
For what is bad with this common brand
@buckle:
“it’s amazing to see how many TOO debates conclude with atheists arguing with Christians”
The above posts prove my point with youtube offering the “truth”.
@buckle: Indeed!
With the exception that I am not an Atheist –just an anti-Calvinist and anti-Augustinian.
My position is that an inclusive and tolerant White ethnostate is the only possible solution:
A Busy Month for American Renaissance
@buckle: If you can demonstrate that Augustine and, especially, Calvin did not believe and teach that human nature was “totally depraved” and hopelessly enslaved to the sin, owing to Man’s acquired “sin-nature” after “the Fall,” I will certainly congratulate you for your excellent scholarship — and I may even change my views on the subject!
I have heard a lifetime of both Catholic and Protestant teachings — and I cannot see any huge or fundamental difference between these two branches of Christianity. Baptists and traditional Catholics have much more in common, theologically, than either seem to realize. What these two camps imagine to be huge and insurmountable differences in creeds are really quite trivial IMHO.
In fact, I’ve been in Catholic and Presbyterian churches where the very same creed was recited, verbatim!
I think with this Jewish sensitivity training, (one becomes actually de-sensitized to your-own survival, for the sake of someone else) or multi-cultural sensitivity training, America and Europe has lost its sense of direction and proper display of “outrage” (almost paralyzed) for what we perceive as detrimental to our well being, for fear of offending someone or being called anti….something, racist, bigot or what ever. This forces you against the wall. The only way for progress is to free yourself by the same force that presses against you. (That is if you have it in you)
Collectively, Christianity is a force to be reckoned with. Jews know that, and that is why they are out to destroy any cohesion within the State-Politic-Religion triad. (Yet within their own country it is pursued)
If Jews succeed here and in Europe, then Christianity is/was just another brick to the whole house. Theology and the Church have their innate demons. Just as Christianity grew out of Judaism and Judaism out of the God/Goddesses religions, it will come full circle back to those ancient understandings. (Kabala for the Jews, and Christianity needs to find her alternative, or acceptable ancient female religion for balance and hope, as she (Christianity) has been perverted too) Hopefully Enlightened thru the ages past by then, with no need for bloodshed. Judaism never stood alone, nor can it stand alone. The same goes for Christianity, but it has not realized it yet completely. Partially yes, as it leans and is supported by Judaism, and Judaism by Christianity and ancient Goddess Kabala religion, although perversely masculinized). But that will not hold.
As for all the past Theologians, they’ve done their work, we can learn from them, but our job is to do a work TODAY that will help our children find “Light grounded in Truth” and stability to create future Generations. We can not live on the work of past Theologians, as they no longer reflect the dilemma of our times. We need new grounded spiritual Thinkers in our time, who have not prostituted themselves to all the isms. (Utterly missing in the US) Who are the great Theologians that can think Out-Side of the Box today?
Not wishful thinking, complacent and flimsy sugar-coated churches that make one vomit all the while saying the right words (empty). Where is the Meat for our souls and mind to chew on, education, or the values to pass on? There are none left. Our kids tell us we live in the old days.
Sometimes America makes me sick. (Please spare me from your thoughts by some of you: if you don’t like it here go back where you came from, or why are you here? RIGHT! (None of your business) Yes, I get angry, very angry indeed.
Maybe some of you AMERICANS NEED to become so sick, that eventually you’ll become Activists/doers, fighters, instead of great writers and talkers with showmanship. Happy New Year, no, better yet, may it be a year of the sword! (seperate the phony from the real)
@Pilgrim’s Pride:
@William:
To of all of the Christian Identity and British Israelite commentators to this site, how under-educated are you? Do you believe that the world is only 6,000 years old? Is it (sing it like pre-school children) “because The Bible Tells Me So”?
As followers of Jesus, why do you always quote the Old Testament Jews?
Why do you people continue to believe in the Jew demon-god YAHWEH? Is it that you find comfort in being a loyal shabbos goy slaves?
I can understand Rehmat – as a Muslim, he is happy to prostrate himself to the Jew demon-god YAHWEH, aka ALLAH, and follow the slave religion – but why do you, Aryan?!!!
You have been corrupted by 1500+ of judeophile teachings. I would recommend that you read one of the earliest Fathers of the Church to understand how much your earlier, more devout, better Christians knew the truth, and were willing to turn their backs on the Jews.
http://holywar.org/txt/chrysostom.html
The message of our Lord and Saviour, the Christ, whom the Jews hung from a tree, is found in the New Testament!
whew! Where am I? Is this TOO?
Unfortunately, I was raised without religion by commie or fellow-traveling parents. The only thing that this earthbound person, myself, is interested in is the Jew connection with Protestantism and how to deal with it. It appears that the Israel thang is a big deal to many Protestants. I had a Christmas exchange with a Bible Believer who objected to my diplomatic remarks about Israel/jews. He had overlooked his Gospels that clearly had the jews killing Christ…he left the room.
I am just trying to understand how we got to the jew threat (ww3) of today. Jew money swears, jew TV fouls our pop culure, jew intellectuals deform our thinking, etc. Jews grin and squat on our windowsills..Ezra Pound…and observe us. The Jews are Magic. This has a Protestant geneology.
It is all bunk to me, but most folks seem to need religion, which i respect, if fail to understand completely.
If the Jews were resurrected by Protestantism while the Catholic Church had put an end to them with , as I understand it, the Law being fulfilled in Christ and the Spirit, which is supposed to do away with all the jew Laws that leave any normal person trembling, including how to wipe one’s butt…left to right, or right to left? Puhlese G-d, forgive me for I cannot remember the Rule from one day to the next.
As a Darwinian, I simply have great fun and Love the World Without End ,,,yes, without end as opposed to daffy Second Coming appocolypse Protestants…daily by enjoying White People, nature, children, intellect, White Music, and the occasional gadget, and of course, the Great Mystery which my biological orientation tells me to worship, more or less. ( Speaking of Appocolypse, in Mel Gibson’s Appocolypto, the movie, the injuns refuse to come with the White Man (Catholic Church) and go back to the Jungle, thus more or less confirming the whole ersatz Injun Christianity of today, which Gibson must have intended inasmuch as the whole movie led brilliantly (I might add) to the appocolyptic last scenes of Injun Rejection of White sensibility (Catholic Church embodied). Gibson must be a racist.)
So, the jew death-grip on our Protestant collective psyche (Catholic too to some degree I am given to understand) comes from the terrible power of the jew purse? Jew lies? Protestant atavism…going back to the OT…or what? And what about E. Michael Jones’ The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit?
So, the biological character of Whites finds fulfillment in Catholic Christianity with its Charity, etc. Jew biological character finds itself fulfilled by a Darwinian Your People/Race First. The OT can be seen as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, per folks around KM.
Jew religion is not a religion, it is a tribal discourse. We need a tribal discourse I guess that can assume the guise or robes of religion, the noble lie of sorts. Myself, I can do without lies, noble or ignoble.
The Protestant countries seem to be the most Judaized. The Catholic countries seem, at worst, a bit of Me Too, but usually just tell the jews to go to hell.
So, if we are serious about politics, we need to be able to deal with Christian zionists, Protestants And Vatican Two Catholics who have listened to the claptrap of religious discourse that still sees the jews as somehow holy.
God is not dead for our fellow Whites and we need a solid sense of how to deal with the jews that goes beyond rationality. Or maybe we do not.
Seems to me the jews are in Big Secular Trouble. Maybe we can make more progress by not addressing the thing with religious talk. However, I need to know how much Protestantism is infected with the jews. Help. Joe
@James O’Meara:
et. al.
I know the temptation to react with “this is your problem, not ours” feeling of superiority towards the problems of contemporary Christianity is irresistible for you and the other unbelievers. The prescription from you and many WN’s that religious skepticism is a step toward recovery for the white race however seems belied by modern developments. The decline in Christianity and continuing growth of opposition to it in the western world certainly doesn’t seem to have produced a swell in nationalist feeling, rather quite the opposite.
Generally if you review the landscape objectively, even making allowance for the occasional negative contribution of religious groups, it is those countries, parties, and ideologies most devoid of religion and opposed to Christianity which are the most dogmatic in opposition to the white race and nationalism and dogmatic in support of multiculturalism.
Even the most cursory acquaintance with Fraser’s articles here and the world he refers to would be aware that the overwhelming tendency of the modern humanism who whose presuppositions at least you endorse is a dogmatic multiculturalism and globalism. The refusal to see this most obvious correlation between the modern world’s lack of faith and belief and the slide into cultural bolshevism, made by many white nationalists and contrasting with what even the simplest negro senses, makes one question really if many of you fundamentally are any smarter. It also makes one at least partially understand the tendency of many churchmen to favor the latter over the former, as well as to conclude the Jews really are endowed with some superhuman invincibility.
@Adeimantus:
There is no mystery that St Augustine fell into heresy in the early stage of his career but this changed following his move to Italy and encounter with St. Ambrose of Milan but I can not believe that TOO posters are interested in a recapitulation of the Bishop of Hippo’s “Confessions”.
What is of interest is surely Fraser’s thesis namely the contribution to the corruption of European thought by Karl Barth. In my own UK experience the Church of England fails to defend the best interests of the British tribes by engendering a healthy patriotism. It was completely different when the Pope was here in 2010. He spent the whole 3 days reminding us of the greatness of our “noble” peoples.
Although, as I have indicated, this German Pope is prickly around the subject of Judaism and his latest book would appear to contain “Barthisms” on the subject of Jewish conversions to the Faith.
@Okiereddust:
Well said. The expression “Communism for the Rich” is being used to describe are “interconnected” financial services industry for example. These guys are anything but patriotic and no friends of Christianity.
@Joe Webb:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ6WLB9oRUk AIPAC – The Israeli Lobby
jew threat (ww3) of today Can we get opinions on the value of the preceding video in combatting the jew threat?
@Okiereddust:
Let me correct this.
Although I think Andrew Fraser is basically correct in his interest in modern theologians both like Barth I immediately recognize as greatly influential and those like J. Cameron Carter I do not, I think in view of the general anti-Christian sentiment widely felt in WN circles this statement regarding not only the Church but the State as adopting Barth’s doctrine on “near and distant neighbors” some clarification is in order regarding this and the nature of Barth’s “Christian Humanism”. This adoption by the modern state hardly represents a modern form of theocracy, as many ignorant or dishonest WN’s would suggest. It au contraire merely represents the substitution for traditional religious doctrines in modern Christianity, whether most blatantly through the liberalism of mainline Christianity or through the slightly more veiled form of neo-orthodoxy for evangelicalism, of secular, humanistic, and atheistic doctrines, in this case Marx’s doctrine that “the proletariat has no fatherland”.
Here also I think we see the source, not only in mainline Churches but in most dispensationalist leaning evangelical Churches as well, of the bias toward Israel. While the rank and file certainly are affected by popular dispensationalist writing like the “Left Behind” series, this would not be so influential in the Churches’ polity were not the more intellectually respectable (albeit equally bogus to orthodoxy) doctrines of Barth and similar theologians on the Israel and national questions so accepted among Church leaders and theologians.
@Joe Webb:
There is a strain in mainstream Protestantism, I don’t know that it is all Calvin, that holds up the Old Testament Jews as an example of what to do wrong. I don’t know how someone could take the mistakes, crimes, arrogance, and, sins of the ancient Jews as somehow being pro-Jew? If anything the Jews are being ridiculed for their evil nature, leading up to their ultimate rejection & deicide of Jesus Christ.
Today, most Protestants go to church a few times a year, if that, and their religious education is limited to a few Sunday school lessons, or vbs lessons when they are children.
One of the main things that is wrong is that educated, I’m talking Protestant college grads, have become too accommodating of of Jews, Catholics, and now these outright pagan sects like the Moslems, Hindus etc.
You are right about Augustine & Sola Scriptura, in relation to the Roman Catholic belief in the Trinity, which is hard to support by Christ’s own words in scripture. But, does it make that much of a difference in the genreal scope of things?
As far as the Jews go, they have been tolerated, used and promoted by the Roman Catholic Church since the days of Augustine. (There is no direct criticism of the Jews by Augustine that I know of.)
I’m sure you are aware that Augustine believed in deamons, and wrote a lot about them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ij4sZRY79zo J. S. Bach – Chorale ‘Nun Komm’, der Heiden Heiland’ BWV 659
Buckley changed his views and by the mid-1960s renounced racism. This change was caused in part because of his reaction to the tactics used by white supremacists against the civil rights movement, and in part because of the influence of friends like Garry Wills, who confronted Buckley on the morality of his politics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Buckley,_Jr.
What theologies do White racists need? What tribal discourse do we need?
Consider an ethnostate with 10 basic principles:
1) Anyone who is not pro-White is heavily taxed, exiled, sterilized or imprisoned.
2) No immigration is allowed.
3) Anyone who is not ultra-pro-White is restricted in owning property and is not allowed to vote.
4) The ultra-pro-White Council consists of hereditary members who rule as White racist magistrates of the ethnostate, and the Council decides who is ultra-pro-White and also who is pro-White.
5) No one under the age of 30 is allowed to vote.
6) The ethnostate’s White citizens have a Constitution and Bill of Rights with the right to appeal a Council ruling that might declare them to be not pro-White or not ultra-pro-White.
7) The ultra-pro-White Council obeys an unchangeable Constitution that gives rights and veto powers to the White citizens who do not belong to the ultra-pro-White Council.
8) The Constitution establishes who is, or is not, a White citizen.
9) Every White citizen over the age of 12 has the right to bear arms.
10) Robust free speech is allowed for all White citizens, and the law must be simple enough for a 12-year-old child to understand.
What is wrong with the preceding principles?
@Less IQ than a Jew:
The problem is you describe healthy Whites as “racist”. Stop using the enemy’s language. The only racists on this planet are people opposed to White identity.
@Less IQ than a Jew: the issue of how judaized Protestants are remains unanswered.
Please somebody chime in on E. Michael Jones’ The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit. This a book that must be read by us, even if it is rejected as a ” sound history. If it is rejected, then how, and why? Who else to read.
Fore example Cabbala was Jewish but there was also a Christian Cabbala, which I assume came from the Jews. Cabbala is magic, and is also very sexual in at least Jewish Cabbala. It starts with Sex in the Sky between a female diety , Shekanah, and a male deity called by various names. They have a family romance gong with their offspring, which leads directly to Freud’s pseudo-brain.
For example, in Hawthorne’s Scarlet Letter, Christian Cabbala shows up as occult signs ornamenting a Boston house.
I wrote a 25 page piece a year or two ago on Jewish Cabbala and Freud, suspecting the connection…and found that a jew hand beat me to it about 50 years ago and had written a book celebrating the Freud-Cabbala connection. Insane, but true.
All this magic and the clear Opportunity and Motive of Jews to destroy the Church is related in Jones’ book on the Jews. The question is, How much?, How influential? and How influential in our Protestant and even Catholic churches.
The widespread support of jews here in the states did not start in 1948 or 1967. I have read-up on the Leo Frank trial of 1913. Jew Money/Power was famously demonstrated at that trial. Frank was convicted of murdering a factory girl, Mary Phagan. The judgment was appealed 12 times and all the way to the US Supreme Court. Jewish New York money and influence poured into Georgia.
The Governor of Georgia was a law partner with Frank’s defence team. He commuted the death sentence. Atlantans and Georgians went berzerk. A lynch party composed of local big shots and lesser notables broke Frank out of jail and lynched him.
Probably the best book on the Frank affair is my Steve Oney, And the Dead Shall Rise. The title is opportunistic, but it is 600 pages of day by day detail and for 10 bucks or so from Amazon, a near-must read not only for the Frank Trial, but for life and times in Atlanta 100 years ago. Oney is or was a newpaper writer and spent 17 years on this book. It shows it.
The New York Times’ Ochs, Mr. O, threw in the NYT’s prestige along with many other Me-Too papers and jew groups to lobby (and corrupt witnesses as well with jew money) to free Frank.
Mr O commented more or less after Frank was lynched…we killed Frank with our Outside Jew influence. Pretty amazing. Georgians and the entire South were outraged by the Jews. Oney says there was little or no anti-semitism in the South or Georgia/Atlanta, but afterwards the KKK was revived and the ADL was founded. It did shut the Jews up in Georgia . And Mr. O of the Times, who never wanted the NYT to be a “Jewish Newspaper,” got some.unintended consequences. The NYT never again mounted activist defense for an individual, says Oney.
What is the Point? The point is that jew power was immense 100 years ago.
How did this happen? Protestants have a much stronger attachment to the Jews than Catholics. Why and How…again.
Joe
@Joe Webb: I can’t properly “chime in,” as you ask, Joe, because I haven’t read the book in anything like its entirety (I’ll leave the uninformed commenting to Tom and certain others). Yet everything that I have learned of it, along with what I have read in transcripts of two of Jones’s live appearances (at a seminar and a more straightforward book-flogging presentation) where he spoke at length of the book, suggests that your main premise—that his book is instructive enough to merit a close reading by fans of this site—is on the money. Incidentally, I also agree with your take on the Leo Frank case—i.e., on its significance, not merely the fact that it took place.
I hope that this is enough seconding for a start. Happy New Year, Joe.
@Joe Webb:
“the issue of how judaized Protestants are remains unanswered.”
Well they worship a Jewish messiah, read about ancient Jewish heroes, and base their values on the writings found in Jewish religious texts. I’d say their Judaization is somewhere around 99%.
@Okiereddust: Here and elsewhere you have posted comments that stand out by reason of their being characterizable as informed and reflective. More than occasionally they are the only ones so describable. Here, they are virtually alone in embodying rational extensions of Fraser’s very fine pair of articles. Thank you.
@buckle: You are even righter than you may be aware. As of 1960 the only two book-length monographs in German on the Church Dogmatics were those written by Hans Küng and Hans Urs von Balthasar, two of the most pernicious pseudocatholic Modernists. Though only Küng was a Vatican II peritus, both men’s writings were instrumental in the council’s work of deforming the Faith.
@Stogumber: If you would like to get a taste of Barth’s stuff, both neat and more or less on the cheap, there is a very good fifty-year-old selection available at the site named after the big river in South America. Mr. Fraser’s articles misrepresent nothing, either theologically or otherwise, but there is a lot more to be said about Barth, like him or not (I don’t), and going to the horse’s mouth is seldom a bad idea.
@Adeimantus: Indeed, the Methodist church and the Catholic church seemed very similiar to me. However, others do not see it at all.
I’ve heard the Nicene Creed in virtually every denomination. Clearly, Episcopal and Catholic are similiar except for the sacraments. The only thing we seem to totally agree on these days is that everyone is welcome, and although the Jews are going to hell for not believing in Jesus, they are still God’s chosen people and we must protect that damned ole israel!
@Joe Webb: Joe, I will help you out and hopefully you can return the favor. I never make it through a Sunday without either the preacher or my Sunday School teacher exhorting the faithful that life without Jesus is empty and leads to the grave, as well as eternal separation from God. But everyone still calls the Jews God’s chosen and sez we must support Israel. I cannot understand the willful stubborness to support Israel, when God himself has cut them off from salvation. Perhaps I should use subtle criticisms of jewish hatred to wake them up?
@Vlad writes: Vlad, why not ask the direct question to your minister; tell him a friend wants to know.
Ask him or Her, if it is not true that Christ came to redeem the Law, that the Law is fulfilled in Him, and that the OT is therefore behind us and ditto the Jews as Jews. Christ came once and once only, and all one has to do is follow the sacraments if a Catholic, and just get baptized if a Protestant (as I understand it).
O, and the Jews killed Christ per the Gospels. Doesn’t that cut some ice?
Why do Christians entertain such strange affect for Jews after all of this? What is the Biblical authority for so doing? What is the Synagogue of Satan, per the Gospels, if not a complete repudiation of jews?
What is the OT to a Christian today? What is it to a Catholic?
Thanks, Joe
@Joe Webb: “What is the OT to a Christian today? What is it to a Catholic?” Fortunately, that’s a pretty straightforward question to answer. To a true Catholic—that is, a traditional Catholic, one who recognizes the Second Vatican Council as the engine of the betrayal and demonic transformation of the Faith—the OT is what it has always been: the inspired utterance of God set in the words of specific human languages (Hebrew and Greek, as it happens). The fact that even the literal meaning of many, many OT passages is not now clear in no way detracts from the authenticity of the Scriptures’ inspiration, but it does tend to confuse people who expect them (i.e., the Scriptures) to carry more of a burden than they were meant to.
Frequently ignored by apologists for Israel and the Jews and even more frequently misstated or falsified by Judaizing Christians (including many postconciliar catholics) is the strictly temporary nature of the Old Covenant, whose expiration with the arrival on earth of Jesus was announced time and again in the OT. Pretending that that covenant hasn’t expired when God Himself declared that it, first, would expire and, then, had expired is attributable in my opinion to one thing only: loss (or perhaps surrender) of belief in the true divinity of Christ (the belief that is the one and only basis for calling oneself a Christian) and the once-for-all-time salvific effect of His Crucifixion and Resurrection. Once belief in the divinity of Jesus and the redemptive effect of his actions has been discarded, replacing its long-term (i.e., postterrestrial) focus with one concerned rather more with the appanages of a comfortable life—and who better to provide such things than the Jews?—tends to follow pretty swiftly. As indeed it has.
Not incidentally or coincidentally, the Catholic Church does not consider Bible reading necessary for salvation. As you rightly say, proper reception of the sacraments and adherence (often but not always the same thing as obedience) to the Church’s instruction and direction in all matters where it has the divine authority to require such adherence are “all” that are required. Of course, I put all in quotes because time has shown that the preceding sentence is a lot easier in the saying than the doing. In the present time, when orthodox belief and teaching within the Church are even more subverted and deformed than they were during the 150 years of the Arian, semi-Arian, and post-Arian heresies’ ascendancy, finding the one true standard to follow has become no easy task even for the most serious-minded Catholics.
As Bishop Richard Williamson wrote a month ago,
This is by no means the only legitimate opinion that a sincere traditional Catholic may hold concerning Jewish influence and perfidy, but it is one with a distinguished pedigree. It is also the one I hold, at least when my exasperation with the Tribe and rage at its Gentile hirelings doesn’t blind me to everything else.
@Joe Webb:
What is the Point? The point is that jew power was immense 100 years ago. How did this happen? Protestants have a much stronger attachment to the Jews than Catholics. Why and How…again.
Look to Oliver Cromwell’s curse on the Anglosphere. He was the one who un-did Longshank’s Edict of Expulsion – at the behest of his Amsterdem Jewish moneylending backers.
Also, look to the Scofield Reference Bible – bankrolled by Jews, with margin notes which supported (continue to support) the zionists world-wide goals.
American Protestantism has been completely judaizied and/or corrupted by judeophilia.
It (and by extension, America) cannot be redeemed.
@WP.Tepes: As a protestant who has never had a bad opinion of catholicism and counted many friends of that faith, I must say I have always rooted for the church to stay true to its roots, and reject modernization.
As to universalism, it is completely overdone and stretched out of proportion by well meaning idiots in the church. I don’t want the world’s would be US immigrants to suffer, but I don’t want them to come here, either. Remember the Tower of Babel and the separation therein constructed by God. I don’t want the minorities here to mistreated, but that is different than being ruled over by them through an oppressive US government and its programs hostile to average white men.
Vlad…continuing…or is it just an emotional thing which has more to do with contemporary Pee- Cee than any Biblical authority?
Finally, I do not have the energy to go thru the dancing angles on pins to ascertain what “theologians” say about all this. I do more or less understand that the Scofield annotated Bible comes up with lots of fireworks To Come, hopefully soon so we can get out of this bad world, but while the life-haters and, I hate to say, losers, may get a kick out of this, like cocaine users, most sorts of sane folks (Protestants) still like this world and yet have this emotional reflex of loving the jews who killed Christ. That is Christian Charity I suppose, but it makes No sense, especially when all one has to do is take a dip in, say, Deuteronomy to discover that jews kill every non-jew, even the little ones, when given the opportunity, and that Christians have a difficult time killing anybody, even their enemies (nowadays)…they seemed to have mounted crusades against Islam, and even Judaism a bit at the same time, and of course drove the heathen out of Europe. No turning the other cheek there.
Which reminds me of the claim made by classicists (Trask? in TOQ archives?) that ancient Greek, the lingo of the NT, had 3 words for “enemy.” Latin had two. Basically it was the private enemy or the public enemy. The counsel to turn the other cheek was for your private enemy…family and friends, etc. that you are having trouble with. The Public Enemy gets it in the neck presumably.
Christ also never condemned slavery. So Jews love to kill and Christians hate to kill, and need chaplains to tell them in the military that it is ok to kill, especially for the Jews…in our current mania of killing A-rabs and Persians.
All of this when Islam reverences Jesus as a prophet, and Judaism has
Christ boiling in excrement for all Eternity…the bastard child of a Roman soldier and a Jewish whore. E. MIchael Jones has a wonderful story about the jews of Paris being called to a convocation by the Queen of France to answer for this brilliantly conceived Punishment of Christ for challenging the Pharisees. Apparently a few jews converted to Christianity and translated the Talmud with all its hot spots for Christians to , for the first time, get acquainted with their jewish fiends. Ecumenism of sorts.
The chief rebbe of Paris showed up to tell the Queen that yes it was true that that a certain Jesus Christ WAS boiling in excrement in hell at this very moment, but that this Jesus Christ was not the Christ of the Christians. Sort of like King Louis. There are many Louies in France but only one King Louis.
Nicholas Donin, a jew apostate, spilt the Talmudic beans to Pope Gregory IX who then called for a conference in Paris (p.121). Gregory called various passages in the Talmud, “criminal” and this opened the gates for the expulsion of Jews from Europe. Talmuds were burned by the church.
The discovery of the Talmud changed everything for the Jews in Europe (p. 122). Jews had always been protected by the Church …this protection based on a view that jews were jews of the OT and children of Moses and Abraham (Augustine) and obeyed OT law. Instead, the Church found out that jews did what their rabbis told them to do, via Talmud, and were instructed to forget the OT. Therefore Jews did not obey the word of God, but their [demented] rabbis. Where Jones will not go is genetics. He is a race unrealist, and it therefore never occurs to him that Jews might have been just doing what even the OT recommends…killing the little ones along with everyone else…for genetic reasons, and/or a psychology of resentment of their betters…that being Northerners like Romans or Germanic and Celtic tribes.
So, read Jones for his knowledge of Church history, not biology.
To continue…
This then made the centuries old prohibitions of harming Jews somewhat problematic. At the Paris disputation in 124O, Donin debated Rabbi Yehiel ben Joseph of Paris, “…under royal auspices and presided over by the queen mother, Blanche of Castille….” When asked about the boiling in excrement part, Rabbi Yehiel “responded, yes those passages were in the Talmud but they did not refer to “that” Jesus or “that” Mary {the whore]. Not every Louis born in France is the king of France.” Think Lenny Bruce here. Jones says this gave new meaning to “chutpah.” He also notes an unnamed “Jewish historian” who referred to Rabbi Yehiel’s denial as the birth of Jewish humor.
Jones also notes that the rabbis , demented by the “narcotic Cabbala… demonology, and astrology…were no match for those trained by the Dominicans. He also states that many jews of the time considered this t debacle to be an announcement of End Times and the Coming, yet again, of the jew messiah.
Funny, but serious stuff. “Quietly waiting for the holocaust” …another line from Jones which is not clear but suggests that jews could have avoided their fate if only they had been true jews of Abraham and Moses, but instead had been hijacked by their Talmudic rebbes and turned into zombies (sorry).
Jewish lawyers/rebbes possess great skill in flim-flam.
Anyhow, this helped spur the Church’s crackdown on the Jews. This was in 1240. Page 119 of Jewish Rev. Spirit…(you can get this book for $48 from Culture Wars website. Amazon wants a lot more for it.
The whole thing is a great read and only about the first half of it concerns itself with the fundamental issue of jew subversion of Protestantism. I only gave you this little tidbit because it is so delicious and could provoke interest in The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit. Joe
@WP.Tepes: ok, and then how and why is the northern White psyche so vulnerable to subversion by the jews?
As a bio-culturist, I often remark that the White psyche is the perfect match for Christianity. As someone stated earlier, Christianity took root in Europe, not elsewhere. There is also the possibility? that Christ, being from Galilee (home to many Roman soldiers were who originally from Gaul ?? true?) was not a genetic jew but more of a White man. If true, Christianity is a true product of the North and not the aridity of the middle east.
Leaving that one to stand or fall, we are still trying to figure out how this happened. Ideas and beliefs must have some kind of similarity to the genes.
If things don’t “feel” right, they do not take root. It feels right for a jew to shepherd his goyim, milking, bleeding, and butchering. Whites by and large would rather work for their bread.
One thing the Reformation did was to bring the Bible to the masses with the just invented printing press. Maybe northern Whites possess Individualism more than southern Whites, but this seems implausible given the Germanic and Celtic tribes who rescued southern Europe after the collapse of Rome.
Some White folks obviously wanted to read the Bible for themselves…can’t blame them for that. Protestants are more genetically Individualist, and Catholic Whites are genetically collectivist….plausible.
Then along come the jews to aid the Rebel Protestants in their emancipation from the Church. Enter the jew. but why go back to the OT? By the 16th century, the Talmud has been outed for several hundred years. Luther figured the jews out…finally. Yet, Protestants hated popery, and still do, many of them.
Reminds me of Dostoyevski’s Grand Inquisitor…men are slaves of course, but rebellious by nature (echoes of Genesis), yet seek Miracle, Mystery, and Authority. The Church was corrupt…goes the common cliche, and the Prots set out to retrieve genuine Christianity. What is older and possibly at least AS authentic as the NT (Talmud is where for the Prots?): the OT.
The northerners keep asking questions, just like we do today. They want to purify themselves and their religion. The Jews are the originals, and the Church has strayed. So, go back to the Jews. Unfortunately whatever the jews were, per Jones, at the time of Christ, by the time of the Reformation, the Jews were now Talmudists, not Jews. Hence, while the impulse of purification is understandable, the Jews were now zombies (sorry) due to the Talmud, and the Prots got something that was not the alleged real mccoy.
So, if they were subverted by Talmudic “jews”, what in the Protestant theology is Talmudic? Maybe nothing. The jews would have been happy enough to simply Destroy the Church which they are still at.
So, the Protestants then go on to the Revolutionary Principles of Every Man his own priest (Equality), something the rebbes like for Christians but totally refuse for their herds, Brotherhood-of-Man, something at which the Jews bend over laughing, and lately its extension to all the non-races of Mankind, a clever intellectual subversion that appeals to Whites, especially northern Whites, and has its religio-theological counterpart in universal salvation under Jesus…for all the niggers in Africa, etc. This is not confined to Prots as the Catholic Church flies in planeloads of darkies, but it probably started with Prots.
So, the Talmudists perceived our psychic achilles heel, and proceeded to wreck the Universal Church with what we call our White Altruistic Punishment trait…purify the Church! Out with the papists, etc. And now we have hundreds of protestant churches all claiming that They Know. It was better having just one church so claiming. There was unity in that.
So the jews continue to twist the revolutionary knife, whether religious, political, sexual, or personal. They celebrate White proclivities toward Expressive Individualism (KM) while all the while demand conformity to Jewish goals/ethnocentrism..of Jews. JewTV, Jewmovies, jew economics (which use White Individualist traits of hard work and thrift and independence, to secure jew financial power…no surprise that virtually all the libertarian notables are and have been jews , not that this means that it was all conscious cynicism…just self-deception, and besides, jew money always goes to the tribe, as opposed to White money that goes for anything but the White tribe) all of this works on our genetic tendencies to subvert us.
I am just rambling here, but I think it makes some sense somehow. The Protestants are true servants of the jews, having been lured into Genesis primal scene…eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The serpent is the jew who tempted… Think for yourself! Ha!
Almost nobody can think for themselves, and that is the truth. Which is why I continue to ridicule philosophy and philosophers. Even socio-biologists (some) deceive themselves with Stories of Mind, and Freedom.
I must state that the Catholic Church tradition has much to offer, it touches genuine emotion, even in me, an agnostic. However, that emotion has a genetic base. All of which does not negate the Church at some level of understanding. Look at our great Art, Music, almost all created by Believers.
Look at the “philosophy” of the last hundred or so years. Judaized per the above considerations, but also driven by our genetic tendencies toward surplus love, charity, compassion for strangers.
Joe
@WP.Tepes: well, again, why and how is the White and largely northern psyche to vulnerable to@Pierre de Craon: thanks Pierre, for your remarks. Edifying.
As for not reading the Bible, Catholics are then to be instructed by what?
How do you get evolutionary notions teamed up with your Catholicism? And what are the arian heresies? thanks Joe
again. Jones is anti biology and evolution. He assumes a universal human stuff. The sketch I offered above is per Jones’ type thinking.
A biological argument might start with the northern tribes that Merged with the Roman peoples, a mixture of Latinis originally from the North above the Black Sea, ( like the Dorians), Etruscans ( an apparently White Mediterranean people), and various lower orders of Turkic and Arab peoples/races( which probably accounted for Rome and Greece decline).
Thus the demographically reconstituted post -Rome southern Europe would have had less northern blood and more southern collectivist blood. The slightly lower IQs today of southern Europe (exception Italy) reflect this, especially the low and below 90s IQs of the Balkans and Greece, per Richard Lynn’s IQ and Global Inequality. Then there is Portugal at average IQ 95 and Spain, 98. (Portugal apparently the only European country to have imported black slaves in about the 16th Century.)
So, IQ can get us in trouble, that is, high IQ. All kinds of “Thinking” that, Genesis like, tempts us into Pride, the First Deadly Sin.
I have read frequently the argument that Catholic White countries are more prone to totalitarianism. This argument was around decades ago in the aftermath of WW2. From a White Nationalist point of view, this is Good.
“Totalitarian” meant , for these liberal writers, very Bad indeed. Whites need more Collectivism. Our Individualism is killing us. The Rugged Individualist, without Social Needs, including children for Chrissake.
So it may follow that the Talmudized Jews per Jones, are really more or less the same jews biologically and the Talmud just distills the OT into a myriad of rules that govern Totally jew behavior. Race does not exist for Jones, so he needs this argument about a mere text transforming the children of Moses and Abraham from nice G-d fearing folks into Talmudic monsters.
Of course, we now know that Ashkenazis today on average carry about 50% northern white genes. They have probably gotten Whiter with time, but they still got the old-time Blood of the Desert Warriors. Thus, Talmud is just the logical extension and updating of OT to deal with Christians. Kill them all is the general character of Talmud.
Genes do not change very fast. A thousand years or two thousand years is more or less nothing, especially if the Tribe is Selecting for Jewish Traits in the first place. The Jew-ish traits of nastiness and HQ (hatred quotient) can be bred thru Sexual Selection, especially by rabid rabbis.
We know temperment is inherited. Jerome Kagan’s book, Galen’s Prophecy (I think), of about 1990 establishes about an 80% heritability for temperment as I recall.
So, Jones’ Catholicism and Equality bias refuses genetics. Nevertheless we can use his argument to think about Jew subversion/revolution as a general Wrecking ball of Western Culture and Society. All of Deconstruction, Psychoanalysis, Surrealism, Da Da, and Possibly, Protrestantism, was part of the Wrecking Process.
Deprived of an Anchor in World Without End (Catholicism), and/or, BioCulture (Evolution and White race superiority, accomplishment, and emotional/temperment superiority as well) Whites have degenerated into Believers in Nothing except Equality, Sex, and Equal Opportunity to turn oneself into a mere animal, money, sex, and power.
That is starting to change however, as we all can see. Blood is coming back. With Blood coming back, fraternity and genetic similarity is also rising in White folk’s senses, if not intellect. Senses are better than intellect inasmuch as the jews control most folks’ intellect.
How religion can help in this regard is not clear to me. I am not one of those Abstracted characters who say we would be better off without religion. Religion is the opposite of abstraction. Feelings of love and hate are stirred by religion. We need more of each.
Love our fellow Whites, and hate our enemies, and negotiate with those in between. Joe
@Joe Webb: Excellent writing Joe, thanks for taking the time. It would appear that the Talmud in its original form would ruin the Jews, so the ones sold today I suppose are totally edited to make them look good?
@Vlad Writes: thank you Vlad. I think there is an unbowdlerized edition. Ask E. Michael Jones at his website, Culture Wars.
That is, an unbowdlerized edition in English. The Hebrew or Yiddish (if there is one) would retain the great hatreds. That is what keeps them going. As someone said many years ago, if the Palestinians were smart they would lay off the jews thereby providing no outside target for jew genetic hatreds. Thus, Israel would go into civil war soon.
Pardon me, the People who hate too much, and the Whites who love them.
I came across a Robert Frost poem that expresses some of the stuff that I write about: goofy thinking v. the solidity of love and feelings. I am going to get go find it and maybe reproduce it here.
As an addendum, when I remarked the somewhat lower IQs of southern Europe, Italy excepted, and went on to suggest that the Germanic and Celtic tribes that Saved southern Europe from Arabs and Turkic people taking over following the disintegration of Rome, I also suggested that these northern tribes would have raised intelligence and that southern Europe should have received enough northern blood to keep intelligence high. Not so apparently.
Well, high, but not as high as the North of Europe today. So, the Goths and the Celts and the Vandals (that got to N. Africa and Carthage as I recall, were still only supplementing the extant populations, which included many Arab and Turkic peoples. So, I do suspect that the immigration from the relative South Mediterranean area Did permanently lower the White IQ of the South of Europe., Also, the black slaves in Portugal darkened the genes as well.
Also, we should not give the Catholic Church a complete pass with regard to the sapping of White superiority. I guess that the Church, like today, has been after souls to save, no matter how cretinous the body. In the early days of world exploration/discovery, I am told that European churchmen argued for quite a long time over whether the various native peoples were human or not. Ultimately the decided that they were human and Endowed By Their Creator With Certain Inalienable Rights. And here we are. Joe
In the 19th and early 20th centuries, American Protestantism was a leader in the realm of social change; the abolition of slavery, populist redistribution of wealth (Bryan), women’s suffrage and the temperance movement all had roots in Protestantism, to one degree or another. Now, rather than being leaders of social change, “progressive” Protestants follow the social directives of the secular world, desperately trying to gain it’s respect by advocating such things as gay rights or abortion rights. To paraphrase RamzPaul’s video, it isn’t working.
As a rising tide of atheist sentiment gains official status in America, the traditional notion of heaven is increasingly portrayed as absurd, nothing but an outdated fantasy. Without being aware of it, liberal Protestants are buying into the “Heaven on Earth” promise of social change, a much more palatable concept for the non-believing world. They act as if it’s all in the tradition of the 19th century church, but it isn’t. Whether you agreed with them or not, those earlier Protestants were trying to get the world to act more like upstanding, conscientious Christians. Today’s liberal Protestants are trying to blend in with everyone else.
Preterism, or, the restoration of an old Christianity that was satisifed that Christ’s Return HAD happened in the first century, espec the Roman wiping out of Jerusalem, in ad 70 thereby fulfilling the Bible’s prophecy of Christ’s Return and the End of the reign of the Jews.. thus nullifying the claims of today’s loonies that Christ is about to show up, Israel being needed as some kind of blast-off point for Rapturing flocks ascending to Heaven in a vast cloud (like those whorls of saridines you see in the nature shows), the jews either converting to Christianity or going directly to hell, etc, etc,,,,,Fraser suggests that this Preterism could be a new Reformation. OK.
Meanwhile, if you read E. Michael Jones’ The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, you will readily see that EVERY “revolutionary” movement, cause, etc, from the Reformation to pornography, from women’s suffrage to labor unions, and of course, socialism to Liberalism, queer rights to animal rights, etc, is a result of the Jews’ subversion of the Natural Order of Things.
Now, we know that from a vantage of evolution and biology and ethnic group competition, that a Strategy for successful ethnic group competition, that is, for one particular group to maintain dominion or gain dominion over other ethnic groups, it does not matter what kind of weapon one uses, just that it works. So wrecking is the goal, and not any particular program or ideology or war technology.
Therefore, to follow the General notion that jews have a group dominion strategy over Whites particularly, then we have to discern just what aspects of Modernity, for lack of a better term, we can support as surely there are some that are supportable, meaning Good for Whites, and are not just Jewish Weapons of White Destruction.
Fraser’s suggestion that a new Reformation of Preterism would neutralize Jewish Power is useful. I know nothing about these possibilities.
However, we should discriminate between what is good and what is bad for Whites in our Time of Revolution, say, not only the Reformation but perhaps more usefully, say, since 1776 and 1789.
Jones, gets more than a little eccentric in some of his views, like his insistence that urban renewal was a plot to destroy ethnic Christian neighborhoods in the eastern cities.
Are labor unions bad? Are public schools bad? Is universal suffrage bad? Is freedom of speech, and all the enumerated rights in law to protect individuals from , shall we say, the insolence of office? etc., bad?
Modernism may have been revolutionary, but some revolution is Good. Right now we are starting a Revolution, or Counter-Revolution. Just what are we going to discard and what are we going to “go back to.”
Clearly, going back to a race-based polity is the first thing…going all the way back to ancient Greece, and the way the whole world used to be organized, etc. Not so clearly, are we thinking about traditional Angle-Saxon political governance with elected chiefs subject to recall, or is monarchy the only genuine racial social/political compact? Likewise, is the Pope infallible in a reconstituted church if indeed it is Reformed yet again?
So, while Jones is a great source to read and think about jewish subversion of the West, we Whites are not total fools. What is genuinely White and White Tradition? Edmund Burke set the tone I think when he criticized the French Revolution’s comic Book of Human Rights, Temple of Reason, and of course, terror and stated that he was entitled only to what was due him as an Englishman…an English constitution that was many centuries old with the common law, and organically grown customs. These customs had nothing to do with Abstractions, but were, what we can now call genetically based common sense, true because they worked over long periods, changed slowly if at all, and aroused llittle protest. Of course, change does come, but it too is based on common sense, trial and error, restraint, and not total revolution which can only be dreaming/abstract claims, etc, by the resenters, nihilists, and misfits (jew or not).
This is just to offer some criticism of Jones. After all he himself is a Modern in his racial equality dogma, or better, his Belief in We all be Children of God and very importantly subject to subversion by a text , or Bad Ideas. There is truth in that view, but, genes always have the final say.
This does not mean that in any single life a person can sluff-off the cultural claptrap of democratic and egalitarian ideologies, but a group Can figure it out after enough bloodshed or social breakdown. That is what is starting to happen now. Jones is a prisoner of an ultimately Enlightenment Belief in Reason, or Catholic Belief in Reason, or both, that texts, doctrine, and education determine outcomes.
This is a yes and no situation. Right now, people are following their guts and eyes and refusing the propaganda of racial equality, etc. Our contribution of texts will not hurt, but it is not going to be decisive or even all that marginally useful for the arena of political action.
Our own actions in public will carry far more weight but Reason will be behind that public action and therefore validates all our words in more or less private space.
Joe
I was raised in a Lutheran before it ‘reformed’ about 40 years ago.
I was taught Christians were the chosen people, as the Jews had not kept their bargain with God, and the new covenant was with Christians.
It is not Protestantism that is the problem it is those who have corrupted Christianity