Sweet Dreams of Christian Nationalism (But What About the Protestant Deformation, Globalist Churches, and Jewish Political Theology?) Part One


Weak-willed Anglo-Protestants in Canada meekly acquiesced in official recognition by their federal government of Jewish political theology in the form of the Holocaust mythos.  This is hardly surprising in light of their failure a few years earlier to resist repeal of a milquetoast Criminal Code provision prohibiting only the most egregiously vulgar displays of blasphemous libel.[i]  Having already surrendered the historical theological hegemony of Protestant Christianity in English Canada, Anglo-Protestants hardly seem likely to resurrect the ethnoreligious mythos which inspired the Old English church of their medieval ancestors.  Such Protestant pusillanimity stands in stark contrast to the aggressively ethnocentric political theology of organized Jewry, not just in Canada, but across the entire Anglosphere.  If contemporary WASPs had any self-respect, they would rush to remedy the absence of a spiritually compelling, bioculturally adaptive, Anglican/Anglo-Protestant ethnotheology.

Optimism on that score is probably unwarranted, however.  Few WASPs know or care much about their ethnoreligious origins.  Even most members of the Anglican church believe that it came into being with the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformation.  It was then that Henry VIII formally broke with Rome for reasons of state.  Before then, the ecclesia Anglicana had been absorbed within the institutional framework of a papal monarchy asserting universal jurisdiction.  Allied with a French-speaking, Anglo-Norman ruling class, the Roman Catholic papacy had no reason to preserve the explicitly ethnoreligious character of the Old English Church.  Nor did the break with the papacy precipitate an Anglo-Saxon ethnoreligious revival; beyond replacing the Pope with the King as the formal head of the Church of England, the new state religion retained its traditional commitment to the catholicity of the Three Creeds enshrined in the Thirty-Nine Articles.  But, whatever the intentions of those who set the Protestant Reformation in motion, over the next few centuries, the combined impact of English and American Protestantism deformed beyond recognition the very idea of Christian nationhood.

As James Kurth writes, the doctrinal base of the Anglo-Protestant Reformation “protested against the idea that the believer achieves salvation through a hierarchy or a community, or even the two in combination.”  Of course, the reformed Church of England “accepted hierarchy and community for certain purposes, such as church governance and collective undertakings [but] they rejected them for the most important of purposes, reaching the state of salvation.”  Protestant reformers held that “the believer receives salvation through an act of grace by God.”  It is divine grace that “produces in its recipient the faith in God and salvation that converts him into a believer.”  Hence, “reformers placed great emphasis on the Word, as revealed in the written words of the Bible.”  They denied that only a priestly hierarchy could deliver the right interpretation of the Bible to individual believers.  Indeed, authoritative hierarchies were more likely to impede the work of divine grace upon individual believers seeking a direct relationship with God through personal study of the Holy Scriptures.[ii]

The initial “Protestant rejection of hierarchy and community in regard to salvation spread to their rejection in regard to other domains of life as well.”  From the beginning, “some Protestant churches rejected hierarchy and community in regard to church governance and local undertakings.”  Nowhere were such anti-institutional tendencies more pronounced than “in the new United States, where the conjunction of the open frontier and the disestablishment of churches in the several states enabled the flourishing of new unstructured and unconstrained denominations.”[iii]

Over the past five-hundred years, the Protestant faith gradually lost its spiritual intensity, a process which began when salvation by grace was replaced by the “half-way covenant” in which grace could be evidenced by works.[iv]  Then, even “the idea of the necessity of grace began to fade.”  Once “work in the world was no longer seen as a sign of grace but as a good in itself,” good works offered the promise of personal salvation.  The transformation of religious experience into a personal relationship to God was an early expression of Anglo-Protestant individualism.  In our own time, the transformation of religion into a personal and private matter has culminated in the recognition of universal human rights as the sacred birthright of every individual.  According to Kurth, “this means that human rights are applicable to any individual, anywhere in the world.”

Thus, “the ultima ratio of the secularization of the Protestant religion” has become an “expressive individualism” in which the imperial self is free to express his/her/its “contempt for and protest against all hierarchies, communities, traditions, and customs.”  In other words, Kurth writes, “the long declension of the Protestant Reformation has reached its end point in the Protestant Deformation,” producing a religion without God, “a reformation against all forms.”[v]

Expressive individualism in America was inspired by the romantic-humanistic ethic prevalent among Progressive reformers in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, most of whom were middle-class WASPs.  But it was the massive wave of immigration from southern and central Europe which provided the raw material enabling the WASP clerisy to manufacture the cosmopolitan spirit characteristic of urban America during the Progressive Era.

Confronted with the tightly-packed masses of immigrants in New York and Chicago, middle-class reformers learned “to interpret Protestant Christianity in a very peculiar, almost secular way.”  In adapting “the tenets of egalitarian humanism to their polyglot, culturally-charged context,” the reform movement established “settlement houses” to assist alien newcomers in adjusting to life in America.  Anglo-Protestant reformers such as Jane Addams and John Dewey led the campaign to recognize and accept immigrant cultures “as a ‘gift’ to the American amalgam.”  They implored the American nation “to shed its Anglo-Saxon ethnic core and develop a culture of cosmopolitan humanism, a harbinger of impending global solidarity.”[vi]  Other Anglo-Protestant reformers such as William James urged their fellow WASPs to embrace a pragmatic approach to religious experience, choosing whichever “type of religion is going to work better in the long run.”  It did not matter much whether God was dead, so long as “we form at any rate an ethical republic here below.”[vii]

An American century later, Kurth notes that, by then, almost every nation with a Protestant religious tradition has “by now adopted some version of the human rights ideology.”[viii]  One might add that the many manifestations of Anglo-Protestant humanism in various corners of the Anglosphere do not always maintain logical consistency.  In Canada, for example, the offence of blasphemous libel was removed from the Criminal Code in the name of the universal human right to free expression just four years before the decision to criminalize anyone who condones, denies, or downplays the Jewish Holocaust.[ix]  No-one should be surprised to learn that organized Jewry overwhelmingly approved both pieces of legislation.  After all, Jews are now held up as exemplary victims of those who would deny or abuse human rights.  At the same time, however, neither measure appears to have encountered any serious opposition from Anglo-Canadian Protestants, even though both (especially taken together) would have been interpreted as deformations of Christian nationhood by earlier generations of Protestants in English Canada.  Almost everywhere in the Anglosphere, such Protestant deformations of traditional Christian mores have been consecrated, sooner or later, by globalist churches with the full support of the Holocaust industry.

All too often, either the Church of England or its Anglican successors in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States have been in the vanguard of that moral declension.  We need to understand the historical roots of such dysgenic institutional behavior.  Unfortunately, even the recent rise to prominence of “Christian nationalism” in the USA is unlikely to reverse the Protestant Deformation.

Christian Nationalism, American-Style

A recent book by Stephen Wolfe making The Case for Christian Nationalism has much to recommend it.[x]  As an unapologetic paleoconservative, the author blames the postwar Global American Empire (GAE) for undermining Christian nationhood at home in the USA, perhaps terminally.  “In the New America,” he observes, “the ground of patriotic sentiment is away from the Old America.  Thus, civic holidays, national heroes, memorials, and patriotic events are all colored according to the grand narrative of progress.”  Even mainstream conservatives are committed to the progressivist narrative of US history, so much so that they are the staunchest supporters of the military which, they believe, fights to defend “the American way of life.”  But, despite his experience as a West Point graduate serving in the U.S. army in the world-wide “fight for democracy,” Wolfe now advises young men not to get “blown up in the name of liberal imperialism; shed blood to open up markets for Netflix and Pornhub; [or to] make the world safe for dudes in dresses.”[xi]

He holds the GAE responsible for undermining the moral and cultural foundations of Christian nationhood.  Not only has the imperial regime imposed homosexual marriage upon all the states by judicial fiat, it also steeps young minds in critical race theory and gender-bending ideology.  Meanwhile, the floodgates have been opened to a tidal wave of non-Western immigration, further eroding the once-dominant Anglo-Protestant character of American national identity.  Nevertheless, in opposition to the relentless onslaught of nihilistic disenchantment, Wolfe holds out the hope that Christian nationalism could inspire a “true revolt against the modern world.”  He believes in the possibility of “the pursuit of higher life—both the life to come and a life on earth that images that life to come.”  Indeed, he insists that Christians can still regard the world as their “inheritance in Christ.”  With undisguised passion, Wolfe presents Christian nationalism as “a collective will for Christian dominion in the world.”[xii]

But what prevents Christians from exercising the biblical mandate to exercise dominion over this world?  The problem, as Wolfe sees it, is essentially psychological.  American Christians “have been so conditioned to affirm what we feel to be good that the feeling determines for us what is true.  Conversely, we deny any thought that we feel is bad.”  Some beliefs, notably Christian nationalism, are psychologically more difficult for churchgoers to entertain than others.[xiii]

Most Anglo-American Protestants, for example, have long been conditioned, by both church and state, to regard religion as a private and personal matter.  Wolfe’s vision of Christian nationalism cuts across the grain of those habits of religious privatism.  For example, Wolfe calls upon civil government to protect and preserve the exclusively Christian identity of the nation by penalizing “open blasphemy and irreverence in the interest of public peace and Christian peoplehood.”  Few mainstream Christians will be “comfortable” with his argument that “Sabbath laws are just, because they remove distractions for holy worship.”[xiv]

Similarly, Wolfe’s case for upholding the legitimacy of traditional gender hierarchies has already attracted accusations of “misogyny.”  On this issue, however, Wolfe pulls no punches.  He declares that Americans “live under a gynocracy—a rule of women.”  He concedes that this “may not be apparent on the surface, since men still run many things.  But the governing virtues of America are feminine vices, associated with certain feminine virtues, such as empathy, fairness, and equality.”  Any such defense of “toxic masculinity” runs contrary to feminist norms eagerly enforced by the established secularist regime.  But Wolfe remains unrepentant, declaring flatly that the “rise of Christian nationalism necessitates the fall of gynocracy.”[xv]

Inevitably, therefore, the very idea of Christian nationalism represents an existential threat to the Woke liberal regime.  Wolfe bluntly characterizes “the secularist ruling class” as “the enemies of the church and, as such, enemies of the human race.”[xvi]  At the same time, he recognizes that to resist the moral and political consensus enforced by a godless regime, Christians must summon the hitherto absent strength of will necessary to affirm what is true even when it causes them enormous psychological discomfort.

To his credit, Wolfe admits that many Christian leaders deliberately undermine political action in opposition to the secularist regime.  Instead, they “advance a sort of Stockholm syndrome theology” which excludes “Christians from public institutions” but requires them “to affirm the language of universal dignity, tolerance, human rights, anti-nationalism, anti-nativism, multiculturalism, social justice, and equality.”  Wolfe deplores the fact that any Christian who “deviates from these dogmas” faces exclusion from the ranks of respectable churchgoers.[xvii]  What, then, is to be done?  Wolfe turns to Christian political theory in search of an answer.  Unfortunately, the result, even for many of his Christian readers, leaves much to be desired.

Nationalism and Christianity

Wolfe’s book has attracted wide interest in a multitude of online reviews and podcast discussions.  Understood as a political program, Wolfe’s conception of Christian nationalism is often pronounced DOA, dead on arrival.  For example, Neema Parvini, author of The Populist Delusion, dismisses Christian Nationalism as a “political fantasy.”[xviii]  In fairness, however, Wolfe himself readily agrees that, on the national level at least, the idea has little chance of success.  He does not present the book as a viable “action plan.”[xix]  Instead, he sets out the principles that should guide any Christian nation.  Wolfe’s preferred model of Christian nationalism is grounded in a Reformed Presbyterian version of two-kingdoms theology which distinguishes between God’s redemptive work of salvation and his providential governance of earthly affairs.

Accordingly, he defines Christian nationalism in the following manner:

Christian nationalism is a totality of national action, consisting of civil laws and social customs, conducted by a Christian nation as a Christian nation, in order to procure for itself both earthly and heavenly good in Christ.[xx]

In other words, “Christian nationalism is nationalism modified by Christianity” which is to say that “the Gospel does not supersede, abrogate, eliminate, or fundamentally alter generic nationalism, it assumes and completes it.”  Apart from Christianity, therefore:

Nationalism refers to a totality of national action, consisting of civil laws and social customs, conducted by a nation as a nation, in order to procure for itself both earthly and heavenly good. [xxi]

According to Wolfe, “the specific difference between generic nationalism and Christian nationalism is that, for the latter, Christ is essential to obtaining the complete good.”  The ordering of people to heavenly life would have been “a natural end for even the generic nation” but for the fall.  “Had Adam not fallen, the nations of his progeny would have ordered themselves to heavenly life.”  Following the advent of Christ as the Redeemer, “the Gospel is now the sole means to heavenly life.”  If nations are to achieve their “complete good,” even “earthly goods ought to be ordered to Christ.”  Without Christ, pagan and secularist nations may be “true nations but they are incomplete nations.  Only the Christian nation is a complete nation.”[xxii]

Wolfe situates all nations and nationalisms, Christian or otherwise, within a Reformed Presbyterian vision of salvation history.  Wolfe describes his argument as a “Christian political theory” rather than a “political theology” grounded in his own biblical exegesis.  His understanding of Scripture relies instead upon the work of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Reformed theologians.  That Reformed tradition developed within a metanarrative framework established by Augustine of Hippo (354–430 AD).  Augustine and the later Reformed tradition posit a fundamental metaphysical distinction between the City of Man and the City of God.  Both interpret Scripture through the lens of a Hellenistic hermeneutic envisioning the creation ex nihilo and future destruction of the earthly world as the appearance and foreordained disappearance of corruptible material existence following the Day of Judgement.[xxiii]

Augustine’s neo-Platonic cosmology presupposed the absolute dependence of both mankind and the material world itself upon an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God.  Following in Augustine’s footsteps, Wolfe believes that modern Americans seduced by the delights of mortal life in Mammon have wandered far from heavenly goods, thereby losing sight of “the invisible things of God.”  Given the inherent difficulty mortal beings experience in apprehending such invisible divine “objects,” Wolfe, too, recognizes our spiritual debt to the revealed Word of God.  He holds fast to the Augustinian doctrine that, guided by the light of the Gospel, Christian nations should view their entire existence as a journey towards the unchangeable heavenly life, and their affections should be entirely fixed upon that.[xxiv]

It follows that “politics” in every Christian nation must be understood as “the art of establishing and cultivating necessary conditions for social life for the good of man.”  The point of a Christian political life comes from God; it must aim to create civil governments capable of shoring up the social order “for man’s complete good.”  In other words, the difference between generic nationalism and Christian nationalism is that the latter “expresses a Christian nation’s will for heavenly good in Christ and that all lesser goods are oriented to the higher good.” [xxv]

Presented in such universalistic, all-encompassing terms, Wolfe’s “Christian political theory” transforms “politics” into “public administration.”  Civil government, he says, must aim to identify the most effective earthly means within any given society to realize a heavenly destiny common to faithful believers in every Christian nation.

Action versus Behavior in Political Theory

In this context, the “totality of national action” is better understood as a socially ordered system of behavior premised upon the existence of one common interest, i.e., the interest of every Christian society not just in its own earthly survival and collective vitality but also in the heavenly salvation of every believer.  Public administration, as distinguished from politics, may become detached from natural persons and lodged instead in a social life-process which requires that human behavior conform to the developmental needs (both spiritual and material) of society.  Wolfe seems unaware that “politics,” strictly speaking, originally required the institutionalization of a realm of freedom in which civic action became possible.

The distinction between “action” and “behavior” was central to Hannah Arendt’s political theory.  In her view, “action” was the means by which the individual could distinguish himself from others in the public realm.  For a citizen to leave the private sphere of the household “to devote one’s life to the affairs of the city demanded courage” because entry into the “political realm had first to be ready to risk his life, and too great a love for life obstructed freedom, was a sure sign of slavishness.”  With the administrative victory of society over the public realm, the possibility of individual action gives way to the statistical regularities of human behavior, while the equality of men possessed of the acknowledged right to reveal themselves in their own distinctive public persona becomes degraded into conformism to the assumed common interest of society as a whole.[xxvi]

Not only does Wolfe’s “Christian political theory” fail to offer an “action plan,” it fails even to recognize the existential need for a public realm.  It is only in such a res publica that individuals, families, tribes, and nations are able to distinguish themselves, one from the other, through exemplary modes of civic action.  Such recognition of the distinctive character of political life has been the exception rather than the rule in human affairs.  Arendt may have been concerned primarily with the phenomenology of politics, but she well understood that the unique character of a civic mode of action was first discovered in ancient Greece, most famously in the Athenian polis.[xxvii]  To fully understand the early experience of politics and its decline in the totally administered societies characteristic of the modern transnational corporate welfare state, it is necessary to study, not just its biocultural preconditions but their historical development and the history of theological-political subversion.  Unfortunately, Wolfe’s argument treats Christianity, nationalism, politics, and civil government in generic, free-floating terms altogether detached from the biocultural history and theological presuppositions of any particular Christian nation.

Christian Meier observes that “ever since the Renaissance it has been possible to use the word politics to designate any action of which the state is capable.”  Wolfe simply assumes that this modern sense of the term effectively delimits its meaning, past, present, and future.  In classical Athenian democracy, however, the polis became identical with its citizens and “the majority of citizens gained supreme authority (with the help of those nobles who placed themselves in their service).”  For Aristotle, the word political meant “appropriate to the polis.”  His concept of politics denoted it as “the science of the highest good attainable through human action.”  Politics presupposed the unity of the citizenry as a whole: “the general civic interest…transcended all particularist interests.”  As a consequence, “there was no way in which anything resembling a state could establish centralized power or state institutions that were divorced from society.”[xxviii]

This great experiment in participatory politics rested on the “importance of familial and religious piety in Athenian democracy.”  Indeed, “those who failed in their familial, religious, or military duties” could be excluded from the polis.  The civic unity of the polis “was founded on family, patriarchy, community, military courage, common ancestry, and an intense patriotism.”  Indeed, it has been said that Athenian democracy was based upon a prototype of “racial citizenship.”  In contrast to other Greeks, “Athenians claimed to be racially pure…having supposedly sprung from the Attic soil as true autochtones.”  Bolstered by that myth of autochthony, the direct democratic politics associated with Athenian citizenship “was grounded in strong racial identity and pride in one’s lineage.”  In short, Athens was “a spirited and nativist democracy” in which even prominent residents not of Athenian blood (such as Aristotle) were excluded from citizenship.[xxix]

There was also an important geopolitical dimension to the character of the Athenian polity.  This can be seen in the contrast between Athens and Sparta.  In the eyes of an imperial power such as the mighty, multinational, military monarchy of Persia, Athens and Sparta represented a Greek power which “was that of patriotic, fractious little republics, defined by civic freedom.”  The particular forms of civic power in each city-state emerged out of very different geopolitical circumstances.  Sparta was a land power characterized by autarchy, hierarchy, community, and a rigorous military discipline organized to guard against the danger of rebellion by an enslaved population of helots.  Athens was a sea power in which international trade and a strong navy encouraged a commercial culture, democracy, individualism, and technology.[xxx]

Guillaume Durocher suggests that “Athens embodied the long-term superiority of dynamic commercial, democratic-individualist, and technologically advanced systems over static, austere, hierarchical-communitarian, and primitive ones.”  Like the modern, Anglo-Saxon thalassocracies in Great Britain and the United States, Athens was “dynamic and expansive in peacetime” while “able to adopt sufficiently hierarchical-communitarian characteristics in wartime.”[xxxi]

At the same time, the high level of social solidarity in both polities and its vital contribution to their respective war-fighting abilities gave the Greeks a sophisticated and distinctive understanding of the friend-enemy distinction.  A bright-line distinction was drawn between one’s enemies inside the polis and outsiders threatening society as a whole.  The modern German jurist Carl Schmitt identified the difference between friend and foe as the existential essence of politics.  He took note of the gradations in the Greek understanding of enmity encoded in the koine dialect of ancient Greek and later carried over into the New Testament.  Unfortunately, the linguistic precision of the Greek original was lost when translated into English or German.  As we have seen, Wolfe relies upon English versions of Reform theology for his rare forays into biblical exegesis.  He may never have recognized, therefore, that the (mis)translation of Matthew 5:43-44 conceals a fundamental fault line between idealist and realist political theologies.

When Jesus enjoined his followers to “love your enemies,” he was not laying the moral foundation of Christian pacifism.  Wolfe is no pacifist, however; he vigorously defends the martial virtues “as a necessary feature of masculine excellence.”[xxxii]  Nevertheless, like most Christians, Wolfe strenuously resists the temptation to build our identities by discriminating between “us” and “them.”  Having internalized the anti-discrimination ethos of the civil rights revolution, many Christians mistakenly believe that Jesus asked his followers to “love” their persecutors.  As a matter of fact, he merely urged them to “pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” (Matt.5:44).  Carl Schmitt took a more realistic view of the Sermon on the Mount.  He tackled the translation issue, clarifying what Jesus meant when asking his audience to love their “enemies.”  In the Greek original, Jesus uses the word echthroi to denote persons who might be “private” or “personal” enemies of their fellow citizens (or, in this context, fellow Jews engaged alongside him in a spiritual battle to fulfill the law of Old Covenant Israel).  He was not talking about the “public” or “alien” enemies (polemoi) of the Jewish people as a whole.[xxxiii]

Unless one keeps that distinction in mind, Christian charity can easily degenerate into a pathological altruism incapable of addressing existential threats to one’s nation as such.  Christian nationalism should be based upon a realist political theology which, in turn, should ground itself in a multi-dimensional understanding of the history and biocultural foundations of every Christian nation.

The Origins and Ends of Mankind in History and Christian Mythology

History can be understood as an intellectual discipline providing narrative or analytical accounts of past events based upon the empirical investigation of more or less reliable sources.  It is worth noting that “scientific” history in this sense was the product of two Greeks writing in the fifth century BC.  According to R.G. Collingwood, Herodotus and Thucydides “quite clearly recognized both that history is, or can be, a science and that it has to do with human actions.”  Their histories were not legends; they were research.  They were “an attempt to get answers to definite questions about matters of which one recognizes that one is ignorant.”[xxxiv]  Nothing could be further from this methodology than Wolfe’s universal, one size fits all, and thoroughly unscientific schema of salvation history.

Needless to say, the study of human biocultures is also a scientific enterprise which relies upon the empirical study of interactions between biological and cultural phenomena as they have evolved within various population groups.  By contrast, Wolfe’s account of Christian nationalism simply presupposes a neo-Augustinian vision of the divinely-ordained stages of the salvation history of mankind, a generic “Christian narrative of creation, fall, redemption, and glorification.”[xxxv]  This story presents the past, present, and future of humanity in general as it unfolds in four stages: a state of integrity; a state of sin; a state of grace; and, finally, the state of glory.

Wolfe’s speculative account of the prelapsarian state of integrity is truly breathtaking in what one critic describes as its intellectual irresponsibility.  He spends an entire chapter describing the sort of “civil fellowship” that Adam’s progeny would have arranged but for the fall.  As Bob Stevenson observes, Wolfe’s vision of the prelapsarian world rests on the biblical account found in

61 verses, comprised of 1,253 words describing the world before our first parents saw the goodness of the forbidden fruit, took and ate.  If we only include the parts where humanity exists—and thereby human society, sociability, diversity of gifts, normative roles etc.—that number is reduced to 36 verses, consisting of 764 words.[xxxvi]

It is impossible to construct an account of what a counter-factual prelapsarian world would look like on the basis of those 764 words.  Wolfe’s uses his own reason and imagination to reconstruct the structure of the unfallen world that might have been.  Wolfe contends that families, tribes, nations, and cultural diversity would all have been natural in the original state of integrity.  So, too, would have been hierarchy and the need for the masculine leadership and the martial virtues essential to self-preservation.  Wolfe’s portrait of the state of integrity calls to mind the image of the sinless noble savage and is equally devoid of evidence grounded in physical or cultural paleo-anthropology. Wolfe appears to be one of those Christians for whom it has long been “standard doctrine that every member of the human race is descended from the biblical Adam.”  How interesting, therefore, that it was a seventeenth-century “Calvinist of Portuguese Jewish origin from Bordeaux” who challenged Christian orthodoxy with the “beguilingly simple” claim “the human beings existed before the biblical Adam.”[xxxvii]

The impact of Isaac La Peyrère (1596–1676) on theological hermeneutics was such that many modern Christian scholars now accept that, in Hebrew hermeneutics, Adam need not be, and probably was not conceived as the first human being (see also Andrew Joyce’s comments, here and here).  On that reading, sin was in the world well before Adam.  Adam’s story was not about universal human origins but rather about the origins of Israel.  Having been created at the exodus and brought to the promised land of Canaan, Israel was bound by a law which it disobeys, suffering exile as a consequence.  In this way, “Israel’s drama—its struggles over the land and failure to follow God’s law—is placed into primordial time.”[xxxviii] In other words, the biblical Adam is better understood in mythical terms as proto-Israel.

In any case, after the fall, according to Wolfe’s rendition of the orthodox Reformed hermeneutic, the world becomes subject for the first time to sin, creating the need to augment the powers of civil government to suppress sin and maintain civil order.  With the advent of Christ, however, the redemption of mankind becomes possible and “Christians take up the task of true and complete humanity.”  Wolfe contends that “restorative grace sets the redeemed apart on earth—constituting a redeemed humanity on earth—and, on that basis, Christians can and ought to exercise dominion in the name of God.”  In that way, “grace perfects nature.”  Christians “are perfected for heavenly life but also restored in their perfection for obedience in earthly life.”[xxxix]  Wolfe never considers the possibility that the mission of the historical Jesus was limited in scope: i.e., the redemption of Old Covenant Israel, not humanity at large.

[i] Few people were ever prosecuted for blasphemous libel in Canada, the last in 1935.  This was probably a consequence of the giant loophole in s. 296(3) of the Criminal Code:No person shall be convicted of an offence under this section for expressing in good faith and in decent language, or attempting to establish by argument used in good faith and conveyed in decent language, an opinion on a religious subject.”  There is a similar exemption [see, s. 319(3)(1)(c)] in the recently enacted law prohibiting denial, downplaying, or condoning of the Holocaust.  One might reasonably expect more vigorous efforts to be pursued by organized Jewry in contesting the application of that exemption clause whenever cases of public skepticism or outright denial of the Holocaust are deemed threatening to their theopolitical interests.

[ii] James Kurth, “The Protestant Deformation and American Foreign Policy,” (1998) 42(2) Orbis 221, at 225-226.

[iii] Ibid., 227.

[iv] Perry Miller, “The Half-Way Covenant,” (1933) 6(4) New England Quarterly 676.

[v] Kurth, “Protestant Deformation,” 229, 236.

[vi] Eric P. Kaufmann, The Rise and Fall of Anglo-America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004), 95-98.

[vii] Eugen McCarraher, Christian Critics: Religion and the Impasse in Modern American Social Thought (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2000), 15.

[viii] Kurth, “Protestant Deformation,” 237.

[ix] For the common law background to s.296 of the Criminal Code (as it then was) and an illustration of the liberal conventional wisdom successfully calling for its repeal ten years later, see Jeremy Patrick, “Not Dead, Just Sleeping: Canada’s Prohibition on Blasphemous Libel as a Case Study in Obsolete Legislation,” (2008) 41 University of British Columbia Law Review 193.

[x] Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2022).

[xi] Ibid., 435-438.

[xii] Ibid., 443, 447-448.

[xiii] Ibid., 454-455.

[xiv] Ibid., 31.

[xv] Ibid., 448, 454.

[xvi] Ibid., 455-456.

[xvii] Ibid., 4-5.

[xviii] Neema Parvini, “Christian Nationalism Is a Political Fantasy” December 1, 2022 https://chroniclesmagazine.org/view/christian-nationalism-is-a-political-fantasy/; see also, The Populist Delusion (Perth: Imperium Press, 2022).

[xix] Wolfe, Christian Nationalism, 433.

[xx] Ibid., 9.

[xxi] Ibid., 11.

[xxii] Ibid., 15.

[xxiii] Augustine, City of God Against the Pagans, ed. And trans. R.W. Dyson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), bk. XX, ch.1, 965.

[xxiv] Cf., Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, (Radford, VA: Wilder Publications, 2013), 12-14, 22.

[xxv] Wolfe, Christian Nationalism, 89, 180.

[xxvi] Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958), 36, 40-44; see also, Hanna Fenichel Pitkin, The Attack of the Blob: Hannah Arendt’s Concept of the Social (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998).

[xxvii] Christian Meier, The Greek Discovery of Politics trans. David McLintock (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990).

[xxviii] Ibid., 14, 20-21.

[xxix] Guillaume Durocher, “Athens: A Spirited and Nativist Democracy,” (Fall 2018) 18(3) The Occidental Quarterly, 74-75, 78; See also, Susan Lape, Race and Citizen Identity in the Classical Athenian Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), ix, 59.

[xxx] Ibid., 72.

[xxxi] Ibid., 73, 80.

[xxxii] Wolfe, Christian Nationalism, 76.

[xxxiii] Cf. Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political trans. George Schwab (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1976), 28-29.

[xxxiv] R.G. Collingwood, The Idea of History (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), 17-18.

[xxxv] Wolfe, Christian Nationalism, 41.

[xxxvi] Bob Stevenson, “The Case for Christian Nationalism: A Review (Part Two).” https://bobstevenson.net/the-case-for-christian-nationalism-a-review-part-ii-84384e87eab1

[xxxvii] David N. Livingstone, Adam’s Ancestors: Race, Religion, and the Politics of Human Origins (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008), 5, 26,33.

[xxxviii] Peter Enns, The Evolution of Adam: What the Bible Does and Doesn’t Say About Human Origins (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2012), 65-66.

[xxxix] Wolfe, Christian Nationalism, 100, 101, 110-111.

66 replies
  1. Crush Limbraw
    Crush Limbraw says:

    I appreciate the extensive work of this author on a subject that is essentially in DaCrushLimbraw wheelhouse at http://www.crushlimbraw.com – that’s just the beginning point which directs you to DaLimbrawLibrary – where there is a whole study on the Kingdom of God. All I did was simply connect the dots of authors like Gary North, David Chilton and others. Their books were vital in my research on the subject of dominion. Chilton’s Paradise Restored is the best book I have found that summarizes the topic all in one felt swoop. Check it out!

  2. Karl K
    Karl K says:

    How about American “Christian Nationalists” help suffering Christians overseas?

    We forget that our Middle Eastern wars in Syria and Iraq hurt Christians who have lived there since before the rise of Islam and thus since Arabs came to live there.

    Will American Christians help *Christians* in the Middle East as much as they help Israel and the so-called (I think it’s phony) “The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews”? I am so tired of the latter’s TV ads.

    The first nation in the world – Armenia – that adopted Christianity as its state religion is suffering because of assaults by Turkey and Azerbaijan (helped by Israel!) and has been for 32 years, if not for centuries.

    There is lots of room for some “Christian Nationalist” sympathy for Armenians and all the Christians of the Middle East and surrounding regions.

    But all I see is sympathy for Russians. That’s fine but what about other Christians?

    There are American organizations that do help Christians overseas such as Persecution.org.

    Can we please see some more sympathy and action for these Christian peoples overseas?

    • Weaver
      Weaver says:

      if you watch on Twitter, people like Ramzpaul will post sympathetic comments regarding Syria and, recently, Turkey. Also, the trend among Christians is towards Orthodoxy. The other churches are LGB etc. There are battles all over the US between groups of small “C” Christians just vying for a bit of the authentic religion vs. mainstream heresy. The “battles” are usually just breakaways while the mainstream institutions retain most assets.

      Armenia, for what it’s worth, is a white nation. They’re significantly different from Europeans, but they’re Aryan or whatever. The heritage overlaps, even if the genetics are a bit different now.

      Similarly, Syria does the “Roman salute.” They’re obviously kin nations, though with significantly different genetic identities today. So, it’s unwanted that these peoples disappear. You won’t find even the most extreme on the right wishing their destruction. Their heritage is ours, though it’s wanted that we remain separate too.

      • B. Rockford
        B. Rockford says:

        Watch the space between the ears of every “Church” of “England” bishop in the UK with Ms God and Gay Marriage and the Black Jesus, as the congregations die off, or rush towards happy-clappy bible-banging, atheism, Islam, or Eastern Orthodoxy (which does not frown on nationalism).

    • Weaver
      Weaver says:

      If you want to know whom to influence:

      Chuck Baldwin, emeriticus (Pedro Gonzalez), and ultimately Tucker Carlson. Laura Ingraham might also be moved, just my theory. Before Trump, I could sometimes get a response from someone like Ingraham. Now, it’s tough to talk with any of them.

      I follow Partisangirl and the Syriana Analysis guy, and sometimes others. I am sympathetic… It’s illegal to even donate to Syria. Some of the radical GOP House might turn on sanctions. If DeSantis turned, it might be huge.

      Ideally, as I’ve said before, it’s wanted for nations to be proud, independent. However. Syria is in the path of Israel, and Armenia is in the path of Turkey. It’s like Serbia resisting Albania… one side wins; the other loses. I’m not happy about it.

      Christians are very weak currently. Nick Griffin cares, another to look at.

    • B. Rockford
      B. Rockford says:

      Matthew 25.31-46 is NOT a plea for lifelong total universal indiscriminate altruism, but a condemnation of nations that persecute Christians.

  3. Captainchaos
    Captainchaos says:

    All of this is just a long-winded way of saying what I said in the other thread. We need an ideology that can produce revolutionary objectives yet at the same time can be soft-pedaled enough that it doesn’t scare off boomers and bourgeois conservatives. Red State secession is that ideology.

    Boomers and bourgeois conservatives don’t have the balls to exercise “dominion” over a goddammed thing. They are dyed in the wool pussies and human sheep. As a practical necessity you’ve got to lie to them when discussing the brute realities of life. That’s fine. Just sell them the fairy tale of peacable secession on the basis of nigger-loving civic nationalism and slip the more hardcore stuff (paramilitary political gangsterism) in the backdoor all Machiavellian-like.

    • RockaBoatus
      RockaBoatus says:

      Although I know it will do little to persuade you otherwise (I write this solely for other readers of TOO), your fixation on “Boomers” misses an important truth – namely, that your generation and every generation after would have acted the same way as the “Boomer” generation given the same time period, same societal attitudes, and the same historical circumstances. To blame “Boomers” for all that has occurred is both shortsighted and deeply prejudicial.

      It’s an escape for you perhaps, and it might make you feel good to blame another generation, but it does little good to change things for the better. Are the “Gen-X” and the current “Millennial” generation any better? A whole lot of justifiable criticism could be directed at them too, but what would that really accomplish except setting Whites from different generations against each another?

      To claim that the “Boomer” generation are “dyed-in-the-wool pussies and sheep” is unfair and fails to deal squarely with the fact that EVERY generation has both good and bad people.

      The “Boomer” years, despite their failings, produced many good and decent people. There were great scientific discoveries and new technologies that were invented as well. A good many of those “Boomers” were very brave and honorable men and women. Yes, they fought in several unjustifiable wars, but your generation given the same circumstances and worldview as they had would have done exactly the same.

      Also, the level of deception by our government only gradually increased as Jewish power and Jewish cultural subversion took root. This did not occur overnight, and so many Americans were unable to discern what was occurring and its implications for the nation.

      The “Boomers,” admittedly, were naive about this because they did not have the same span of time as the current generation to look back and see how destructive it would all prove to be.
      Also, the “Boomers” did not have the same access to information such as the internet which we have today. They had, in fact, comparably few resources available to them, and it was the rare person indeed who grasped the kinds of truths we understand today.

      Your bitter and fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants form of argumentation lacks nuance and is simplistic at its core.

      Again, if you want to reach our people, then you might want to stop alienating an entire generation of Whites and start being less belligerent and thinking more strategically.

      • John D. Alder
        John D. Alder says:

        Keep in mind that boomers provided many activists in numerous pro White organizations all over America and England, especially in the 1960s and 1970s.

      • Casper Koch
        Casper Koch says:

        “Also, the “Boomers” did not have the same access to information such as the internet which we have today. They had, in fact, comparably few resources available to them, and it was the rare person indeed who grasped the kinds of truths we understand today.”

        It can indeed be rough for a younger fellow to understand how difficult it was to find sources of alternate information. I am a Boomer who was in his teens and early 20’s in the late 70’s/early 80’s. In my suburban Chicago, there was no cable TV available. Broadcast TV had 5 to 7 channels and 3 to 2 daily newspapers, all in lockstep. In order to subscribe to an alternate newspaper or magazine, you first needed a copy, or at least an address with a subscription rate in order to send in your subscription request with your check (no credit cards accepted). Alternate history books were just as rare. One needed the address of a distributor who carried the books in order to request a catalog. Titles such as “Iron Curtain Over America”, “The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor”, “The Hoax of the 20th Century”, etc. were not found in any libraries or books stores (of which there were many in those years). Even if one could realize that things were not right, the feeling of isolation could be overwhelming. Although many more Gen X and Millennials have had their eyes opened compared to Boomers, given the relatively easy availability of alternate media via the internet, it’s a wonder that so many of the younger generation are blinded, members of antifa and brainwashed by leftist college professors.

      • Lady Strange
        Lady Strange says:

        This fad of accusing boomers of all evil seems to come from the same sources where it is ” trendy ” to accuse white women of destroying the entire Western civilization ! (no less), it’s simplistic and immature but there is something more sinister : these accusations came essentially from the same dubious, some would say compromised , internet websites and figures ( remember daily stormer ? ).
        I’m not sure myself but ior me it smells like hashbara-made narratives.
        When the Jewish question became too apparent among young Alt-Rrighters, conveniently, and ” coïncidences !! ” , boomers bashing, white women bashing and hollywood nazism a la Andrew Anglin became ” à l’ordre du jour ” in order to shape vulnerable young minds. For, if we look at the consequences, the responsibility of Jewish subversion is obscured while sterile obsessions against boomers, women, and ” normies ” are created and as boatus says, this accentuates inter generational divisions and gender hatred between and only between whites as if feminism has not done enough damage. ( at the same time yellow fever is promoted among white boys on these websites as jungle fever among white girls in the mainstream, Coincidence ? )
        Now that Andrew Anglin Hollywood nazism has succesfuly single destroyed the Alt-Right, he has shape-shifted As Christian convert , coïncidence ? Just when Christian nationalism get some Coverage.
        I don’t think these persons are conscious but they are certainly influenced.

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          Is the surf up today in Eilat, Strange Lady?

          First, your boyfriend, the chaotic captain, plays the opening pawn of Jewish chess—”sow discord by creating false divisions”—with his tired, fact-lite Boomer generalizations. Then Rocky responds with four hundred words of generalities that manage to be both patronizing (“The Boomer years, despite their failings, produced many good and decent people”) and just plain insulting (“The Boomers, admittedly, were naive about this …”) while entirely missing the point that Generational Ranters are saying nothing worth attending to. In other words, Rocky is dignifying distraction and misinformation with a long and inherently enabling response when he should instead be expressing contempt.

          (If the reader truly believes that people born in 1946 and people born in 1960 have much in common beyond being born into a society where it was still considered neither indecent nor “supremacist” to be white, Christian, or a child of parents who had more than one other child, let him raise his hand and ask to be excused from class on the grounds of invincible ignorance.)

          Mr. Alder’s pointedly brief comment then hews to the observable facts. Naturally, alas, it is ignored. Mr. Koch’s, while also meant well, assumes facts not in evidence—viz., that “many more Gen X and Millennials have had their eyes opened compared to Boomers.” The gentleman and I are plainly watching different parades pass reality’s reviewing stand.

          Canadianer is a tad cruel in his abrupt dismissal of his elders, but his indication of which age cohort is today of most concern is surely on the money. I hope he is aware, however, that even the few oldsters who would enjoy passing their final years in what he somewhat anachonistically calls a retirement home almost certainly can’t afford to do so—unless they are Jewish, that is, or associated with the Clinton or Biden crime family.

          Farther down the thread, Mr. Fellis’s comment is so apt that it has got the tiresomely chaotic captain’s knickers in a twist. “Simple yeet” then calls the beast by his true name.

          Back at last to the Strange but Transparent Lady. Her punctuationally challenged invocation of “Hollywood Nazism,” with Andrew Anglin as gauleiter in chief, might be seen, outside the present context, as merely silly and shrill, but in context, it functions as the queen’s bishop’s follow-up move to Captainchaos’s pawn. That is, it is a lie meant to buttress the division, distraction, and subversion.

          While no one is obliged to like Anglin—thousands don’t—anyone who bothers to actually read a few dozen of his postconversion columns and reports cannot fail to see that his occasional rhetorical excess has as its target the calamitous feminization of society, especially with respect to its conscious warping of the mechanics of Western jurisprudence, and of how that feminization—in a process wrought entirely by the Jews and for their interests, certainly not the interests of white Christian women—has wittingly worked to substitute (1) sentimentality and Orwellian goodthink for hard evidence and (2) “feelings”-based arbitrariness for disinterestedness and evenhandedness.

          Put otherwise, what Anglin despises in New, Improved Lady Justice is not her anatomy but the fact that (((her current masters))) have removed her blindfold, the better for her to see the TV she now holds in her right hand, where she once held scales. Her sword, however, remains as and where it was, except that now she is encouraged to swing it ever and ever more freely at designated “anti-Semitic” crimethinkers.

          Also apropos Lady Strange, if she were really a lady, she wouldn’t have to be told about the sorts of things that women, when among themselves, say about men! My bet is on “her” being an Israeli fairy en travesti.

          • Lady Strange
            Lady Strange says:

            I answer a bit too late, but this trad cath trolling needs a response.
            So I’ll keep it short. you are disappointing curmudgeon and your religious litteralism has dumbed you down considerably. Now that the very suspicious Anglin is posing as a bigot ( french meaning ) he is glorified, those who find him suspicious are hashbara posing as Women. What a lack of imagination. We are a the level of a 14 years old 4 chan troll.
            You confirm what I think without wanting to say it , Christianity is a dead religion that has become more harmful than anything else.

          • Lady Strange
            Lady Strange says:

            Sorry, I mean Pierre de Craon, not Curmudgeon but it’s the same.
            And what a shame, when i think I descend from the real Pierre de Craon who wasn’t very pious by the way and a nasty Bastard.

          • Captainchaos
            Captainchaos says:

            I’m afraid you’ve got that backwards, Pierre. I’m not a pawn, but indeed a puppet master. My (more detailed) plan involves pushing the Jews into political exile, economically gelding China and removing most mestizos from North America. As for the last two on the list, we will embark on a nation building project in Central America that exterminates the drug cartels and erects an industrial base for cheap manufactured goods to rival China’s. Mestizos will not be shunted into the outer darkness but return to a brighter future than they can imagine in a way that is mutually beneficial for themselves and Whites. The altruism of White Christards can be very neatly sublimated in helping this endeavor along. Whites keep the high-end manufacturing, mestizos do the low-end stuff whilst China economically withers.

            Do you begin to see the possibilities inherent in Red State secession?

          • RockaBoatus
            RockaBoatus says:

            Good Lord, what a meandering, messy and convolu ted word salad. May I recommend William Zinsser’s book, ‘On Writing Well,’ especially the chapter on removing clutter from one’s essay?

          • B. Rockford
            B. Rockford says:

            The sayanim are everywhere, except under the cathedra from which Pope Pierre II pontificates his infallible truth to the world.

    • Canadianer
      Canadianer says:

      Why does everyone talk so much about what “Boomers” believe? The war ended in ’45 and boomers are in their 70’s and are retired and shuffling off into retirement homes. In what way does it matter what they believe? What matters is what working age people age 18-50 do and believe. 76 year old pensioners with dementia… who cares.

      • Michael Adkins
        Michael Adkins says:

        Then what you’re saying is, ‘the 58,000 soldiers killed (most European American males) in the Vietnam War can just go down the memory hole.’

      • Weaver
        Weaver says:

        The US changed radically after WWII and with it Europe. 1965 didn’t need to pass.

        The mass media is likely most to blame. Boomers seem to believe in fighting against perceived white racism, believe in their institutions, tend to be trusting and to assume everyone is good. They won’t question authorities.

        Boomers also assume that the US will always continue and that what’s most important is that their Medicare and social security be funded. However, they also want to fund wars, don’t mind what happens to the poor, believe anyone can work his way up. Similarly, they believe in the Cold War, in the dichotomy between capitalism and socialism, etc.

        Anyway, each generation has its positives and negatives. I’m sure you could write a list of positives.

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      The enemy jewmasterss

      “(paramilitary political gangsterism)”

      is the basic modus operandi
      of the globalist ILLuminati gangster jewmasterss
      in their genocidal elimination of
      individualistic Nordic/White cultures .

      It is like magnesium on fire which cannot be extinguished by any amount of
      Christianized sheeple herd
      water/(good will)/love .

      You are correct ;
      it will take fire
      to prevail against the enemy fire and “save” Nordic cultures .

      A viable Nordic version of
      the jewmasterss enemy fire

      (explicitly ,
      a Nordic paramilitary political gangsterism )

      would be required to prevail against them .

      Unfortunately , most Nordics are severely deficient in the political intelligence ( not IQ ) needed to establish an effective Nordic version of their jewmasterss gangsterism .

    • J.M.
      J.M. says:

      Booby trapped it with a ‘Thrilling Shake’, then created us his Seekers and Finders of Knowledge. Seems Man requires a game to keep ‘The Drama’ going and the Thrilling Snake alive.

  4. Hitmarck
    Hitmarck says:

    Just take Luther’s words.
    Protestants are NOT human beings with a free will.
    That is what Protestants chose.

    • B. Rockford
      B. Rockford says:

      More like Calvin with his predestination of millions to hell.
      Luther’s heresy was “faith alone”.

      • John D. Alder
        John D. Alder says:

        For myself I take the position that if there is a god and if this god has things he she or it wants me to do or things not to do then said god must contact me directly because I wont accept some human being who makes their living claiming to speak for god. If there is a god it looks very much as though this god person is at best indifferent to what takes place here on earth.

  5. Freki The Ravenous
    Freki The Ravenous says:

    It all boils down to ridiculousness to me. I am 49 and “converted” to Germanic/Norse Paganism when I was 16. A religion I’ve always felt at home in and I am somewhat devout about it. That said, I never felt connected to Christianity. My mother gave me a kids bible when I was nine. You know, the comic book type. I couldn’t relate to anyone until the Romans showed up. Wasn’t until I was 12 and got a books of Norse myths from school that I had my “ah-ha” moment. It explained so much of what I thought and felt my entire life up to that point. Now I get that may not be the path for everyone and ok, fine. But I’ve researched many religions and the origins of them in my life. I love studying them. Learning judaism came from caananite paganism kinda thru me for a loop. So I investigated and yes, the conflated 2 caananite gods into one (El & Yahweh) and then broke away as a stand alone cult. Kinda make the judaism of the past few thousand years seem like pure bullshit. But wait a minute, if judaism is bullshit, what are it’s children, Islam and Christianity ? Well friends, I kinda hope that answer will be obvious. But whether you believe me or not, care or not or whatever, that religion has turned us into global cucks. So much of the bs we face right now can be traced right back to Christianity in some way. Whether it is the innate need to be the good guy or our suicidal altruism, we are killing ourselves off. Some happily even. And getting down to brass tacks, it only dominated Europe because it killed, tortured and bribed it’s way it. They bribed kings and cheifs with gold, silver and fancy titles that couldn’t be contested as they were “from God”. Funny, when they were still Pagan they only kept their crown by being the kind of Man his people expected him to be and if he wasn’t he was gone. Funny indeed. It took many native Pagan holidays and turned them into their holidays. Easter for one. Come from the Goddess Eostre. But I digress. After about 15 yrs of earnest study of my Pagan faith it dawned on me the White/ethnically European people are all caught up in some kind of 1,500+ year case of Stockholm Syndrome. So much so that you have people who actually believe the Anglo-Saxons were the lost tribes of Israel. Lol.. We wuz kangz now ?, Ahahaha. Point is, this fucking religion butchered and brainwashed our ancestors but you still think it’s the way to go. But if you wanna forget all the spiritual stuff and keep it simple, you can not be both pro-White and pro-Jew. jesus was a jew. You can not fight the jews while worshipping a jew. And if you worship a jew then you are actively working against your own people. You don’t have to embrace you actual ancestral religion like I did. But we will never be free of jews while even one of us worships one.

    • John Alder
      John Alder says:

      Very well put ! I recall reading about an ancient jewish scholor who researched the bible and came to the conclusion that the god of the bible could not be the creator of the universe but was nothing more than a jewish tribal god. Bart Ehrman a bible scholar at University of North Carolina has authored numerous books that shatter the myth of the bible being without error . It’s good you are at home with a faith that has no semitic origins.

      • B. Rockford
        B. Rockford says:

        Plenty of scholarly studies exposing the unbelievable elements in the library known as “the” Bible, from the 19th century onwards, from Jews, Christians and Muslims, as well as atheists.

    • Odin's left eye
      Odin's left eye says:

      Freki The Ravenous, thank you for your insightful comment!

      I was never able to identify with Christianity and found my spiritual home in this world within paganism. Intellectually, spiritually, aesthetically (it’s a beautiful way of life!) and practically (wholesome and life-promoting!), it is deeply satisfying. For people who have not yet discovered paganism, some useful websites:

        • John D. Alder
          John D. Alder says:

          It appears that all religions that ever existed and all religions currently operating and all religions that are yet to be are created by human beings, some to make a fast buck some to control people. How do people join a religion such as Scientology which was created by a science fiction writer? Did alarm bells fail to go off? Can any of these religions present any scientifically verifiable evidence of their claims?

    • Weaver
      Weaver says:

      It’s easy to declare oneself “pagan,” but what do you actually believe in? My comments won’t get through if I explain, which is perhaps for the best, but I’ve seen some dangerous ideas (dangerous to whites) on at least one “pagan” site.

      The Zoroastrians were white. Their religion seems to have been unique at the time, more similar to Christianity than Norse paganism, perhaps. The authoritative book on the religion is by a German; I’d need to look it up. They seem not to fully know their original religion well, which also seems common among Indian faiths and perhaps Chinese faiths also (from what little I’ve read on China). Pagans seem to forget the details of their faith with time. In the US, it appears that some Amerindians have been told lies about their faiths. Theirs has become some fictional LGB nonsense.

      Where are the druids to teach us? A lot has been lost even if some remains. Christianity developed in Europe. It’s widely seen as the European faith, and it’s the heritage that unites us, in addition to Europe sharing enormously in genetics. The pagan Ukrainians, doing their weird cult practices in Ukraine, seem perfectly happy serving Jews.

      I’m asking a sort of rhetorical question here of, what is believed? I’m also legitimately curious what values you hold. If we worship genetic evolution through competitions of survival of the fittest, do we jump to a lab, design new “superior” life to replace us? Or is humanity itself sacred as the Creation of God?

      Often the “anti-Christians” teach a sort of Nietzschean ethics which just leads to barbaric ruin. I’ve always been drawn to the Celts and Germans who resisted, rejected, and survived the Romans. I hate Rome. The greatest beauty on Earth is found in the fringe remnants of Nordic and Celtic heritage. But what values does it hold? At heart, I’m a “Nordicist,” but the details are significant.

      We’re dying out for a reason, but you have to remember our pagan heritage is from sparsely populated regions of Europe. Jews are better adapted to struggles in the dense urban situations we find ourselves in today.

      • Bob
        Bob says:

        The sky God is a high ranking interdementional demon who helps with farming and live stock . People laugh but Genghis khan was deeply into it. Maybe like that king of Persia character in the Bible

      • Michael Adkins
        Michael Adkins says:

        ‘Jews are better adapted to struggles in the dense urban situations we find ourselves in today.’

        Agree without doubt. That’s why we need a new model of the European male.

        • moneytalks
          moneytalks says:

          ” That’s why we need a new model of the European male.”

          Maybe so .

          More importantly ,
          we ( humanity ) and especially
          ( Nordics/Whites/Celtics/[ et al ] )
          need an ultimate common goal which is really the one principal indispensible factor that unites/solidifies disparate cultures populated by individuals whom at least tacitly acknowledge the necessity to matriculate into organizations dedicated to facilitating each and every individual/member in attaining their ultimate common goal .

          Any ultimate common goal that is not dedicated for humanity and especially for Nordics/Whites/Celtics to thrive-n-survive beyond the

          {{ Solar TOTAL Extinction Event }} ,

          whereby all extant humanity here on planet earth
          will inevitably perish forever

          ( when Helios-the-Sun
          BURNS-OUT )

          into the abyss of the

          DOOM of OBLIVION

          as that event commences ,

          would be utterly futile

          only idiots , crazies , religious fanatics , and completely irrational persons would have a lessor ultimate common goal .

      • B. Rockford
        B. Rockford says:

        Zoroastrianism influenced both Judaism and Christianity with the concept of good versus evil, heavenly angels, demonic adversary, a redeemer hero and a final cataclysm. The book of Daniel played a key part.

  6. Brian Fellis
    Brian Fellis says:

    As I waded through this piece, I kept wondering when jewish subversion was going to be mentioned.
    And a comment above, right on cue, blames “boomers.”
    It wasn’t boomers that took down the west; it was JEWS.

    • Captainchaos
      Captainchaos says:

      Get a grip, dude. Jews are a constant in this equation, White acquiescence to their schemes is not. I offer in Andrew Fraser’s preferred terminology an “action plan” that seeks to guide the “behavior” of retarded boomers and bourgeois conservatives to a socio-political destination where the “action” of leaders and political soldiers can make an actual difference in achieving the 14 Words. If what it takes for boomers and bourgeois conservatives to “behave” in the desired fashion is to give them a swift kick in the ass then so be it. (My “action plan” is Red State secession, just in case I need to spell it out for you, which I suspect I do.)

    • Weaver
      Weaver says:

      The Reformation, Enlightenment, and general WASP failure are also blameworthy. As a Jew argued to me at Unz: the English Enlightenment didn’t begin as Jewish.

      Specifically, as many have pointed out: WASPs only value work. WASPs don’t want to rule, even mock the very idea of ruling. Anglos want individuals to trust one another, working together in harmony and goodwill, trusting in the individual’s ability to reason.

      As a result: Jews easily take over the media, academia, history, culture, everything significant, everything relevant to power. We do share blame in the rapid collapse of our nations. However, perhaps things would be different had we kept them out.

      Where do we see Jewish power greatest, today? In Anglo Canada, NZ, and Australia. Maybe Estonia and some other East European states could be included there, but Anglos are conquered. It’s sad.

  7. todd hupp
    todd hupp says:

    Jesus was himself a “protestant.”He pushed back on the entrenched Jewish establishment of his era.The Coptic gospels are very much focused on individual spiritual development vs a rigid structure of religious laws.
    WASPs built America.The decline of USA WASP control/influence/individualism since the 1960s is directly related to the decline of the USA.

  8. Panzerknacker Fridolin
    Panzerknacker Fridolin says:

    Normally most healthy and commendable when members of a cultural, ethnic, racial community do not want to let die the memory of their ancestors and their love for their homeland. A quality which the Jews do not concede to the Europeans stigmatized by them as “original sinners of mankind”, but strive to prevent, forget and extinguish under all circumstances. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTNMPYI51H8

  9. Panzerknacker Fridolin
    Panzerknacker Fridolin says:


    First comes culture shock, then reverse culture shock.This adventurous urge to go far away, the search for “stimulation” and the insatiable hunger for experience diminish with increasing age, although the curiosity about the world and the attraction of the (supposedly) “exotic” remain. Today, people flee because their own homeland seems cramped, stuffy, alienated, hostile to life, the pressure of conformity of “postmodernity” almost unbearable.

    Until you realize that everywhere else you will always remain a stranger. In the end, the circle closes and one wants to be buried where one’s own cradle stood, even if the oh so beloved homeland (which does not love one back, because Heimatliebe in our time is a one-sided, unfulfilled, unhappy love) has meanwhile been distorted beyond recognition. After all, one was and is unmistakably descended from its maternal bosom.


    • B. Rockford
      B. Rockford says:

      The Holocaust looks like replacing Good Friday as the Pole Event of History and in “good” time risen Israel could well replace Easter. See e.g. Gabriel Wilensky, “Six Million Crucifixions” (2010).
      As for (Se)Xmas see Tanya Gold, “Jingle Kvells,” The Jewish Chronicle, December 14, 2022.
      The “Church” of “England” meanwhile is busy explaining that the silly only-begotten Son of God was wrong to refer to his Father as a “male”. Anyway, wasn’t Jesus in fact the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier according to ancient Jews and modern Nazis?

        • B. Rockford
          B. Rockford says:

          De rien, mon vieux courtois comme d’habitude!

          Aussi voir: (1) Thierry Murcia, “Yeshua ben Pantera,” Judaisme ancien 2, 1914, en ligne; (2) Peter Head, “Susannah Heschel’s ‘The Aryan Jesus’,” JSNT, May 2010, en ligne; (3) Jane Schaberg, “The Illegitimacy of Jesus” (2006); (4) Wikipedia, “Croyances religieuses d’Adolf Hitler,” en ligne.

  10. Panzerknacker Fridolin
    Panzerknacker Fridolin says:

    I completely reject the esoteric nonsense that “in her body (any) unprocessed traumas are”! This is a way of thinking that comes from Jewish “psychoanalysis”, but not from our Germanic view of the world.

    The Germanic view is that negative feelings (which are exclusively the result of negative beliefs) are a fundamentally unnatural unhealthy state of imbalance that goes against nature.

    Nature wants us to be happy and feel good and well. So I am not a Jewish “trauma therapist” but a “Germanic behaviorist” so to speak.

    In this respect, American Skinner was (at least) better than Jew fraud Freud, even if behavioral change will inevitably not result in a real change of attitude at all.

    But conversely, change of attitude will result in a change of behavior and feelings. Change always starts in the head. No disturbed brain can permanently be changed by “reward & punishment”, only temporary.

    Of course, thinking, acting and feelings influence (and condition!) each other at any time. However, an attitude cannot be sustainably triggered to change by “incentives” and “impulses” from the outside as long as an inner defense exists.

  11. SimpleMale
    SimpleMale says:

    It seems to me, based on what I’ve read here and there on evolution and neuro-science, that Europeans became too intelligent by 1750 AD due to the mini-ice age from 1400 AD to 1700 AD, and their Group Selected instincts did not rise as fast, such as Ethnocentrism, Religiosity, Industriousness, Lebido constraint, etc. As such, Europeans by 1750 AD started to intellectually question their traditional ideas. Also, with repect to environmental influences, their higher intelligence by this time resulted in scientific based explanations for what was previously attributed to acts of miracles by God. Together, this pushed Europeans by this time to seek an altered version of Christianity, one which allowed individuals to be more Individually Selected, as opposed to Group Selected, at an environmental level. For example, Europeans questioned why God, who is kind and generous, would have a problem with Europeans having some fun, such as hedonism, gluttony, pre-marital coitus, etc. And they questioned why they should discrimate against genetically more distant people. Perhaps they didn’t have all the scientific data at this time regarding the innate differences between population groups.

    Of course, later, when Darwinian Selection was greatly relaxed due to all the mortality reducing innovations of the Industrial Revolution, it was actually the progressively increasing genetic deterioration brought on by dysgenics that greatly pushed Europeans towards an innately influenced Individually Selected behavioral trajectory.

    So, does the scientific data back up what I’ve stated above? I really don’t know for sure.

    “Similarly, Wolfe’s case for upholding the legitimacy of traditional gender hierarchies has already attracted accusations of “misogyny.””

    But if European females have become too masculine at a genetic level (less sexual dimorphism in behavior and appearance), then part of a change back to traditional Christian ways will have to be the result of the reintroduction of rigorous Darwinian Selection, the kinds that first lead to patriarchy and higher sexual dimorphism.

    Athens was a sea power in which international trade and a strong navy encouraged a commercial culture, democracy, individualism, and technology.

    What is meant here by the word “individualism”? This always confuses me. In evolutionary terms, individualism means “Individual Selection,” meaning each man for himself, like in Africa. Thus, Europeans can’t be both individualistic and ethno-nationalist at the same time – these are evolutionarily opposite states of existence.

    Guillaume Durocher suggests that “Athens embodied the long-term superiority of dynamic commercial, democratic-individualist, and technologically advanced systems over static, austere, hierarchical-communitarian, and primitive ones.” Like the modern, Anglo-Saxon thalassocracies in Great Britain and the United States, Athens was “dynamic and expansive in peacetime” while “able to adopt sufficiently hierarchical-communitarian characteristics in wartime.

    What do the terms “democratic-individualist” and “hierarchical-communitarian” mean? Unless one is writing from a religious perspective where all human behavior is determined to be the result of spiritual forces (which I do respect and value), I would think that by now, the secular writers could describe human behavior in basic neurological-level and quantifyable terms, as opposed to sociological terms, since so much research has now been done on this.

    Anyway, I will once again post my solution to merging Religiosity with eugenics/transhumanism:

    I have a religious/monumental/spiritual belief that my envisioned Group-Selected nation should collectively seek to approach the realm of God by working together as a national family to become god-like ourselves via eugenics/transhumanism. It does not matter if we succeed or fail – it’s the effort that counts, and it’s the effort that gives our lives meaning and a purpose, which is to attempt to touch the realm of God together as a united national family, for God is pro-family, and we honor God in our attempt to become one with Him. God only helps those who helps themselves, and He is pleased and honored by our attempt to ourselves reach His realm. God understands that laziness leads to entropy, while hard work leads to higher orders of existence, thus He declares hard work to be a virtue, and laziness to be a Sin. Eugenics/transhumanism is the highest manifestation of hard work, and God is honored by our attempt to become one with Him. Again, in God’s eyes, it’s the attempt that counts, and as long as we try our best in the attempt to implement eugenics/transhumanism, we please God and increase our chances for transcendence into the next level of existence/After-Life/’Heaven.’

    • Weaver
      Weaver says:

      I obviously differ on your exaltation of transhumanism.

      Regarding intelligence, even if past Europeans were smarter genetically, we enjoy better nutrition today. Even the nobles supposedly ate badly at times.

      I’ve always seen northern Europeans as akin to northern Chinese, who are more group oriented and value Confucius. Southern Europe is more akin to southern Chinese.

    • B. Rockford
      B. Rockford says:

      Eugenics: “let us go unto perfection”.
      Teilhard de Chardin, Dean Inge, Bertrand Conway….Christian eugenicists.

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      ” Eugenics/transhumanism is the highest manifestation of hard work, and God is honored by our attempt to become one with Him.”

      That is your belief and your prerogative ;

      it is most assuredly not a scientific fact .

      Please do not try to impose your [ faith ] on contrary others since only valid authentic empirical [ scientific facts ] , which have been democraticly established ,
      may warrant acceptance and demand behavioral fidelity regardless of any contrary [ belief ] .

  12. Panzerknacker Fridolin
    Panzerknacker Fridolin says:

    Am I fundamentally against faith? I always ask only, in which direction this faith is aligned, what is its actual goal. If this means like in the Jewish caused Christianity to merge the whole world and to “unite us all humanistically”, I am strictly against it! What faith can cause, can hardly be denied when looking at the world history.

    Today, for example, billions of people believe in alleged “historical truths” that never took place (we all know what I’m talking about) and make a mockery of any reality check. If someone needs a “talisman” in his pocket because it promises him “good luck”, this is childish, but quite crucial for the process of his chance of success. The underlying principles (nocebo/placebo) are well known.

    What we expect all too strenuously turns out to be true with mechanical certainty in the end, the proverbial “self-fulfilling” “prophecy”. That’s why someone who harbors self-doubt should never enter a playing field (or a “man” who believes his happiness depends on a woman should never approach a woman). To speak of “self-responsible independent individuals” in this respect, however, would be an inconceivable crime against all reason.

  13. Bob
    Bob says:

    That one guy said “being moral” was the only way to defeat them. I heard it off Dr Eric karlstrom. He was talking about e . Michael Jones. I buy all my friends stuff on the internet. This is really the answer, I believe. I’m not even Catholic either.

  14. Ron Chapman
    Ron Chapman says:

    Our world view depends on what we think the cosmos is. Arguably everything emerges from the mind of the Creator, i.e. it is thought energy. The cosmos is thus composed of myriad interacting energetic frequencies some of which coalesce into physical matter. The result for us appears to be our electromagnetic universe and everything in it. The process seems to involve the evolution of combinations of energies into matter all of which is imbued with an element of Creator consciousness and some of which then evolves into individuated consciousness i.e. life and eventually self-conscious life – us.

    Arguably the dystopia humanity currently lives in arises from long gone origins. Some recent markers:
    Roman Emperor Constantine, influenced by Pharisees, created the Christian religion, convening the First Council of Nicaea. He also published the first edition of the Bible but it is not clear whether it was just the New Testament or included the Old Testament; or was just 50 copies of the Gospels. In any event the Bible eventually excluded the gospel of Thomas and hundreds of other Biblical accounts.

    The First Council of Nicaea https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-28/325-first-council-of-nicea.html

    Second Council of Constantinople https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#:~:text=The%20First%20Council%20of%20Nicaea%2C%20the%20first%20general%20council%20in,Hosius%20and%20supported%20by%20Constantine.

    553 – https://www.britannica.com/biography/Vigilius

    And: Reincarnation: The Church’s Biggest Lie – https://www.facts-are-facts.com/article/reincarnation-the-churchs-biggest-lie

    Christ Jesus taught that ensouled human beings are indwelt by a fragment of Creator consciousness and that once an individual human chooses to live a moral life his/her soul fuses with that indwelling Creator spirit fragment and the individual becomes an eternal spirit being.THAT was a crucial part of his GOOD NEWS which the Pharisees wanted to suppress.

    The soul development process requires myriad incarnations before individuation occurs and myriad incarnations thereafter until an individual reaches the stage of conscious self awareness and direction. Then, further myriad incarnations occur as the, newly evolved sovereign individual HUman (Higher Universal man) journeys through the cosmos to meet with the Creator on Paradise Isle. Thereafter that sovereign HUman returns to the Creation to assist with its administration and management. Eternity is a veryyy looong time…

    This means that we are incorporeal spirit beings and NOT our physical bodies (meat suits) which are mortal. No amount of chemical infusions or technological manipulations can make physical matter eternal. That is presumably why the physical human body is constantly shedding cells and replacing them as we live each physical life.

    Jesus didn’t incarnate to create a religion and didn’t. He came to reveal divine truths lost over millennia and corrupted by Pharisees and others.

    Not satisfied with forcing the Romans to crucify Jesus, the Pharisees influenced Roman emperors to establish the Christian religion to corrupt and destroy Jesus’ message.

    In particular, Jesus did not come to sacrifice himself to redeem or “save” anyone because he couldn’t. He came to reveal divine truths lost over millennia and corrupted by Pharisees and others. Each ensouled human being must ‘save’ self. WHY? Because EVERY ensouled HUman is gifted by the Creator with an indwelling spirit; a spark of Creator consciousness AND a unique personality together with intellect and free will which makes him or her an only begotten (i.e. unique) son or daughter of God. As a consequence, every Human is a sovereign individual responsible for his/her own thoughts, decisions, actions, culpable inaction, evolvement and destiny. Accordingly every HUman must personally learn through trial and error (i.e. mistakes labelled by religions as “sin”) about life, the universe and everything and gradually evolve spiritually to ‘save’ self, i.e. to become like God. THAT is the purpose of Creation. HUmans are immaterial eternal spirits and hence they have eternity in which to reincarnate and complete this process. THAT was Jesus’ GOOD NEWS!

    Spirits are eternal. They are NOT the mortal physical bodies (meat suits) that they inhabit.

    Once the Pharisees had arranged for Roman Emperors to establish a false religion in an effort to eliminate divine truths taught by Jesus they distorted his teachings by excluding the Gospel of Thomas and many other books from the Bible. But their biggest coup was getting the Torah included in the Bible as the “Old Testament” (OT). The OT was completely antithetical to Jesus’ teachings and so its inclusion in the Bible completely compromised his teaching therein and created the basis for perpetuating the colossal LIE that Christian truth somehow arose out of Pharisaic bullshit. That perfidious accomplishment has enabled Pharisees and neo-Pharisees to pretend that despite having crucified Jesus they never-the-less happen to be the font of “Judeo-Christian” morality and values and hence the source of the civilisation that Jesus’ divine teaching caused to manifest in Europe despite its distortion and corruption by Pharisees and neopharisees. Much (most?) of the confusion about life the universe and everything we experience stems from Talmudic i.e. Pharisaic disinformation.

    In particular, the Pharisees were not satisfied with forcing the Romans to crucify Jesus and inserting the Torah into the Bible, calling it ‘The Old Testament’. They sought to ensure that virtually all references to Jesus’ GOOD NEWS such as reincarnation and the fact that EVERY ensouled HUman being is indwelt by a fragment of Creator consciousness, was deliberately omitted from Christian religious teaching and deleted from the Bible.

    Pharisees and neo-Pharisees have censored and distorted successive iterations of Jesus’ teachings and the Bible narratives for two millenia, starting with the Pharisee, Saul of Tarsus (St Paul), who denigrated females, subjugating them to males. Subsequently Pharisees and neo-Pharisees (ie the Khazars who adopted the Pharisees’ Talmudic ideology and pseudo religious rites in the 8th century AD in an attempt to ward off the Rus and the Byzantine empire that sought to stop continuance of the Khazars’ barbarous and murderous attacks on their neighbours) continued to manipulate Ecumenical Councils.

    The elimination of the fact that every ensouled human being is a higher universal man (HUman) because s/he is indwelt by a fragment of the Creator’s spirit consciousness; and once s/he chooses to try to live a moral life s/he fuses with their indwelling God fragment and becomes sovereign and eternal, was as crucial as their elimination of the truth about reincarnation. Why? Because it led to fear of death and hence the infantilization of Christian religious believers via the false doctrine that Christ Jesus was the ONLY begotten son of God and that he sacrificed himself for the salvation of ALL of humanity. He didn’t and couldn’t.
    Jesus’ message was that every HUman is gifted by the Creator with a fragment of Creator consciousness AND a unique personality and free will and that, as a consequence, every ensouled human being is a sovereign individual responsible for his/her own thinking, evolvement and destiny. Each HUman must learn about life, the universe and everything and evolve spiritually to ‘save’ self, i.e. progress through the cosmos. Moreover, HUmans are eternal spirits and have eternity in which to reincarnate and complete this process.

    The Christian religion doesn’t tell adherents this truth because Emperor Justinian eliminated virtually all references to Jesus’ teaching about reincarnation from the Bible and Christian doctrine. This was finally achieved during the Fifth Ecumenical Council in 553 AD. At that time Emperor Justinian arrested Pope Vigilius for Believing in Reincarnation and had the Council declare:

    If anyone asserts the fabulous preexistence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it: let him be anathema. (The Anathemas against Origen), attached to the decrees of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, A.D. 554, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2d ser., 14: 318). See eg: Pope [Vigilius] Arrested for Believing in Reincarnation – https://reluctant-messenger.com/reincarnation-pope.htm

    Eradication of the doctrine of Reincarnation, ie knowledge that the evolvement of MIND and free will is based on the reincarnation process (which is essential to enable spirit beings incarnating into physicality to avail themselves of a sufficient number of physical incarnations to adequately explore and understand the immensity of life, the universe and everything) is the method used by the Pharisees and neo-Pharisees, ie Talmudists who call themselves Jews but are not, to convince gentiles (i.e. all who DO NOT accept Talmudism) that they are merely physical creatures having one, only, lifetime which has no meaning, destiny or purpose.

    Concomitantly this LIE, reinforced by the Talmudists’ funding and coercion of scientists to accept and promulgate false science about life, the universe and everything as typified by falsely promulgated Darwinian evolutionary theories about the Origin of Species, has made it easy for Talmudists and the Christian religious puppets they control, to instil fear of death into congregations. The truth is scientifically explained by Bruce Lipton. See eg: The Science That Could Change Your Future – Dr Bruce Lipton
    How Your Genes Listen to Your Beliefs with Dr Bruce Lipton
    EPIGENETICS AND EVOLUTION: BETTERING YOURSELF AND HUMANITY WITH DR. BRUCE H. LIPTON – https://neurohacker.com/epigenetics-and-evolution-bettering-yourself-and-humanity-with-dr-bruce-h-lipton

    This process of inserting LIES into Christian teaching and the Bible has made it feasible for Talmudists and materialists generally, to distort human consciousness and science by having scientists, academics, educators and commentators as well as the MSM, promulgate false and ridiculous ideas including the idea that consciousness arises from random chemical reactions. This also enables Talmudists et al to contend that people on this small planet on the edge of this local universe are the most, and probably the only, consciously intelligent beings in the Cosmos. LOL. Anyone still believing that shtick is gonna get a big surprise very soon.

    As regards Christians being “raptured” and going to “Heaven”, be aware that the Creation is a veryyy BIG, seemingly material manifestation* which, to all intents and purposes, appears to be growing indefinitely. Accordingly there are myriad places to go and innumerable things to do therein. No one sits around on clouds doing nothing with “Jesus”.
    * For discussion on the holographic aspects of the material cosmos see eg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpi6auFau70&t=921s

    Once individuals “get it” sufficiently to progress through the cosmos to meet with the Creator they then return to the Creation to assist with its administration and governance. In fact many evolved spirit individuals are here NOW to assist this planet and her inhabitants to cast off her demonic controllers and to enable those who seek to serve others more than themselves to safely navigate through 4d into 5d. Trump, Putin and Xi are among their number.

    NONE of the information in Jesus’ message was acceptable to the Pharisees whose Talmudic ideology was essentially an oppressive societal control mechanism, as it still is. That is why they forced the Romans to crucify Jesus and then sought to eliminate his message by creating the Christian religion to distort and corrupt it. The Khazarian (Ashkenazi) neo-Pharisees have continued to use and embellish the Talmudic enslavement mechanism. The only reason that Jesus’ message persists in the hearts and minds of HUmans is that it is the truth.

    Those seeking greater knowledge about the cosmos and this planet can find a lot of information in the Urantia Book. See eg: https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-53-lucifer-rebellion

    Hatonn also elaborates on these matters in the Phoenix Journals: http://en.christ-michael.net/the-phoenix-journals/

    To understand why our subconscious mind controls our life see eg: https://www.theclearingnw.com/blog/biology-belief-change-your-reality-bruce-lipton


    Peace and Blessings,

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      ” Talmudic enslavement mechanism.”

      Is that worse than
      the Christian enslavement mechanism ?

      Servants ,

      obey in all things your masters


      ( verbatim quote abstracted from :
      The Christian NT / KJV / Book of Colossians / chapter 3 / verse 22 )

      where “Servants” means [ slaves ] .

  15. moneytalks
    moneytalks says:

    Interestingly , author Fraser presents
    13 different mini-narratives on the meaning of “politics”.

    Immediately below is quoted the first sentence in this Prof. Fraser essay that has the word “politics” ___

    It follows that “politics” in every Christian nation must be understood as “the art of establishing and cultivating necessary conditions for social life for the good of man.”


    “Politics” is about motivating and/or manipulating a labelled group of people to attain a goal that inexorably results in a redistribution of resources that is normally considered to be more favorable to that group . Have no doubt , that political elections are normally intended to redistribute resources .

    Politics is always and ultimately about redistributing finite resources ;
    and it normally involves either an overt or covert power struggle . In particular , overt or direct power struggle politics is about explicitly acquiring control over a resource genericly called [ humanity ] .

    This particular quote below has the chronologicly last word “politics” in the main part of the essay ___

    ” The modern German jurist Carl Schmitt identified the difference between friend and foe as the existential essence of politics.”

    Obviously , Schmitt nails it since all politics normally involves either an overt or covert power struggle

    ( as an inevitable consequence of any attempt to redistribute a limited/scarce resource )

    between opposition groups .

    Another particular quote ,
    out of 13 different mini-narratives ,
    with the word “politics” ___

    Unfortunately, Wolfe’s argument treats Christianity, nationalism, politics, and civil government in generic, free-floating terms altogether detached from the biocultural history and theological presuppositions of any particular Christian nation.


    Unfortunately , virtually all religious and political discourse intended for public consumption is conducted in

    ” generic , free-floating terms
    altogether detached ”

    from any stable definitions that would effectively preclude much of the pervasive arcane nature or unintelligibility of such discourse .

    Please note that operational definitions of valid authentic scientific discourse precludes virtually all of the vagueness , ambiguity , definitional instability , and outright nonsense that usually obfuscates intelligibility of religious and political discourse .

    Astonishingly , it all began about 2500 years ago with the saliently historic successful termination , of the ancient Tower of Babel engineering project , as a result of injection of language confusions , into the workplace vernacular of the ancient Tower of Babel project , by the slave worker and father of Judaism named Abraham and his merry band of fellow ToB worker subversives

    ( refer to : The Holy Jewish Torah / KJV /
    Book of Genesis / chapter 11 / verses 1 – 9 ) .

  16. B. Rockford
    B. Rockford says:

    Ten Jews, 12 opinions.
    Twelve anti-Semites, 10 opinions.
    H. H. Pope Pierre de Craon, one bee, 1 bonnet.

Comments are closed.