I meant to put a link to Laurent Guyenot's book, "From Yahweh to Zion," which I'm reading now and finding just as worthwhile as I'd been told to expect it would be. I forgot, so here it is:
For some reason, Barnes and Noble has it mis-listed according to its translator (Kevin Barrett, who does a very nice job, btw. Not sure whether it is the same Kevin Barrett, who interviewed me years ago and has a very good substack: https://kevinbarrett.substack.com ).
I've never really considered the difference between the Judaic version of god and the pantheon of Greek and Roman gods in quite this way. That is, that the single Jewish "G-d" is a single-minded mania, whereas the pantheons of gods that are part of the Western spiritual inheritance represents a broader, multi-faceted way of looking at the world.
Not only that, but, as Guyenot points out, the other civilizations were developing--organically--the idea of a One all-encompassing God just as there is a one all-encompassing Cosmos. Among the Egyptians, the idea of a One God predates Yahwist monotheism by a thousand years. The huge difference is the "all-encompassing" aspect of the organic peace-seeking God of the Cosmos and the murderous, blood-thirsty, hate-filled, chauvinist god of destruction the captive Jews and benighted Christian Zionists worship.
Guyenot is simply the best contemporary author, at least for those who like to read books. OTOH his oratory isn't great. Kevin Barrett, the substacker and Muslim convert, is the translator for Guyenot. He is a good speaker, but his writing is confined to short articles. The only counter-Semite I know who combines both strong oratory and writing skills is E Michael Jones. Too bad he's a dogmatic Christian/Catholic.
David Irving absolutely, but I think he's retired now. You're right about counter-Semite too. It's off in the same way anti-Semite is off. Semite was originally just a language definition that we now use racially. I'm pro-Pal.
Someday, there should be an annual celebration of HOOP Day--Heroes of our People. It would honor people like David Irving and James Watson who were giants in their chosen fields and matched that excellence with excellence in personal character, which would be demonstrated by knowingly sacrificing all their professional success to fidelity to the truth. Tradition could develop where people gave each other gifts of things like toilet plungers, diapers, dog poop bags, and so on emblazoned with an image of Deborah Lipstadt's face and children were told the HOOP Day story of how the evil Jewess and her tribe used money, deceit, and nepotism to pervert our institutions, blind our people, and destroy David Irving.
HOOP, good acronym. Did you have any personal dealings w/ David? I attended 2 conferences in Cincinnati and one lecture in NYC. I felt sorry for his fall from grace. He was a fine speaker whose sophisticated British demeanor was immensely appealing to a conservative American audience. He also attracted some interesting guest speakers - the lovely and charming Lady Michele Renouf and the redoubtable Michael Collins Piper who was soon to experience his own fall from grace.
No, unfortunately, never met him. I know of him through Ron Unz' high praise for his work and integrity and, after watching some of his public speaking videos, I shared Unz' estimation.
The horrors of Gaza have been 'complemented' by the shit show of Israelis openly reveling in their murder of the innocents. Videos and quotes of their psycho-pathological behaviour been all over Twitter. The sight of their unbridled blood lust seems to have changed the conversation in America & Europe (I can only speak for the English speaking parts) where its suddenly become permissible to discuss the role of the Jew in the White nations.
comes from the American site https://stewpeters.com/ and discusses how and why its become illegal to name the Jew. And how that must change. Its not my cup of tea - being somewhat brash - but I imagine its aimed at people who prefer videos to reading this site. That is a huge market. Its only by bringing ordinary Americans to an understanding of the danger of letting Jews control both their culture & ZOG that will lead them to act to save the Republic.
It would appear that the boastful arrogance of Zionists, leading them to enthuse about their war crimes online, is red pilling millions.
Armageddon has begun!
(Well, if we're the Good Guys then who did you think were going to be the devil's minions - the Satanic hordes erupting out of Hell? If not those who follow yahweh, love treachery and hate humanity?)
Pastor Chuck Baldwin regularly denounces the zionist entity and it's incredibly despicable misbehavior. The IOF goons think it's pretty funny to post their war crimes on social media. Meanwhile, the're getting their asses kicked on the battlefield, by the outgunned Palestinian resistance forces in Gaza, as is evident in Resistance videos. Such an interesting juxtaposition.
I ran across this in Laurent Guyenot's book mentioned above:
"Alexander Jannaeus, brother and heir of Aristobulus, was less successful in his attempt to convert the Hellenistic cities of Samaria, Gaza, and Pela in Transjordan; so he “slew the inhabitants of Gaza; yet they were not of cowardly hearts, but opposed those that came to slay them, and slew as many of the Jews” (Jewish Antiquities XIII.13).
I had forgotten about Chuck Baldwin. Thanks for reminding me.
Great quote.! Electronic Infitada shows the videos on youtube, with good analyses, once or twice a week. Really interesting stuff. Idf's pretty good at bombing and slaughtering defenseless civilian targets, ''commando'' raiding hospitals while disguised as Doctors/Nurses and murdering patients, and deadly false flag drone/missile attacks on American bases that're blamed on Iran. They're not so great at close combat.
I'm not sure of the importance of an apparent authorship question in terms of its content for historical factuality. With fiction we don't question the worth of the work itself. But, in this context there's something weird. Recent historians have questioned the authenticity of Tacitus's works, as Guyenot points out in a chapter from the new book, Pope's Curse. The chapter is Fake West and the subsection is What were the humanists up to? (pp230-236) Tacitus is first mentioned in the 12 century where he's listed w/ 2 other authors: Serenus, Tranquillus and Tacitus (Serene, Peaceful and Silent). The intentional humor is unmistakeable, yet it was ignored and Tactitus was often quoted thereafter, even by Guyenot himself.
There's more to the story of fake works by other famous Roman authors like Cicero. Interesting reading. Seems money and prestige came w/ discovery of "lost" mss. Tactitus's work Germania is cited as valuable to the papacy in degrading German culture in light of the superior Roman culture.
In the Iliad, Zeus was very offended by Achilles disrespecting Hector’s body by dragging him around his friend’s funeral pile.
Apollo denounces Achilles before the other gods as “one that hath neither heart/Nor soul within him that will move or yield to any part/That fits a man, but lion-like, uplandish, and mere wild,/Slave to his pride, and all his nerves being naturally compil’d/Of eminent strength, stalks out and preys upon a silly sheep” (Id., ll. 41-45). “Shame,” Apollo says, “is not known, nor hath the power to be,/In this man’s being” (id., ll. 47-50). Achilles’ treatment of Hector’s body, Apollo says, is “vile” and “outrageous.”
Apollo intervenes to protect Hector’s body from Achilles’ unrelenting abuse. He places his divine shield over Hector’s body (so that, when Priam finally retrieves his son’s body, Hector can be given a burial worthy of a fallen hero):
Apollo yet, even dead,
Pitied the prince, and would not see inhuman tyranny fed
With more pollution of his limbs, and therefore cover’d round
His person with his golden shield, that rude dogs might not wound
His manly lineaments (which threat Achilles cruelly
Had us’d in fury). (Iliad Book XXIV, ll. 18-23.)
The gods then take counsel. Although the goddess Hera takes Achilles’ side, arguing that Hector and Achilles cannot fairly be treated as equals, the chief god, Zeus, decides that the dishonoring of Hector’s body must end, albeit in a way that does not injure Achilles’ honor. Zeus proclaims that Priam, the aged King of Troy and Hector’s father, must ransom his son’s body from Achilles, and that Achilles must yield the body to Priam. Zeus instructs the goddess Thetis (Achilles’ mother) to tell her son of his decree, telling her of the gods’, and above all his own, anger at Achilles’ defilement of Hector:
Haste then, and tell thy son
The gods are angry; and myself take that wrong he hath done
To Hector in worst part of all: the rather, since he still
Detains his person. Charge him then, if he respect my will
For any reason, to resign slain Hector. I will send
Iris to Priam to redeem his son, and recommend
Fit ransom to Achilles’ grace . . . (Iliad Book XXIV, ll. 122-28.)
Achilles’ accepts Zeus’ decision. Priam comes to Achilles’ tent to ransom Hector’s body and, in scenes of exquisite beauty and pathos, is reconciled to the man who slew his son.
If you think the Crescent is more willing to coexist than the star of david....wow.
Upside down.
Heres a simple test:
Theres Muslims in all kinds of societies around the globe.
But How do the non muslim people fare in sharia muslim countries? They basically don't. Mostly They have been killed or forced to leave or left by choice before the prior 2 options could come for them.
Yesterday I was working on something for a post and looked up the name of Egyptian god 'Ra' in Hebrew goog. trans, and it resulted in the word 'bad'. Thought it was strange. Why label Ra - the creator of all life - bad?
"Peaceful relations between civilizations always raises the sum total of human well-being, while violent relations never add and can only subtract from it."
Violent reactions like war boost the economy, which has a religious origin. (Naturally.)
"Since they had their sun god (and, likely, several other gods) in common, they could stake their honor in the same currency. Thus, the syncretic properties of their two distinct pantheons facilitated the blessings of peace, warded off the evils of war, and emphasized something mysterious and powerful “above” them—their common humanity. This was likely our first conception of the divine."
The priests originally minted coins in the temples, and the value of each coin (regardless of the metal involved) was based on the god's image, not the value of gold/silver. Eventually the lowbrow Saturn-worshipping materialists took control and started cutting the value of the metal with cheap crap and the rest is history.
The Heeb god is Saturn. They're losing power because Saturn's power is usurped by Uranus, Saturn's mythical father. Uranus, whose perigee to earth is in 2030-2033, returns to rule Aquarius. (Religion is a form of astrology and the pagan gods were planets.) Insanity will rule supreme unless people have stuck to genuine truth throughout their lifetime of choice-making.
"Violent reactions like war boost the economy, which has a religious origin. (Naturally.) "
If there are 10,000 workers in your town and you murder a thousand of them, the wages in your town will rise. But that doesn't mean the economy improved. War only destroys value. It has no intrinsic creative property.
I'm aware war has no intrinsic value at all especially in a golden/silver age, but I'm also aware the iron age 'economy' drivers do it consciously; the judeo-christian cabal - the Phoenician merchant classes - use it to grow wealth, tech., business expansion etc.
Our iron age history of bloodshed is just an economic factor in building our global civilisation. Those who 'don't want to play' global trade games get scheduled for war. It's sick, but how else to build and prepare a global civilisation in a dark age which had to ready at a certain time? As a friend said recently, their way is 'Not personal, it's just business.' The point is to connect the world with wealth and technology. Some resist change but the whole point of life is change and evolution. Our current war suggests values will change alright, but only under its pressure. It's sick, but clever and effective.
It took me forever to understand. I only got a view that made sense last year and I've been seeking my whole life. War is part of a war god strategy. If a given people worship a war god, then we get wars. Jupiter and Saturn are war gods, or at least not very stable gods but they are worshipped to build the new world or civilisation. Problem is.. They're not 'God', which is pure love and bliss, they're 'gods'. From the beginning of the iron age, Saturn and Jupiter (discipline, war, expansion, hard work, cruelty etc.) have been the predominant gods. Saturn for the jews, and the Sun and Jupiter for Christians. There has been no Uranus (Greek for Heaven) on earth all through the iron age, Uranus onlyreappears to rule under Aquarius, there is a very pronounced physics behind it. I wrote about it in more detail in the Famous Uranus post and a friend recently wrote a good post on how the Phoenicians used religion as business keeping the 'science' to themselves.
So - one could argue war was necessary to a degree, yes.
Aaand, finished the post. It's really good info all in one spot. Thanks for the link. My little brother is considering an old flame in Germany. She's a childless teacher in to poly relationships who wants to make amends for her ancestors behaviour.
It seems likely that the original Phoenicians wrote out the Old and New Testaments along with other myths like Dante's Divine Comedy (because it is a comedy!) and Ovid's Metamorphosis etc., around the same time and split in to groups. Phoenician Hunter goes in to great detail about this. (He also agrees with Schlomo Sand who I've not read.) His work is pretty good and covers everything up to the Beaty Military Intelligence section in the writing you linked including the conversion idea mentioned in the Phoenician/Carthaginian proposal. I tend to agree.
Thanks, I need something new to read today. The word 'jew' in itself has been made external. It used to stand for a 'Brahmanic' state (a Brahmanic, like Abrahamic), ie. when a close follower of the Upanishads hit the jackpot (so to speak) and reached full death/ enlightenment via the Kundalini. In our given religion, their name 'Kundalini' is equivalent to goddess Cardia, which is why all the sacrifices to her atm and for the last 80 years. But good luck hearing about her via the standard religious routes. I attempted to write out the entire history as briefly as possible but it still ran in to three posts (under the title TL:DR for the record). A friend sent me this quote a few days ago. Feel what we will, they've still got a vital role to play:
The Emperor Julian, in his Hymn to King Helios, states:
For the opinion of the Phoenicians—(who are) wise and
possessed of knowledge in respect of divine matters—stated
that the sunlight (which is) sent forth everywhere is the
Thank you, Teresa. Yes, it is unacceptable that the Church has submitted to its mortal enemy--the enemy of all humanity, Yahweh. In doing so, it has subjugated the civilization it claims to have created to the worst barbarism and, ultimately, annihilation. You and I and many others around the world understand that humanity and Yahweh are incompatible. Yahweh needs to be destroyed by whatever means necessary. If the Church has polluted itself by its attachment of the Old Testament to the New and declaring them of "equal divine authority" to the point it is unsalvageable, and even an impediment to the salvation of the West, then the Church will have destroyed itself. Every true Christian will understand this and undertake to help destroy the monster the Christian Zionists (primarily Protestants) have created.
In England the traditional congregation is so old its dying off. They can't make sense of the modern church leaders who embrace moral degeneracy, Islam and reject their role as stewards of the Church of ENGLAND.
The more charismatic churches seem to have embraced Zionist Christianity - and are unable to understand that the Jewish god is Satan. Even when I quote St. John '....your god is a murder and the father of lies'. Sad
The most famous Christian Zionist preacher here is a loathsome little maggot named John Hagee. He was quoted recently saying that calling for a cease-fire in Gaza was doing the work of the Anti-Christ. It would be hard to say anything more sinful, more blasphemous, or more vicious than that. It's like God is smacking Christians over the head with a 2x4 to wake them up it's so obviously irreligious, but they simply will not wake up.
I think those who lack much intellectual ability really need to be educated (indoctrinated) with healthy values and beliefs while still a child. For once perverted with false beliefs and degenerate morals you can't change their minds. (Well, you can, 'deprogramming', conversion experience, etc). Whereas those with a more discriminating mind will recognize the hypocrisy of falsity and, given time, come to reject it.
That's another area in which Christianity is failing us, in my view--the moral foundation for human life. And, once again, the problem can be laid at the feet of this insane idea that there is a magic book somewhere that one time God whispered in someone's ear the final and full cosmological and metaphysical truth and he wrote it down and that's it. Not one letter can be changed forever and ever or "God" is going to torture you with being burned alive for all eternity. This one is so regressive and insane even the Jews are more advanced. At least their Talmud rolls with the times (shame about it being Satanic, and all).
There are perfectly good reasons to give a kid if you are trying to teach him to be honest, aside from being honest yourself. If it's a Jewish kid, you teach him moral in-group/out-group duality. Only charge the goyim interest and your group can take over their country, etc, which works as a system, but everybody ends up hating you, which is their fault for being antisemitic, blah, blah, exterminate--an ugly evil world with no off-switch.
But if you are everybody else in the world and the kid asks, why should I be honest, you can tell him:
All humans strive to act in terms of the world as it really is. That is, they strive to act rationally. (Even if they are intentionally acting "irrationally," they have their "reason" for it.) To act in terms of the world as it really is requires our knowledge of the world around us to be as full and as accurate as possible. At its extreme, this is a matter of life and death. Someone who intentionally degrades the accuracy or fullness of the information you have about the world around you--by lying to you, say--to make their own knowledge superior to yours and thereby give themselves an advantage by making your actions less rational than theirs is really a kind of enemy (this is why lying and love are incompatible).
So, you tell the kid, if you are a liar, that means you believe lying is the way to act rationally in terms of the world as it really is. And that means you MUST believe everyone else is a liar, too, since you have to believe that that is the real world for everyone else, as well. That means you will live your life among enemies. You'll never experience true love. You'll never have a true friend. You'll live a degraded, stunted life. Honesty is a sign of strength and confidence in one's ability to act in terms of the world as it really is without needing to give oneself an advantage over others through the corruption and distortion of reality.
Christianity's moral foundation rests on the threat of God torturing sinners for all eternity in a lake of fire, which no rational person can believe exists.
I knew a family in Brooklyn into which as baby was born. The whole family doted on the baby--mom, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and they all lied to this kid from the moment he could learn to talk. When mom started to leave and the kid started crying, she would say, "Oh, I'm just going out to the car to get your toy," then she'd be off to a night of clubbing. That kid never had a chance.
"Christianity's moral foundation rests on the threat of God torturing sinners for all eternity in a lake of fire"
Well, if that is the basis for Christianity's morality then its a pretty messed up system of morality. But i don't think - in modern practice - Christianity is based on fear of pain, suffering and eternal damnation. I think Christianity is (or at least I believe it should be) based upon the love of fellow man, forgiveness of the sins of others, self sacrifice for the greater good of all, a love of others - community and a deep abiding love of God's creation - since he made it for us. Surely the whole point of Christianity is that it offers a positive way of life in a world made by a loving God. He may have been a bit of shit to his only begotten. But that is history. Now we live in a universe saved by - created thru - His sacrifice. A sacrifice we can join in by forgiving others.
(Which doesn't mean a senseless acceptance of evil - you can only forgive those who renounce their wicked ways. All others get whats coming to them - just retribution!)
"That's another area in which Christianity is failing us, in my view--the moral foundation for human life....All humans strive to act in terms of the world as it really is. ...."
In a sense you are making 'the world' the ultimate reality instead of the god from some primitive tribe's stories recorded in a book. I would agree with the underlying assumption. Let me put it like this: there was nothing and god created the world. So there was nothing but that for which we name 'god' and this 'nothing but that' 'created' the world out of.....? Well there was 'nothing but that' so it must have created the world out of itself eg that 'which we name 'god'.
So in a sense physical reality is god made manifest. There may be other aspects such as the act of creation, the 'nothing' and so forth. But in a way you are verifying Spinoza's theory that god is reality - God is the World. This is not to denigrate the divinity or mystical nature of the divine. Rather its to recognize that 'before time began' there was nothing. And out of that nothing the Big Bang (eg god + act of creation + the 'nothing') -> the Universe. A universe in which we find our world, the miracle of life and the miracle of evolution (which is how 'god' created man).
I'm arguing for a novel way of (re)conceptualising the divine. Which is in fact the original (the ancient primitive peoples') conception: that this very world, this creation of god's is god here and now, manifesting as physical reality. There is only god - physical reality - and nothing but god.
So... is this of any use to a guy who seeks to propose a rational basis which will serve as the foundation for a new way of expressing the religious impulse?
As reasonable, rational, albeit imperfect people we make the mistake of assuming others are like us. And they mostly are. But a small minority are psychopaths. For them, for these 'ubermensch', they have no love in their universe. No respect for others - indeed for them there are no others, no equals, only untermensch - goyim, two legged beasts.
There are two value systems here. The stupid, selfish bitch above is just a nasty / morally degraded mother who needed to be programmed with moral and rationally derived values when she was young enough to be impressionable. But wasn't. So she grew up to be a stupid, selfish bitch.
And the consciously evil psychopath. Psychopaths act rationally but upon the basis that they are god like. And everyone else is inconsequential. You can see this on twitter's many feeds showing psychopathic Israelis hating on Palestinians. Their genocidal nature is of a magnitude of difference to that of a selfish mother. They are not irrational. Just evil.
I meant to put a link to Laurent Guyenot's book, "From Yahweh to Zion," which I'm reading now and finding just as worthwhile as I'd been told to expect it would be. I forgot, so here it is:
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/from-yahweh-to-zion-kevin-j-barrett/1134385516?ean=9780996143042
For some reason, Barnes and Noble has it mis-listed according to its translator (Kevin Barrett, who does a very nice job, btw. Not sure whether it is the same Kevin Barrett, who interviewed me years ago and has a very good substack: https://kevinbarrett.substack.com ).
I've never really considered the difference between the Judaic version of god and the pantheon of Greek and Roman gods in quite this way. That is, that the single Jewish "G-d" is a single-minded mania, whereas the pantheons of gods that are part of the Western spiritual inheritance represents a broader, multi-faceted way of looking at the world.
Not only that, but, as Guyenot points out, the other civilizations were developing--organically--the idea of a One all-encompassing God just as there is a one all-encompassing Cosmos. Among the Egyptians, the idea of a One God predates Yahwist monotheism by a thousand years. The huge difference is the "all-encompassing" aspect of the organic peace-seeking God of the Cosmos and the murderous, blood-thirsty, hate-filled, chauvinist god of destruction the captive Jews and benighted Christian Zionists worship.
Guyenot is simply the best contemporary author, at least for those who like to read books. OTOH his oratory isn't great. Kevin Barrett, the substacker and Muslim convert, is the translator for Guyenot. He is a good speaker, but his writing is confined to short articles. The only counter-Semite I know who combines both strong oratory and writing skills is E Michael Jones. Too bad he's a dogmatic Christian/Catholic.
Also David Irving.
"Counter-Semite" I like the "counter" part. But pro-Semite, given the Palestinians are the only Semites in the area.
Counter-Talmudist?
Counter-Chosenism?
David Irving absolutely, but I think he's retired now. You're right about counter-Semite too. It's off in the same way anti-Semite is off. Semite was originally just a language definition that we now use racially. I'm pro-Pal.
Someday, there should be an annual celebration of HOOP Day--Heroes of our People. It would honor people like David Irving and James Watson who were giants in their chosen fields and matched that excellence with excellence in personal character, which would be demonstrated by knowingly sacrificing all their professional success to fidelity to the truth. Tradition could develop where people gave each other gifts of things like toilet plungers, diapers, dog poop bags, and so on emblazoned with an image of Deborah Lipstadt's face and children were told the HOOP Day story of how the evil Jewess and her tribe used money, deceit, and nepotism to pervert our institutions, blind our people, and destroy David Irving.
HOOP, good acronym. Did you have any personal dealings w/ David? I attended 2 conferences in Cincinnati and one lecture in NYC. I felt sorry for his fall from grace. He was a fine speaker whose sophisticated British demeanor was immensely appealing to a conservative American audience. He also attracted some interesting guest speakers - the lovely and charming Lady Michele Renouf and the redoubtable Michael Collins Piper who was soon to experience his own fall from grace.
No, unfortunately, never met him. I know of him through Ron Unz' high praise for his work and integrity and, after watching some of his public speaking videos, I shared Unz' estimation.
https://www.unz.com/runz/the-remarkable-historiography-of-david-irving/
The horrors of Gaza have been 'complemented' by the shit show of Israelis openly reveling in their murder of the innocents. Videos and quotes of their psycho-pathological behaviour been all over Twitter. The sight of their unbridled blood lust seems to have changed the conversation in America & Europe (I can only speak for the English speaking parts) where its suddenly become permissible to discuss the role of the Jew in the White nations.
This video https://rumble.com/v4a50zi-live-man-arrested-for-speaking-against-zionist-power-anti-trump-bureaucrats.html
comes from the American site https://stewpeters.com/ and discusses how and why its become illegal to name the Jew. And how that must change. Its not my cup of tea - being somewhat brash - but I imagine its aimed at people who prefer videos to reading this site. That is a huge market. Its only by bringing ordinary Americans to an understanding of the danger of letting Jews control both their culture & ZOG that will lead them to act to save the Republic.
It would appear that the boastful arrogance of Zionists, leading them to enthuse about their war crimes online, is red pilling millions.
Armageddon has begun!
(Well, if we're the Good Guys then who did you think were going to be the devil's minions - the Satanic hordes erupting out of Hell? If not those who follow yahweh, love treachery and hate humanity?)
"but I imagine its aimed at people who prefer videos to reading this site. That is a huge market. "
I concur.
Pastor Chuck Baldwin regularly denounces the zionist entity and it's incredibly despicable misbehavior. The IOF goons think it's pretty funny to post their war crimes on social media. Meanwhile, the're getting their asses kicked on the battlefield, by the outgunned Palestinian resistance forces in Gaza, as is evident in Resistance videos. Such an interesting juxtaposition.
I ran across this in Laurent Guyenot's book mentioned above:
"Alexander Jannaeus, brother and heir of Aristobulus, was less successful in his attempt to convert the Hellenistic cities of Samaria, Gaza, and Pela in Transjordan; so he “slew the inhabitants of Gaza; yet they were not of cowardly hearts, but opposed those that came to slay them, and slew as many of the Jews” (Jewish Antiquities XIII.13).
I had forgotten about Chuck Baldwin. Thanks for reminding me.
Great quote.! Electronic Infitada shows the videos on youtube, with good analyses, once or twice a week. Really interesting stuff. Idf's pretty good at bombing and slaughtering defenseless civilian targets, ''commando'' raiding hospitals while disguised as Doctors/Nurses and murdering patients, and deadly false flag drone/missile attacks on American bases that're blamed on Iran. They're not so great at close combat.
I'm not sure of the importance of an apparent authorship question in terms of its content for historical factuality. With fiction we don't question the worth of the work itself. But, in this context there's something weird. Recent historians have questioned the authenticity of Tacitus's works, as Guyenot points out in a chapter from the new book, Pope's Curse. The chapter is Fake West and the subsection is What were the humanists up to? (pp230-236) Tacitus is first mentioned in the 12 century where he's listed w/ 2 other authors: Serenus, Tranquillus and Tacitus (Serene, Peaceful and Silent). The intentional humor is unmistakeable, yet it was ignored and Tactitus was often quoted thereafter, even by Guyenot himself.
There's more to the story of fake works by other famous Roman authors like Cicero. Interesting reading. Seems money and prestige came w/ discovery of "lost" mss. Tactitus's work Germania is cited as valuable to the papacy in degrading German culture in light of the superior Roman culture.
In the Iliad, Zeus was very offended by Achilles disrespecting Hector’s body by dragging him around his friend’s funeral pile.
Apollo denounces Achilles before the other gods as “one that hath neither heart/Nor soul within him that will move or yield to any part/That fits a man, but lion-like, uplandish, and mere wild,/Slave to his pride, and all his nerves being naturally compil’d/Of eminent strength, stalks out and preys upon a silly sheep” (Id., ll. 41-45). “Shame,” Apollo says, “is not known, nor hath the power to be,/In this man’s being” (id., ll. 47-50). Achilles’ treatment of Hector’s body, Apollo says, is “vile” and “outrageous.”
Apollo intervenes to protect Hector’s body from Achilles’ unrelenting abuse. He places his divine shield over Hector’s body (so that, when Priam finally retrieves his son’s body, Hector can be given a burial worthy of a fallen hero):
Apollo yet, even dead,
Pitied the prince, and would not see inhuman tyranny fed
With more pollution of his limbs, and therefore cover’d round
His person with his golden shield, that rude dogs might not wound
His manly lineaments (which threat Achilles cruelly
Had us’d in fury). (Iliad Book XXIV, ll. 18-23.)
The gods then take counsel. Although the goddess Hera takes Achilles’ side, arguing that Hector and Achilles cannot fairly be treated as equals, the chief god, Zeus, decides that the dishonoring of Hector’s body must end, albeit in a way that does not injure Achilles’ honor. Zeus proclaims that Priam, the aged King of Troy and Hector’s father, must ransom his son’s body from Achilles, and that Achilles must yield the body to Priam. Zeus instructs the goddess Thetis (Achilles’ mother) to tell her son of his decree, telling her of the gods’, and above all his own, anger at Achilles’ defilement of Hector:
Haste then, and tell thy son
The gods are angry; and myself take that wrong he hath done
To Hector in worst part of all: the rather, since he still
Detains his person. Charge him then, if he respect my will
For any reason, to resign slain Hector. I will send
Iris to Priam to redeem his son, and recommend
Fit ransom to Achilles’ grace . . . (Iliad Book XXIV, ll. 122-28.)
Achilles’ accepts Zeus’ decision. Priam comes to Achilles’ tent to ransom Hector’s body and, in scenes of exquisite beauty and pathos, is reconciled to the man who slew his son.
But this God is more moral than Zeus?
If you think the Crescent is more willing to coexist than the star of david....wow.
Upside down.
Heres a simple test:
Theres Muslims in all kinds of societies around the globe.
But How do the non muslim people fare in sharia muslim countries? They basically don't. Mostly They have been killed or forced to leave or left by choice before the prior 2 options could come for them.
What if I told you that YHVH is a foreign God. Meaning a God already being worshipped by non Jews at that time.
Yesterday I was working on something for a post and looked up the name of Egyptian god 'Ra' in Hebrew goog. trans, and it resulted in the word 'bad'. Thought it was strange. Why label Ra - the creator of all life - bad?
"Peaceful relations between civilizations always raises the sum total of human well-being, while violent relations never add and can only subtract from it."
Violent reactions like war boost the economy, which has a religious origin. (Naturally.)
"Since they had their sun god (and, likely, several other gods) in common, they could stake their honor in the same currency. Thus, the syncretic properties of their two distinct pantheons facilitated the blessings of peace, warded off the evils of war, and emphasized something mysterious and powerful “above” them—their common humanity. This was likely our first conception of the divine."
The priests originally minted coins in the temples, and the value of each coin (regardless of the metal involved) was based on the god's image, not the value of gold/silver. Eventually the lowbrow Saturn-worshipping materialists took control and started cutting the value of the metal with cheap crap and the rest is history.
The Heeb god is Saturn. They're losing power because Saturn's power is usurped by Uranus, Saturn's mythical father. Uranus, whose perigee to earth is in 2030-2033, returns to rule Aquarius. (Religion is a form of astrology and the pagan gods were planets.) Insanity will rule supreme unless people have stuck to genuine truth throughout their lifetime of choice-making.
"Violent reactions like war boost the economy, which has a religious origin. (Naturally.) "
If there are 10,000 workers in your town and you murder a thousand of them, the wages in your town will rise. But that doesn't mean the economy improved. War only destroys value. It has no intrinsic creative property.
I'm aware war has no intrinsic value at all especially in a golden/silver age, but I'm also aware the iron age 'economy' drivers do it consciously; the judeo-christian cabal - the Phoenician merchant classes - use it to grow wealth, tech., business expansion etc.
Our iron age history of bloodshed is just an economic factor in building our global civilisation. Those who 'don't want to play' global trade games get scheduled for war. It's sick, but how else to build and prepare a global civilisation in a dark age which had to ready at a certain time? As a friend said recently, their way is 'Not personal, it's just business.' The point is to connect the world with wealth and technology. Some resist change but the whole point of life is change and evolution. Our current war suggests values will change alright, but only under its pressure. It's sick, but clever and effective.
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying war is a necessary evil? Or even a net positive?
It took me forever to understand. I only got a view that made sense last year and I've been seeking my whole life. War is part of a war god strategy. If a given people worship a war god, then we get wars. Jupiter and Saturn are war gods, or at least not very stable gods but they are worshipped to build the new world or civilisation. Problem is.. They're not 'God', which is pure love and bliss, they're 'gods'. From the beginning of the iron age, Saturn and Jupiter (discipline, war, expansion, hard work, cruelty etc.) have been the predominant gods. Saturn for the jews, and the Sun and Jupiter for Christians. There has been no Uranus (Greek for Heaven) on earth all through the iron age, Uranus onlyreappears to rule under Aquarius, there is a very pronounced physics behind it. I wrote about it in more detail in the Famous Uranus post and a friend recently wrote a good post on how the Phoenicians used religion as business keeping the 'science' to themselves.
So - one could argue war was necessary to a degree, yes.
https://phoenicianhunter.substack.com/p/wolves-in-sheeps-clothing
Most people think I'm nuts and that's cool, I don't try to change their minds. But it's all finally starting to make sense to me.
Our natural state is peace, which is what the words Zion and Jerusalem actually mean in bible dictionaries. It's a big picture. No apologies for that.
"Most people think I'm nuts and that's cool, I don't try to change their minds."
I admire your detachment.
Were the Phoenicians Jews? Unz has an interesting post about that:
https://www.unz.com/runz/prof-john-beaty-and-the-true-origin-of-the-jews/
Aaand, finished the post. It's really good info all in one spot. Thanks for the link. My little brother is considering an old flame in Germany. She's a childless teacher in to poly relationships who wants to make amends for her ancestors behaviour.
I don't know how to tell him...
It seems likely that the original Phoenicians wrote out the Old and New Testaments along with other myths like Dante's Divine Comedy (because it is a comedy!) and Ovid's Metamorphosis etc., around the same time and split in to groups. Phoenician Hunter goes in to great detail about this. (He also agrees with Schlomo Sand who I've not read.) His work is pretty good and covers everything up to the Beaty Military Intelligence section in the writing you linked including the conversion idea mentioned in the Phoenician/Carthaginian proposal. I tend to agree.
https://phoenicianhunter.substack.com/p/moor-than-meets-the-eye
Thanks, I need something new to read today. The word 'jew' in itself has been made external. It used to stand for a 'Brahmanic' state (a Brahmanic, like Abrahamic), ie. when a close follower of the Upanishads hit the jackpot (so to speak) and reached full death/ enlightenment via the Kundalini. In our given religion, their name 'Kundalini' is equivalent to goddess Cardia, which is why all the sacrifices to her atm and for the last 80 years. But good luck hearing about her via the standard religious routes. I attempted to write out the entire history as briefly as possible but it still ran in to three posts (under the title TL:DR for the record). A friend sent me this quote a few days ago. Feel what we will, they've still got a vital role to play:
The Emperor Julian, in his Hymn to King Helios, states:
For the opinion of the Phoenicians—(who are) wise and
possessed of knowledge in respect of divine matters—stated
that the sunlight (which is) sent forth everywhere is the
immaculate action of pure mind itself.
Thank you, Teresa. Yes, it is unacceptable that the Church has submitted to its mortal enemy--the enemy of all humanity, Yahweh. In doing so, it has subjugated the civilization it claims to have created to the worst barbarism and, ultimately, annihilation. You and I and many others around the world understand that humanity and Yahweh are incompatible. Yahweh needs to be destroyed by whatever means necessary. If the Church has polluted itself by its attachment of the Old Testament to the New and declaring them of "equal divine authority" to the point it is unsalvageable, and even an impediment to the salvation of the West, then the Church will have destroyed itself. Every true Christian will understand this and undertake to help destroy the monster the Christian Zionists (primarily Protestants) have created.
In England the traditional congregation is so old its dying off. They can't make sense of the modern church leaders who embrace moral degeneracy, Islam and reject their role as stewards of the Church of ENGLAND.
The more charismatic churches seem to have embraced Zionist Christianity - and are unable to understand that the Jewish god is Satan. Even when I quote St. John '....your god is a murder and the father of lies'. Sad
Same here in the States--plus Prosperity Gospel!
The most famous Christian Zionist preacher here is a loathsome little maggot named John Hagee. He was quoted recently saying that calling for a cease-fire in Gaza was doing the work of the Anti-Christ. It would be hard to say anything more sinful, more blasphemous, or more vicious than that. It's like God is smacking Christians over the head with a 2x4 to wake them up it's so obviously irreligious, but they simply will not wake up.
I think those who lack much intellectual ability really need to be educated (indoctrinated) with healthy values and beliefs while still a child. For once perverted with false beliefs and degenerate morals you can't change their minds. (Well, you can, 'deprogramming', conversion experience, etc). Whereas those with a more discriminating mind will recognize the hypocrisy of falsity and, given time, come to reject it.
That's another area in which Christianity is failing us, in my view--the moral foundation for human life. And, once again, the problem can be laid at the feet of this insane idea that there is a magic book somewhere that one time God whispered in someone's ear the final and full cosmological and metaphysical truth and he wrote it down and that's it. Not one letter can be changed forever and ever or "God" is going to torture you with being burned alive for all eternity. This one is so regressive and insane even the Jews are more advanced. At least their Talmud rolls with the times (shame about it being Satanic, and all).
There are perfectly good reasons to give a kid if you are trying to teach him to be honest, aside from being honest yourself. If it's a Jewish kid, you teach him moral in-group/out-group duality. Only charge the goyim interest and your group can take over their country, etc, which works as a system, but everybody ends up hating you, which is their fault for being antisemitic, blah, blah, exterminate--an ugly evil world with no off-switch.
But if you are everybody else in the world and the kid asks, why should I be honest, you can tell him:
All humans strive to act in terms of the world as it really is. That is, they strive to act rationally. (Even if they are intentionally acting "irrationally," they have their "reason" for it.) To act in terms of the world as it really is requires our knowledge of the world around us to be as full and as accurate as possible. At its extreme, this is a matter of life and death. Someone who intentionally degrades the accuracy or fullness of the information you have about the world around you--by lying to you, say--to make their own knowledge superior to yours and thereby give themselves an advantage by making your actions less rational than theirs is really a kind of enemy (this is why lying and love are incompatible).
So, you tell the kid, if you are a liar, that means you believe lying is the way to act rationally in terms of the world as it really is. And that means you MUST believe everyone else is a liar, too, since you have to believe that that is the real world for everyone else, as well. That means you will live your life among enemies. You'll never experience true love. You'll never have a true friend. You'll live a degraded, stunted life. Honesty is a sign of strength and confidence in one's ability to act in terms of the world as it really is without needing to give oneself an advantage over others through the corruption and distortion of reality.
Christianity's moral foundation rests on the threat of God torturing sinners for all eternity in a lake of fire, which no rational person can believe exists.
I knew a family in Brooklyn into which as baby was born. The whole family doted on the baby--mom, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and they all lied to this kid from the moment he could learn to talk. When mom started to leave and the kid started crying, she would say, "Oh, I'm just going out to the car to get your toy," then she'd be off to a night of clubbing. That kid never had a chance.
"Christianity's moral foundation rests on the threat of God torturing sinners for all eternity in a lake of fire"
Well, if that is the basis for Christianity's morality then its a pretty messed up system of morality. But i don't think - in modern practice - Christianity is based on fear of pain, suffering and eternal damnation. I think Christianity is (or at least I believe it should be) based upon the love of fellow man, forgiveness of the sins of others, self sacrifice for the greater good of all, a love of others - community and a deep abiding love of God's creation - since he made it for us. Surely the whole point of Christianity is that it offers a positive way of life in a world made by a loving God. He may have been a bit of shit to his only begotten. But that is history. Now we live in a universe saved by - created thru - His sacrifice. A sacrifice we can join in by forgiving others.
(Which doesn't mean a senseless acceptance of evil - you can only forgive those who renounce their wicked ways. All others get whats coming to them - just retribution!)
"That's another area in which Christianity is failing us, in my view--the moral foundation for human life....All humans strive to act in terms of the world as it really is. ...."
In a sense you are making 'the world' the ultimate reality instead of the god from some primitive tribe's stories recorded in a book. I would agree with the underlying assumption. Let me put it like this: there was nothing and god created the world. So there was nothing but that for which we name 'god' and this 'nothing but that' 'created' the world out of.....? Well there was 'nothing but that' so it must have created the world out of itself eg that 'which we name 'god'.
So in a sense physical reality is god made manifest. There may be other aspects such as the act of creation, the 'nothing' and so forth. But in a way you are verifying Spinoza's theory that god is reality - God is the World. This is not to denigrate the divinity or mystical nature of the divine. Rather its to recognize that 'before time began' there was nothing. And out of that nothing the Big Bang (eg god + act of creation + the 'nothing') -> the Universe. A universe in which we find our world, the miracle of life and the miracle of evolution (which is how 'god' created man).
I'm arguing for a novel way of (re)conceptualising the divine. Which is in fact the original (the ancient primitive peoples') conception: that this very world, this creation of god's is god here and now, manifesting as physical reality. There is only god - physical reality - and nothing but god.
So... is this of any use to a guy who seeks to propose a rational basis which will serve as the foundation for a new way of expressing the religious impulse?
I'd say mostly true but not quite correct.....
As reasonable, rational, albeit imperfect people we make the mistake of assuming others are like us. And they mostly are. But a small minority are psychopaths. For them, for these 'ubermensch', they have no love in their universe. No respect for others - indeed for them there are no others, no equals, only untermensch - goyim, two legged beasts.
There are two value systems here. The stupid, selfish bitch above is just a nasty / morally degraded mother who needed to be programmed with moral and rationally derived values when she was young enough to be impressionable. But wasn't. So she grew up to be a stupid, selfish bitch.
And the consciously evil psychopath. Psychopaths act rationally but upon the basis that they are god like. And everyone else is inconsequential. You can see this on twitter's many feeds showing psychopathic Israelis hating on Palestinians. Their genocidal nature is of a magnitude of difference to that of a selfish mother. They are not irrational. Just evil.