Too many Christians believe that the Old Testament is not relevant to them. And as a result, too many of them forget that God (the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit) is the same throughout the whole Bible. In the New Testament, Revelation more than any other book makes that especially clear, which is another book that most Christians avoid.
*Note I'm talking about actual Christians, not those who claim to be while supporting homosexuality, abortion, never-ending appeasement. Not to mention denying the Trinity. For those, Revelation is very clear what will happen to them.
God never changes. However, a true Christian who knows God should be able to tell the difference between John's Gospel and the differing gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul upon examination. In John's Gospel, one must be born again believing on and receiving the Lord (as He is revealed in the Gospel of John). This is the only way to see and enter the Kingdom of God. But in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, a differing gospel appears that these 3 tell the same by plagiarism. These 3 say to gain eternal life, one must keep the law (presumably of Caesar by application) and surrender all private property (obviously to Caesar in application) to gain eternal life. That's not the same.
To say that God is the same through the whole Bible is a fallacy. Human authors have presented 2 different Gods in John versus Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
Then, Paul tells us that he has his own gospel. He tells us in Romans that we must subject to Caesar in everything or suffer damnation. He tells us we're required to give tribute to Caesar (like Matthew, Mark, and Luke advise) - or we deserve to be killed. He tells us that the Sword of Caesar is just. Well, Caesar crucified the Lord.
There's a real difference between the God that Romans present through books they added to the Hebrew Bible and the One True Living God revealed in the Gospel of John.
My friend, you cannot even prove that the creation story in Genesis 2-3 is valid. It contradicts Genesis 1 in every way. Genesis 1 is a 6 day creation in which male and female are created at the same time by the exact same method by the same spoken word as equal children of God set in equal dominion as full equal persons in marriage partnership. But, in Genesis 2 creation is a 1 day creation; man is created first; man is created as a living soul into whom the Genesis 2 God breathes; woman is created after man, from man, for man; woman is not breathed into and does not become a living soul by extension; by clear application woman is created as a soulless clone whose body a man owns as his own body. They're not the same creation stories. They don't tell the same lines and precepts of who we are.
God is the same in the Bible He authored.
But men have added many chapters and books. By no means is God the same in the 66 book AKJV I read cover to cover so many times.
Genesis 1, the Gospel of John, and Revelation are the same God.
I know Him. I know the Trinity.
But Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul deny the Trinity. These are Romanist books that make men God by declaring all men Roman gods. But they make women non-person bodies men own who owe men subjection and reverence as God.
I critically analyzed the Bible reading it so much. The 2 different religions are plain to see upon examination in systematic theology.
Yes, God is coming as stated in Revelation.
Woman is putting on her crown as stated in Revelation 12.
The dragon Rome represents is being cast down.
Please read that Bible again.
PS. I will add this for the sakes of those who do not use reason but instead believe all they are told blindly. God told us not to worship graven images. What is a book? It is a collection of pages upon which words have been engraved. A book is a graven image. No book is God. God Himself is the Word. God is a Person. God is Spirit. No man ever printed God by engraving letters on a page. The Bible is not God. Making the Bible God in one's own vain imagination is violation of the True Command of God not to worship a graven image men carve, draw, OR write.
As a traditional (pre-1958) Catholic for around 15 years and before was a basic medical science researcher that found real challenges in putting together Apologetics for those things that seem paradoxes or impossible. I discover how they can be possible given modern science if you can think outside the box. I in no way assert that I am finding the truth only that I can find a way that what is believed to be impossible or paradoxical or 'a mystery' could be explained.
And - there's the point before you pee yourself - that if I can derive one way then there are likely many many ways - including God Way.
A woman I knew left the church because all the 4 books of the Gospel were true but they had different versions of the same events, and that was enough to sink her faith.
So, one of my first Apologetics was to find a way they can all be true. See article.
In Joshua 5, the titular meets a man holding a sword. He asks him whose side he is on, and the man says he is on neither side, and calls himself the Captain of the Army of God.
My contemporary language calls this a theophany (O.T. appearance of God), but since all the theophanies of which I am aware involve a man walking about, I would call it a Christophany (O.T. appearance of Christ himself.)
Whether the O.T. Christophanies took place after the Ascension, or he went for a very long walk on Easter Sunday, is a question on which I often meditate.
My grandmother in New Zealand was quarter Maori and she had a huge chip on her shoulder and was always creating disorder and being violent in public. The whole Maori side of my family were freaks, criminals and thugs. Most my life I didn't realise the underlying cause of this primitive behaviour until I became a race realist.
"The lie of equality. The myth of the noble savage. The belief that those who have never risen beyond the Stone Age will willingly do so if exposed to the correct collection of trinkets, or that those who have been criminals for generations will be otherwise if only EBT is tweaked upwards by some certain percentage."
It's all "real egalitarianism has never been tried" all the way down. EBT is a relatively small price to pay in the long run, but your life isn't.
Don't mistake the real tiger w/ the imagined one like the stuffed tiger in Calvin & Hobbes.
I've seen this sort of double-standard on a more personal level. Far less dire consequences of course but still utterly maddening. All the patience in the world for those with no interest in doing the right thing and not a scrap of patience for those who want to do the right thing.
There is one factor that you don't mention (explicitly), and it is this:
These men defeated their enemies, and defeated them decisively, WITHOUT any help from the motherland. This makes them a threat, should they decide to go home. The liberal scolding is a signal that a decent chunk of the elites do not approve of them, and combined with negativity bias, encourages them to stay over there.
A good example is Francisco Pizarro, who toppled the Incan empire with around 200 men. The chattering classes largely ignored him when he returned to Spain, and he died in poverty.
Only once did he get an audience with the king, and he only did this by getting in the way of his carriage as it moved through the streets. When the king asked who he was, Pizarro replied: "I have given you more countries than Spain has cities!"
Brilliant article ,many thanks. I think the "woke" Catholic clergy in general, the pope in particular, are the embodiment of the case for the Protestant reformation.
I got tired of hearing the Satanic commie feminist witch version of settlers expanding in N. America, with the mass-murdering of the poor helpless Indians, so I applied my model of history and I'm happy to say I got it, and you verified it.
The way the heroes in this piece were treated by the Liberal Elites of yesteryear reminds me of the case of Russian Captain Alexey Stchasny in 1918. Not that Stchasny was involved with Noble Savages, but he was dealt with extraordinarily harshly by the decidedly Leftist rulers of his day for doing a great service for his country.
Stchasny was the naval commander of Russia’s Baltic fleet in 1918. With Russia’s involvement in World War I drawing to a close, all 236 vessels of the Baltic fleet (including 6 battleships) were ice-bound in the Finnish city of Helsinki at the end of the winter. With the German army advancing on Helsinki with plans to capture the fleet, the Bolsheviks ordered Stchasny to blow the ships up if he couldn’t bring them home.
Incredibly, with very little time and his sailors suffering from very low morale, Stchasny came up with a daring scheme to use their icebreakers to open a narrow channel through the frozen seawater, and in doing so, the entire fleet was able to be guided safely back home. Captain Sychasny left Helsinki on one of the last ships to set sail on April 11, 1918, on the eve of the city’s capture by the Germans. A more heroic feat could hardly be imagined.
But while Stchasny was a true patriot, he was no fan of the Jewish Bolsheviks who had taken over Russia. On his return home, he was hardly met with a hero’s welcome from Leon Trotsky (birth name Lev Davidovich Bronshtein) and his ilk, so intent were they in obliterating any conceivable opposition.
After arriving in Kronstadt, Stchasny was arraigned for ‘‘treason”: the indictment against him said: “Although he has accomplished what would seem to have been a heroic deed, his object was none other than that he might thereby earn popularity for subsequent use against the Soviet Government!”
Trotsky acted as chief, in fact, sole, witness for the prosecution in the ensuing trial, and the end was that on May 22, 1918, Stchasny was shot for having saved his country’s warships in the Baltic.
As a communist, Trotsky was as far Left as you can get. You could say he is the "naked" version of the bleeding heart Liberals in the article above. In his case, he wasn't pretending to have compassion for any Noble Savages; he just wanted to protect his own power at all costs.
Possibly one of the best pieces I've ever read. We really are seeing the consequences of listening to this kind of rhetoric thanks to the constant butchering of Christian teaching and believing the lie of "equality."
I have been seeing increasing news stories about "Romance Scams". The victim is often, but not solely, an elderly person. Then, the victim is shown a false profile of the suitor. The Romance Scammer lies and lies to generate a false image, a false persona, and a false story.
It really reminds me of all of these mythologies you cover that the left so desperately want to believe.
The Civil Rights Movement, the Hart Celler Immigration Act, the "Romantic Image" of "The Noble Savage" and stories of "the oppressed, marginalized, noble non-white races" seem to me to be mythologies akin to a Romance Scam.
We're told lie after lie after lie by politicians, celebrities, the mainstream media, the leftist education system, etc. The mythologies are designed to con us into surrendering to scammers everything that belongs to us as the posterity for whom America was founded.
Amazing the degree that liberal and conservative behavior is predictable throughout the centuries in white countries. Liberals always side with the savages and conservatives always follow liberals' moral framework so that they are guaranteed to be fake opposition. Also just like leftist women in the 60s didn't let the fact that Cleaver was an avowed rapist diminish love of him, they do the same thing today with blacks and invaders
Not all Anglos. The Rhodesians themselves were of the same stock. They were the best of the English stock. That is one of the problems with colonialism, it drains the homelands of their best or those with potential.
Right, so only like, half of them. Jefferson Davis actually talked about it in a speech and he said they were “recruited from the bogs and swamps of northern England,” referring to Cromwell’s army. It’s not just an urban bourgeoise problem
Normans were slayers and pillagers, hardly altruistic. They were given Normandy because the frogs couldn't protect it from the Normans' depredations, so the frog king said "just take it, but give me a cut."
I appreciate what you are saying about the myth of the noble savage. It also seems true, at least of the natives here in America, they showed more resolve and nobility in fighting against being replaced, than we Western men are.
I've compared such people to the barbarians in Civilization (the game). They will always attack on sight, you cannot conduct diplomacy with them, you can only kill them. And you must kill them to even begin to play the game.
Too many Christians believe that the Old Testament is not relevant to them. And as a result, too many of them forget that God (the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit) is the same throughout the whole Bible. In the New Testament, Revelation more than any other book makes that especially clear, which is another book that most Christians avoid.
*Note I'm talking about actual Christians, not those who claim to be while supporting homosexuality, abortion, never-ending appeasement. Not to mention denying the Trinity. For those, Revelation is very clear what will happen to them.
Yes
God never changes. However, a true Christian who knows God should be able to tell the difference between John's Gospel and the differing gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul upon examination. In John's Gospel, one must be born again believing on and receiving the Lord (as He is revealed in the Gospel of John). This is the only way to see and enter the Kingdom of God. But in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, a differing gospel appears that these 3 tell the same by plagiarism. These 3 say to gain eternal life, one must keep the law (presumably of Caesar by application) and surrender all private property (obviously to Caesar in application) to gain eternal life. That's not the same.
To say that God is the same through the whole Bible is a fallacy. Human authors have presented 2 different Gods in John versus Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
Then, Paul tells us that he has his own gospel. He tells us in Romans that we must subject to Caesar in everything or suffer damnation. He tells us we're required to give tribute to Caesar (like Matthew, Mark, and Luke advise) - or we deserve to be killed. He tells us that the Sword of Caesar is just. Well, Caesar crucified the Lord.
There's a real difference between the God that Romans present through books they added to the Hebrew Bible and the One True Living God revealed in the Gospel of John.
My friend, you cannot even prove that the creation story in Genesis 2-3 is valid. It contradicts Genesis 1 in every way. Genesis 1 is a 6 day creation in which male and female are created at the same time by the exact same method by the same spoken word as equal children of God set in equal dominion as full equal persons in marriage partnership. But, in Genesis 2 creation is a 1 day creation; man is created first; man is created as a living soul into whom the Genesis 2 God breathes; woman is created after man, from man, for man; woman is not breathed into and does not become a living soul by extension; by clear application woman is created as a soulless clone whose body a man owns as his own body. They're not the same creation stories. They don't tell the same lines and precepts of who we are.
God is the same in the Bible He authored.
But men have added many chapters and books. By no means is God the same in the 66 book AKJV I read cover to cover so many times.
Genesis 1, the Gospel of John, and Revelation are the same God.
I know Him. I know the Trinity.
But Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul deny the Trinity. These are Romanist books that make men God by declaring all men Roman gods. But they make women non-person bodies men own who owe men subjection and reverence as God.
I critically analyzed the Bible reading it so much. The 2 different religions are plain to see upon examination in systematic theology.
Yes, God is coming as stated in Revelation.
Woman is putting on her crown as stated in Revelation 12.
The dragon Rome represents is being cast down.
Please read that Bible again.
PS. I will add this for the sakes of those who do not use reason but instead believe all they are told blindly. God told us not to worship graven images. What is a book? It is a collection of pages upon which words have been engraved. A book is a graven image. No book is God. God Himself is the Word. God is a Person. God is Spirit. No man ever printed God by engraving letters on a page. The Bible is not God. Making the Bible God in one's own vain imagination is violation of the True Command of God not to worship a graven image men carve, draw, OR write.
The truth makes free.
As a traditional (pre-1958) Catholic for around 15 years and before was a basic medical science researcher that found real challenges in putting together Apologetics for those things that seem paradoxes or impossible. I discover how they can be possible given modern science if you can think outside the box. I in no way assert that I am finding the truth only that I can find a way that what is believed to be impossible or paradoxical or 'a mystery' could be explained.
And - there's the point before you pee yourself - that if I can derive one way then there are likely many many ways - including God Way.
A woman I knew left the church because all the 4 books of the Gospel were true but they had different versions of the same events, and that was enough to sink her faith.
So, one of my first Apologetics was to find a way they can all be true. See article.
Here is an audio overview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW2WPDwJ24s
".. Apologetics of Traditional Catholic Magisterium" https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-2208, https://archive.is/s5Pyp
God Bless., Steve
In Joshua 5, the titular meets a man holding a sword. He asks him whose side he is on, and the man says he is on neither side, and calls himself the Captain of the Army of God.
My contemporary language calls this a theophany (O.T. appearance of God), but since all the theophanies of which I am aware involve a man walking about, I would call it a Christophany (O.T. appearance of Christ himself.)
Whether the O.T. Christophanies took place after the Ascension, or he went for a very long walk on Easter Sunday, is a question on which I often meditate.
My grandmother in New Zealand was quarter Maori and she had a huge chip on her shoulder and was always creating disorder and being violent in public. The whole Maori side of my family were freaks, criminals and thugs. Most my life I didn't realise the underlying cause of this primitive behaviour until I became a race realist.
"The lie of equality. The myth of the noble savage. The belief that those who have never risen beyond the Stone Age will willingly do so if exposed to the correct collection of trinkets, or that those who have been criminals for generations will be otherwise if only EBT is tweaked upwards by some certain percentage."
It's all "real egalitarianism has never been tried" all the way down. EBT is a relatively small price to pay in the long run, but your life isn't.
Don't mistake the real tiger w/ the imagined one like the stuffed tiger in Calvin & Hobbes.
I've seen this sort of double-standard on a more personal level. Far less dire consequences of course but still utterly maddening. All the patience in the world for those with no interest in doing the right thing and not a scrap of patience for those who want to do the right thing.
Oh yes, these are just the extreme examples. It plays out constantly in smaller ways
Well written! Fascinating accounts that, once again, show that our problem is in every generation and nation.
A pattern that requires not a single change, but rather a consistent care and maintenance.
Thank you! Yes, absolutely
There is one factor that you don't mention (explicitly), and it is this:
These men defeated their enemies, and defeated them decisively, WITHOUT any help from the motherland. This makes them a threat, should they decide to go home. The liberal scolding is a signal that a decent chunk of the elites do not approve of them, and combined with negativity bias, encourages them to stay over there.
A good example is Francisco Pizarro, who toppled the Incan empire with around 200 men. The chattering classes largely ignored him when he returned to Spain, and he died in poverty.
Only once did he get an audience with the king, and he only did this by getting in the way of his carriage as it moved through the streets. When the king asked who he was, Pizarro replied: "I have given you more countries than Spain has cities!"
He was too over-powered for his own good.
Brilliant article ,many thanks. I think the "woke" Catholic clergy in general, the pope in particular, are the embodiment of the case for the Protestant reformation.
Thank you! Outstanding!
Thanks!
I got tired of hearing the Satanic commie feminist witch version of settlers expanding in N. America, with the mass-murdering of the poor helpless Indians, so I applied my model of history and I'm happy to say I got it, and you verified it.
Audio overview of article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64DKR7CCccE
".. Indigenousness Traditional Majority-White Christian-Based Western Cultural Genocide Apologetic" https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-2234, https://archive.is/cQfsn
The way the heroes in this piece were treated by the Liberal Elites of yesteryear reminds me of the case of Russian Captain Alexey Stchasny in 1918. Not that Stchasny was involved with Noble Savages, but he was dealt with extraordinarily harshly by the decidedly Leftist rulers of his day for doing a great service for his country.
Stchasny was the naval commander of Russia’s Baltic fleet in 1918. With Russia’s involvement in World War I drawing to a close, all 236 vessels of the Baltic fleet (including 6 battleships) were ice-bound in the Finnish city of Helsinki at the end of the winter. With the German army advancing on Helsinki with plans to capture the fleet, the Bolsheviks ordered Stchasny to blow the ships up if he couldn’t bring them home.
Incredibly, with very little time and his sailors suffering from very low morale, Stchasny came up with a daring scheme to use their icebreakers to open a narrow channel through the frozen seawater, and in doing so, the entire fleet was able to be guided safely back home. Captain Sychasny left Helsinki on one of the last ships to set sail on April 11, 1918, on the eve of the city’s capture by the Germans. A more heroic feat could hardly be imagined.
But while Stchasny was a true patriot, he was no fan of the Jewish Bolsheviks who had taken over Russia. On his return home, he was hardly met with a hero’s welcome from Leon Trotsky (birth name Lev Davidovich Bronshtein) and his ilk, so intent were they in obliterating any conceivable opposition.
After arriving in Kronstadt, Stchasny was arraigned for ‘‘treason”: the indictment against him said: “Although he has accomplished what would seem to have been a heroic deed, his object was none other than that he might thereby earn popularity for subsequent use against the Soviet Government!”
Trotsky acted as chief, in fact, sole, witness for the prosecution in the ensuing trial, and the end was that on May 22, 1918, Stchasny was shot for having saved his country’s warships in the Baltic.
As a communist, Trotsky was as far Left as you can get. You could say he is the "naked" version of the bleeding heart Liberals in the article above. In his case, he wasn't pretending to have compassion for any Noble Savages; he just wanted to protect his own power at all costs.
Possibly one of the best pieces I've ever read. We really are seeing the consequences of listening to this kind of rhetoric thanks to the constant butchering of Christian teaching and believing the lie of "equality."
Thank you very much!
I have been seeing increasing news stories about "Romance Scams". The victim is often, but not solely, an elderly person. Then, the victim is shown a false profile of the suitor. The Romance Scammer lies and lies to generate a false image, a false persona, and a false story.
It really reminds me of all of these mythologies you cover that the left so desperately want to believe.
The Civil Rights Movement, the Hart Celler Immigration Act, the "Romantic Image" of "The Noble Savage" and stories of "the oppressed, marginalized, noble non-white races" seem to me to be mythologies akin to a Romance Scam.
We're told lie after lie after lie by politicians, celebrities, the mainstream media, the leftist education system, etc. The mythologies are designed to con us into surrendering to scammers everything that belongs to us as the posterity for whom America was founded.
It just all reminds me of a scam.
yeah it is definitely a scam
Amazing the degree that liberal and conservative behavior is predictable throughout the centuries in white countries. Liberals always side with the savages and conservatives always follow liberals' moral framework so that they are guaranteed to be fake opposition. Also just like leftist women in the 60s didn't let the fact that Cleaver was an avowed rapist diminish love of him, they do the same thing today with blacks and invaders
It's because of the Enlightenment. Once you accept its premises, not moving towards liberalism creates cognitive dissonance.
This is just convincing me that there is something really, really wrong with Anglos
Not all Anglos. The Rhodesians themselves were of the same stock. They were the best of the English stock. That is one of the problems with colonialism, it drains the homelands of their best or those with potential.
Na, it’s just a certain whiggish type that emerges in 17th century from the ashes of the civil war, basically the urban middle class.
Right, so only like, half of them. Jefferson Davis actually talked about it in a speech and he said they were “recruited from the bogs and swamps of northern England,” referring to Cromwell’s army. It’s not just an urban bourgeoise problem
That’s like saying the Irish and Germans recruited for the Union army were to blame for the policy and ideology of the Civil War.
You have it wrong. The Norman are the opposite of this
Norman Yoke is literally an enlightenment leftist slop theory. Utterly retarded
💯
Normans were slayers and pillagers, hardly altruistic. They were given Normandy because the frogs couldn't protect it from the Normans' depredations, so the frog king said "just take it, but give me a cut."
I appreciate what you are saying about the myth of the noble savage. It also seems true, at least of the natives here in America, they showed more resolve and nobility in fighting against being replaced, than we Western men are.
I've compared such people to the barbarians in Civilization (the game). They will always attack on sight, you cannot conduct diplomacy with them, you can only kill them. And you must kill them to even begin to play the game.