In this thread we shall dissect the mongrelized dogma that is Christianity. I aim specifically to demonstrate that Christianity itself was transformed by the Germanic peoples in the early Middle Ages. Thus, it will be pertinent to give examples of this transformation as well as to identify elements with Christianity that are of Germanic origin.

This Germanization process is often overlooked. Studies of the interaction between Christian and Germanic religion and culture customarily focus upon the Christianization process as the active force and Germanic paganism as a passive or reactionary phenomenon. This is understandable, since there is no evidence of a major drive by non-Christian Germanic peoples comparable to that of the Emperor Julian to restore or advance pre-Christian Roman religion. Yet there did exist a subtle but pervasive Germanizing force which resulted primarily from a missionary policy of accomodation and gradualism, instead of a policy of preliminary doctrinal and ethical inculcation.

This observation is not intended to detract from the overall effectiveness of the Church's missionary policy. In fact, it is quite possible that if doctrinal assent and ethical modification had constituted a prerequisite for baptism, those Celtic and Germanic leaders whose own baptism often precipitated that of many of their kinfolk might well have rejected Christianity outright owing to its obvious ideological opposition to their Indo-European warrior code. Thus the Christianization policies of accomodation and gradualism were effective in incorporating the Germanic peoples into the Roman Catholic Church, but at the same time they led to a substantial Germanization of Western Christianity.

The early medieval Germanization of Christianity, in most cases, then, was not the result of organized Germanic resistance to Christianity, or of an attempt by the Germanic peoples to transform Christianity into an acceptable form. Rather, it was primarily a consequence of the deliberate inculturation of Germanic religiocultural attitudes within Christianity by Christian missionaries. This process of accomodation resulted in the essential transformation of Christianity from a universal salvation religion to a Germanic, and eventually European, folk religion. The sociopsychological response of the Germanic peoples to this inculturated form of Christianity included the acceptance of those traditionally Christian elements which coincided with Germanic religiosity and the resolution of dissonant elements by reinterpreting them in accordance with the Germanic ethos and world-view. The profundity of the resulting transformation of Christianity is attested by Josef A. Jungmann, who notes: "we may safely assert that in all the two thousand years of the Church's history, no period has ever seen a greater revolution in religious thought and institutions than that which took place in the first five centuries between the close of the patristic age and the dawn of scholasticism [600-1100]."

The general imperceptibility of this transformation may be due to two reasons. The first is that theologians and church historians are accustomed to locating developments in Christianity in such matters as doctrinal debates, heterodox formulations, Church-State controversies, spiritual treatises, the founding of religious orders, and conciliar pronouncements. However, the order of magnitude of the development being considered here is far greater than any of these. For example, the Germanic peoples did not bother to object to individual dogmas, because dogmatic orthodoxy was not central to their notion of religion. The second reason that the Germanization of Christianity is seldom acknowledged may be that now, when syncretic developments are usually associated with "developing nations," there may exist at least a sub-conscious reluctance by Western Christians to accept the notion that their mainstream religious tradition is itself the result of a syncretic development which eventually became normative.

However, such reluctance among Christians may be somewhat ironic, since, were it not for Germanization, Christianity might never have spread throughout Northern and Central Europe.

One of the most obvious examples of the Christian accomodation of Germanic religiocultural attitudes may be found in the medieval Church's attitude toward warfare. In a study of this subject, J.M. Wallace-Hadrill has noted:

Germanic pagan peoples had a clear sense that war was a religious undertaking, in which the gods were interested. At once one thinks of Woden as a God peculiarly, though not exclusively, connected with warfare. . . Pagan and pagan-transitional warfare, then, had its religious facet. Not suprisingly, Christian missionaries found this ineradicable, though not unadaptable to their own purposes. Christian vernacular makes considerable use of the terms of pagan warfare. . . Why, then, did the men who converted the Anglo-Saxons differ so sharply from Wulfila? The Anglo-Saxons were not less belicose than the Goths. The answer may lie in the prudent spirit of accomodation shown by Gregory the Great. More than that, the pope was an ardent supporter of warfare to spread Christianity and convert the heathen, and this last is, I think, the more important consideration. So far from rejecting the Germanic war-ethos the pope meant to harness it to his own ends, and the evidence is that he succeeded. The barbarians may fight to their heart's content in causes blessed by the Church, and this is made clear not only in the matter of vocabulary. [i]It is the position of the Church rather than of the Germans that had undergone modification. As Erdmann showed, the Church subsumed and did not reject the warlike moral qualities of its converts. Who shall say that St. Michael of later days was not Woden under fresh colours?

The apotheosis of the Christian assimilation of the Germanic warrior code may be found in St. Bernard of Clairvaux's "recruitment tract" for the military order of the Knights Templars, De laude novae militiae, in which the killing of non-Christians in battle is justified, if not encouraged.

To further validate the assertion of the Germanization of medieval religious culture, it is useful to consider the principle lex orandi, lex credendi. Van Engen advances this notion when he states that "the real measure of Christian religious culture on a broad scale must be the degree to which time, space, and ritual observances came to be defined and grasped essentially in terms of the Christian liturgical year. Similarly, it may be presumed that the real measure of Germanization of medieval religious culture must be the degree to which time, space, and ritual observances came to be defined and grasped essentially in terms of the Germanic ethos and world-view.

The succinct outline of early medieval liturgical history provided by Cyrille Vogel in his guide to medieval liturgical resources ascribes a major role to Germanic influence in the formation of early medieval religious culture. He states:

The period that extends from Gregory the Great [590-604] to Gregory VII [1073-1085] is characterized by the following facts regarding liturgy:

a.) the systemization of the liturgy of the City of Rome and of the papal court (the Roman liturgy in the strict sense.);
b.) the spread of this liturgy into the Frankish kingdom through the initiatives of individual pilgrams and, after 754, with the support of the Carolingian kings;
c.) the deliberate Romanization of the ancient liturgy of Northern Europe (Gallican) at the behest of Pepin III and Charlemagne.
d.) the progressive creation of a "mixed" or "hybrid" set of new rites in the Carolingian Empire through the amalgamation of the Roman liturgy with indigenous ones;
e.) the inevitable liturgical diversification resulting from these Romanizing and Gallicanizing thrusts;
f.) the return of the adapted Romano-Frankish or Romano-Germanic liturgy to Rome under the Ottos of Germany, especially after the Renovatio Imperii of 962;
g.) the permanent adoption of this liturgy at Rome because of the worship vacuum and the general state of cultural and religious decadence which prevailed in the city at that time.

This long period which we have just outlined is one of major importance in the history of Christian worship. The Latin liturgy which came into being in this era and which continued to be the liturgy for centuries to come, was not a purely Roman one; as a result of its long and turbulent history, it is better characterized as Romano-Frankish or even as Romano-Germanic.

Vogel is not alone in attributing great significance to the evolution of the official Roman Catholic liturgy into a Romano-Germanic form. Jungmann likewise viewed this development as portending momentous consequences, not only for the future of Christian worship, but for Western religious culture in general:

As is well-known, in Church life, in the forms of worship, in canon law, in monastic life, and, not least, in theological science, from the 9th century it was the countries north of the Alps that took the lead, while Italy suffered a period of set-back. From the 10th century onwards, the cultural heritage which had accumulated in the Carolingian North, streamed in ever increasing volume into Italy and became the cultural standard in Rome itself. . . Ultimately it was from Rome that the new spirituality and new ways spread to the Church at large. What had been established in the Carolingian Empire now became normative for all the West. The structure of the liturgy is but the most outstanding example.

http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol1no1/sf-russell.html

You'll do anything to defend Christianity except face the truth!

Some examples, derived by Jungmann from a Germanic over-reaction against Arianism, are a decline in Christ's mediative role, an increase in private votive Masses commerorating Mary and the saints, the multiplication of signs of the cross in the Mass, and the introduction of silent prayer with hands folded, which was derived from the posture of a vassal pledging fealty to his lord. Germanic influence was largely responsible, according to Jungmann, for an increased emphasis upon the dramatic and allegorical representation of the vents from the life of Christ in the Mass and in Scripture, as well as in the weekly liturgical cycle, and a simultaneous decline in soteriological-eschatological emphases in the liturgy and in artistic expression. Also related to Germanization was the emergence of the Christmas festival cycle aas a rival to the Easter cycle, and an increased stratification of clergy and laity, represented by the growing distance between the altar and the faithful, as well as by the introduction of a communion rail boundary at which communicant knelt. Although Jungmann believed that the primary cause of these developments was an anti-Arian response that emphasized Christ's power and glory, given the generally low level of the perception and significance of doctrinal subtleties among the Germanic peoples in the early Middle Ages, it seems more likely that these developments were the expression of a Germanic ethos and world view

As Jungmann observed, liturgy was not the only aspect of medieval religious culture which was Germanized. In his History of Christian Spirituality, Urban T. Holmes notes that Germanic spirituality "tended more toward objects - e.g., the Cross, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, the Blessed Virgin, the Scriptures - than the whole subtleties of process - e.g., growth in perfection. The whole shape of Western spirituality is a function of this radically new Germanic culture with a strong addition of Celtic culture.

Drawing upon evidence from the Germanic law codes, Katherine Fischer Drew has recently sought to "reemphasize the importance of the role played by the Germanic kingdoms. . . in the period from about 500 to 800 A.D." A common feature among the Germanic peoples is "the development of a concept of collective security. This was closely related to two Germanic institutions: the family and kin group one the one hand and personal lordship on the other." Collective security may be considered the antithesis of anomie. The social and spiritual needs of the Germanic peoples were being adequately fulfilled from the sources within their own societies. A religious movement which had flourished in the anomie urban quarters of a declining society, was not likely to meet with immediate success in a rural emerging society with a high level of collective security, unless that religious movement was represented in a manner which was compatible with the world-view of the latter society. Only then could an alien religious movement effectively compete with the internal sources of stability. A noteworthy example of such accomodation was the portrayal of Christ as a victorious Germanic warlord.

James C. Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity (New York, 1994), pp.39-43

You'll do anything to defend Christianity except face the truth!

I am not a Christian you moron. You idiots are simply extremists. One the one hand, you have the anti-Christians who are unwilling to accept the reality of the fact that the Christianity they so hate was in fact heavily Germanized and Romanized. On the other hand, there are the religious fanatics who are unwilling to accept that much of what they attribute to their God comes from other religions.

Interestingly, the timetable and geographic pattern of Christian expansion resulted in its interaction with the successively younger, more homogeneous, and more authentically Indo-Eurpoean societies. Despite the diluted state of Indo-European ideology in the Roman Empire during the early Christian period, some of the older Indo-European sociocultural forms appear to have endured. They contributed to a gradual Indo-Europeanization of various aspects of early Christianity, even prior to its contact with the Germanic peoples. Some of the most prominent examples of pre-Germanic Indo-Europeanization include the adoption of a Greek philosophical method in Christian apologetic literature and the emulation of Roman hierarchical and legal structures by the Church. The most significant effects of the subsequent Celo-Germanic Indo-Europeanization of Christianity were the emergence of a sense of Euro-Christian religiopolitical complementarity and a magicoreligious reinterpretation of Christianity, both when figured prominenly in medieval Europe.

Frederick Copleston in his History of Philosophy has summarized the Christian debt to Greek philosophy:

As Christianity became more firmly established and better known and as it became possible for Christian scholars to develop thought and learning, the philosophical element tended to become more strongly marked, especially when there was a question of meeting the attacks of pagan professional philosophers. . . As the Christians had no philosophy of their own to start with (i.e. in the academic sense of philosophy), they very naturally turned to the prevailing philosophy, which was derived from Platonism but was strongly impregnated with other elements. As a rough generalization, therefore, one may say that the philosophic ideas of the early Christian writers were Platonic or neo-Platonic in character (with an admixture of Stoicism) and that the Platonic tradition continued for long to dominate Christian thought from the philosophic viewpoint.

James C. Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity (New York, 1994), pp.60-62

I am not a Christian you moron. You idiots are simply extremists. One the one hand, you have the anti-Christians who are unwilling to accept the reality of the fact that the Christianity they so hate was in fact heavily Germanized and Romanized. On the other hand, there are the religious fanatics who are unwilling to accept that much of what they attribute to their God comes from other religions.

You can dress Christianity up in many forms, but it doesn't compete with white religions like Paganism, Hinduism or Buddhism. Christianity is the ideological origin of liberalism and no matter how many internal factors may "counter-balance" this they don't overcome the pity.

Do we need to post "Beyond Good and Evil" in its entirety here?

You can dress Christianity up in many forms, but it doesn't compete with white religions like Paganism, Hinduism or Buddhism.

Paganism, Hinduism, and Buddhism are white religions? How, pray tell, did you ever come to this conclusion?

Christianity is the ideological origin of liberalism and no matter how many internal factors may "counter-balance" this they don't overcome the pity.

I would most certaintly agree that Liberalism grew out of Christianity. What's your problem with Liberalism?

Do we need to post "Beyond Good and Evil" in its entirety here?

Do you know what Nietzsche thought of anti-Semites?

You can dress Christianity up in many forms, but it doesn't compete with white religions like Paganism, Hinduism or Buddhism. Christianity is the ideological origin of liberalism and no matter how many internal factors may "counter-balance" this they don't overcome the pity.

Do we need to post "Beyond Good and Evil" in its entirety here?


I used to think there were mitigating factors, like the beautiful churches (even though they are mostly sterile copies of the secular Roman Basilica), lovely paintings and really sublime music. But, the price for all that exquisite, but deeply sick, art is the murder not only of our indigenous culture, but our very race. Destroy every vestige of the jewchristianmoslem racket that masquerades as a religion. Then, maybe the world can begin to be free again.

Did the Romans care about this thing you call the "white race" Gott? By the way, tell us what the Romans thought of the Cimbri and the Teutones.

The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity

Hey Fade ! - not to offend you ! - but if you start out with posts that are several pages long you are bound to loose some audience - only few have the inclination to read that much ! I would like to suggest that you cut things down to essentials yourself rather than expecting others to seperate them from what you write in very long posts....

I myself is very interested in how Christianity got spread in Europe but I haven't got the surplus energy to deal with a task of that magnitude now. Perhaps you have ? Judgeing from the lenght of your posts you must have a lot of energy........ Might I suggest the following (?) :

In societies when a religion is not spread through enlightent men - I think it is a phenomenon of power structures gaining power over the populations. Therfore I would like to suggest to you that you focus on the money and the power to see who had advantage of Christianity this way. Also I think it is obvious that we will find either Jews , Romans or Arabs behind it in some way also as they had most to gain from destroying Europe culturally....

FIAT LUX

Hmm. The Catholic Church was an enemy of the Jews in the Late Empire and was notorious for persecuting them throughout the Middle Ages. There was no "Europe" at the time to destroy. The Romans did not think of themselves as Western Europeans. Egypt was more a part of their world than Denmark was. Also, the idea of a "Western Civilization" did not come about until much later. As for Christianity, and its spread through Europe, yes, Christianity was substantially changed in its early centuries. LOL there was no papacy in the Middle East. Much of what is thought of as "Christian" today is not really Christian at all. Jesus Christ was a pacifist who counted prostitutes amongst his closest associates. LOL John Calvin would have burned such women at the stake, in fact, he did. The distinction that is made between the body and the soul, for instance, comes from neo-Platonism. The idea that the soul is indestructible also comes from the Druids. The Druids had been worshiping a "virgin who would give birth to a God" for centuries before Jesus Christ was ever born. Chartres Cathedral in France was in fact constructed over just such a site. There is actually a chamber in Chartes Cathedral where the Druids continued to practice their religion after the Western Empire fell. Free Will and the Trinity was also important to them. Many of the earliest missionaries in heathen Europe were Irish and in the early years of Irish Christianity priests were often simply referred to as Druids.

Hmm. The Catholic Church was an enemy of the Jews in the Late Empire and was notorious for persecuting them throughout the Middle Ages. There was no "Europe" at the time to destroy. The Romans did not think of themselves as Western Europeans. Egypt was more a part of their world than Denmark was.

You make more incorrect presumptions.....
First of all a case of mistaken identity : you confuse the Roman Catholic church with Christianity - also much of the Catholic rampaging in europe happened rather late (I think)
Secondly : Not a europe to destroy ? - you do not know european history very well because 1) The Jews have been a serious power factor more places in europe rather early thus interested in gaing power there (York to take on place)(Thus the American Jew Capitol New York) . 2) The Romans rampaged Europe and the British isles very early - Please read Tacitus and British history....
Thirdly I cannot see from the context why you bring up a place like Denmark - but I know for a fact that 2 great Roman armies were completely annihilated when they came to northern Germany (around Denmark) this is described by Tacitus in his Germanicus (I think it is the Germanicus) - so yes europe - especially Northern Europe was a great threat to southerns and the easterns.
Sorry I haven't got time to give you a greater history lessons - but the northern european vikings fought a lot of places (Moslem places as well as Roman)

FIAT LUX

You make more incorrect presumptions.....First of all a case of mistaken identity : you confuse the Roman Catholic church with Christianity - also much of the Catholic rampaging in europe happened rather late (I think)

We are discussing the Roman Empire here. Protestantism did not exist at the time. The Great Schism within the Church also occurred well after the collapse of the Empire.

Secondly : Not a europe to destroy ? - you do not know european history very well because

Who referred to "Europe" as a cultural/racial/political entity during the Roman Empire?

1) The Jews have been a serious power factor more places in europe rather early thus interested in gaing power there (York to take on place)(Thus the American Jew Capitol New York) .

???? New York City did not exist during the Roman Empire. :p

Once again, when did the Romans refer to themselves as Western Europeans?

2) The Romans rampaged Europe and the British isles very early - Please read Tacitus and British history....

I never said the Romans did not campaign in the British Isles. Once again, when did the Romans think of themselves as white western Europeans sharing a common culture with the Germans?

Thirdly I cannot see from the context why you bring up a place like Denmark

Do you consider Denmark to be a Western nation? Did the Romans think of Denmark as being a Western nation?

but I know for a fact that 2 great Roman armies were completely annihilated when they came to northern Germany (around Denmark) this is described by Tacitus in his Germanicus (I think it is the Germanicus) - so yes europe - especially Northern Europe was a great threat to southerns and the easterns.

The Romans did not consider Denmark to be a part of the Empire or its inhabitants part of their culture. Once again, where did the Romans refer to themselves as "Europeans"?

Sorry I haven't got time to give you a greater history lessons - but the northern european vikings fought a lot of places (Moslem places as well as Roman)

What do the Vikings have to do with my post?

We are discussing the Roman Empire here. Protestantism did not exist at the time. The Great Schism within the Church also occurred well after the collapse of the Empire.

The Romans did not consider Denmark to be a part of the Empire or its inhabitants part of their culture. Once again, where did the Romans refer to themselves as "Europeans"?

What do the Vikings have to do with my post?


Gee ! - I wish you would read your own posts some time here is your intial post - and NO I didn't care to read the other mile long


In this thread we shall dissect the mongrelized dogma that is Christianity. I aim specifically to demonstrate that Christianity itself was transformed by the Germanic peoples in the early Middle Ages. Thus, it will be pertinent to give examples of this transformation as well as to identify elements with Christianity that are of Germanic origin.

From what you call "Germania" came the "Angles" those that gave name to Anglia (England) so yes Britain is involved in this discussion.

Denmark lies directly connected to "Germania" and may even have been been considered as part of Germania at that time but that do really not matter as the Germanic influense must have been strong in Denmark at that time and we are Discussing Germania - right (?)
Anyway - you brought the state of Denmark up not I....

You must be ignorant not to know that the Vikings also were closely connected to Northern Germania - to learn about Germania seee here http://www.vinlandtraders.com/germanics.php
http://www.vikingage.com/vac/religion1.html

I advise you to brush up your history knowledge rather than giving wrong statements....

FIAT LUX

Gee ! - I wish you would read your own posts some time here is your intial post - and know I didn't care to read the other mile long

This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with the Vikings fighting the Moslems.

From what you call "Germania" came the "Angles" those that gave name to Anglia (England) so yes Britain is involved in this discussion.

Once again, I never suggested the Romans did not campaign in the British Isles.

Denmark lies directly connected to "Germania" and may even have been been considered as part of Germania at that time

The Romans considered Denmark to be part of Germania??

Denmark lies directly connected to "Germania" and may even have been been considered as part of Germania at that time but that do really not matter as the Germanic influense must have been strong in Denmark at that time and we are Discussing Germania - right (?)

LOL “Germania” and the Germanic peoples are not the same thing FIATLUX.

Anyway - you brought the state of Denmark up not I

The Romans definitely did not consider the Danes to be part of their culture.

You must be ignorant not to know that the Vikings also were closely connected to Northern Germania - to learn about Germania seee here http://www.vinlandtraders.com/germanics.php http://www.vikingage.com/vac/religion1.html

A straw man argument.

I advise to to brush up your history knowledge rather than giving wrong statements....

Brush up on your logic before you lecture me.

Hey FIAT. This guy is a lying fake - a jew plant is my guess. He always lies, he always changes the subject, and he always tries to drown you in an avalanche of his merdy, inappropriate, stupid and BORING quotes.

The ignore feature works great with felch.

This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with the Vikings fighting the Moslems.

Yes it has - because I wrote about the threat from northern europe to south and South-east - which I see as the reason why Europe should be destroyed culturally by Christianity.


LOL “Germania” and the Germanic peoples are not the same thing FIATLUX.
Who said they were - but out of Germania must have come Germanic people....



The Romans definitely did not consider the Danes to be part of their culture.
No because they didn't come under the Roman empire.....


A straw man argument.
Who cares if you think so - You're a Hair man (splitting hairs)



Brush up on your logic before you lecture me.
Not needed! - I got a first class set of intellectual capabilities -surely I screw up from time to time - don't we all - but intellectualy you're no match for me

case is - you come here neither to learn people anything or to learn yourself - you come only to discuss for the sake of the discussion alone - probably out of low self esteem (meaning you come to win diiscussions to gain self esteem) - I don't suffer from that kind of problem - I know my worth - and I do not care to waste my time on futile discussions and hair splitting like this....
So don't expect me to continue to participate - especially not at petty level like this (futile hair splitting / discussion for discussions sake only and so on)....

I have better use for my life....

FIAT LUX

Hey FIAT. This guy is a lying fake - a jew plant is my guess. He always lies, he always changes the subject, and he always tries to drown you in an avalanche of his merdy, inappropriate, stupid and BORING quotes.

The ignore feature works great with felch.

Thank you very much Gott.......

Well ... Poor Jews - to think they can't steal everything from everyone without someone sometimes finds out - that must be a terrible situation for them .... :rolleyes:

I don't know what his problem is but it seems as he is haunted in some way. So he could also have a really bad case of psychic problems....
If it weren't such a nuisance one could pity him....

But maybe the ignore feature is best in this case.....

Regards...

FIAT LUX

Hey FIAT. This guy is a lying fake - a jew plant is my guess. He always lies, he always changes the subject, and he always tries to drown you in an avalanche of his merdy, inappropriate, stupid and BORING quotes. The ignore feature works great with felch.

Is it possible for this hick to possibly sound any cruder? Yes, the ZOG in combination with COINTELPRO (LOL!) has wired your mobile home. The FBI is proceeding down your dirt road at this very moment. Your sister/wife has already been arrested as she was pulling out of the Wal-Mart parking lot.

Yes it has - because I wrote about the threat from northern europe to south and South-east - which I see as the reason why Europe should be destroyed culturally by Christianity.

What is "European" culture?

Who said they were - but out of Germania must have come Germanic people....

You think! Master of the Obvious!

No because they didn't come under the Roman empire.....

North Africans did.

Who cares if you think so - You're a Hair man (splitting hairs)

:rolleyes:

Not needed! - I got a first class set of intellectual capabilities -surely I screw up from time to time - don't we all - but intellectualy you're no match for me

ROFL

case is - you come here neither to learn people anything or to learn yourself

LOL what do YOU people have to teach me?

you come only to discuss for the sake of the discussion alone - probably out of low self esteem (meaning you come to win diiscussions to gain self esteem) - I don't suffer from that kind of problem - I know my worth - and I do not care to waste my time on futile discussions and hair splitting like this....
So don't expect me to continue to participate - especially not at petty level like this (futile hair splitting / discussion for discussions sake only and so on)....

Hmmm. . .okay

I have better use for my life....

???? (scratches head)

But, the price for all that exquisite, but deeply sick, art is the murder not only of our indigenous culture, but our very race.

It wasn't Christianity that inspired Alexander the Great to conquer Greece, most of the known world, and then exhort his white legions to take Persian wives. It wasn't thousands of years of Christianity that turned the white invaders of India into the mongrels we see today. It wasn't the diabolical curse of Christianity that caused the Tocharians to disappear into the Chinese gene pool thousands of years ago. It wasn't Christianity that led the white Pharaohs of Egypt to experience years of genetic attrition from non-white invaders.

You might want to repeat yourself. Gott has a pretty thick skull. Take it easy on him. He's a little slow.

Listen to this Pathogen:

"Thus Alexander's conquests and ecumenical pursuits appear to have contributed toward religious syncretism, the popularization of astrology and the advancement of the notion of a universal brotherhood of man. This notion later became a central and distinctive feature of Christianity. According to W.W. Tarn, Alexander "declared that all men were alike sons of one Father, and when at Opis he prayed that Macedonians and Persians might be partners in the commonwealth and that the peoples of his world might live in harmony and in unity of heart and mind, he proclaimed for the first time the unity and brotherhood of mankind. . . He, first of all men, was ready to transcend national differences, and declare, as St. Paul was to declare, that there was neither Greek nor barbarian."

James C. Russell, The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity (New York, 1994), p.70

Nietzsche's thoughts on anti-Semites referred to people who blamed Western problems on the Jews, when in fact the error was Christianity. This arose from his disputes with Wagner.

Further, liberalism - egalitarianism - is what has created the leadership and racial problem in the West, so I think it's obvious why Christianity is detested here.

Many disasters have befallen the white race, but Christianity is a pathogen that has forced our people to follow a sick and unnatural path.

Nietzsche's thoughts on anti-Semites referred to people who blamed Western problems on the Jews, when in fact the error was Christianity. This arose from his disputes with Wagner.

Answer the following questions Craig Smith. Lets clear this up once and for all:

1. Was Nietzsche an anti-Semite himself? Yes or No.

2. If yes, are you suggesting that Nietzsche attacked anti-Semites because they were Christian hypocrites?

Further, liberalism - egalitarianism - is what has created the leadership and racial problem in the West, so I think it's obvious why Christianity is detested here

Who detests Christianity Craig Smith? People like yourself (LOL!), some bizarre racist cult? What have YOU people EVER accomplished? Do not mouth off the names of any of your dead Christian ancestors either or associate yourself with any of their deeds. You know what's the most obvious mark of savagery? Savages, you see, spend their time tearing things down because that is all they are capable of. That is exactly what you people are doing here. Any idiot can attack Christianity but you fools do not have the slightest conception whatsoever of what to replace it with or how to make such an alternative attractive to millions of white people. You people cannot even unite the White Nationalist community. I doubt you could even organize a barbeque. No wonder you are such failures.

Many disasters have befallen the white race, but Christianity is a pathogen that has forced our people to follow a sick and unnatural path.

This would make sense if Craig Smith was able to demonstrate a casual link between Christianity and the "sick and unnatural path" that "our people" are now following down. That would presuppose that prior to Christianity a "different path" was being followed by "our people," in this case obviously meaning "the white race." Unfortunately for Craig Smith, there was no political association known as "the white race" before Christianity, just as there has never been such an organization in all of history at either the religious, cultural, or political level. The Romans certainly never went about discussing how to save the white race. Whiteness was never the basis of Roman citizenship. In fact, there were plenty of nonwhite and Jewish citizens of the Roman Empire prior to Christianity just as there was race-mixing and multiculturalism. In fact, there were plenty of Jews in the Roman Empire who owned white slaves.

It wasn't Christianity that inspired Alexander the Great to conquer Greece, most of the known world, and then exhort his white legions to take Persian wives. It wasn't thousands of years of Christianity that turned the white invaders of India into the mongrels we see today. It wasn't the diabolical curse of Christianity that caused the Tocharians to disappear into the Chinese gene pool thousands of years ago. It wasn't Christianity that led the white Pharaohs of Egypt to experience years of genetic attrition from non-white invaders.


So what? I have nothing against conquest - fighting is good. You fight or you die. When you stop fighting you do die. Any idiot can see that. And Persians were Aryan too. It's the KIKES that I can't stand, and the zombies that they control - IE CHRISTIANS.

And if you want a list of atrocities with IT WAS THE CHRISTIANS WHO...well, who can't give you one, eh?

Tell me about how we are all his FUCKING BROTHERS, and then out of the other side of your mouth tisk tisk about polluting the Indian gene pool! You pitiful zombies are JEWS, only you are too stupid to know it. At least the real jews know it, and that is one reason (only one of so many potential reasons) why they have such overwhelming contempt for you. Me too.

So what? I have nothing against conquest - fighting is good. You fight or you die. When you stop fighting you do die. Any idiot can see that.

Was the conquest of Nazi Germany a good thing Gott?

And Persians were Aryan too.

Define 'Aryan.'

It's the KIKES that I can't stand, and the zombies that they control - IE CHRISTIANS.

How do the "kikes" control the "Christians" Gott?

And if you want a list of atrocities with IT WAS THE CHRISTIANS WHO...well, who can't give you one, eh?

Do you have a problem with Jews owning white slaves Gott?

Tell me about how we are all his FUCKING BROTHERS, and then out of the other side of your mouth tisk tisk about polluting the Indian gene pool! You pitiful zombies are JEWS, only you are too stupid to know it. At least the real jews know it, and that is one reason (only one of so many potential reasons) why they have such overwhelming contempt for you. Me too.

You are a paranoid lunatic, seriously. COINTELPRO is not about to barge into your shack Gott. No one wants to see you fucking your sister.

You idiots are simply extremists.

Oy vey! :D


Paging ADL...paging ADL

So what? I have nothing against conquest - fighting is good. You fight or you die. When you stop fighting you do die. Any idiot can see that. And Persians were Aryan too. It's the KIKES that I can't stand, and the zombies that they control - IE CHRISTIANS.

I wasn't speaking about conquest, but Alexander's belief that Hellenic civilization was universal, that all peoples -- Greek, Persians, Indians, barbarians etc. -- are essentially the same and can adopt the Greek ways. One of the consequences of his empire was the destruction of the Greek city-states, and the cosmopolitization of the Hellenic world.

When you stop fighting you do die? That doesn't make much sense. Usually when people start fighting they start dying. When they stop fighting, they stop dying. But maybe your point is more abstract. However, I'm not willing to assign much weight to your arguments when your ramblings on here show less erudition than a glue-sniffing adolescent.

Liberalism--the evil of the world--grew out of the revolt against the White Civilization dominated by the rightwing and the Monarchy.

ROFL what the hell are you talking about? First, there is no such thing as "the White Civilization." Western Civilization and "white" are not synonymous so get it straight. The Russians are white. This does not make them part of the West however. Russia is not GERMANY. Second, Liberalism coexisted with the monarchy in both France and England for centuries. The idea of a "rightwing" is a stupid democratic idea that only came about much later. Liberalism and democracy are not synonymous.

It was concocted by freemasons, jews and reds, in order that we may surrender our power to a jewish/communist world dictatorship.

Some bizarre conspiracy theory. Let me guess, you are an American.

What's your problem with liberalism? Are you for real?

There are different varients of Liberalism. There is quite a difference between Classical and Reform Liberalism philosophically. I have recently come to admire many liberal ideas myself although I reject liberalism as a philosophy. Liberalism simply cannot be dismissed out of hand. The most spectacular scientific, technological, economic and aesthetic accomplishments in the history of the world have occurred under liberal regimes.

There are different varients of Liberalism. There is quite a difference between Classical and Reform Liberalism philosophically. I have recently come to admire many liberal ideas myself although I reject liberalism as a philosophy. Liberalism simply cannot be dismissed out of hand. The most spectacular scientific, technological, economic and aesthetic accomplishments in the history of the world have occurred under liberal regimes.

You ought to point out that there are two diametrically opposed definitions of liberalism depending whether you live in the States or Europe.

That's very true. The same can be said of "conservatism" as well. In America, to be a "conservative" is to be a classical (Locke) or neoclassical liberal (Hayek). To be a "liberal" in America is either to be a reform liberal (Rawls) or a postmodernist (Foucault).

Fade,

You begin the thread by claiming you are a non-Christian, but then the body of your thread is conciliatory toward a germanized Christianity. You going to clarify that some?

I am not a Christian. That should be clear by now as I have stated that numerous times over. I do not believe in the existence of any God or that Christ was the son of God. My ancestors were heathens. That is true. My ancestors were also Christians for generations as well. Western Civilization grew out of the Christian Commonwealth of the Middle Ages - not the Roman Empire. I respect the Church as I respect the Empire because it is a part of my past. The Church, in my opinion, did a lot more good than it ever did bad for Western Europeans.

A common faith is of enormous value. Its gives a people a reason to care about one another, a sense of community which did not exist before. Whether or not such a faith is true or false is utterly irrelevant. At one time it was simply self-evident to Western Europeans that populations like the Mongols, the Turks, and the Saracens were a MENACE to be kept at bay so far as possible. That's priceless, in hindsight, and BY FAR preferable to the atomization and disintegration of heathen tribalism and atheist individualism.

This however does not seem to register very well with many of the savages who post on this forum. They (white trash) go out of their way to be as crude and immature as humanely possible for that is the limit of their capabilities. Browsing over their posts, civilized people (the few on this forum) can only be struck by the impression that "these people are of the rabble." Their barbarism simply enraptures them and it is repulsive. Like true savages, their first and determining instinct is simply "destroy everything." Any idiot can tear something down and criticize others. Few, however, possess the intelligence and foresight to actually create something as enduring and viable as the Christian faith.

One can be culturally Christian without taking it literally. Or one can believe in a God that man creates. On one level anything with a name exists if only in someone's imagination. A collective belief in a God would give the God existence as a collective being. Who knows what kind of real power such a being might have. Possibly enough power to confer grace on a devotee. I think it is a shame that Christianity has its roots in the religion of that group of people.
I for one am not Christian either, but I do not have a problem with Catholicism in theory, although it's current incarnation, Catholic Charities and all of that, is bad.

This however does not seem to register very well with many of the savages who post on this forum. They (white trash) go out of their way to be as crude and immature as humanely possible for that is the limit of their capabilities. Browsing over their posts, civilized people (the few on this forum) can only be struck by the impression that "these people are of the rabble." Their barbarism simply enraptures them and it is repulsive. Like true savages, their first and determining instinct is simply "destroy everything." Any idiot can tear something down and criticize others. Few, however, possess the intelligence and foresight to actually create something as enduring and viable as the Christian faith.

Yes there are some almost incredible idiots on this site. Just put the worst offenders on your ignore list. Works wonders.

I for one am not Christian either, but I do not have a problem with Catholicism in theory, although it's current incarnation, Catholic Charities and all of that, is bad.

Why are Catholic charities bad?

Why are Catholic charities bad?

note: these Somalis are not even Christians!

BALDACCI AND ALLEN SEEK FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO ADDRESS INFLUX OF SOMALI IMMIGRANTS

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. Representatives John Baldacci and Tom Allen announced on Thursday that they are seeking federal funds to help Somali immigrants in Maine. The resources being sought would ease the transition for Somali families in central and southern parts of the state, and ensure that money is also available to continue meeting the needs of other Maine people who are likewise seeking employment opportunities and adequate housing.

In a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services & Education, Representatives Baldacci and Allen called for $100,000 in funding to enable Catholic Charities of Maine to provide needed services to Somali immigrants in Lewiston and other communities. Catholic Charities provides outreach and assistance to refugees and immigrants.

The appeal to Chairman Ralph Regula (R-Ohio) and Ranking Member David Obey (D-Wisconsin) follows a series of meetings in which Baldacci, Allen and their staff members have worked to determine how the federal government could help Somalis and other immigrants. The assistance being requested would support job placement and relocation initiatives.

“We are writing to urge you to include funding for a critical project in the state of Maine in the Fiscal Year 2003 appropriations legislation for Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education. Specifically, we are seeking $100,000 from the Employment and Training Administration Account for Catholic Charities of Maine to provide refugee services for the influx of Somali refugees moving into Maine,” Baldacci and Allen wrote.

Baldacci and Allen explained that the arrival of Somali families in Maine is expected to continue. Known as secondary migrants, they have relocated from the south -- particularly the Atlanta, Georgia area. Most of the immigrants came to the United States from refugee camps in Kenya, where they fled to escape Somalia's civil war.

Officials believe more immigrants will arrive in Maine during the coming months - with as many as 1,000 settling in Lewiston. The addition of these new families and workers is expected to place a strain on the region’s social service infrastructure. Baldacci and Allen are working to prevent this from happening. The $100,000 appropriation request would help to address the needs of Somali families, and ensure that resources remain available to aid other Mainers who likewise require some support.

“Federal assistance would greatly aid Catholic Charities of Maine as they begin to prepare job placement and relocation services for the incoming Somalis. We hope that there is an opportunity within the Subcommittee to allocate $100,000 from the Employment and Training Administration Account for Catholic Charities of Maine,” Baldacci and Allen added.

In addition to pushing for federal funds, Baldacci and Allen will continue to work with state and local officials to identify collaborative efforts that might benefit both immigrant families, and the communities in which they settle.

I can see that you are a complete moron and there is no sense in debating with morons that don't know what the hell they're talking about. No such thing as white civilization, "rightwing", traditionalism, absolutism...lol!!!

There is no such thing as a "White Civilization." Such a thing has never existed in all of history. Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, Westerners no doubt! ROFL!

What you (Fade) fail to realize is this=

Nobody gives a shit about what happened 100 A.D. Burden yourself with baggage all you want, times have changed brother. Those you call heathens, Pagons, Druids or what have you, are no more like they were in the 1st century, than the christians who currently are destroying our culture, our people and our faith in mankind as a whole. It's funny how you claim Druids want to sacrifice people, and have not changed in the last two thousand years, yet you are so prompt in claiming how "christianity" has tamed the White man. I guess we bark eaters are still stuck in the 1st century.

You talk matter-of-factly of how we were nothing but heathens until christianity came along, but have NO concept of how we have changed with the times, just as your church that has tamed us has. The point (witch you have missed entirely) is that we can overcome our current predicament without the likes of christianity. Plain and simple. If we can toss aside our silly beliefs in some "saviour" that is going to rescue us from an Earthly life, we can cross the barriers of a self-fullfilled prophecy= Destruction.

Yes, christianity is as much a part of our heritage as the gods of lore, and you are right about christianity "taming" mankind. That was fine back then, but not now, and you know it.

I can tell you this for a fact, no ancient wisdom or "christianity" involved. I am a pagon who denounces christ as a divine being. A humanitarian if you will, and no, that does not mean sending money to starving negroes in Africa.
I have not had the notion to sacrifice small children or my neighbors either.

Mankind has the power to overcome the godsent and climb towards the stars, yet ancient beliefs and dogma permits this from happening. I guess we can hang out and civilize ourselves in the name of christ in the meantime.

There is no such thing as a "White Civilization." Such a thing has never existed in all of history. Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, Westerners no doubt! ROFL!


White civilization was a part of nature. Just because some christian did not record it 1,000 years ago, does not exlude it from our being.
At one time, America was a White civilzation, as well as the current Russia. Several others too. Just because a collective people do not come out and say " WE are WHITE ", does not make them any less civilized than Haiti.


Fade, you sir are digging yourself into an intellectual hole that seems to have no exit.

Last I checked Europe was North East, asshole.

Europe is a geographic expression. LOL there is no more a “white civilization” than there is a Santa Claus at the North Pole. All whites have never shared the same civilization or culture. LOL the Cimbri and the Teutones, Romans for sure!

And N, W, E, S, were cardinal directions not biological entities. Go fucking eat your crackers.

(scratches chin) Did you see Santa Claus at Wal-Mart today?

What you (Fade) fail to realize is this=

What have I failed to realize Magnus, tell me?

Nobody gives a shit about what happened 100 A.D

Historians do not care about what happened in 100 A.D.?

Burden yourself with baggage all you want, times have changed brother.

When have I denied that times have changed Magnus? :p

Those you call heathens, Pagons, Druids or what have you, are no more like they were in the 1st century, than the christians who currently are destroying our culture, our people and our faith in mankind as a whole.

LOL I would love to engage you in a debate about our culture Magnus. Tell, what is YOUR culture? What is YOUR people? I want to know, seriously.

It's funny how you claim Druids want to sacrifice people, and have not changed in the last two thousand years, yet you are so prompt in claiming how "christianity" has tamed the White man. I guess we bark eaters are still stuck in the 1st century.

There are some here who are bark eaters stuck in the 1st century, no doubt, Fredrik Haerne comes to mind for instance.

You talk matter-of-factly of how we were nothing but heathens until christianity came along

Northern Europe was nothing until Christianity came along. I am willing to compare the accomplishments of Northern Europe before Christianity to Northern Europe after Christianity anyday, yes.

but have NO concept of how we have changed with the times, just as your church that has tamed us has.

This is odd Magnus. The Teutonic Knights were not effete sissies and neither was Jean d’Arc. Civilization has “tamed” you – not Christianity. Do you know what civilization is? Tell us.

The point (witch you have missed entirely) is that we can overcome our current predicament without the likes of christianity.

LOL I don’t see you people overcoming anything, much less Christianity. Compare the accomplishments of Christianity to White Nationalism. Who are you to criticize Christianity? Look how wildly successful Christianity has been in comparison to your own non-movement. Obviously, the Christians are doing SOMETHING right. Obviously, you people are doing something WRONG. If you are going to criticize Christianity, and I criticize and attack Christianity all the time, at least do it intelligently.

Plain and simple. If we can toss aside our silly beliefs in some "saviour" that is going to rescue us from an Earthly life, we can cross the barriers of a self-fullfilled prophecy= Destruction.

This would follow if we lived in a largely religious culture. We don’t. LOL we just took “under god” out of the Pledge of Allegiance, and that is the United States. The Europeans are even more secular. They do not care about any God by and large. They are not anti-racists because Christianity. The idea that attacking Christianity is somehow going to change anti-racists who do not believe in God in the first place is preposterous.

Yes, christianity is as much a part of our heritage as the gods of lore, and you are right about christianity "taming" mankind. That was fine back then, but not now, and you know it.

Civilization is what tames mankind, gross wealth created by commerce. Living in URBAN areas Magnus is what has created the culture you so despise. Do you know anything about sociology?

I can tell you this for a fact, no ancient wisdom or "christianity" involved. I am a pagon who denounces christ as a divine being. A humanitarian if you will, and no, that does not mean sending money to starving negroes in Africa. I have not had the notion to sacrifice small children or my neighbors either.

Whatever Magnus.

Mankind has the power to overcome the godsent and climb towards the stars, yet ancient beliefs and dogma permits this from happening. I guess we can hang out and civilize ourselves in the name of christ in the meantime.

Yes, truly, the vast majority of anti-racists who are atheists are going to be swayed by attacking Christianity.

White civilization was a part of nature. Just because some christian did not record it 1,000 years ago, does not exlude it from our being.

There was no “white” civilization. The Greeks and the Romans did not consider the barbarians to be a part of their world, a world that Africa and the Levant were synonymous with. You are simply making up a modern fantasy and projecting it upon the past. The Afro-centrists do this too.

At one time, America was a White civilzation, as well as the current Russia.

America, perhaps, but not Europe. White implies a distinction, something nonwhite. Whiteness became so important in America, especially in the South, because it has always been so mongrelized. LOL the Russians in the days of Peter the Great did not go about identifying themselves with “white civilization.”

Several others too. Just because a collective people do not come out and say " WE are WHITE ", does not make them any less civilized than Haiti.

You are a materialist Magnus and you are projecting your materialism onto the past in a ridiculous attempt to falsify history. No one ever spoke of a “white civilization” that included all white people until quite recently for such a thing never existed. The Classical World was no “white civilization.” ROFL Persia and India were never part of the same civilization as Germany anymore than Russia and America are today a part of the same civilization. You people, Arthur Kemp comes to mind, do nothing but embarrass and discredit white racialists with your pathetic abuse the past. The Imperium Romanorum was real. The Respublica Christiana was real. Western Civilization is real. This preposterous thing you call “white civilization” has never existed anywhere and no serious scholar in this world you take what you say with anything but a grain of salt.

Fade, you sir are digging yourself into an intellectual hole that seems to have no exit.

LOL Magnus thinks of himself as an intellectual.

Northern Europe was nothing until Christianity came along.


..........................***LOL***

........................Right You Are !

............http://www.whiterevolution.com/forum14/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/10194/normal_jesus-borg.jpg
........................jesus borg

.

Fade the Butcher says:
Northern Europe was nothing until Christianity came along. I am willing to compare the accomplishments of Northern Europe before Christianity to Northern Europe after Christianity anyday, yes.
-----------

Actually the great formative force in European culture was Rome, not Christianity per se. At first the religion was heavily larded with Neoplatonism, later with Aristotelianism. Even after the Protestant Reformation, Christianity in Europe, apart from certain fringe sects, has not meant a serious attempt to live in accord with the scriptures. One abides with the parts of the scriptures that seem agreeable and ignores the parts that do not.

Christianity was in decline before the French revolution; thereafter the religion was promoted heavily as a way to keep the masses pacified; prominent people thereafter were obliged to pretend to be Christian so that the faith of the masses would be reinforced. Thus the 1800s and early 1900s were outwardly more Christian than the 1700s. An examination of Europe only in the 19th and 20th centuries would lead one to overestimate the importance of Christian doctrine in European history.

I would argue that the development of a less nominal, more serious Christianity, relatively late in the history of Europe, has not been entirely helpful.

Actually the great formative force in European culture was Rome, not Christianity per se.

During the Empire, Christianity was a ROMAN religion. The barbarians themselves were not evangelized in any real sense. What do you mean by European culture as well? Greece and France do not share the same culture. Roman civilization was centered on the Mediterranean, not the North, much less Western Europe since the East was by far wealthier in the Late Empire. The Carolingians are by far more important to what is today known as "Western Civilization" than the Roman Empire.

At first the religion was heavily larded with Neoplatonism, later with Aristotelianism.

No joke.

Even after the Protestant Reformation, Christianity in Europe, apart from certain fringe sects, has not meant a serious attempt to live in accord with the scriptures. One abides with the parts of the scriptures that seem agreeable and ignores the parts that do not.

Christianity was adopted overwhelmingly by rulers because it was politically useful.

Christianity was in decline before the French revolution

Not really, it was just becoming more secularized.

thereafter the religion was promoted heavily as a way to keep the masses pacified; prominent people thereafter were obliged to pretend to be Christian so that the faith of the masses would be reinforced. Thus the 1800s and early 1900s were outwardly more Christian than the 1700s. An examination of Europe only in the 19th and 20th centuries would lead one to overestimate the importance of Christian doctrine in European history.

Christianity was of the upmost important in creating the political superstructure upon which Western Civilization rests.

I would argue that the development of a less nominal, more serious Christianity, relatively late in the history of Europe, has not been entirely helpful.

I would argue that the Europe was not ever really referred to as "Europe" in any real sense until the modern era. It was known for centuries as the Respublica Christiana. I would also argue that modern science is utterly inconceivable without the Christian culture in which it arose. LOL the Classical world was technologically stagnant for a very good reason - classical philosophy and its emphasis upon essences.

..........................***LOL***

........................Right You Are !

............http://www.whiterevolution.com/forum14/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/10194/normal_jesus-borg.jpg
........................jesus borg

.

How is your cave no_nomen? It gets chilly this time of year. Shoot any rats today? Eat any bark? Warm your meat under your saddle lately? :p

How is your cave no_nomen? It gets chilly this time of year.

Our Cave is wonderful! Chilly? Not in here... I would guess TheButcher is not familiar with Caves. Ha!

Shoot any rats today?

Hunting was most rewarding this week. Venison steaks... Umm Good! And enough to last all through the winter with lots to spare.

Rats? Ha... 'popped' a good number of Kikes if that's what you mean, yes. (just for fun and practice mind you).

Eat any bark? Warm your meat...?

Got some Venison roasting by the fire right now. Half an hour and it will be just right.

Sure could have used some help with the Butchering and Skinning work though I seriously doubt if that's the kind of Butchering Fade knows how to do.



..........http://www.whiterevolution.com/forum14/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/10194/fade-JC.jpg


.

Fade, you contradict yourself So much, I don't even know where to begin.

Is this familiar?=

I am not attacking christianity by defending Pagonism.

You generalize WAY too much, and your agenda is as plain as the wind. I don't consider myself an intellectual by any means. I consider you one, but I do know something about human life. You stated that christianity did not tame man, it was civilization. You stated before that it was christianity that tamed man, brought him out of the horrors of living in caves and eating bark. Essentially tamed him. Your arguments are wearing thin. You are a hypocritical, contradicting windbag, and I am done with you..

Well, I know the usual suspects will attack me and try really hard to mock me to silence me for saying this, but in my opinion Christ and most of his early followers were white men execpt for Judas Iscariot who was a jew. I know many people here won't like that but tough I really don't care, I am intitled to my opinion, and no ones going to take that away from me. I will concede that the jews later starting inflitrating the early Christian movement to try and destory it and prevert it to their will and purpose.

Man, I miss threads like this. Banning the Fag was the worse mistake this board ever made.