On the risen Jesus

People do not know how the mind works. Virtually all white nationalists who are Christians believe that the stories of the Resurrection have to do with the empirical world: an event in 1st-century Palestine. Now comes to my mind an oil painting of the risen Jesus that Andrew Anglin chose for his Daily Stormer in the days of Easter a few years ago.

In reality, the stories about Jesus that Christians believe, and revere, have nothing to do with the empirical world but with the structure of the inner self. I’m not going to give a class in this post about what introject means, or how our parents can program us malware without us knowing. Suffice it to say that, in my long odyssey in the fight against dad’s introjects, I had to read a lot of literature to convince myself that what the Gospels say must be questioned.
 
The resurrection of Jesus
 
The ordinary Christian does not have the faintest idea of the studies that have been done to the narratives of what they call the Resurrection and the Pentecost apparitions—research by those who have taken the trouble to learn ancient Greek to make a meticulous examination of the New Testament. The way secular criticism sees all these Gospel stories is complicated, but I will summarise it here in the most didactic way possible.

The oldest texts of the New Testament, like one of the Pauline epistles to the Corinthians, better reflect the theology of original Christianity than the late texts. Therefore, it is important to note that Paul does not mention the empty tomb or the ascension of Jesus. Modern criticism says that, if Paul’s epistle to the Corinthians was written by the 60s of our era, in that decade these legends had not yet unfolded.

Of the evangelists, Mark is the oldest and John the latest. (The Christian churches confuse the order in their Bibles by placing the Gospel of Matthew before Mark.) As Matthew and Luke copied and pasted a lot of verses from the Gospel of Mark when putting together their own gospels, these three evangelists are known as the Synoptics to distinguish them from the fourth gospel. Take this very seriously to see how the writers of the New Testament were adding narrative layers throughout the 1st century. To the brief visions that Paul had, collected in his first epistles some three decades after the crucifixion, in the 60s, the Synoptic evangelists were adding greater legends in the following decades and, in the case of John already in the dawn of the 2nd century of our era, more sophisticated Christologies.

I said that the oldest texts of the badly ordained New Testament in the traditional Bible are some of the epistles of Paul, who, while mentioning the ‘risen Christ’, does so within his dense and impenetrable theology. The Paul question is very important. Unlike the apostles, he never met Jesus in flesh; he only claimed that he heard his voice in a rare vision he had on the road to Damascus. And it is this little fellow who never knew Jesus the first one to speak of the ‘risen Christ’ in a chronologically ordered New Testament.

Unlike Paul the author of the Gospel of Mark, who wrote after Paul, does mention the empty tomb; but not the apparitions of Jesus.[1]

Matthew and John, who wrote after Mark, do mention the risen Jesus speaking with his disciples; but not the Ascension to the heavens.

It is Luke who already mentions everything, although he does not develop Christology at such theological levels as those of John the evangelist.

Another thing that uncultured Christians ignore is that Luke wrote his Gospel and Acts of the Apostles as a single book. The way both Catholic and Protestant churches separate the book of Luke is contrived. And it was precisely Luke who popularized the idea of the Ascension of Jesus: an obviously late legend insofar as, had it been historical, such a Hollywoodesque achievement would have been narrated not only by Paul; but by the other writers of the New Testament epistles, and by Matthew and John the evangelist (and let’s not talk about the other John: John of Patmos, the author of the Book of Revelation).

In short, serious scholars see in the diverse New Testament texts a process of myth-making: literary fiction that, in layers, was developed throughout the 1st century of our era. He who knows the chronology when the books and epistolary of the New Testament were written, and reads the texts in that order—instead of the order that appears in the Bibles for mass consumption—can begin to glimpse the evolution of the myth. Ultimately, there is no valid reason to suppose that what is told in the New Testament about Jesus’ resurrection and apparitions was historical.

It took me years to get oriented in the best literature about the Bible, including everything miraculous that is alleged about Jesus. The truth seeker could consult these selected texts.
 
____________

NOTE:

[1] To the bare ‘empty tomb’ narrative of the original Markan text in Greek, the church interpolated the verses that, in the common Bibles, we see at the end of Mark’s gospel; but the exegetes detected that trick a long time ago.

Anyone interested?

Listen to this YouTube audio involving Andrew Anglin and Mike Enoch. In my humble opinion these guys are dead wrong. I know nothing about the AWD group they mention but I wonder if Anglin or Enoch have read The Turner Diaries or even The Brigade or Siege?

I believe that in this age of treason ‘black hats’ should coexist with ‘white hats’ even if the two sides never, ever meet each other for obvious security reasons. Incidentally, by having this site on the open internet I’m obviously a ‘white hat’. But I’d never condemn people like Breivik or Roof.

I wish I could speak fluent English but I can’t. Anyone interested to debate this kind of anti-black-hat guys in the WDH Radio Show within the limits of the Brandenburg v. Ohio ?

Anglin vs. Sargon

What is striking in the recent debate between Andrew Anglin and Carl Benjamin (also known by his YouTube pseudonym, Sargon of Akkad) is Benjamin’s schizoid stance that, yes, white people have the right to exist—but they don’t have the right to reverse the genocidal levels of immigration!

Reason for this schizoid disorder? This secular man subscribes Christian ethics, particularly a secularised version of the ethics of the Sermon on the Mount; Pauline universalism, and an out-group altruism that did not exist before Christianity.

Published in: on February 12, 2018 at 11:41 am  Comments (12)  
Tags:

Women in combat?

This is an update of our Tuesday post on women in the movement. Both Occidental Dissent and The Daily Stormer have published articles today about the subject. I agree with Roosh that ‘Andrew Anglin is the only alt right personality who is 100% red pilled on women’.

I’m not alt right but my POV is analogous to MGTOW’s. But not identical as they are not racists, instead they’re often degenerates (see this section from the 2017 edition of The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour).

Published in: on December 7, 2017 at 1:16 pm  Comments (12)  
Tags:

Fuck the British!

How many British men allowed this*
to happen without going full Breivik?

Andrew Anglin

_____________

(*) Child sex abuse gangs could have assaulted
one million youngsters in the UK.

Published in: on December 2, 2017 at 12:01 am  Comments (52)  

Poland & Andreas Donner

I am relocating the below entry I had posted at midnight to noon because I’ve just learnt that this is the group that organised the big nationalist march in Poland—something that destroys the effete discussion about ‘optics’ on this side of the Atlantic. Pace Anglin et al, what whites need is this imagery, not American flags!

This is the text I had originally posted at midnight:

I’ve just listened the interview in Radio Free Northwest of Andreas Donner: very critical of the Alt-Right and White Nationalism as these are a reactionary, not a revolutionary movement.

Tactically the Northwest Front men are right. But strategically I still think that the goal is the hostile takeover of all US à la Turner Diaries, especially its atomic bombs. Otherwise we would be nuked…

Published in: on November 13, 2017 at 12:09 pm  Comments (11)  

Killing innocents and sinners

Writing about the Sutherland Springs church shooting, on The Daily Stormer Andrew Anglin said today: ‘I hate aggressive edgy atheists as much as anyone…’

Apparently Anglin hates those whites who reject the existence of the Jewish god—a volcanic demon that Jews claim appeared to Moses, the very same god that Aryans were compelled to worship after Constantine took over the Roman Empire.

Anglin’s words exemplify beautifully the gulf between me and most American racists. But it’s not only a matter of worshiping the god of our enemy: it’s also about the universalist ethics imposed on whites after Constantine. (Every sandnigger or black could be a citizen of Constantinople as long as he was Christian.)

Another recent example: In his blog for southern nationalists, Hunter Wallace started his article with the words: ‘Devin Patrick Kelley, the EVIL bastard who murdered 26 people at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, TX this morning…’

One of Kelley’s victims, the 14-year-old daughter of church pastor Frank Pomeroy, was black. A pre-Christian Aryan would never mourn the killing of a black adoptee, and the rest of the adult victims in Texas were complicit of tolerating such sin against the holy ghost: adopting a subhuman as if she was human.

I would only mourn the white children killed: the only really innocent victims inside the church.

The others were sinners. But Anglin, Wallace and many American racists still have the Bible as their sacred book instead of Hitler’s Table Talk, right? ‘Almost two thousand years—and not a single new god!’ said Nietzsche.

This is the sort of thing that moves me mightily to continue the translation of Deschner’s book, who in this pic is shown long before he started to write his magnum opus…

Kindergarten racists

American white advocates are now discussing what they call ‘optics’ as PR for the movement (two of the most recent pieces by Hunter Wallace and Andrew Anglin: here and here).

Incredibly, Wallace who a few years ago sided mainstreamers against Greg Johnson, is now tolerant of fashy optics in the rallies while Anglin, whose site with acid sarcasm on Jews often uses Nazi imaginary, is now claiming that the movement needs electoral politics and Americanism!

Just compare this with what James Mason said in Siege (this morning I just added one more of the chapters of Siege as a post for this site). But Mason himself has his own problems. He was stuck in the religion of our parents and abandoned revolutionary politics: a religion I’m now debunking with my translations of Deschner’s Criminal History of Christianity.

Wallace seems to have a better grasp of reality than Anglin, but generally speaking their movement is a failure. And it is a failure because all of them are unable to give up Christian ethics. Apropos of the fact that Kevin MacDonald is now accepting Jewish contributors for The Occidental Observer, I responded to Franklin Ryckaert today:

The real issue here is my claim that whites do indeed have a loose screw. Our central intellectual figure in understanding the JQ cannot fathom à la Hitler that no Jew ought to be platformed, especially in a Jew-wise forum.

You can imagine an ‘Anti-Semites Watch’ periodical run by Jews admitting a Nazi contributor! Recently someone said that many white nationalists support Israel because they believe that Jews should have a home of their own, but that Jews don’t reciprocate the favour: they don’t support a home nation for whites anywhere in the world. That was an excellent point!

Christian-problem The Aryan problem does encompass the Jewish Problem. If even secular white nationalists subscribe the Christian commandment to love our enemies, we have a huge problem at home.

I will continue to promote MacDonald’s trilogy as fundamental reading to understand the JP but not only I’ve now removed The Occidental Observer from my blogroll list: I’m more confident than ever that NS should replace WN/Alt-Right (cf. my comment on Strauss/Zweig below), and that the ongoing discussion among them on optics is for Kindergarten racists who have no clue about the history of Christianity.

I was referring to this comment on mine about Richard Strauss and Stefan Zweig in Nazi Germany.

Spencer’s shortcomings

Chris, Evan McLaren, Daniel Friberg and Richard Spencer recently gathered in a podcast to talk.

Spencer takes no sides on the Second World War around minute 10. Indignantly, he says that he has never denied the Jewish holocaust. Of course, he does not mention the true Holocaust perpetrated on Germans. (I repeat what I asked on October 19th: Anyone rich enough to send Spencer a copy of Tom Goodrich’s Hellstorm?) He said that in spite of the fact that the Polish government, influenced by Jews, has threatened to ban Spencer from entering Europe for another three years.

What I find bothersome is that Black Pigeon Speaks, who is not even Alt-Right but Alt Lite, gets that the demonising of Germany is at the very root of the West’s darkest hour. Spencer still doesn’t get it.

Later, before minute 20, Spencer continues to believe in his pan-European ideology with no feuds between white nations and continues to imply that all European nations are just equal. ‘The last thing I’d support is German supremacy’ said Spencer. Remember the recent post ‘Against Spencer el al’: ‘Why should anyone care about preserving Polish or Croatian identity if their impact on world history is negligible? How does that advance the interests of Aryan man?’

After minute 50 Spencer said, ‘It is not about…connecting our movement with German National Socialism. It’s really about the opposite of that: it’s about making it new’. The new thing Spencer has in mind is a grotesque pigmy if we compare it with German National Socialism. Seven minutes later he said that NS imagery is ‘never going to appeal…’ completely ignoring what Rockwell said before he was born (more recently iterated by Iron March).

Similarly, Andrew Anglin complained yesterday about optics and even embedded a rant by William Pierce in his article.

I rarely criticise Pierce but in this case I must side Arthur Kemp’s critique when we talked in England: Pierce’s big mistake was not forming a political party. How comfortable for Pierce and Anglin! This is the same Anglin who never goes to the rallies.

Kriminalgeschichte, 11

Saul of Tarsus, later known as Paul, who in his epistles claims to be Jewish was the true creator of Christianity. In his book Deschner discusses how Paul strongly criticised his co-religionists and then writes:

Unsurprisingly, the Jews counterattacked. This fact was very prominent by German Catholics in Hitler’s time, for example in Heilige deutsche Heimat, with ecclesiastical censorship, which continually recalls how the Jews ‘calumniated, cursed and persecuted’ Paul, that ‘wonder of the Spirit and of Grace’, how they conspired against him for being ‘a friend of the Gentiles’, how they ‘planned to kill him’ and ‘organised various attacks against him’, ‘expelled him from the synagogues as though he was a stench or a leper’, they banished him ‘to the most inhospitable places under the sky, to the forests and to the deserts where only the beasts live’, etcetera.

In one of the thousands of endnotes in Deschner’s ten-volume work, he cites his source (Walterscheid, J., pp. 1139f, II pp. 40f, Heilige Deutsche Heimat. Das deutsche Kirchenjahr mit seinen Festen, Seinem Volksbrauch, den Volksheiligen, religiöser Literatur und religiöser Kunst, 1,1936). Deschner adds:

This educational inspector from Bonn cites on the first page of his huge text in two volumes (prologue p. XIII) the work Die deutsche Volkskunde of the Nazi Reichsleiter Adolf Spamer and glorifies militarism, e.g. pp. 1128ff esp., 133ff and other pages, where he alludes for example to the old Nazi abbot Ildefons Herwegen ‘during the days with the Führer at Maria Laach’, where the Grand Brotherhood of St Sebastian ‘has found an indispensable help in the ideas of the new State’ since it ‘goes back to the same old roots of the German force’; celebrates in addition ‘the thunder of the canyon’ and ‘the perfect parades’. The pious Catholic author dreams of no less pious Catholic squads armed with ‘real shotguns’ and so on. The fact is that the Bible and the gunpowder go together the whole history of Catholicism… under ecclesiastical imprimatur.

All this would seem wonderful to people like Andrew Anglin, whose The Daily Stormer can now be seen in Tor. As a title for a periodical, The Daily Stormer is inspired by a German newspaper of the 1930s. (And let’s not talk about how the pious Christian Vox Day, who sounds like Sean Hannity, recently debated Anglin on National Socialism.)

But what Deschner writes is misleading in many ways. The faction of Christianity that would finally prevail in Christendom is not, say, that of a Richard Wagner whose operas fascinate me, including the Christian ones Tannhäuser and Parsifal (Parsifal is my favourite opera). It was its antithesis: the Calvinist faction of Christianity that restored the Old Testament in what became the most powerful country in the West, the United States. As to Catholicism, in the times when the Nazi abbot Herwegen wrote the above a more powerful figure, Pope Pius XI, stated on 29 July 1938: ‘One forgets today that the human race is a single, large and catholic [universal] race’.

The last political attempts to harmonize Christianity with racialism died in Nazi Germany. Now we have to question the Galilean cult from its root—and to question also the silliness of what Vox Day and many others are trying to do: harmonise Christianity with Aryan preservation.