Monday, November 21, 2016

The Perversion of Christianity, Part 4

Part 1.

Part 2.

Part 3.

All content wholly fictional and © Full Information Security.

Anti-Jewish Representations in the Bible

The Gospels of Christ that the Judeo-Turkish coalition at Nicea edited and selected for inclusion in the "New Testament" aimed at northern Europe remained, even thoroughly redacted, somewhat hostile to Judaism. The New Testament is not anti-Semitic, because it is explicitly multikulti and universalist, and it is not anti-Jewish, because it calls for the Jews to receive worldly material wealth, racial survival and racial homogeneity for the duration of physical creation, and eternal special treatment for being the first chosen people and sire of the entire human race. Nonetheless, some of the most blatant circumstances of the Passion story, such as the Jews machinating Christ's execution, remain, along with Christ's declaration that Jews who do not accept Him as their savior are a "synagogue of Satan." Compared to 2016 Terran universalism, this constitutes a hate-filled screed that goes beyond mere microaggressions.

Practically, though, the New Testament is not at all anti-Jewish. Besides acknowledging them as the oldest and purest of all peoples, and the source of God's only living human manifestation on Earth, the few slurs against the Jews that remain are only slurs when taken in a certain context. The Pharisees of the "New Testament" are blamed for Christ's death, but this is in contrast to all of the other Jewish tribes and organizations of the time period. People eager to read anti-Judaism into the New Testament are able to cite the Pharisees' (and perhaps the Sadducees') behavior as proof that the acceptable Gospels take a strong stance against Jews, but this is a ridiculous claim. Jesus criticizes many who claim to follow Him, also--which is to say, He criticizes many Christians--but this does not mean the New Testament is an anti-Christian polemic. So, too, His harsh speech against a few Jews here and there is not a condemnation of Jews or Judaism. European and Arabic peoples occupied by Jewish masters in later years would certainly find a strong temptation to claim a few quotes here or there were meant against all Jews, or against Jewishness, but the men who edited the Gospels at Nicea did not intend for that to be the meaning of the story. Instead, they held the perspective that, because Jews were already the chosen of God, there was nothing more they needed to do. Europeans and other peoples wishing to be saved from their non-chosen fate would need to worship Rabbi Jesus, but with a few token exceptions, the New Testament released by Nicea completed the storyline of the Torah by making the Jews the group that didn't require salvation, and everyone else's soul as being "up for grabs"--vulnerable to utter destruction without careful adherence to the Jewish creator-god. European sellouts who take a few small quotes about a handful of fictional Jewish tribes portrayed negatively and turn thosee into "Christianity has always been anti-Jewish" is comparable to homosexual men cherry-picking the Bible for quotes about universal love which must, therefore, justify anal marriage.

The dumb, unproven "faith" that the post-Nicean churches propagated (as contrasted to the true divine and/or literary Christian faith we'll discuss later) upon European peoples leaves wiggle room for interpreting common sense into or out of the Nicean Gospels and common nonsense into or out of them, where politically appropriate, much like the American Sanhedrin's vigorous work interpreting the fourteenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Following western classical logic, however, this approach is atrociously flawed; prima facie irrational, and left wanting for proof, which proof the Semites of Nicea would prefer wait until worldly goods have been forsaken. Bypassing thousands of years of practical approaches to dealing with gods, spirituality, and the physical world, this Semitic "faith" that came out of Nicea had damning effects on the cultures it encountered.



The above picture is highly representational of the marriage of the edited gospels and the Torah. Jewish-Christianity destroyed both Africa and Europe: in the latter case, by fostering a paternalistic urge to spread the Torah and its sequel worldwide, and in the former case, by demanding that Africans be Samed. This impossible, stupid crusade cost Europe over a thousand years, and countless of its lives and trampled cultures, as prodigious treasure was wasted upon sadistically, yet masochistically, brutalizing and helping Africa. Africa, by contrast, was the subject of those occupations, and its sustainable, enjoyable, and ecologically sound cultures were turned, at first by comparison and then in actuality, into rootless poverty, where Jewish-Christian conceptions as experienced by Europeans inspired the latter to destroy African nations, atomize individuals, and arm them exceedingly in the service of Judeo-Christian ideals. Absent the Torah's influence, Europe might have exterminated the Africans, left the Africans alone, segregated them into uninteresting habitats (regionally leaving them alone), or created societies with European and African spheres designed not to conflict with one another. With Jewish Christianity, though, the forced collision of worlds became mandatory. The impulse that destroyed or enslaved so many forgotten European peoples did the same to Africa.

The Hidden Gospels

Throughout this series, we've referenced the impossibility of knowing here what all the gospels of Christ contained. The creatures who destroyed and edited the surviving Christ stories--those that had survived three hundred years of mass killings, documentary purges, and other acts of historical erasure--made it impossible to recover complete evidence of what exactly they had done, like a shred party at Monsanto the day after the subpoena (or is it more hip now to say "like BleachBit night at the Clintons'"?). Nonetheless, confessions of brute power were popular enough during the times of the Council of Nicea, and its aftermath, that the killers boasted of their own hideousness. This--much like early Herzl and Ben-Gurion--gives us an insight into what was done, and why, free of the mincing political lies that various Jew-Christ churches developed after the embarrassing blows dealt them by telescopes and archaeology. In this way, long before recovering firstshand evidence of some of the damning documents, we knew of them through the boasting of the censors themselves.



The most significant of the censored gospels were referred to as "gnostic" by early Semitic, then European, censors, and we'll focus on those first. This subset of the Christ narrative is only so significant by comparison, though, because it was so significantly, by comparison, recovered. We must remember here that, in investigating the story of Christ, we're like a pre-telegram culture of Californians arriving in Ferguson, Missouri, years after Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown, trying to track down the truth of the story, only to discover that every person left alive in the town is on George Soros' payroll, and that the only evidence available is New York Times retrospectives. Soros' henchmen have long ago made the little Asian storekeeper disappear, bought the store and burned it down, given cement shoes to anyone else who'd previously spoken to either of the primary figures in the story, and adjusted the hall of records to create whatever history they wished to be later discovered.

This example isn't used to make a Christ comparison to anyone involved, but to illustrate how an effective narrative might be crafted. The resulting cover-up of the Christ story, and its end product, was managed by the financiers and imperial officials who executed Christ--which, even without their boasting or editing, speaks far more volumes than there are pages in their preferred Bible. In combination with the contradictory accounts of their low-grade crisis actors, historical proof of the plagiarism and revisionism in which they've engaged over the years (which technologies for preservation and investigation of dead cultures they would've hoped to avoid), and scientific observation since the release of the redacted accounts (which technologies they also tried, desperately, to stop), what remained of their narrative, even for the significantly emotionally desperate, falls apart. Western Jewish-Christianity, though still popular, is composed primarily of people who have learned to see the Bible as a feelgood metaphor, as most of them, even some of the dumbest, are unable to actually believe in an anthropomorphic Invisible Sky Jew, and who instead use the metaphor as a means of justifying materialist reassurance.

Saving the Narrative

In Part 3 of this series, we discussed the benefits that a useful, believable Christ narrative should have. In short, we reviewed how a good Christ narrative--whether one believes in it or not--should be compatible with cosmology, genetic science, and morality, in order to support a plausible spiritual belief and/or to support a healthy society. From a sense of rationality and logic, or from an artistic perspective, a good Christ narrative should be coherent in plot and character. If characters within a narrative do not have a consistent character, a narrative proves itself inherently flawed, useless not only for spiritual purposes, but for merely pragmatic material ones. Indications of plagiarism, multiple authors/inspirations rather than one Jewish Creator-God, and the like, make Jewish-Christianity worthless as a tool for an intelligent person's emotional or spiritual comfort.

A more complete narrative should resolve these problems. Because of the pieces of the Christ narrative that survived the purging of the Semites and Romans, and the people who managed to conceal some of the original accounts at Nag Hammadi thousands of years ago, we have such a narrative, which is typically associated with early "gnostics" (based upon Semitic elite slurs of the time). Those not interested or believing in the spiritual aspects of Christianity, but merely interested in pragmatism, may find intellectual satisfaction in the ways in which these pieces of the original Christ narrative are in conformity with modern and future Terran cosmology, while those interested in racial science will be similarly vindicated. Those who are spiritual, but rationally so, or who might be open to spirituality if it is rational, may discover that the idea of the selfish material void is not actually, any longer, the inevitable, most sensible, fit for their inquisitive, fact-verifying minds. Spirituality should be rational; absent morphine, even the dumbest of the dumb faithful followers of Jewish-Christianity would find this out, near the end. Physical pain plays a significant factor in palliative care, of course, but it has long been the practice of western priests/physicians to drug the dying in order to spare bystanders the cold realization of irrational faith's horrors upon those who see its disproving time drawing near. Contra popular wisdom, contra selflessly reassuring professions for the benefit of others, it is easier to be a believer when you're not about to die, unless you're in drugged delirium.

The division between faith and rationality in the western world occurred because of the need to reconcile the abject idiocy and easily demonstrable falsity and hypocrisy of the Jewish-Christian book-product. Not merely the ability to use telecommunications satellites, which has shattered the Bible again this past century, but the ability to reconcile textual contradictions--errors of the original Semitic plagiarizers and their later lackeys--which was available to everyone literate once Luther got the Bible out of the sole hands of the occupation-government priests. As we're remembering the many losses along the way, here, take a moment to consider what happened to the hundreds of other valiant Luthers, murdered by the Catholics again and again, in lands less brave, lucky, and inquisitive than sixteenth century Germany.

Closer to the Christ Narrative: Creation and Incest

On its own, the "New Testament," even moreso than the Qur'an, doesn't appear to be a complete religion. The Jewish Christ does not offer a creation story, and that Christ's references to the Old Testament are veiled and contradictory, to those not already steeped in the idea that contradiction is not contradiction because the Bible is always a metaphor except when it's not.

Both the Torah and the Qur'an tell a creation story involving two Semites who establish extremely inbred family lines in order to genetically dominate a planet filled with inferiors. Incest, pedophilia, and non-sexual child abuse are prominent themes in both religions, both in the context of Yahweh's/Allah's punitive relationships with their children-creations, and the clannish or parent-child sexual conduct encouraged by the said gods. The New Testament, by contrast--even after going through the grinder at Nicea--adapts itself to the mores of its targeted populations farther north, most immediately so west of the Hajnal line, where cousin marriage was not only not encouraged, but actively dis-couraged. The materialistic benefits of self-preserving genes, as we understand them now, form an obvious pairing with the roaming tribes of plagiarizers, raiders, and middlemen who established Judaism/Islam, but the formation of these inbred clans had been rejected by Europe prior to Christianity. After Charlemagne's work, European rulers, Torah in tow, began following the cultural patterns of the Semites, inbreeding for short-term genetic selfishness (with predictable results for later European politics). The initial form of Christianity released upon the west, though, did not, in its "New Testament" portion, include any of the genetic baggage found in the Torah. Even the edited Jewish Christ did not spend time telling his followers about the benefits of sleeping with their daughters to save la raza.

This is a theme to which we'll refer again: the ways in which Yahweh and Allah, the Semitic death-gods, are very similar to each other, while Jewish-Christ is markedly dissimilar to both of them, and the non-Jewish Christ is the opposite of either Semite. The racial or "HBD" implications are clearly indicative of Christianity being created as an anti-Semitic religion based on Indo Aryan notions of individual spirituality, rather than a Semitic offshoot. Religious people, conversely, may note the lack of interest Christ has in child-sex and child-abuse, compared to His supposed Yahweh-father.

Closer to the Christ Narrative: Creation and Cosmology

Christianity's seeming lack of a creation story, and Christ's references to a father, seem to make the New Testament dependent on the old. Many of the Christ accounts preserved from Nicean censors in the Middle East, though, offer a full creation story. People approaching Christianity from a religious perspective might prefer to hear Christ's account of the creation of the world, rather than to have powerful djinn-worshiping pagans, or Jews, in Nicea, assure them that Christ had nothing to say on the subject, and that, therefore, He agreed with the Torah's account. People approaching Christianity from a scientific perspective might find their apprehension toward non-metaphorical modern religions to be alleviated by a creation story conforming to current objectively verifiable theories.

The Christ-narrative that the 4th century censors attempted to destroy offers such a narrative. The gospels the Nicean junta tried to purge from the world--some successfully, and some which have since been rediscovered--depict the following creation story: God is an eternal presence beyond the bounds of mortal understanding and lacking a need for worship. Through its generative nature, God produces entities somewhat like itself. Somewhere in time, one of these lesser entities was created, through the innocent but dire mistake of its forebear, who felt isolated and bitter. Said covetous lesser entity attempted to mimic the indecipherable majesty of God by creating its own, necessarily sub-standard version of the universe, copied from the eternal creativity of God, which copy would have the purpose of striving for said lesser entity's favor, and over which the entity would rule as "god." The resulting bastardized creation--"our" universe, as we might call it here--seemed an affront to the true, larger creation, but in time, the plagiarized universe found its discordant nature to be destined for reabsorption into the whole (a fundamental concept in mathematics or composition theory; in literature, a recent parallel is Morgoth's failure to use minor chords to despoil Iluvatar's theme). But this one is getting ahead of itself; the story available through the gospels hidden from the early Catholics at the Nag Hammadi site ends somewhere in the middle, where the copycat Satan/Yahweh creates a playpen materium to satisfy his ego by having lesser beings compete for his favor. The unstoppable press of creation light pierced this materium, infecting it with beings beyond the power of its evil creator, who wished to remove the offending blot and escape therefrom, to broader and better creation.

It's all there, scientifically speaking. Strong and weak nuclear forces, elecromagnetism, gravity, potential for space travel, life or no life on other planets, uncertain age of the universe--none of the pseudoscience nor superstitious idiocies of the Torah. "Gnosticism," e.g. the most complete textual version we yet have of actual Christianity, is unembarrassingly compatible with science.

The religious perspective on the Jewish versus the Christian creation is richly rewarding: Christ is not a mistaken dunce who arrives hundreds or thousands of years later to clean up yet another one of his mistakes, but is instead a traveler offering hope of salvation from Satan-Yahweh's cruel games. Yahweh's many "mistakes" in the Torah are explained only by this interpretation of Christ. For example, Yahweh's creation of the first man and the first woman in Genesis, followed by later discoveries in the same book that the earth outside of paradise is already populated by many, many peoples, make internal sense only if it is understood that Yahweh is shortsighted and selfish. Similarly, Yahweh's rants about being a "jealous" god, and not wanting his chosen people--his Jews--to worship any other gods, make sense in light of the true Christian explanation of Satan/Yahweh being a jealous lesser deity who demands self-affirmation from people created in his image. Christ's offer of "salvation" makes sense once it is understood as salvation from the world created by Satan/Yahweh, rather than by Christ/Yahweh.

The scientific perspective on the original Christian creation is far more useful, particularly in a less religious world. Christ describes a vast universe populated by entities of light and spaces of darkness, unlimited by the "firmament" in the sky that the early Jews created via their poor translations of Egyptian creation myths. The hidden Christian gospels complement an evidence-based understanding of the eternal universe, the time that gravity would have necessarily taken to form galactic superclusters, and the feasibility of telecommunications satellites, among other things. Christ calls Yahweh a bloodthirsty liar whose "Book of Genesis" is an incomplete ripoff of others' work, which is what our physical and social sciences had shown us long before we were civilizationally reunited with some of the other gospels. To add an example, before the Dead Sea and Nag Hammadi finds, we had learned that the numbers that the Jews provided for Yahweh's great flood made the Jewish God either a liar or an incompetent, as the Great Flood was not high enough to cover Mount Everest at the time. The Christ narrative shows that, centuries before more detailed topography, actual Christians knew the Jews' Bible was wrong. Current Jewish-Christians are left with all the broken foolishness of the Torah, in which even the descendants of its creators have ceased to actually believe--the only one so gullible as to believe in the Jewish screeds of -500 B.C. (a more reliable archaeological date for the Pentateuch) is today's Jewish-Christians.

Furthermore, depicting Yahweh as the ultimate materialist anticipates currently popular notions of evolution by natural selection, in which cruelty within Satan/Yahweh's creation is rewarded by brief survival, then death. In that Yahweh-world, weakness and empathy are dysgenic, and vicious betrayal for coin eugenic. The un-edited literary Christ stood against that, offering access to a higher creation based on rules more profound than "kill eat screw die." Yahweh's universe, like the materialist cosmological conception of today's nihilists--who are direct ideological descendants of the Torah, rejectors of all Indo-Aryan philosophy except limited components of methodical observation--is cruel and designed for entropy and failure, yet with an inexplicable infusion of energies which cannot be portrayed or understood by today's science, except as "background effects of Yahweh/BigBang." The better creation stories of original Christianity are speculative, open to possibility and change, without the utterly dumb, foresightless plot holes produced by the original Jews. Ergo even if you don't believe in a historical Christ or any deities, the pragmatic utility of original Christianity as an organizing or motivating social force is of great interest to you. That original Christianity we've been discussing provides a social framework compatibly with thousands of generations of scientific discoveries and normative rewrites, and does not command, nor suggest, barriers to technological or ideological progress.

Food and Drink

Both of the Semitic death gods are keenly interested in bodily fluids, food, alcohol, and regulations thereby. Yahweh's story of the creation of man is materialistic in a vulgar way, evincing the early Semitic obsession with anatomical materialism: blood, flesh, bone, genitals, et cetera. Allah's story is similar, but with more sperm--lots more sperm--and, like the "Jew" Semitics, the "Muslim" Semitics are blunt and direct, not metaphorical, in their depictions of bodies created out of dirt, mud, semen, semen, blood of fathers, blood of mothers, mud, semen, and semen. Later incest and child-rape stories in the Torah and Qur'an reaffirm this ongoing, non-metaphorical philosophical union, while specific prohibitions on foods and drinks further emphasize the visceral nature of each cult.

The edited Jewish-Christian gospels contain none of this. Christ's veiled references to "the old law" and "my father," reinterpreted 300 years later in Nicea by a council of high-ranking Semites, are taken by Jewish-Christians to connect completely unrelated gospels to the spermy wreck of the Semitic inbreeding philosophies underlying Judaism and Islam. In the gospels that Saul of Tarsis' "Catholic"-whatevers tried to destroy, we see that the references to Christ's heritage are not vague, but direct, referring to a father beyond the scope and understanding of Yahweh/Satan. In company with the edited Gospels of today's "New Testament," the references in the latter can be understood as references to a higher authority.

Semitic food prohibitions on alcohol, certain types of game, and Semitic mandates to sadistically murder certain animals in certain ways--often as sexual stand-ins for children, as in the Abraham/Isaac story that was later itself plagiarized at Nicea in order to rationalize the Yahweh/Christ sacrifice story--are completely absent from the original Christian gospels, demonstrating their Europeoid character. Successful Semitic societies of the time tended to include insane preoccupations with alcohol avoidance and food preparation, while successful pre-Semitic Indo-Aryan societies did not. Ergo Christ drinks wine at a giant outdoor party and lots of people there are okay with it, while the Jew-Semites reserve wine for certain secret rituals, and the Muslim-Semites punish its use.

Scientifically speaking, we now, most of us, like Indo-Aryans before us (but not like Semites before us), recognize the ancient-world utility of fermented beverages--not for receiving mystical (drunken) visions that should be reserved to rabbis, but for bolstering communal health through the avoidance of stagnant water. Prior to the Torah's work among Indo-Aryan peoples, spirits were a way everyone could preserve liquid nourishment against spoilage, eliminating the need for constant movement between water sources or host populations, and allowing for future-oriented planning to nourish families or communities. By contrast, the roving Semitic bandits knew of spirits as a way to get loaded: a benefit to the leaders of society, but something which should be discouraged amongst the lower members of society, since it might cause poor-decision-makers to engage in anti-social behavior. Ergo Yahweh/Allah/Satan admonishes his people to treat spirits as either a djinn-possessed evil, or as rabbis' private reserve. Christ, by contrast, shared wine with everyone: His act of turning water into wine, which the Semitic editors mistook for a cheap miracle, was actually a metaphor for early Europeoid agricultural techniques which allowed (and which resulted from the pre-existing ability to do so) their populations to plan their future uses of liquid nourishment, settle, and engage in more stable horticulture and animal husbandry without a need to rush to the next filthy watering hole. The free sharing of alcohol--like the lack of discouragement from eating certain kinds of food, which the Indo-Aryans knew how to prepare properly--demonstrates further the irrevocable rift between the original Christ (again, whether really a deity or merely a fictional representation of emotional aspirations) and the Semitic death-god.

The racial implications of this section are obvious; the non-racially scientific ones are so as well, if the division between food and alcohol policy is viewed as an aspect of cultural evolution rather than genetic expression.

Sex and Sacrifice

Sexually, Jesus stands opposed to Yahweh and Allah as well, both in a pro- and an anti-homosexual stance. The original Christ is written for a higher class of religious person, specifically, one who already knows not to have coprophagic sex or rape one's children, and does not need to be specifically told. The great Semitic patriarchs are heralded for lives of rutting children and animals, being punished for it by Yahweh, and then leading their people to survival by establishing Very Important Rules about not screwing animals. Yahweh, like Allah, feels a need as the supreme deity of the world's wisest and most chosen people, to admonish their adult males not to have sex with one another. Allah, of course, explicitly promises that his worshipers will have sexual access to nubile young boys in paradise, so long as they do not swive grown men on Earth. Absent the promise of as many catamites as you want, Yahweh sees fit to give the same commandment to the Jews--do not lie with other men--and, even though Yahweh makes specific provisions not to lie with animals, and what kinds of animals not to eat, he pointedly says nothing about children. Orthodox Jews are, at least, specifically commanded not to appear naked in front of their inheritance-children, while slave (goyim)-children are fair game: an obvious rabbinical commandment against raping your own child--except when it is needed to preserve the race, e.g. Lot innocently mounting his two young daughters (while drunk, of course).

Scientifically, this makes sense. Semitic cultures--whether "Jewish" or "Muslim"--have lengthy traditions of using children for sexual purposes, both for the firsthand pleasure and satisfaction of powerful men, and for the communal vindication of killing children "for (the) god(s)." This is the largest doctrinal change made by the Semitic Niceans, namely, the changing of the Christ story to be one where Christ was god being sadistically killed for god (sic), rather than the original Christian version. The Niceans and others murdered so many Christians in order to eliminate the idea of Christ having been killed by evil agents of Yahweh/Allah, rather than by "guilty Europeans misled by sin." In the Nag Hammadi codices, Christ comes to Earth to warn people that Yahweh/Satan/Allah is deceiving them, and when He is killed, He laughs on the cross because He knows death is not a final punishment, but an escape from the material world. Besides eliminating the laughter--and Christ's cooperation with Judas in permitting the Semites and their Roman puppets to make the point--the Nicean censors were forced to engage in an atrocious retconning of the Christ narrative in order to explain how Christ could be God and yet needed to be killed. Depending on the century and the motivation, the neo-orthodox claim goes something like, "It was necessary to come to Earth in human shape and not commit any sins and then be killed by humans in order to fulfill ten-dimensional mathematics because God lacks the power to save people without dying as a human first."

Literarily, that's ridiculous; theologically, it's more ridiculous, since it presupposes that an all-powerful entity requires black magic in order to achieve an end. I.e., God actually can create a boulder so large that he himself cannot move it. This blasphemy, this raw stupidity, is integral to the pairing of New Testament with Old: God is an impotent freak who can't undo old work, or do his work correctly the first time, or even revise his work without taking human form and suffering. It takes a poor imagination to conceive of this kind of balancing act; even today's screenwriters (aided by a thousand years of gentile work on computers, neuroscience, perception, and science fiction) would be able to come up with a better way for this shallow, impotent god to "redeem people's sins" or "experience suffering" than by taking human shape.

The original Christ story does include the Passion, but presents it in a religiously sound, and a literarily and scientifically plausible way. Christ comes to Earth as an agent of God to warn people that they are living--as the ancient Indo-Aryans long suspected--in Plato's Cave, and before He can spread His message too far, the servants of the errant creator-demon Yahweh/Satan have Him executed and destroy his work. This is why "synagogue of Satan" comes from Christ--not because the Jews had "turned away from God," but because the Torah originally was a religion of the evil mini-creator. If Christ were himself the creator god, and had spent hundreds upon hundreds of years punishing the Semites for their infidelity, only to suddenly decide later on to live as a BSDM doll because it was the only possible way for an omnipotent entity to save them from things he had created them knowing they were going to do.

(God's omniscience, of course, though necessary to explain the later mutated version of the Semitic Passion, is obviously not present in the Torah, since Yahweh doesn't know Adam and Eve are naked until he comes into the garden. Omniscience was retroactively added at Nicea to justify why the murder of the Christ-figure was both bad and good, and why Zoroastrianist notions of sin and reward/redemption could be co-opted into the hybridized, more-marketable new religion.)

The child-sex/child-sacrifice religions of Judaism and Islam differ so profoundly from Christianity that it's simple to understand why so many Christians had to be murdered, so many Christian texts destroyed as "heresies," and so many European peoples exterminated, in order to get the survivors to swallow the resulting product. Scientifically, or as a modern moral person, the original Christian perspective on sex, like that on food, is refreshing: no eerie Semitic preoccupation with anti-grownup sex and pro-statutory-rape-of-a-child, and a mature understanding that blood and semen and feces exist, without needing to talk about them. Early Indo-Aryans, for example, already knew how to bathe and how to wipe their asses, and did not need to inscribe hallowed tablets on how to wipe or how to wash, as did the early Semites. (Current affairs in America and Europe suggest this necessity may not be confined to times of yore.)

True Christianity is rewarding on both the spiritual and non-spiritual, homoaverse and non-homoaverse sides of the scale. The Christ's perspective on sex, free from the chains of the Torah, is one of rationality: Yahweh created the material universe to glorify himself, pitting beings against one another in the struggle to survive. This is why the Torah and Qur'an are so focused on spreading seed: they are texts of genetic utility. It's also why those books are so violently against adult homosexuality. The Torah and the Qur'an don't mind child rape, for a pleasurable (material) release, but they are explicitly against the idea of consensual adult male homosexual relationships, which might detract from the production of future patriarchs, ergo the expansion of the cults glorifying Yahweh/Allah.

(Actual) Christianity, by contrast, doesn't feel a need to scold consensual adult relationships, because there is not that same drive to succeed in materially glorifying Yahweh/Allah/Satan. If you're homoaverse, this may present a philosophical divide, and you may prefer a Jewish Christ; however, the resulting benefit is that the original non-Jewish Christ neither condones nor encourages the rape of children. Christ speaks of a greater creation beyond the one of Yahweh's quest for material quantity, and the entire point of His message here was (again, whether literary or literally) that success in Yahweh's material mess is not actually the ultimate goal of creation. It is this rabid drive which produces the prevalence of Semitic child-rape alongside Semitic homo-murder. It is likely the earlier Semitic traditions of child-rape and problematic adult homosexuality that led to the now-ironic Semitic divine prohibitions against adult sex and for child-rape. Ironic, now, because it is those prohibitions that lead to the secretive use of children by sick adults, increasing the likelihood that there will be more sick adults later on to perpetuate the cycle. Free of Yahweh, the real Christ wouldn't think to mention it; if pressed, He might say, say, "Leave it alone and it won't be a problem."

Religiously, the actual Christ's lack of concern over consensual adult homosexuality is actually a stronger condemnation of lust than the Jewish-Christ's one. By de-legitimizing the material urges with which Yahweh/Allah implanted us in order to more numerically revere him, Christ suggests that the lustful sins--for food, flesh, money, et cetera--are far less important than Satan/Yahweh would make them out to be, in the Torah. There is no pressure to "spread the seed," since this is Plato's cave; conversely, you neither revere nor loathe adult consensual sex, up until the point when they want you to hand over your kids and/or pay for their medication. All those gross bathhouse stories from the past couple centuries are representations of homosexuality in Jewish-Christian culture, and speak against Semitic attitudes on sexuality, not for them.

Another level of irony we attain when we combine non-Semitic technology with Semitic mores is that homosexuality becomes, rather than reviled, exalted. Now scientifically able to reproduce and fight disease using techniques developed by Indo-Aryans, the peoples of the Torah can carry their materialistic urges into the homosexual realm. Reformed Judaism's metaphorization of "god is our genes" makes perfect sense, and in Yahweh's creation, it is a form of truth. Since material sensation is of penultimate importance to the Torah--as opposed to the salvation religions of the Aryans--then homosexuality should, in a time of antibiotics and socialized medicine, be king. Jewish-Christianity has, predictably, led to the materialist nowness, forming a straight-line graph from the spiritual pagan Europeoid societies that were first infected, to the as-yet nadir of this point in the current.

The Festering Splinter

The importance of Semitic retellings of the Christ narrative has been immense. Even in a world where so few say they believe, and so few of those who believe actually believe in the "believing" sense, rather than the self-vindicating sense, Jewish-Christianity has worked amazingly well at deflecting the mortal exposé that Christ had aimed at the Semitic death-cults. In fact, by capitalizing on the contemporary good-feelings toward Christ and the generic "niceness" elements of the gospels, the scraps of Christianity preserved in Jewish-Christianity saved the Semitic cults from destruction by resurgent pagans. Only through incorporating Rome's would-be savior into the philosophy of the Middle East, as the earlier Egyptian saviors were imprisoned, could Yahweh/Allah grow in power, and take the northern reaches of Europe.

Most Americans' opinions of nuclear power's safety and utility in the 21st century are formed not by science, but by the background knowledge (details now forgotten, but impression strongly remaining in the subconscious) that Homer Simpson worked as a safety inspector at Mr. Burns' nuclear plant. This delicate, hilarious, brilliantly evil juxtaposition accomplished more to slow human technological advancement in the past few decades than any number of easily-forgotten news stories about Fukushima or Hiroshima. Millions of dollars of ads, lectures from high school teachers, scare stories about radioactive barrels: these things are nothing to form the average person's opinion, compared to a reference from an enjoyable narrative. It is the tales that speak to us. The power of the Torah is such that, even forcibly lampooned and utterly ignored, it is the commercial on in the background of all of our minds, whispering its fiat materialism into the fibers of every normative we analyze or accept.

Since the fall of Egypt, the only figure to take a stab at the Torah itself has been Christ. Without the independent Christ narrative beside them--or another which rejects the heavenless, hell-less, nihilistically materialist Torah murderbook--any people will eventually fall victim to the stories that the Torah, or something like it, presents. Casting aside "all religion" for a Scientism ultimately dependent upon Torah-based Protestant Universalism will fall to later Torah-like narratives of nihilistic material progress, just like it turned out when the surviving children of Europe lost their parents' forest-gods for Charlemagne's Jew-Christ. Something needs to be there for them. Pretending you don't need a story is like pretending you don't need to go to the bathroom--it won't end well for you, no matter how fiercely you protest and squirm.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Genesis 1:27
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
John 8:44
Yaldabaoth said to his subordinate demons: "Let’s create a man according to the image of God, And our own likeness, So that his image will illuminate us."
Apocryphon of John
Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
Genesis 11:7

No comments:

Post a Comment