Changing the Past: on Old People Not Liking New Movies
We've previously teased out suggestions of this topic in Merely Potent and Ending His Reign of Terror, and many times previously addressed the idea of Christianity, which is to say with the historical pretense of European Christianity, which is really to say Nicean Christianity, or Judaic Christianity, or just most honestly on this planet Judaism, as the more modern version of what we now colloquially refer to as Christianity was formed hundreds of years after decades-late Jewish commandments for gentiles about worshiping a dead rabbi and giving up all their stuff and not resisting people who attack you, which we know of as gospel or dogma, specifically (and successfully) to sell to Europe, and the ways in which what became accepted as Orthodox Christianity in Europe and Asia were not the original Jewish narrative but a heavily Europeoid-derived story of morality.
This one may have had an early experience, or perhaps a late experience--you be the judge, by how you read culture; it could admittedly be either, but probably "late" since the k'arash are always working these things way ahead of any given local mortal lifespan--with an updated version of the old story. Which is to say, lying, because the planet is never told honestly "You're going to die," but sweet-talked in some way.
I speak of the reclassification of history, which we saw and continue to see in Christianity, which we've seen and largely continue to see as a native product of Europe, rather than what it truly is. And that strategy, accomplished over centuries of hiring spokespeople to tear at their shirts and profess their belief and do other culturally shifting things like we see in, for example, 2018 and prior Hollywood, has a powerful effect on the people who see it. Often when people get older, their own personal memories, if not dispelled by biology or social pressure from the young or a desire to stay "with it" or some other similar effect, start to dislike "movies these days" or "music these days" or "those damn politicians," because they realize that it all isn't true anymore. It wasn't true before, but they didn't have the historical context to know it, so they thought that what was, to them, the modern action hero was really portraying a believable tough and honorable hero and really fighting for a noble cause and covering relevant issues and all that. All nonsense, of course, just like is the one they scorn at 80; the heroic Brit fighting evil Nazis in fictional 1920s Berlin provided no more of a realistic historical context than the gay African American who saves Grecian-style democracy in 2018. And yet, advanced seniors can still look back fondly on the days when they felt it was different, and they can correctly identify some of the bullshit in the 2018 movie that they can't in the 1920 movie, whereas a senior in 1920 might have been dismissive of the then-current bullshit.
This effect is partly related to standard human thought and standard human aging. An advancing male elder may think that girls are less seductive or proper these days, don't dress as well, don't carry themselves as well, et cetera, and he may be correctly assessing the situation--there are many reasons why that opinion could be accurate, quantifiable and able to be cited relevantly and in correct context and outright correctly and so forth--but that same conclusion can also be reached, and disingenuously justified using the above source material, simply and truly because the elder's libido is diminishing, his body is weaker, his outlook has changed, and related reasons, therefore he thinks some 1920s or 1960s starlet being used by some corporation to sell its product is substantively different than some pointless 2020 slut showing her curves to draw attention to soft drinks. What the elder may be remembering is not an objective difference in the quality of the Hollywood starlet, but instead, the way it felt to be young and teased by girls doing and wearing certain things. For example, Marilyn Monroe may have been hot or beautiful, and even without the measuring tape, the empty employment of her sexuality was a certain kind of expression, like, say, Mariah Carey's now, and deciding that the younger version of yourself would definitely like one thing but be turned off by a garish other is difficult for many to perform honestly. The cultural imagery of Marilyn's hotness in context, versus Mariah's, so strongly influences what most motivates most (all?) people that it takes a high degree of insight to put yourself in less current mindsets and assess things as a more objective version of yourself, which is discouraged by The Powers That Be in any era, in part but not in whole because it would damage commerce.
We reclassify history constantly ourselves, as we go, to save ourselves the pain of growing older when we really think it's possible to end, and to reassure ourselves that our time existed and possessed its own sort of eternity as part of a perceived progression of history creating and created by what is now and what will be then. Anything, not just corporate culture ("pop culture"), can be affected by this. Kids these days are out of control, because he doesn't remember the time he and his brother took dad's shotguns from under the bed and went out to that side yard and shot apart Mr. Johnson's stupid ugly float before the big parade, or young people have no motivation today because they want one of the careers open to my generation before we brought Guatemalans in to do them for cents on the dollar these kids are just lazy that's what it is. As different populations mix and merge, including those which control our advancing media and inspire attitudes and behavior in host children, there certainly are changes in behavior that people can recognize, but then the Roof/Breivik conundrum rises again, what did you do during the war Grandpa? oh I charged Normandy and saved Private Ryan by bringing Algerian cocks to French pussies--and the sin is no less.
Female bodies are an easy topic, but images of male idealization suffer the same trials. Returning to what we might call a different kind of religion, similarly, some confident playboy rake of an earlier year in the twentieth century, flipping his smoke and pouring crushed ice over his drink and pulling up to the club in the hottest car of
It Didn't Use to be that Way--Jesus in the Forest
Let's delve into anecdote again to broaden the subject. I got a chance to see some of a newer phase of this firsthand, in a completely personally non-offensive context, so if emotions were involved, they remained hidden. The subject was a cranky old man who was upset about Trump not building his border wall, perhaps because he was surrounded by Mexicans doing work and sending the money to Mexico while Americans had fewer, or no, jobs or businesses, and they kept their zeroes right here. And that's a complicated dynamic for a lot of people, and it can really be talked about, but for discussion purposes, we can cut to the chase and say that the cranky old man was a racist in the way modern westerners conceive of as bad, and everyone who knew him knew it, and the subtext of any conversation about his feelings on this issue was touched with an understanding of that racism, and it was a bad and forbidden subject, and so forth.
(And all this occurred in the context of Nu Euro acceptable modern racism, where I'd said it had been wrong for Barack Obama to kill 17 Arab babies a day on average or whatever, and suggested that they wouldn't be comfortable with Obama droning America's white suburbs, and they didn't care and it was okay to kill Arab kids and discussion over, so it had that unique American flavor where presidents with certain qualities may murder whomever they like without consequence. That had its own sad humor, along with the added sad humor of those same people now being really mad at Europeans forming groups of on-call defenders to shepherd women to parts of the city to prevent rape by Arabs that had become endemic in their area, because that was "racist," and somehow killing 17 babies a week was not racist but Dubya was still bad for starting it but walking with a scared female friend who begged you to walk her so she doesn't get raped is racist and good grief come home from Germany dude or your parents will never talk to you again. Anyway.)
Now, we have this stereotypical racist and sexist old Europeoid, and I made the closing comment that it was weird how despite a majority of the folks agreeing that this dude's racism and sexism and et cetera were way out of scope, it just really made you think about things (no I did not say it with either a positive nor a negative vibe; just as a sort of summing up food for thought let's all be friends again way) that, this man's opinions, which were generally considered so noxious and unlikable--heresies such as thinking that men and women are fundamentally different, or that other individuals will be affected by their hundreds of thousands of years of evolution and genetic parentage along different paths, might have different inherent predilections and capabilities and all that stuff--were the attitudes of so many people in history. Like, Caesar, George Washington, the Wright brothers, the dude who invented agriculture in Europe, the dude who invented the bulk of the computer, et cetera: they lived so long ago, in such horribly racist and sexist times that did not have the iPhone 14, and yet they had these ideas that made them terrible people by modern definition.
And that's when I saw it, the ugly spark of future belief, like watching some 380 A.D. "Christian" teaching children in your village in the forest about the Jew from down south who would save them from hell: someone spoke up loudly and told me, "Not all of them." As in, among the people who built shit or wrote things down or thought things up in the past, stood a pillar of 2018 neoliberal values, who both was tough enough to understand murdering Iraqi babies but also thought all those people with spears and poop-smearing games out there were equally capable of working quietly with microscopes and serums for all week. I was seeing the Nu Euro at work. He'd been provided with things he thought were goodthoughts and facts, sure, but there were no Mossad hitmen around and he was completely in good company and he still felt the desire to express a thought that would deny that he dwells in matter and that the matter here affects him.
I saw this as a preface to what must happen to our conceptions of history as they go forward. Certainly, with Martin Luther King, Jr., and certain casting decisions in Hollywood, we've seen a microcosm of what must become true for all history. MLK's violence against women and plagiarism becomes he's a saint, a black dude plays George Washington, Alexander the Great made all the plans and not some otherwise-straight general who desperately liked traps and tried to make the best he could out of some spunky little dude in a metal skirt in a time before makeup and hormone replacement therapy...in that person's "not all of them were" I saw a vast historical embarrassment at predecessors having not subscribed to molecularly-blind religions that are popular now, and realized that, because people like history, that has to happen more. Our images of figures in the past have to stop being of racist sexists, because they built all the good shit, and we won't go without it to spite them, so we have to believe not only that we know everything, but that they did too.
This is old news, in a way; Siberian ("Mexican") historians have been creating their own racial history for a while now, where grand empires with great technological and architectural prowess were unjustly conquered by weak lying Spaniards on whom the Siberians took pity, and Americans are perhaps more familiar with the noble slave montage of the times since the Jews brought Africans to America and taught the popular, noxious Arabian habit of owning people.
Now, it's an act of great faith to believe that some weird old minor inventor in, say, 1300s Norway, would have had an opinion on racial differences anyway, probably encountering none, or perhaps noticing that British people liked "biscuits" more than his neighbors, or something like that. But in a decidedly more physical era, where damned heavy cranks needed to be turned or heavy crates lifted on a more frequent basis, unruly horses having their snouts pulled away from something they shouldn't be investigating, and so forth, it's preposterous, but quite modern, to think that the babies who didn't get heavy testosterone infusions during their youth and never did at any point in their lives would be just as strong in adulthood as those who did. And we understand that, right? We think we know about testosterone, and there are even modern studies on its effects, like in a hundred years, if there's still science, there will be equally duh studies about brain design and brain function that make their own really obvious points about different human species and what they tend to do and what they "excel" in comparative to the others and it'll all just be as normal as knowing that people who are seven feet tall are usually better than four-footers at American basketball, or that toddlers aren't ready to drive on the freeway, or something like that.
Or, go back a little, and imagine a 400s Dane transported to Australia to meet some of the local aborigines. They look like monkeys, they scream like monkeys, and they live in huts made of mud and shit and when he finds some stones and tries to mortar them together they knock them down at night and won't look at him the next day. Their language has a vocabulary of like 80 words, they get angry and try to stab you if you try to show them how to sharpen wood, and then he's transported back home. And that's so much proto-colonialism, i.e. "looking around ships can go far," until a Jewish company operating under directors with Dutch names decides that everyone should go back because there could be a mine there, and sure you might get stabbed but we bought the local mine and it had to be shut down and you will either go or you will starve. And once you are there you will use guns to scare the weird monkey things into carrying rocks for you and if they don't listen you will go shoot up the place where the females and children live, oh, wasn't it a good idea Nu Euro, didn't it turn out swell? TBD. As with all contact between early peoples, the differences were so obvious that it took a gradual idiotification, great loads of misleading television and movie culture, and more than a few honorless, feckless, or stupid academics to make people with wheels and motorcars and firearms convinced that people with sticks and skins and brush-huts were really like them on the inside, as interested in abstract crap and arithmetic and building weird things rather than fucking that hot chick over there. The desire for "progress" is, in so many ways, a mistake per the rules of Bangism and evolution by natural selection, and we're certainly seeing that in population numbers now, as the descendants of inventors are too impotent to use their own presumed power to recover their population, while those who've just been screwing and bashing for three hundred years prove their fitness.
None of this is to say, of course, that either of those example people, transported as infants to the 21st century and raised by modern public schools, wouldn't become universalists. That may be in their hearts; that may be their capacity. However, arguing that the ancient world, with no supportive imagery in the opposite direction and an actual ability to watch Africans spear each other around mud-huts while the British are firing bricks and building buildings that can keep out the wind, would have provided comparable abilities to celebrate molecular denialism, is quite ridiculous. Similarly, if a bunch of human infants were transported into an isolated biodome, fed and ignored, taught language completely neutrally by computers, contested and wrestled through childhood, and the Congoids had certain ways they liked to play and certain things they were good at, and so did the Mongoloids, and so did the Europeoids, and you gave them all a quiz when they hit twenty years of age, they'd know people better than modern informed citizens do now. It is sad to see "liberals" give up their bright dream of the early twentieth century, that by education they could create such a beautiful, integrated world--all the women and men who worked on that dream will be dismissed in the nu-history wherein all the good people of the past were never racist nor sexist. People who, say, believed in that education so much that they got their bones broken by some capitalist's thugs for lecturing the kiddie workers about what they needed to learn really got sold out on that one. And suddenly, space travel was created by blacks without any public schools whatsoever!
The point, here, really isn't to talk about "race," or sex, but to talk about the way my Nu Euro friend characterized history as responsible to his current needs, rather than truth or fact or objective or potentially unpleasant or whatever. This is a racist essay, and it is racist against Nu Euros, no matter who had spears when the other had guns or whatever passes for technology around here. The trait we're interested in here is not whether or not there are different species on this planet that we tend to group under the parent group "human," but in looking at some of the ways Nu Euros redesigned their given version of Judaism, "Christianity," to better entice and entrap themselves; how they mopped and broomed their prison cell, put up pictures on the walls, and "made it theirs" as though unaware of its fundamental nature, and of the sick horror of devoting your life to sweeping your cell.
Early Developments in Judaism for Europe
The original Jewish creation, Christianity, was a rather banal BDSM story of threat and seduction in which Yahweh's awesomeness was expounded upon after the Torah, which was rather a bare threat and a geno-military sourcebook. Telling the world's goys what trash they were, and how hard Yahweh was going to give it to them, was the theme of the Torah, and it perhaps served to unify the Jewish people more than, really, to frighten the rest of the world, who then considered Jews a lamentable little group. The Torah served more so to reinforce the "apart" notion of what became modern Judaism, and has become rather incestually successful and, in so doing, at isolating an elite class that is consistently able to partially diversify and exclude insufficiently Jewish offspring from membership. I had a friend, for example, who recently did one of those "ancestry" tests at some Jewish-owned company and got all these disingenuous results, like "15% Scandinavian Jewish" and "10% Spanish Jewish" and "3% British Jewish" and other crap like that, where the company takes results from a Jew who reports that his family once lived in Scandinavia and had some partial integration, and then uses those results to claim that the intermixed Scandinavian eggs were a Jewish trait, since someone who had that identity at some point reported source ancestry in a Jewish line that lived in Scandinavia. "See? Science! Everyone's Jewish!" The Israeli government doesn't think so, of course, and none of those traits make people eligible for citizenship there, but it's great PR because then everyone who gets that kind of result can think "I'm Jewish, and I'm not doing all those bad things the news sometimes says happen in the super Jewish country, therefore no one is affected by molecules and there are no conspiracies!"
The lie in Christianity has been similarly carried out, wherein a Jewish product they don't use themselves (for good reason, of course, like when the CIA flew all the coke to LA) has been touched by so many Europeoid influences along the way that people have essentially forgotten who built the prison in the first place. It's "home" now. Nu Euros consciously think that the new belief substructure they got was and is a present. In an earlier post, this one metaphorized original Judaism as follows:
This is Thugmo. He kicks ass and likes pretty flowers. Therefore, do what he says and he will not kick your ass and will let you hang out by his flowers next Tuesday,The metaphor is quite apt in the sense of both Old and New Testaments of the Bible, the single most successful published work on the planet (which should really tell you something if you've studied, say, Hollywood), which in original Jewish form, stresses in great detail the absolute power of Yahweh, his occasional rages and relaxations, and a warning to do what he likes so you can get his rewards (which were then just usually victory in worldly battle for Jews and lots of suffering and dead goys--apparently that group of specimens had an inherent trait of deceiving non-Jews and getting them killed--rather than the cloudy fields of Nu Euro fantasy) or else you can enjoy only his wrath, which is described in detail. The threat of Yahweh's anger, and how easy it is to earn it, continues in the New Testament, where the Jews and other rapespawn in Turkey tried to soften Yahweh for Europeoid acceptance through an agreement on how Christ's character would be sold.
Over time, so much Christ fanfiction, and the explanation of the nuance of his character, has been added to a non-canon, but almost unanimously approved, set of literature that, in conjunction with its successful use in getting Europe to accept Jewish and Arabian immigration and everyone else, there is now this "European Christianity" that is far beyond the wildest hopes of its original Nicean subsidiary creators. There is much fuss now about the Jewish-led immigration push of Arabs and Africans and crypto Jews into Europe, and many a Barbara Spectre quote has been shared, but she has been duplicated a thousand times over before, and although the biomass payload is greater, the more significant impact on the continent was earlier, when Jews themselves gained not only permission, but blessing, via Christianity, to set up shop in Europe.
Christ as an Early Trump
And the genetic stamps of those creators, and their later European subordinate helpers--what played at being the European aristocracy throughout those many centuries, acted like Trump does now, fake tough goys, but never actually building the wall or executing those already stationed there or ordering the military to defend the border with lethal force against people coming inside to take European lives and homes and pussies and jobs and so forth--show on the narrative. Later Christ/Yahweh stories show Christ/Yahweh in such a good light that it casts a pleasant, justified tone upon all of his earlier actions. So, Yahweh kills everyone in a city down to the last child, but that's okay because Jesus is rumored to be so incredibly loving and forgiving. And, he heals three people for every three thousand he exterminates, so you know he's got a good heart.
Ergo, there's this dude who stabbed three hundred little European kids in the neck this one day because their parents didn't let his weird hobo friend come in and sleep with their families, but it's completely okay because he also once gave a fish feast to three hundred grownups. Europeoids should not have been desirous, nor able, to remedy Yahweh's character, but it somehow happened, and Christianity has been the world's most successful tale, though not for its original components. The version that only included Yahweh killing all the little kids went only to a very small audience, but once a bunch of idiots in Europe and Asia were encouraged to gain fame and cash by writing spinoffs on how nice Yahweh had been to others, his fame exploded. Both the treacherous fools who wrote the spinoffs, and the unbelievably immoral cowards who forgetfully believed them, were incorrigibly stupid, but more important, incorrigibly savage. It is telling, though, that Europeoid morality operated properly at one time--when the Torah was originally written--but was so easily subverted by adding the "nice guy" face through Jesus-art. If it had been Yahweh's trial, he only needed to tenderly pet a cute puppy on the way to the witness stand before the glove didn't fit and a bunch of white idiots wanted to not only acquit him but to make him king of the world.
The many, many white pedo-clerics and merely sexless clerics who wrote lengthy descriptions of what Jesus' sacrifice meant for you and how much Yahweh secretly loved the people he kept massacring were necessary for Christianity's acceptance in Europe, both for convincing soldiers to kill the inhabitants of the next town over and for keeping them drilling Yahweh into their grandsons with promises that He cries whenever you jack off. This nuance of the intimate relationship between Yahweh/Christ and Earthly Human accomplished the necessity for a religion that Nu Euros could literally believe in to their own detriment. To the old Europeans, the Torah was ugly, savage, and laughable; it was filled with inconsistencies they couldn't believe, and it couldn't hold a flame to the much vaster, observation-bolstered, kin-bonding-supportive perspective (also observation based, but nicer than the Torah's strictures for membership). The European paganisms were a kind, accepting immigration policy as well as a social platform, like pre-1965 American laws that gave preference to nearer kin but provided for meritorious or laboring means of earning; Christianity's destruction of paganism was not just a reformatting of all European internal society, but an immigration mandate from outside. Like Harry Potter, too, Christianity was a poor substitute for Europe's hopes of scientific advancement. Yes, kids read Harry Potter, but they did so at the expense of things that would make them smarter or better people. Similarly, the native European religions of creation and destruction cycles, mimicking the regularly observable cycles of seasons and gestation and planetary movement, caused a great harm to Europe when they were murdered, attaching an anchor of firmament to intellectual capacity for its future. Like its effectiveness in Greece, the Jewish tales were not about ingenuity or invention, but about murder and a singular sky-man with no character other than more murder. The later controversial addition of St. Johns "Revelations" attempts to evoke the cyclical stories stolen from the paganisms, and, like some Hollywoodian vague plagiarism (remarkably like it, in fact, almost as though there were a trackable connection), proved mildly successful, but was not able to recapture the cyclical spirit of the earlier belief systems, being too necessarily distracted from the beginning of the cobbled story. In the original European paganisms, you can tell they were written as complete tales, but in the oft-combined components of the accepted and rejected pieces of the Bible, even a reader of average Terran mental abilities can tell that the story was not written as a complete story.
The House Always Wins
An important part of the Yahweh lie for Europe is metaphorized in: "Therefore, do what he says and he will not kick your ass and will let you hang out by his flowers next Tuesday." Next Tuesday is important because of the indebtedness of Yahweh to all his promises, since he always promised the Jews victory, which they have always attained, while in Christianity, he switched to providing gentiles rewards only later, which makes him seem to have a more troubling route to success. Earlier Europeoid paganisms had now-promises, such as, "Pray to Odin before the battle and you'll really kick ass." And that kind of promise works well, because if you're not dead, Odin obviously helped you, whereas if you're dead, you're not there to express doubt in Odin's existence and/or willingness to help someone else believe better in him. And earlier Europeoid promises didn't really happen that way, anyway; it was more like you pray to Odin for strength, or valor, or honor, or something else, rather than praying to Odin to get a certain thing at the store that you really want, so they were not rife with contradictions about faithful believers who never got what they wanted.
Yahweh initially cared only about the Jews, and wanted everyone else dead--an impossibility gentiles had to accept at the points of Roman swords early on, and which they later required more self-generated tales about, sometimes with Jewish assistance and other times caused by their search for a way to confront their own existential fears. How nice Yahweh was to believe in his change to pro-everyone-who-obeyed! And Yahweh's promises switched, too--according to the Bible, he was still and always will be partial to his perfect Jews, but will give other people rewards for following him after their death, in contrast to the mere wealth and power he will give the Jews. Seriously, the Nu Euros bought that. You couldn't ask for a better gene-influencing religion. So the rationale is even better, now, because anyone dead can't come back and tell you that it's true, while anyone alive can't say it's not true either, since they're not dead and therefore couldn't know anyway.
An interesting conundrum appears in the New Testament with regards murdering and making war on infidels or heretics. It's doubly interesting because Jesus has not, in these middle sections of the Gospel, yet been crucified and proven himself the savior of mankind, so the heretics his fans would be killing or just shunning would primarily be people who had been heretics against...Yahweh? These notions of joining battle against "heresy" more accurately represent the initial Jewish brainstorms that became Islam, which was rounded down and smoothed over for the more peaceful population of Europeoids, but one day in the back of the studio Mohammed found the old reels and boy was he glad they hadn't thrown them out. Which was to say, this earlier heresy-crushing Jesus was a proto-Muslim, until his character switches later in the gospels to not kicking any more ass, because the northering Jews desperately did not want Europeans making an example of someone who acted more like Thor when you raped their women or lied about where their money was. The savior who would get things done in the real world was reserved for the northering Arabs to whom the Jews soon targeted with Islam. And what a terrific irony it was, when the two major competing genetic groups who lived near each other started having a deadly fight over whose Torah-brand character was really the coolest? The House always wins.
Some Christians like to take pride in Jesus having been a violent realist "when the occasion called for it," such as when he protected the Jewish Temple of Yahweh by driving the moneychangers out, but a true battle against infidels just didn't motivate Europeoids as much as surrendering and letting someone else rape their women so the offender could be forgiven. Ergo all the Christian-jihad had to wait for another century, another people. Why it's acceptable for Jesus to attack people in a Jewish temple is understood, since he was a respected rabbi, whereas the need for his followers to burn and slaughter devotees of Sybil to raise up a replacement Mary cult was left to the limited understanding of self-critical Europeoids many centuries later.
That choice--the choice to repurpose their old gods into new; their old quandaries into new--was so necessary for Europeoids, because even when the Jews had modified and rewritten Christianity many times over, it just didn't have the staying power, sufficient side character, or enough moral dilemmas to keep its hold on the Nu Euro imagination. So Sybil had to be killed and risen as a Mary zombie, in order that Nu Euros would have somewhere to pool their fantasies, previously complimentary to ethnic-kin group survival, about motherhood, socially respecting female virginity before planned reproduction with a known father, et cetera. Judaism for Nu Euros didn't have these factors, let alone a thousand other little European variations, some even down to local "saints," and it could survive and thrive in Europe only by the work of the Nu Euros themselves, like declaring a festival where prisoners decorate their cells and are suddenly pleased with the results and think prison is great.
The corruption of Rome, from an empire filled with people who didn't actually believe in the deity Jupiter in the crazy sense, into the Catholic Empire, could only occur through the europanization of the religion, ergo we see Constantine seeking the forgiveness of the rabbinical savior for the murders he committed personally, and an end to the prophylactic treatment of people who preferred to screw Arabians and wanted their neighbors to also. Prior protections against invasion by immigration proved effective until Constantine went fully Christian in the 300s AD, beginning a trend of influential Europeoids who wrote stories about how great Yahweh was and how every country in Europe should host the Chosen Jews and anyone else who would pay lip service to Yahweh. Gradually, this universal acceptance was extended to include worshipers of the Allah face of Yahweh, who received what was then Byzantium, and who made themselves quickly unwelcome for strictly realistic reasons and were eventually invited again, in force, in the 21st century. A minor rebellion against Catholicism, founded by some of the more hale survivors in the German forests the Judaized Romans had invaded, failed, spawning only the "Protestant" church, which had many amazing good things to say about how well Yahweh knew you personally, being discoverable without the aid of an active pedophile. Naturally, even as he stood "against" the Christian church, the Protestant went to work prettying up his cell, producing prodigious centuries of commentaries on how great it was to worship the rabbi, and about all these special and nice things that the rabbi and some of his worshipers had done, producing a literary compendium that became, many dozens of times over, the largest the world would ever see.