In this fascinating narrative advanced by the Scottish Theologian Alexander Hislop, all supra-scriptural practices instituted by Roman Catholicism (naturally) are attributed to insidious expression of the evil Babylonian Mystery Religion:

Christmas, which should accurately take place in the Spring if scripture is to be faithfully demarcated, is thus a deceptive adherence to the Winter Solstice and Nimrod’s re-birthday – hence, an enactment of the Babylonian Mystery Religion. “True” Christians are being fooled in countless ways such as this, thinking that they are loyally engaged in a pure Christian tradition, when in fact they are really engaged in worship of the mystery religion as revealed by Hislop.

The way to counteract this evil infiltration and misrepresentation is to be found in true understanding of the texts.

One of the things preventing me from rendering this into a screenplay is that many on our side would see it as “a Jewish attack on Christmas and Christianity” wouldn’t they? That is among the double binds we are caught in and that keep us held with the Christian narrative, even where we do not consciously believe ourselves bound to the religion. We would supposedly be doing our people a disservice, while the devil’s bidding.

Adding yet another knot in the tangle is the argument that with the Christian texts already being the terms in which many of our people think, the currency for two thousand years now, there must be some ontological basis beneath, and we may as well find the positive logic to it for our purposes. However, with the texts being what they are, the motivations of the texts being as convoluted, Jewish and ambiguous as they were to begin, all that winds-up happening with the deciphering of our “true” logic behind Christianity is a contribution to the mess.

Hence, while I had originally meant for my next discussion to be directed toward the ontology project, I see now that it is necessary first to attend to pushing aside muck from the narrative side of our racial conceptualization, attending to where our narratives may speculatively overshoot and distract from adequate conceptualization.

The Hislop narrative is a story so fascinating that it holds sway over hundreds of millions of people. It forms the basis of The Jehovah’s Witnesses and The World Wide Church of God. It is a branch of Christianity that stems from a conviction in true exegesis, direct apprehension of the texts without the intermediary of the Catholic Church, from the same root that forms the basis of Christian Zionism and its tens of millions of adherents.

It is not exclusively legions of low I.Q. folks who are held captive. Even World Chess Champion Bobby Fischer found it captivating. Perhaps being a biological Jew, he unconsciously promoted The World Wide Church of God as it served the interests of Jews and Israel. Whatever his true motives, a man alleged to have a 187 I.Q. found The World Wide Church of God compelling enough to contribute significant money over several years.

Of course, getting to the “truth” beneath Christianity is a logical move to begin with, especially when you consider just how patently absurd it is at first glance while having held so many adherents for two millennia in spite of that.

Of marked significance for European history is this notion of direct apprehension and rendering of the truth of the texts – the reform of the Protestants. It may be hypothesized that this was based somewhat on reasonable prejudice (the need to maintain European distinctions) unreasonably expressed.

That is, for example, Germans wanting to be Germans or English wanting to be English and thus expressing this nonsense in a different way than before.

However, “truth” versus the evil mystery religion remains a compelling narrative despite being unreasonable; and the more it is beyond rationalization and account, perhaps the better it is a rally to thwart one’s adversaries and maintain a people’s distinctions.

Whether it serves our people’s interests or not, it is not easy to escape Christianity.

Not only is a moral order necessary, this one contains many double-binds, including one with regard to our mortal enemies: reject Christianity and you are as much as a Jew by Europe’s definition for two millennia: for we were Christendom. On the other hand, practice Christianity and you basically adopt the Jewish perspective: Rome and other impure Christians (other Europeans) are the greatest enemy and not just another European city and other European people. The Jews however are granted special status as a people who have not gotten it quite right just yet. Not to mention, ehem, look at who you are worshiping as god incarnate.

Jim has apparently found the story of uncovering the evil mystery behind Southern Europeans somewhat useful. Perhaps there is utility in cultivating this interpretation given the numbers of Northern European Christians in the Midwest of the U.S. or perhaps it is a remnant meme of the anti-Catholicism of endemic Christian-Zionism.

In this meme, anything but individual relation to the text and god is evil corruption. Perhaps it is a coincidence that individualists in relation to Jesus are not much challenge to Jewish Zionist authority.

Of course even people who believe themselves fully secular and freed from Zionism still experience Judeo-Christian influence in everything from habits, law, leisure and science – in particular, its relation of knower to known.

This Christian individualist relation to god was famously reinforced by the Enlightenment; in all likelihood only extended farther by the Cold War vilification of Marxist communist collectivization and furthered still by the Jewish interest of preventing Europeans from unionizing.

The double binds and toxicity of Christianity naturally become so poison after a while that they compel a convulsive, biological reaction, sometimes into collective defense such as Nazism, despite Christianity’s prescriptions. Nazism was in a sense, a purer form of Christianity yet, in another way still doing the Jews’ bidding, only culling the Jews, while attacking the “false worship” of European others; attacking White unionization in favor of a notion of supra-purity.

While a transcendent realm, beyond simple attack may even be necessary for defense of European peoples, one would hope that the prejudices between Europeans, which should exist to the extent necessary to maintain their distinctions, would not be beyond reason and beyond kindred, familial, brotherly or cousinly cooperation.

It is too bad that Hislop could not have just forthrightly proclaimed and found a way to maintain the Scottish distinction without doing the Jews bidding by rendering Southern and other Catholic Europeans the personification of Evil.

That isn’t to say there are not good reasons to maintain lines between European peoples, but when you are being equated with the Anti-Christ and Beast 666 (1) before tens of millions of idiots backed by The US/Israeli military industrial complex, that is a drag indeed.

We needn’t begrudge Northerners defending themselves, can even see their invocation of transcendent terms in order to do so, what is objectionable is this tradition of demonizing Southern Europeans, putting potential allies and buffering nations in jeopardy by vilifying them.

In Nordicist Christian theology, we should not be surprised but disappointed to find traces of Alexander Hislop’s motivational gobbledygook; i.e. a similar, convenient motivation to equate Rome and the South with evil.

If only Hislop could have said, we love being Scottish and wish to maintain all Northern European distinction. What European could, with any moral authority, reject that? None. No European could. There is an ontological difference that makes a difference between a Southern European and a Jew: The Jews could deny this, of course, they would say that we can do without the European differences. So too, could those under the Jewish spell and double binds of Christianity dispose of those differences; but it is the Jewish aspects of the narrative that compel that painful compliance. Christianity is a Jewish vexation and double bind to us all, not just Northerners – and it was not merely aimed to destroy Northerners, but primarily in fact, aimed at Rome. Thus, when Hislop and the Northerners tweak the Christian Narratives with their fascinating “exegesis” what they are doing is piling on the Southerners, destroying what remaining buffering capacity and natural defense they have against predators.

Haven’t we really had enough of this flight of fancy? Are we still to be blamed for the campaigns of Caesar and Nero? Do we still want to bicker about the historical impositions of Catholicism as opposed to the wonderful liberation of the Protestant Churches? Jesus, you guys want to drop the guilt trips about the Nazis. Fine – how about forgetting about Caesar and the Medieval Catholic Church already?

What is more sickening than a Northerner who says that he despises Southern Europeans so much that they can just drop dead but that Africans are OK?

Blacks are OK because we Northerners are so objective…we are not like those hot-tempered, prejudiced and collectivist Southerners who would be racists. No, our discrimination is based on the “purity of our interpretation.”

For Southerners are the people of the mystery religion, the Papal worship, of Nimrod and his mother wife.

A fascinating story and one that might be compelling to Northerners who don’t much care for Southerners.

..

Whatever you believe, for your own good, don’t believe those who state, in hubris, that Blacks are fairly benign but misguided. Is criticism of Blacks really a diversion from Jews or is it a confrontation and correction of the Jewish misrepresentation of Black reality? Blacks are not natural allies against Jewish power when Jews are giving Blacks everything that they could never achieve on their own, including our women. One suspects that there is a measure of convenient pandering in the outlook: The “lower” Europeans are so uncouth but Africans are unproblematic, just misguided. Insulated in a technical niche, purblind up-in-their-heads or just disingenuous snobs, they would let the lower Europeans deal with the brunt and take the casualties from Blacks. Nevertheless, what insulation they have is temporary and precarious, especially without allies among Europeans..
………..