Christianity and White Genocide

I think the problem that is shared by both catholic and protestant christians is that submission to genocide, has been cloaked as christian charity and universalism. I think this is the big deception, leading to destruction, that we have now. — Shari

LAWRENCE Brown,whose comments are not always friendly, has some good things to say about the early Christian missionaries to Northern Europe. He says they went in with the Good News of Jesus Christ. He says their obvious love of their fellow man was the best advertisement for their faith.
I would add that one thing our “barbarian” ancestors respected was COURAGE. Those men went into places where Roman Armies dared not tread and often, cheerfully, paid the price.
Bible-thumpers keep telling us that the Bible, i.e., Chrsitanity, is 70% Old Testament.
Try to imagine this picture of the early missionaries. They are in a boat with the entire set of scrolls that make up the Old Testament. The potential converts sit around and listen to hundreds of thousands of words of what even C.S. Lewis admits is a mythology far interior in quality to that of Northern Europe.
No, those missionaries carried the GOSPEL, not in texts, but in their hearts. The Middle Eastern crap was a dirty trick that came AFTER our forefathers had listened to the Good News itself.We know that the Gothic Church was of the Arian Heresy Wolfila brought with him. We do not know WHICH version of the Good News, in the terms of later ruling theologians, each of those other early missionaries carried.
I don’t think it matters.
Missionaries to Northern Europe carried Christianity without the quotation marks. Wordist “Christianity” came later. ~ Whitaker Online
...we have the historical record of what our Nordic forefathers loved best in the Bible: the Old Testament.
The reason is that they loved the battles and exhibitions of heroism.
What C.S. Lewis meant by “mythology” was very specific. He was talking about the stories involving magic, supernatural beings, and other worlds — things that we would assume were based on using mushrooms. The Old Testament is more factual in tone.
Besides the histories of “mighty men of valor” slaying foreigners (the allophyles appearing thousands of thousands of times in the LXX), a particular favorite book was the Book of Enoch, before it disappeared for a time. That book is a detailed story of genetic experiments producing the monsters, which were hybrids. - Pain

Devout Christians want to know the history of the Church. But their interest is largely academic.
Devout, undoubting Christians have no doubt about WHY Christianity succeeded. They are sure that it was inevitable. God made it succeed.
But I am 99% atheist. I’m not uncomfortable about that. Jesus praised faith the size of a mustard seed. If most Christians weren’t mostly atheist, Jesus wouldn’t have talked about faith so much.
And it is that 99% of me that finds church history fascinating.
A devout Christian believes that Christianity’s success is very simple: God made it what it is today.
But an atheist believes that this titanic, powerful, ancient institution is built on NOTHING except a total appeal to human psychology.
If you are a student of human psychology, which every practical politician must be, you would be a real idiot not to study this greatest success in human history. ~ Whitaker Online

“A person who believes that men should be united according to their nation — their common race and culture — is a nationalist. One who believes that men are only united by words should therefore be called a "wordist.’” ~Robert Whitaker
There are also people with no loyalty. We call them sociopaths.
People on the right say “Islam” when they mean (non-white) immigration. When Nick Griffith spoke at Clemson he devoted his whole speech to Islam.
National Review uses anti-Islamic rhetoric to be fanatically pro-Israel. As I said, it is also the European code-word for third world immigration.
National Review had an article in its last issue about how Elie Wiesel was demanding that “all countries” should outlaw Holocaust denial. Since only one country does NOT outlaw it, he is using “all countries” the way respectable conservatives use “assimilation”: only demanding it of white countries.
Wiesel is using “all countries” the way political correctness uses “humanity” as a code-word.
I count three statements so far you will not find anywhere but in BUGS.
National review did point out that the Holocaust has been used for Moslems, not Jews. It opened up Europe to a majority Moslem population this century. The Hate Laws are used to outlaw criticism of the much more prevalent Moslems than the Jews. NR does not object to such laws — Buckley endorsed them.
Meanwhile, nobody is really talking about ISLAM.
I hate to confuse historians with facts, but the Catholic Church denounced all governments that practiced ANY tolerance for anybody but Jews.
As the Islamic majority (has grow), “Christian” (has) become a code-word for “white.” Christian is already an excuse for interracial marriage, as per Hannity’s “I don’t notice a biracial couple. I only see two Children of God together.”
A cynic like me wonders how he knows he SAW such a biracial couple, if he doesn’t notice it. - Whitaker Online