Lets talk peacefully about this.

jobee

Chapter 43 : In the Name of God - The Christian Wars

In the New Testament, Jesus Christ is quoted as saying that he had come to bring the sword, to "set father against son and mother against daughter" (Luke 12:53) and called on his followers to "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me" (Luke 19:27).
These words have, in the history of Christianity, been enacted in bloody reality many times - starting when an important political rebellion against the Roman Catholic Church took on a religious slant - leading to the split in European Christendom between Catholic and Protestant. This split sparked off a series of religious wars which were ultimately to be responsible for the death of nearly a third of the entire White race.
The Reformation is the name given to this 16th century religious uprising. Its major outpouring happened in the middle of the Renaissance, there can be little doubt that the two events were linked: added to this was a political problem which the countries in Northern Europe had with the all powerful role the pope had assumed from Rome.
Emerging European nationalism objected to the fact that the pope - usually an Italian - had to approve the appointment of any head of state everywhere else in Europe. The pope's ability to even charge tax from foreign countries to support the Church headquarters in Rome also irked those living thousands of miles from Rome. It has been estimated that the Church ended up owning as much as one third of all the land in Europe in this manner: what the various national states must have secretly thought of this does not need to be imagined.
The Anti-Pope
The Catholic Church, while pretending to serve the Christian god only, itself betrayed its political agenda when a dispute over succession to the papal throne erupted between the Italians and the French. In an event known as the Great Schism of 1378, the French set up their pope, Clement VII, in Avignon; while the Italians installed Urban VI in Rome.
Both popes then proceeded to excommunicate each other from the church. Finally the dispute was resolved in 1415, when both popes were thrown out of their jobs and one new pope set up in Rome. The authority of the Church was severely reduced by the farcical proceedings, and many Europeans saw for the first time that the popes were all too human and lusted after power more than service to their god.
http://www.white-history.com/hwr43.htm

PDN

I'm happy to discuss it peacably.

In the New Testament, Jesus Christ is quoted as saying that he had come to bring the sword, to "set father against son and mother against daughter" (Luke 12:53) and called on his followers to "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me" (Luke 19:27)

Your first sentence contains a rather blatant untruth. Jesus never called on His followers to slay anyone. He told a parable, and a guy in the parable spoke those words.

It might be better to cut and paste from someone who actually has some idea of what they're talking about.

jobee

PDN wrote: »

I'm happy to discuss it peacably.



Your first sentence contains a rather blatant untruth. Jesus never called on His followers to slay anyone. He told a parable, and a guy in the parable spoke those words.

It might be better to cut and paste from someone who actually has some idea of what they're talking about.

Very difficult, I wasn't there. Do you know anyone that was?

[THOU SHALL NOT KILL]

PDN

jobee wrote: »

Very difficult, I wasn't there. Do you know anyone that was?

[THOU SHALL NOT KILL]

You're taking the Michael, right?

The only way anyone can quote those words is because they appear in Luke's Gospel, therefore we have to take them in the context in which they appear - as words spoken by a guy in a story that Jesus told.

Asking whether I was there or not would indicate that you aren't interested in discussing this and are just on a trolling exercise.

Do you want to discuss this or not?

PDN

Jobee, why are you cutting and pasting segments from a racist white supremacist rewriting of history?

The material you posted was lifted from Arthur Kemp's March of the Titans: a History of the White Race. Kemp is the Foreign Affairs Spokesman for the BNP.

AhSureTisGrand

PDN wrote: »

Jobee, why are you cutting and pasting segments from a racist white supremacist rewriting of history?

The material you posted was lifted from Arthur Kemp's March of the Titans: a History of the White Race. Kemp is the Foreign Affairs Spokesman for the BNP.

Haha

jobee

PDN wrote: »

Jobee, why are you cutting and pasting segments from a racist white supremacist rewriting of history?

The material you posted was lifted from Arthur Kemp's March of the Titans: a History of the White Race. Kemp is the Foreign Affairs Spokesman for the BNP.

He's not telling lies is he?

zoomtard

Yes. Although that is softer language than I would use.

PDN

jobee wrote: »

He's not telling lies is he?

Well, I've already pointed out that he told a whopping big lie in the very first sentence that you posted.

Also, the overall narrative behind his book is (and I quote directly) that "Most importantly of all, revealed in this work is the one true cause of the rise and fall of the world's greatest empires - that all civilizations rise and fall according to their racial homogeneity and nothing else - a nation can survive wars, defeats, natural catastrophes, but not racial dissolution."
That I would certainly call a lie, and a nasty racist lie at that.

Here are some more porkies from his book:

The Second World War broke against Germany, not the Soviet Union, primarily because of Jewish pressure to destroy the anti-Jewish Germany; rather than a genuine concern for the Poles.

So WWII was the fault of the Jews? Another lie.

Nazi Germany is however most known for its concentration camps, and particularly those in which large numbers of emaciated and dead prisoners were discovered at the end of the war, and which have become synonymous with any image of that era. The first concentration camps were set up soon after the Nazis came to power, with the best known being Dachau, which is situated to the north of Munich.

These camps were in fact large prisons, and the prisoners were sentenced by civil courts to fixed terms of imprisonment which depended upon the crime committed.

Ah, so the concentration camps were just like our prisons? Another lie.

Conditions in the Nazi camps worsened during the war, particularly when the large scale bombing of Germany started destroying supply lines in late 1944 and early 1945. Nightmarish scenes such as these awaited Allied troops when they seized the camp of Bergen Belsen in northern Germany.

So the piles of emaciated corpses we've all seen photographs of were actually caused by the actions of the Allies, not the Nazis? Another lie.

It was however so that a large number of Communists who were interned were Jews: however, by the time that the Second World War broke out in September 1939, the majority of Germany's Jews - some 319,900 out of a total population of 500,000 - had emigrated from Germany for good, leaving only some 180,000 Jews in Germany itself.

So the German Jews weren't beinmg persecuted for being Jewish, but because they were Zionist Communists? Another lie.

Although much has been made of the Wannsee conference and its detailed minutes, the record of the proceedings does not make particularly gripping reading: nowhere is it said that Jews were to be put to death, and only talks about interning Jews and resettling them in the protectorate of Poland to be used as laborers until the war was over, when another plan could be worked out.

Contemporary historians have taken the word "resettlement" as used in the Wannsee minutes to be a codeword for extermination - there is however no evidence to support this interpretation

So the Nazi 'final solution' was really just a mistranslation by silly modern historians who failed to understand the plan was to build nice jolly Jewish settlements in Poland? Another lie.

The Einsatzgruppen carried out their task with Germanic efficiency, sending back regular reports to Berlin (which survived the war) detailing in specific detail how many people they had killed in each time period between reports. Due to the fact that a large number of Communist functionaries were Jews, this group made up a large number, but not always a majority, of the people eliminated by the Einsatzgruppen, who were always careful to specify exactly how many of who they had killed in each particular operation.

So the Nazis in Eastern Europe didn't target Jews. It was just an unfortunate coincidence that so many Jews were nasty Communists? Another lie.

All things said, to have been a Jew in Nazi Germany could not have been a pleasant experience: but, as the over 4.3 million claims against the post war German state from Jews who suffered as a result of this persecution, (by 1998 the German state had paid out over $50 billion in reparations), certainly far fewer died than what is most often claimed. Increasingly, all the evidence urges a complete revision of this aspect of the history of World War Two.

So there we have it. No holocaust - but being a Jew in Nazi Germany wasn't a pleasant experience?

It's rare that I have to read a lie of such bare-faced magnitude that it makes me want to physically vomit.

jobee

PDN wrote: »

Jobee, why are you cutting and pasting segments from a racist white supremacist rewriting of history?

The material you posted was lifted from Arthur Kemp's March of the Titans: a History of the White Race. Kemp is the Foreign Affairs Spokesman for the BNP.

Your history is awfull, most Popes were white supremists. Religion was mixed up in slavery for centuries. The black man had to free himself.

jobee

PDN wrote: »

Well, I've already pointed out that he told a whopping big lie in the very first sentence that you posted.

Also, the overall narrative behind his book is (and I quote directly) that "Most importantly of all, revealed in this work is the one true cause of the rise and fall of the world's greatest empires - that all civilizations rise and fall according to their racial homogeneity and nothing else - a nation can survive wars, defeats, natural catastrophes, but not racial dissolution."
That I would certainly call a lie, and a nasty racist lie at that.

Here are some more porkies from his book:

So WWII was the fault of the Jews? Another lie.


Ah, so the concentration camps were just like our prisons? Another lie.


So the piles of emaciated corpses we've all seen photographs of were actually caused by the actions of the Allies, not the Nazis? Another lie.


So the German Jews weren't beinmg persecuted for being Jewish, but because they were Zionist Communists? Another lie.


So the Nazi 'final solution' was really just a mistranslation by silly modern historians who failed to understand the plan was to build nice jolly Jewish settlements in Poland? Another lie.

So the Nazis in Eastern Europe didn't target Jews. It was just an unfortunate coincidence that so many Jews were nasty Communists? Another lie.


So there we have it. No holocaust - but being a Jew in Nazi Germany wasn't a pleasant experience?

It's rare that I have to read a lie of such bare-faced magnitude that it makes me want to physically vomit.

The Pope of the period said nothing about the gas ovens, southern germany was strongly catholic and still contributing millions to the RC church from weddings and funerals. Nice little earner.Shhhhhhh

PDN

jobee wrote: »

Your history is awfull, most Popes were white supremists. Religion was mixed up in slavery for centuries. The black man had to free himself.

So you're quoting a white supremacist inaccurate revision of history written by a lying racist as an authoritative source to attack Christians (most of whom are non-white) and yet you are the champion of the black man?

You don't see a problem with that?

jobee

PDN wrote: »

So you're quoting a white supremacist inaccurate revision of history written by a lying racist as an authoritative source to attack Christians (most of whom are non-white) and yet you are the champion of the black man?

You don't see a problem with that?

MOST Popes were white supremists, the white man was boss in the RC church and still is.

PDN

jobee wrote: »

MOST Popes were white supremists, the white man was boss in the RC church and still is.

Jobee, stop this evasion. Being white and leading an organisation doesn't make them a white supremacist.

You spamming this forum with racist propaganda, however, is highly offensive.

You are on your very last warning. Infractions and temporary bans appear to have no effect in modifying your trolling. Please read the Charter, because next time you will be banned permanently.