Christian identity
(media.scored.co)
Zionism is hate, extremism, and terrorism.
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
18 comments:
19
1 month ago
19 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+19Score on mirror
)
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
To be fair, Christian Identity is a name for a specific group of Christians. They're considered "hateful" because they (correctly) state that the modern so-called Jews are not the Jews/Hebrews of the Old Testament, but instead are a fraud.
Matt Gaetz and the other congresswoman likely have no idea of this and will be forced to apologize soon.
Matt Gaetz and the other congresswoman likely have no idea of this and will be forced to apologize soon.
To be fair, the ADL should be considered a foreign terrorist organization and its members banished from the country.
That's a view that my own reason is leading me towards, although I didn't know that it was a CI view. I know that CI claims that various European ethnicities are descended from some of the 'lost tribes of Israel', but not that it claims that the yids are not descended from said lost tribes at all. Of course, this makes more sense than the Armstrongist view on this, that is, that both various European ethnicities *and* the yids are together descended from the lost tribes of Israel. Yids are too alien to Whites to have been sharing all of the same ancestors until just a few millennia ago at which point they scattered in different directions to become the distinct ethnic groups that they now are.
How did today's 'Jews' come to be seen as Israelites according to CI?
How did today's 'Jews' come to be seen as Israelites according to CI?
I have explained all of this a thousand times and more here with links to sources. https://communities.win/c/ConsumeProduct/p/1AR0eKJz8b/x/c/4eWciy44Wnv
> The jews are the edomites of esau.
I've had a look at the links you put up. That just strikes me as almost identical to Armstrongism. Doesn't your version of events still claim that yids and Whites shared the same ancestors - all of them until Isaac - until a few millennia ago? For the Weisman book that you linked identifies Esau with Edomites and Jacob with proto-Europeans. (This book strangely seems to have been seized upon by Black Israelite idiots who insist that Weisman is obscuring the "truth" that Isaac, Jacob, and the other prophets and messengers of God before them were all Africans, a view noticeably more incredulous than the view that they were all Europeans.)
Yet it strikes me now as obviously incredulous, this conclusion that the yids came from a proto-European bloodline as would have been the case if Esau was in some sense, the first yid. Come to think of it, Armstrongism is similarly incredulous, since the conclusion is, again, that the yids came from a proto-European bloodline if Benjamin and Judah were in some sense the first yids.
There is only one difference that I perceive so far from what you promote - you do not make it clear whether you are Christian Identity, although Weisman is indeed identified as a Christian Identity author - and Armstrongism. Armstrongism generally if not always claims that the yids are descendants of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin while the other ten tribes of Israel were proto-European. You claim, by contrast, that all twelve tribes of Israel were proto-European, and you push the origin of the yid back one generation from Judah and Benjamin to Esau.
If you believe yourself to be representative of CI, is that the only difference in CI from Armstrongism regarding the origin of the yid? Namely, that the first yid was Jacob's brother, Esau, rather than Judah or Benjamin, which means that the yids very narrowly miss out on being Israelites?
I've had a look at the links you put up. That just strikes me as almost identical to Armstrongism. Doesn't your version of events still claim that yids and Whites shared the same ancestors - all of them until Isaac - until a few millennia ago? For the Weisman book that you linked identifies Esau with Edomites and Jacob with proto-Europeans. (This book strangely seems to have been seized upon by Black Israelite idiots who insist that Weisman is obscuring the "truth" that Isaac, Jacob, and the other prophets and messengers of God before them were all Africans, a view noticeably more incredulous than the view that they were all Europeans.)
Yet it strikes me now as obviously incredulous, this conclusion that the yids came from a proto-European bloodline as would have been the case if Esau was in some sense, the first yid. Come to think of it, Armstrongism is similarly incredulous, since the conclusion is, again, that the yids came from a proto-European bloodline if Benjamin and Judah were in some sense the first yids.
There is only one difference that I perceive so far from what you promote - you do not make it clear whether you are Christian Identity, although Weisman is indeed identified as a Christian Identity author - and Armstrongism. Armstrongism generally if not always claims that the yids are descendants of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin while the other ten tribes of Israel were proto-European. You claim, by contrast, that all twelve tribes of Israel were proto-European, and you push the origin of the yid back one generation from Judah and Benjamin to Esau.
If you believe yourself to be representative of CI, is that the only difference in CI from Armstrongism regarding the origin of the yid? Namely, that the first yid was Jacob's brother, Esau, rather than Judah or Benjamin, which means that the yids very narrowly miss out on being Israelites?
Jews come from Esau who race mixed with Canaanites to create the edomites. The ashkenazi/khazarians joined them around 700 AD; neither of them are Israelites. Esau lost his Birthright both by race mixing and by selling it to Jacob-Israel for some red bean soup, so they're not "of Isaac" or "Abraham" or "Noah" or "Adam." No non-White comes from Adam. All non-Whites come from Cain race mixing with fallen angel demons (explained in Genesis 6 and Enoch), niggers come from Cain mixing with apes and Asians from Cain mixing with dragons.\
So, no, jews are not of Jacob-Israel or Isaac. They are their own separate, distinct race of edomites and khazars/ashkenazis. All Whites, and only Whites, come from Adam -> Noah -> Abraham -> Isaac -> Jacob-Israel. Jews are not of Judah or any other tribe of Israel. A dog born in a stable is not a horse, a nigger born in Europe is not European, a White born in China is not Chinese, therefore a jew born in Judea is not a Judean.
So, no, jews are not of Jacob-Israel or Isaac. They are their own separate, distinct race of edomites and khazars/ashkenazis. All Whites, and only Whites, come from Adam -> Noah -> Abraham -> Isaac -> Jacob-Israel. Jews are not of Judah or any other tribe of Israel. A dog born in a stable is not a horse, a nigger born in Europe is not European, a White born in China is not Chinese, therefore a jew born in Judea is not a Judean.
Regarding the origin of the negroid, in Apartheid-era South Africa, the Dutch Reformed Church claimed that the negroid instead came from Ham/Canaan, that is, until it turned against Apartheid. This relates to the 'curse of Ham' from Genesis. The negroid's black skin was, for instance, considered part of that punishment.
If Christian Identity claims that the negroid came from Cain and apes, but the Apartheid-era religious authorities claimed that the negroid came from the 'curse of Ham', why should the CI interpretation be trusted, for instance, over the aforementioned Apartheid-era interpretation?
If Christian Identity claims that the negroid came from Cain and apes, but the Apartheid-era religious authorities claimed that the negroid came from the 'curse of Ham', why should the CI interpretation be trusted, for instance, over the aforementioned Apartheid-era interpretation?
Christian Identity is hatred. That's the point. You can't love God if you don't hate evil just as Psalm 97:10 says. If you don't hate nons especially jews, then you're a jew, not a Christian.
The problem is getting Christians to act on that hatred. Too many, even those who are aware of the problem, have the mentality that this life is a 'testing ground' of sorts to get into heaven, resulting in them selfishly concentrating on their personal, pacifist salvation rather acting to squash evil to improve the world for future generations. In many ways it reminds me of boomers saving for retirement while everything goes to hell around them.
Toast message