^
Wanted to comment last time I saw the above, but had trouble posting.
No problem with the stuff they quote from, but have issues with the "conclusions" that the first person commenting (marked as "svenkat" by Ramana) had chosen to draw.
It just won't die, will it... People will keep excusing christianism - giving it space to grow and consume still more - even when they imagine they're criticising it.
And so the problem persists, as seen in:
1. The "white christian" excuse
How convenient. That shifts the blame onto "white" and off christianism.
But as with zombies, it does not matter what ethnicity or part of the globe the infected are from. Once zombified (christianised), the behaviour is the same: it is all Deus Vult christo-terrorism.
That's why you can see Indian sheep be busy with even *forcible* conversions in countries to India's northeast, such as Burma I think it was, same as their European equivalents had done in the past and continue to do in S America etc.
Do Indian sheep deserve to get away with the same crimes, just because they were themselves zombified by others? But if so, then that's true for those of European-origin also: their ancestors were *never* originally christian.
It's true that so-called "ethnic" converts are lower in the christo hierarchy than their "white" superiors. But the *entire* christian hierarchy is inimical to all free peoples of the planet: the ethnic converts are no less dangerous, and are quite as bent on convert-and-kill and the same old replacement theology (e.g. India's northeast, in S Korea, etc). Both the racist hierarchy and the zealous conversion overdrive are innate to christianism and follow on from conversion to the jeebus faith.
2. The error of excusing (protecting) the "jesus of faith"
Thereby shielding its adherents - who are the carriers and implementors of the christianism meme
BUT:
a. There is NO jesus of history (not the one of christianism. Many others persons named jesus existed, naturally, but they are all irrelevant to this topic).
b. There is ONLY the jesus of faith.
c. christianism=jesus=the jesus of faith
Hoping to attack only the LHS while shielding the RHS of the equation will always fail, since it goes against the mathematical equals operator seen above.
People either recognise they need to negate both sides of the equation, or they may altogether retire from pretending they're taking a stand against christianism.
Christianism being "political" is a natural consequence of the total solution to the world that the jesus of faith=christianism is marketed as: the jesus-of-faith (=christianism) will always manifest as a political takeover, as imperialism. Christianism is so by nature. Same as islam. To pretend that islam is purely political and does not really "believe" it is the true religion - the way communist hysterians rewrite islamic destruction of Hindu temples as "mercenary" instead of religious in motivation - is the same error as presenting christianism as a purely political force that does not really believe it is true.
The fact is, christians are dead-serious in believing it is true = they have *faith* that it is true = they have faith in their jeebus/gawd = christianism.
It's why it's a missionary religion. I.e. Replacement Theology: they have a gawd-given mandate to Replace. (Ref: commandment #1 and the "go forth to all nations and peddle jeebus onto them" rule. Aka spreading "the good news"=the *definition* of evangelism.)
3. And this foolish statement:
An utter lie. Hindoos have the same problems with the jeebus of faith that the Hellenistic Greco-Romans faced: the "Jeebus of faith" religion spells death to all heathenism (see biblical commandment #1 and all of christian history).
Sigh. Almost a decade on from when I first started to observe, and Indian activists are still at Square One. All the revelations - and realisations about the repercussions - of jesus being unhistoric has had no tangible effect on the general activist Indian brain. All that's been achieved is to make the as-yet-unsaved Indians further encourage the hydra to grow yet another head: the Indians *choose* to prop up a 'Jeebus of Faith' against 'political christianism', and want the former to be acceptable and the latter to be rejected. How droll: at a time of life-and-death, to still be bartering with the enemy.
But there are no "different facets" to christianism. No good sides and bad sides. It is all *one* thing. And wholly deadly. You can't dissect it into a harmless part and a fatal part, hoping to salvage one and destroy the other, like defanging a poisonous snake. Christianism is like islam. You either understand that you need to unravel every part of it until there's nothing left of the mindvirus, or - in the final analysis - it would have won.
Wanted to comment last time I saw the above, but had trouble posting.
No problem with the stuff they quote from, but have issues with the "conclusions" that the first person commenting (marked as "svenkat" by Ramana) had chosen to draw.
It just won't die, will it... People will keep excusing christianism - giving it space to grow and consume still more - even when they imagine they're criticising it.
And so the problem persists, as seen in:
1. The "white christian" excuse
How convenient. That shifts the blame onto "white" and off christianism.
But as with zombies, it does not matter what ethnicity or part of the globe the infected are from. Once zombified (christianised), the behaviour is the same: it is all Deus Vult christo-terrorism.
That's why you can see Indian sheep be busy with even *forcible* conversions in countries to India's northeast, such as Burma I think it was, same as their European equivalents had done in the past and continue to do in S America etc.
Do Indian sheep deserve to get away with the same crimes, just because they were themselves zombified by others? But if so, then that's true for those of European-origin also: their ancestors were *never* originally christian.
It's true that so-called "ethnic" converts are lower in the christo hierarchy than their "white" superiors. But the *entire* christian hierarchy is inimical to all free peoples of the planet: the ethnic converts are no less dangerous, and are quite as bent on convert-and-kill and the same old replacement theology (e.g. India's northeast, in S Korea, etc). Both the racist hierarchy and the zealous conversion overdrive are innate to christianism and follow on from conversion to the jeebus faith.
2. The error of excusing (protecting) the "jesus of faith"
Thereby shielding its adherents - who are the carriers and implementors of the christianism meme
BUT:
a. There is NO jesus of history (not the one of christianism. Many others persons named jesus existed, naturally, but they are all irrelevant to this topic).
b. There is ONLY the jesus of faith.
c. christianism=jesus=the jesus of faith
Hoping to attack only the LHS while shielding the RHS of the equation will always fail, since it goes against the mathematical equals operator seen above.
People either recognise they need to negate both sides of the equation, or they may altogether retire from pretending they're taking a stand against christianism.
Christianism being "political" is a natural consequence of the total solution to the world that the jesus of faith=christianism is marketed as: the jesus-of-faith (=christianism) will always manifest as a political takeover, as imperialism. Christianism is so by nature. Same as islam. To pretend that islam is purely political and does not really "believe" it is the true religion - the way communist hysterians rewrite islamic destruction of Hindu temples as "mercenary" instead of religious in motivation - is the same error as presenting christianism as a purely political force that does not really believe it is true.
The fact is, christians are dead-serious in believing it is true = they have *faith* that it is true = they have faith in their jeebus/gawd = christianism.
It's why it's a missionary religion. I.e. Replacement Theology: they have a gawd-given mandate to Replace. (Ref: commandment #1 and the "go forth to all nations and peddle jeebus onto them" rule. Aka spreading "the good news"=the *definition* of evangelism.)
3. And this foolish statement:
Quote:we hindus have no problem with the Jesus of Faith.
An utter lie. Hindoos have the same problems with the jeebus of faith that the Hellenistic Greco-Romans faced: the "Jeebus of faith" religion spells death to all heathenism (see biblical commandment #1 and all of christian history).
Sigh. Almost a decade on from when I first started to observe, and Indian activists are still at Square One. All the revelations - and realisations about the repercussions - of jesus being unhistoric has had no tangible effect on the general activist Indian brain. All that's been achieved is to make the as-yet-unsaved Indians further encourage the hydra to grow yet another head: the Indians *choose* to prop up a 'Jeebus of Faith' against 'political christianism', and want the former to be acceptable and the latter to be rejected. How droll: at a time of life-and-death, to still be bartering with the enemy.
But there are no "different facets" to christianism. No good sides and bad sides. It is all *one* thing. And wholly deadly. You can't dissect it into a harmless part and a fatal part, hoping to salvage one and destroy the other, like defanging a poisonous snake. Christianism is like islam. You either understand that you need to unravel every part of it until there's nothing left of the mindvirus, or - in the final analysis - it would have won.