David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
To address the German question, one must first recognize a virtually impassable communication challenge. The post-WWII social conditions of all western civilizations are such that no discussion about Germany or German people can be had without an immediate and predominant focus on Adolf Hitler and the National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (the National Socialist German Worker Party). Two millenniums of German history do not suffice to demagnetize this monstrosity of the modern era.
Adolf Hitler (1889-1945), creator of the modern
German public image.
Conversations are generally of two orders: 1) about old German history and culture before 1914, as being wholly detached from the Third Reich, or 2) about Nazi Germany as the culmination of a “will to power” long in the making, from Charlemagne (742-814). Certainly, German people have taken their turn in fighting for freedom and nationhood. The Diet of Spires in 1529 represents one of the noblest campaigns for religious freedom in modernity, and it laid the foundations for liberty of conscience for all nations to come. This was the “Hier stehe ich” of the German lords. Indeed, the term “Protestant” comes from this very crises cast in the face of Spanish Hapsburg Holy Roman Emperer Charles V.
Diet of Speyers, 1529, at which German princes stood against the Roman Church in protest of its repression of religious freedom.
But German people are not remembered for this precious legacy. German people are remembered today for Nazi attrocities–and the antithesis of religious freedom. German people today cannot be spoken of without a visceral angst over the Holocaust. The German crimes against any people opposed to the Reich are all that the world bothers to regard. Only in lofty academic settings where the arts and philosophies are pondered under glass are German people seen as positive contributors to the accomplishments Western Civilization and to the welfare of humanity.
Any attempt to discuss race, intelligence, science, or politics, and the German legacy of horrors is immediately thrust into the midst of the discussion, and no progress can be made.
And this aversion was not created by Jewish Holocaust studies–which is still a fairly new enterprise.
This impediment is the creation of a world weary of war-mongering and cruelty which Germany foisted on the world twice in one century. The United States of America was responsible for ending both of those wars. This the world cannot forget.
In as much as Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) so quickly and unavoidably becomes the center of all “German” conversations, perhaps an honest, unbiased look at his personal life might hold the secrets actually to lay new foundations for understanding.
In a phenomenological approach to the person of Adolf Hitler, the goal is to be able to talk about race, religion, science, and freedom without a constant attempt by “liberals” to douse any flame of patriotism with the cry, “Nazi!”
This may be impossible. The crimes of the Nazi regime are so very terrible that it is nearly divine grace alone, or some bizarre objectivity, that would allow one even the simple curiosity to find out what Hitler thought, or wrote. In other words, who cares? Whatever he thought, it must have been demonically wrong.
In Hitler’s Letters and Notes (1974), compiler Warner Maser tells us Hitler had three siblings, Gustav, Ida, and Otto, all of whom died in infancy. Father Alois Hitler and mother Klara Pölzl idolized the sole surviving child. Adolf had an older half-brother (Alois, Jr.) and half-sister (Angela) from father Alois’ previous marriage to Franziska Matzelsberger–who had died of tuberculosis a year after her marriage. The fact is, in Mein Kampf, not one of these siblings are ever mentioned. All Hitler says is that his father (Alois) died when he (Adolf) was 13; his mother died two years later, when he was 15.
In Mein Kampf, Hitler reserves no pity for himself, solicits none, and simply mentions no influence of his family beyond his father’s deep desire that young Adolf become a civil servant–a profession which the boy despised through out his youth, preferring rather to become first an artist, and later an architect.
Twenty-five years old, the young
soldier, Adolf Hitler, ca. 1914-1917.
Now, Adolf aficionados may prefer some other edition of Mein Kampf. I use the English translation of Ralph Manheim, published in 1971. (Obviously, I need to purchase a German edition.) I know that the second chapter of Mein Kampf is telling. The problem for the honest reader is simple: Hitler was 36 years old when he wrote the material which portrays his own interpretation of his life in those years. This interpretation is his explanation of how he came to think like he thought. Any objective, academic, scholarly analyst cannot regard this as other than personal, and therefore incomplete and biased, precious as it is.
Hitler’s own account has to be considered a primary source, limited though it is.
Alan Wykes proposes the idea that the young Adolf contracted syphilis from a Jewish girl named Hannah, in Vienne, in 1910. This account is in Ballentine’s Illustrated History of the Violent Century, Book 3, pp. 14,15. Scholarly reference or resource is not included. Obviously, Hitler never mentioned any such experience. Nor, according to Maser, (op. cit., pp. 23,24) was Hitler at all honest about his poverty in Vienna as he portrayed it in Mein Kampf.
The point here is that there is abundant accounting for nearly ever aspect of Hitler’s life. What we propose here at BadEagle.com is a simple analysis of the account of Hitler himself. In his own words, we should be able to understand what affected him, and what he said affected him.
This will be a patient process, and none need jump to unfounded conclusions. Why Californian Americans elected an Austrian German (Arnold Schwarzenneger) in 2003j, and why the Roman Church elected a German pope (Bavarian Joseph Aloisius Ratzinger) in 2005, may be truly pertinent questions. But they shall never be answered accurately or appropriately, as long as low-information voters–including many leading conservatives, are inhibited from rationale discussions about race, nationhood, religion, and politics for fear of being called a “Nazi” by knee-jerking, hysterical liberals with legitimate and dramatic historical references in their bag like “Holocaust.”
31 responses so far ↓
1 iDavid Yeagley // Mar 13, 2013 at 9:19 am
On the matter of Wyke’s reference to a Jewish prostitute (made without reference), I have to say that this Ballantine series of books, though fascinating, are not presented in a scholarly format. There are no footnotes, references, or end notes. There is a bibliography at the end of Wyke’s Hitler, however.
Wyke says Hitler stayed in Vienna only four years.
In Mein Kampf (p.59), Hitler hotly denounces the profession of prostitution, and claims the Jews of Vienna were in control of it. Again, he is writing at the age of 36, about a time, 1910, when he (according to Wykes) was 21 years old.
Morality was something Hitler strongly urged in Mein Kampf.
So, is Hitler lying? Is he covering up the sins of his youth?
2 Thrasymachus // Mar 13, 2013 at 10:23 am
It is high time someone attempted a fresh look at Hitler’s life story with the intent to understand his psyche.
I in no way endorse Hitler or his actions. But I want to mention, in passing, that, over the years, I’ve heard people accuse Hitler of every unnatural or immoral act in the book. He has become a magnet for evil accusations.
I think that a lust for power is the key to understanding Hitler. He simply used race and antisemitism because these were available paths to power in his time. The same goes for today’s Liberals. Some of them are simply using anti-white racism as a path to political power and wealth — a strategy which is short-sighted, as it will lead to their demise. Many of the present-day white Liberals would be Nazis had they lived in Germany in the 1930s.
3 Thrasymachus // Mar 13, 2013 at 10:35 am
Correction: I should have written: “Some of the present-day white Liberals would be Nazis, had they lived in Germany in the 1930s.”
Let’s set aside Hitler’s antisemitism for a moment. If we take away this destructive and immoral element from Hitler’s political philosophy, is there something left? What I’m driving at is this: Did not the United States and Europe succumb to the beliefs of White Oedipal Liberals — exactly as Hitler predicted? If Hitler could give a speech somewhere this afternoon, could he not say, “I told you this would happen?” The “this” being the rise of the Negro to “divine” status — the Obama presidency, for example — and the elevation of his culture to national prominence, along with the gradual erosion of the core racial and cultural identity of European and American civilization, and the loss of jobs and prosperity as the West declines and the Far East rises to world dominance.
I once talked with a Jewish man who, although he strongly objected to and denounced Hitler’s antisemitism, agreed with him on some other matters, such as the fate or predicament of the West since the end of WWII.
4 David Yeagley // Mar 13, 2013 at 10:51 am
In Manheim’s 1970 translation of Mein Kampf, Hitler uses the word “liberal” and “liberalism” to mean exactly what they mean today. This is of grave concern, seems to me.
Hitler was also terribly concerned about trade unions–all of which he called “liberal,” though he comes to believe that the unions themselves were “victims” of liberals.
5 Thrasymachus // Mar 13, 2013 at 11:48 am
There’s a story in the news which is somewhat pertinent to this German theme.
A family from Germany has sought refuge and asylum in the United States because they home-school their children. They are evangelical Christians.
Now, Home-schooling is illegal in Germany today. The Obama Administration agrees with the German government. The current Democrat administration declared — shockingly to me — that no parents have a right ANYWHERE (in the world) to home-school their children.
Just search the Internet for “German Family Facing Deportation for Home-Schooling.” Look for the Fox News video.
Once again, the current US administration sees itself as the presumptive and unquestioned leader of all the people in the world. Liberals leaders have assumed moral rectitude of such proportions that they are automatically qualified to settle disputes of a political nature throught the entire world.
6 Thrasymachus // Mar 13, 2013 at 12:14 pm
Check this out! Totally unbelievable! The U.S. Justice Departments says “no one has a right to homeschool ANYWHERE.”
Christian Homeschooling Family Could be Deported
7 David Yeagley // Mar 13, 2013 at 1:31 pm
I think “democracy” leads to Communism and totalitarianism, and dictatorship.
Why? Low information voters, en mass. Easily fooled, selfish, childish voters.
8 Thrasymachus // Mar 13, 2013 at 1:48 pm
I agree 100 percent. It’s almost providential that you should mention “democracy.” This video has been in my thoughts today:
Why America is a Republic, not a Democracy
9 WHEELER // Mar 13, 2013 at 5:06 pm
Thrasymachus, I wrote leading articles on what is a republic. America is not, never was, a republic.
A republic is mixed government. In order to have mixed government, you must have a mixed or caste society of royalty, aristocracy and commons.
The FFofA rejected the Old Order of Europe so they could not and did not create a classical republic.
The term “republic” was changed during the Renaissance to “any government without a king”. Whereas all the republics of classical antiquity were started under kings.
You can call America “mixed democracy”, but it is not a true republic.
10 WHEELER // Mar 13, 2013 at 7:22 pm
Here is a quote:
“Quisling had been an intelligence officer in Russia during the First World War, and later was Minister of Defense in the Norwegian government. He was filled with a deep hatred of Bolsheviks, Jews and Freemasons. He was convinced that the Jews and Freemasons were behind the Bolsheviks, and that only Adolf Hitler could lead the crusade to destroy Jewish masonic Bolshevism. (pg 237)
From: Ridley, Jasper (2001) The Freemasons, A History of the World’s Most Powerful Secret Society, Arcade Publishing, NY.
Why do you think there is something wrong with Hitler for? Is Quisling mad too? Is Quisling an idiot? Is Quisling a raving mad fool?
Okay, Dr. Yeagley, ask me this question, Why did Hitler form the Anti-Comintern Pact on 6 November 1937 with Mussolini? Mussoline was a former communist himself. What do they all know?
Do you know anything about Freemasonry Dr. Yeagley? Have you read Eric Nelson’s The Hebrew Republic where a teaching from the Mishnah led the Protestant Levellers to kill Charles I?
Do you understand Dr. Yeagley that the Jews have been interferring in European politics in order to set up the world to welcome their Messiah?
Europe is now importing millions of Moslems where there once was none, because of the Holocaust deems homogeneity an evil. So now
Europe is now committing suicide.
If somebody tells you Dr. Yeagley that they are going to end nation and race, as a patriot what does one do? Hitler was only defending himself and his country from the Jews. It was the Jews that declared war on Germany in 1932.
I wish Dr. Yeagley that you buy Vicomte Léon de Poncins two books Freemasonry and the Vatican and you can download for free his book Judaism and the Vatican. Or how about Maurice Pinay’s book, The Plot Against the Church which you can also download for free.
If you can’t see the evil that the Jews plan for the rest of us, and their genocidal ways, I’m sorry. There was no mental sickness in Adolf Hitler if that is what you are trying to proof in your articles. I don’t see the point, of your articles on Germany.
11 David Yeagley // Mar 13, 2013 at 10:25 pm
Wheeler, where do you find in the Bible, (Old or New Testaments), that God has forever and unconditionally abandoned the Jewish people? Definitively. Equivocally. For every verse pronouncing a curse, there is one pronouncing a blessing.
Unless you are in a completely independent fellowship of some kind—which is not incorporated, and does not own real estate, you’re part of the bigger picture–of conspiracy and betrayal. Or, I should say, you will certainly appear to be, from one angle or another.
We live and breath in the flesh, and it costs money. Will you curse this? There is no escape. Spirituality, when it does occur, never occurs on this earth outside the flesh. We can but house it, and we are rather poor hosts of the divine, evermore, here.
Chasing conspiracies amounts to accusation, nothing more. What’s the point of that? That’s the stuff of human concourse. How can you expect to escape anything through knowledge of conspiracy? You and I, and everyone, are always players in someone’s conspiracy. No man is an island, indeed. Your free will is so very subjective and limited. The larger things you are part of are quite beyond your control.
But the merciful God does take all this into account, according to Psalm 87. So, not to worry, too much.
What’s the point of my German articles? What’s the point of chasing conspiracies?
12 WHEELER // Mar 14, 2013 at 7:30 am
Because Conspiracies Exist!
Anytime two or more people colude (my verb form for collusion) for an evil purpose that is a conspiracy.
Conspiracy goes on everyday, all the time, throughout history!
I’ll give you a conspiracy right out of the New Testament! How about Judas conspiring to betray Jesus? Judas formed a conspiracy with the pharisees to capture Jesus.
Let me remind you what Jesus said of Judas Iscariot. “It would have been better had he never been born”.
That is pretty bad.
The concepts of the unity of man, to deracinate the world, to destroy race and nation is Evil.
To bring this about requires a Conspiracy. The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was a Conspiracy. All communist parties engage in Conspiracy because they are evil; their members are evil.
Jews are Deicides. By rejected Jesus Christ, they are Nihilists. They are automatically Evil. When they conspire to bring about their Messianic Age and to hoodwink gentiles to accomplish this goal contrary to the Will of God—That is Evil.
Evil is rebellion against God. To immanentizing the eschaton, i.e. to bring about World Peace, is a form of Gnosticism.
To wreck the Natural Order that God created is Evil. To work wreaking the natural order is a conspiracy. Treason is always an act of conspiracy.
Conspiracy exists at all times. When two or more people gather to do evil, that is a conspiracy. When Jews, taking their Talmud, and teach gentiles to get rid of their kings, because the gentile kings stand in the way of the Jewish Messianic Age—-That is a conspiracy.
Jews are Not Good by nature, Dr. Yeagley. Christ said of them, “Your father is of the devil”. Because they deny Christ, they assented to the Devil. All those that deny Christ, are anti-Christ. And as it says in Scripture, Evil seeks to do evil. Evil does not rest until it is doing evil.
Destroying kings was a way of destroying the hold of Catholicism in countries. The Jewish goal has always been to destroy the Catholic Faith. Is that not evil.
13 Thrasymachus // Mar 14, 2013 at 8:05 am
Wheeler:
The thing is, Jews seem to love “democracy.” Or at least this is the public perception. Try reading Karl Popper’s “The Open Society” to get the picture. Also Alan Bloom’s “The Closing of the American Mind.” And communists support democracy because it leads to conditions wherein dictatorship can be established.
The first volume of “The Open Society” is a strong critique of none other than Plato, who wrote “The Republic.”
My view is that democracy does not work well. Moreover, it requires an extended family for its foundation. It simply fails utterly in a multicultural society. Yet in America today, the people parrot the line that “Democracy” is the great ideal and all the world — including the Mid-East — must be FORCED into practicing it.
Also: Wheeler, are you CI? (Christian Identity)
14 WHEELER // Mar 14, 2013 at 8:09 am
No. I’m a traditionalist Roman Catholic in outlook and legally a Greek Orthodox.
I have more quotes for you about democracy:
“Democracy is the road to socialism.” Karl Marx
“Democracy is indispensable to socialism.” Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
“Modern Socialism is inseperable from political democracy.” Elements of Socialism, pg 337.
“The view that democracy and Socialism are inwardly related spread far and wide in the decades which preceded the Bolshevist revolution. Many came to believe that democracy and Socialism meant the same thing, and that democracy without Socialism or Socialism without democracy would not be possible.” Socialism, Ludwig von Mises, pg 67.
What is really going on is that “democracy” is Marxism/Socialism. America is a Marxist country. It is a democracy. Political Correctness, which is Marxism, is the morality and sophistry of this country.
15 WHEELER // Mar 14, 2013 at 8:19 am
One of the factors of Gnosticism is about hating reality. They hated what was going on.
Greeks are on the other hand, “Lovers of Reality”. We face the world. We don’t seek to change it. I love the Natural Order. I love the Christian Faith. I love Roman Catholicism. Hillaire Belloc said, “The Faith is Europe, and Europe is the Faith”.
In order to destroy Christianity at its roots, you must destroy the European people. This fuels my anger toward the Jews because they seek the Death of Europe. A Grand majority of them.
If you read the OT, the Jews were never obedient. God complained about them all the time. They were always rebelling. Knowing their character, one knows that they will not obey the old law that the Jews were NOT to meddle in Gentile countries. Yet, they do meddle. They proselytize. They seek to implement their Messianic Age! Their Messianic Age automatically clashes with the Natural Order for they seek to dismantle and deconstruct races and nations that are a part of the Natural Order.
Here is a YouTube video of a Rabbi counseling Netanyaha, to “further the cause of the coming of the Messiah” Rabbi tells Netanyahu to bring about the Messiah
B. Netanyahu: I came to ask your blessing and help.
Chief Rabbi: In everything.
B. Netanyahu: In all areas – both personal and political.
Chief Rabbi: Since we last met many things have progressed.
B. Netanyahu: Many things have progressed.
Chief rabbi: What hasn’t changed, however, is that Moshiach hasn’t come.
So do something to hasten his coming.
B. Netanyahu: We’re doing, we’re doing…
Chief rabbi: Apparently it’s not enough, since many hours have already passed today and he’s still not here…
16 Thrasymachus // Mar 14, 2013 at 8:30 am
“What is really going on is that “democracy” is Marxism/Socialism. America is a Marxist country. It is a democracy. Political Correctness, which is Marxism, is the morality and sophistry of this country.” — Wheeler
I agree with you entirely. Democracy sounds good in theory, but in practice it allows the people, who can easily be deceived and corrupted, especially in an age of mass media, to abolish the absolute rule of law (when was the last time that the U.S. Constitution was actually consulted?), or to misuse the powers of government. However, I’d also argue, ironically, that the U.S. has really failed to implement true democracy. The policies of the last 40 – 50 years have clearly not been the will of the people — the will of the majority. America is in fact goverened by a wealthy and supremely selfish elite which is hostile to the legitimate interests of most Americans.
17 Thrasymachus // Mar 14, 2013 at 9:29 am
What we are all caught up in are political movements and their governing ideologies. This we cannot escape.
However, are we to be Fatalists?
Certainly, if I were, like Servetus, to find myself in Calvin’s Geneva, my situation in life would be very different from what I have inherited today.
Why are we political at all? Many people feel that if they ignore politics, politics will ignore them! I don’t think this is true.
In politics and religion, the struggle every man and woman faces is the question of honesty. Politicians and religious leaders do not like to be contradicted. Neither do ordinary people! So many just decide to keep their opinions to themselves. They feel safer doing that.
Honestly, just as devout Orthodox Jews want the Jewish people to continue to exist, so I want all peoples to have that same right and privilege.
Human beings are in a struggle to know and practice the Truth. They disagree about what is right and wrong. Conflict is therefore inevitable.
The Big Question is, “Is there really a solution to all this?” At a minimum, people must agree to disagree.
Let these quotes demonstrate just how impossible it apparently is to resolve these political conflicts in which morals and ethics are involved:
“The highest good, as I see it, is intermarriage between people of different ethnicities, races, religions, and cultures.” — Paul Kurtz (leading secular humanist)
“No intelligent white person . . . in his or her right white mind want(s) black boys and black girls marrying their white sons and daughters and in return introducing their grandchildren as half-brown, kinky-haired black people.”
Do we preserve nations and peoples? Is the survival of nations and peoples morally right?
How can politics solve such a huge problem in which people are so strongly and staunchly divided in their beliefs and attitudes?
18 Thrasymachus // Mar 14, 2013 at 9:32 am
Sorry! The second quote above was by Muhammad Ali!
19 WHEELER // Mar 14, 2013 at 10:01 am
If you read the Freemasons, they are about “destroying all hierarchies”, either Church or in a society. Jews also seek this. They are extreme democrophiles.
The Natural Order puts all things in hierarchy. Part of Satan’s envy was that God put Man ahead of angels for Man is made in the image of God, not angels. All things are in Hierarchy.
Satan hates that. (So did Hitler and the National Socialists. They hated hierarchy, they hated the aristocracy and they hated monarchy!) All those on the side of Satan, hate hierarchy. Satan wishes buy off accoloytes with a better world according to Him, without war, without hierarchy, without suffering. It is Absalom’s principle.
20 WHEELER // Mar 14, 2013 at 10:11 am
Dr. Yeagley, Have you heard the term “natural law”? It can also be rendered “Laws of Nature” but that doesn’t mean physics or gravity. The Laws of Nature is what produces and maintains the natural order, i.e. the cosmos.
God made the world with the Logos. St. John declares that Christ is the Logos. The Logos is that embeded in the cosmos and operates it. The Catholic Church uses this. The Jews, Muslims, Protestants (on the whole), do not.
God created Race and Nation. Race and Nation are products of the Laws of Nature. To attack racial pride, racial prejudice is to attack the fundamentals of group cohesion. This is an evil. It is a direct attack against the Logos.
There is a conspiracy between atheists, Jews, and Protestants agains the Catholic Church. It is driven by hatred. The Church is the body of Christ. That hatred is spiritual.
21 David Yeagley // Mar 14, 2013 at 10:16 am
Of course conspiracies exist. But, knowing that, studying that, results in no saving good for anyone. I’m saying conspiracy is part and parcel of human social existence. Men always jostle one another for power. That’s what I tried to point out in the second article in this series, “Nature, Nationhood, and Naivete.”
By your logic, any nation, in and of itself, is a conspiracy. People conspiring together to create a social entity–prepared to offend and defend. A nation is race-based, and generally has a religious rudiment. That was certainly the ancient way. Religion, language, race, and territory–these comprised a nation.
You’re saying that internationalism is what conspiracy really means.
I see that as just an extension (and perversion) of nationhood. Fighting over resources, fighting over the goods, that’s what nations end up doing.
These things seem inevitable. Therefore, why focus on “conspiracy” as something unusual or something that can be remedied?
22 David Yeagley // Mar 14, 2013 at 10:21 am
Furthermore, your one-verse quote from John (NT) is hardly applicable to the Jewish people. It was spoken to a particular social stratum of that day. You’re making it a racist comment, actually. I don’t think it is. It was just a fact at that time, in that circumstance.
Jesus also said, “Salvation is of the Jews.” John 4:22.
I’m saying, you can’t condemn the Jews based on the Bible. You condemn yourself when you do that.
Also, the Protocols of Zion, according to scholars, is a complete hoax. But, no, I have not read it.
23 Thrasymachus // Mar 14, 2013 at 10:40 am
I am not aware of any modern movement in the Catholic Church — nor of a strong historical movement either — to defend race and nation.
As an illustration. I heard a Catholic priest preaching. He mentioned a Catholic Saint who was half-black and half-white. He suggested that this man could considered be the Patron Saint of persons of mixed-race. This doesn’t sound like a defence of race and nation to me.
I agree that a tendency to “racism” is more or less innate. However, it is not equally strong in all individuals. Its strength varies from person to person. It increases when the culture reinforces it.
To me, the Old Testament is crystal clear about the preservation of the Israelite nation. The New Testament seems to me to be vague on the subject of race because there the Afterlife was of almost exclusive importance and Armageddon was believed to be right around the corner. Questions of Race and Nation just seemed trivial to 1st Century Christians, as Christ’s return was imminent. Just my reading of the “data.”
24 David Yeagley // Mar 14, 2013 at 11:16 am
Well, I think Revelation (90 AD?) reaffirms the concept or at least existence and ordination of race and nationhood–an affirmation which, by the way, certainly aggrandizes the Jews, or Jewish people. Of course, it was a good while before that text of John was included in the official “Catholic” mid-4th century council of Laodicea, but, still, the text is quite conscious of nations, languages, races, ethnicities, etc, throughout, really.
25 WHEELER // Mar 14, 2013 at 12:07 pm
The Catholic Church right now in its Catechism does promote “Human solidarity” and does attack racial prejudice and discrimination of any kind. It has adopted full force political correctness and Cultural Marxism.
It now preaches the Unity of Man. I am in the midst of writing a book right now called On Race: The Failure, Incompetency, Error, and Treason of the Catholic Church in the Tiburcio Vasquez Scandal where I expose the Vatican as adopting the Judeo-Masonic-Bolshevist error. and This marks the end of the so-called teaching of the “infallibility of the Magisterium”. The teaching authority of the Magisterium is now over.
And then I am going thru the Bible and finding all the spots that talk about race or use race to defend the concept. I have already have a philosophical proof of the existence of race. I have about 67 pages. I am now in the chapters discussing all the errors.
The Roman Catholic Church is in error and is in the process of committing Treason here in the US. To waterdown the homogeneity of a country is Treason and the Church participates in that.
A Church that commits Treason is No church at all!
I find this all so unbelievable. The RC Church has adopted the Jewish heresy hook-line-and-sinker of this “Unity of Man” bs.
26 Thrasymachus // Mar 14, 2013 at 12:27 pm
Now, I do not agree with the statement I’m posting below. It is from the 19th Century American Agnostic (and very liberal!) writer, Robert Ingersoll. I call him a Liberal because he advocated, far before the 1965 Immigration Reform Law, the open immigration policy to America that was to be put into place by Senator Kennedy et al! Ingersoll believed that people from anywhere in the world were entitled freely to immigrate to and settle in the United States. A very radical idea for his time.
I quote the following because the author opined that the Bible, though perhaps (in his view) acknowledging race and nation, did not provide guidance as to how nations ought to relate to one another on a sound ethical basis.
I don’t think that he’s right, of course, as Jesus clearly told his disciples that He had come to save men’s lives and not destroy them. (Luke 9:54-56) Therefore Ingersoll is utterly mistaken, as the Wars of Religion, the tortures and persecutions, and the Inquisition are clearly forbidden in and contrary to the plain teachings of Jesus.
Nevertheless, Ingersoll was dissatisfied with what he perceived to be the Bible’s lack of clear rules for international relations — how nations should deal with one another politically:
“Christ . . . said nothing about the duties of nation to nation , of king to subject; nothing about the rights of man; nothing about intellectual liberty or the freedom of speech.”
Again, I find this claim to be an exaggeration, to say the least.
My point was that in the Old Testament, the privilege of belong to God was almost exclusive to Israelites, whereas in the New, the doors are opened to “every creature.” So the emphasis on world evangelism seems to take precedence over the political relations of nation to nation — though I do not think that the early Christians dreamed of abolishing national identities.
27 David Yeagley // Mar 14, 2013 at 12:29 pm
Well, it appears you are correct on what the RCC is doing, in spite of some of its statements in the Documents of Vatican II, regarding cultural (ethnic) or tribal customs and the preservation thereof. (Ch.VI under “Sacred Liturgy,” the very first section.)
28 Thrasymachus // Mar 14, 2013 at 12:43 pm
Well, Wheeler, the “Civic Religion” of our times is dedicated to the destruction of races, nations, and cultures. This is in fact a religious outlook.
The Southern Baptists have elected a Negro as their leader when, traditionally, they were quite opposed to the modern racial agenda.
The only Christians (so far as I know of) who actively oppose this new religion of “anti-racist” multiculturalism with its strenuous promotion of racial intermarriage as a supreme virtue are those who call themselves “Christian Identity.” (No, I am not a member of this cult.) “British Israel” is another branch of the same tree. These groups are tiny and are on the extreme fringes of modern Christianity.
29 WHEELER // Mar 14, 2013 at 1:07 pm
You know I’ve picked up all sorts of books with the word “Theology” and “Race” in the title, and none, including the Catholic, ever do any real theology, I mean searching the scriptures to find out what God wants done.
It is the Calvinists in South Africa that have done the research in the Bible and the Calvinists and Baptists in this country.
But by and large, the whole world is now as you say anti-racist multiculturalist, or Marxist. The Jewish idea of reuniting man, of restoring the Unity of Man is now throughout the world much like the Arian heresy was in the 4rth century A.D.
It is pretty sad situation. I have personally witnessed the acts of treason by Mexican Catholics and then the Roman Catholic Church by what it teaches, the error I call “sola Gospel”, by preaching that people have a “right to immigration”. It is all so bad.
30 Thrasymachus // Mar 14, 2013 at 1:25 pm
Some of the articles to follow may well be from a Calvinist point of view. In any event, I am totally opposed to Calvinism — and the overwhelming majority of Calvinists today are totally liberal on the Race Question. Nevertheless, here are some pages which may also be of use to you, Wheeler, in your research and writing:
The Christian Doctrine of Nations
On Interracial Marriage: The Moral Status of Miscegenation
A Biblical Defense of Ethno-Nationalism
Christian Ethics and Interracial Marriage, Part 6: Essentialism and Constructivism
31 David Yeagley // Mar 14, 2013 at 2:47 pm
At least one pope said if the immigrants can’t make it in their invaded, new country, they should go back home.
Pope Says ‘Mexicans Go Home.’
I’ve written more about all this than I remembered.
You must log in to post a comment.