And maybe Jackson too. Come to think of it, there was an assassination attempt on him as well.
What do you mean by "the Jew god was an evil false idol"? The God of the Old Testament? But Paul and most of the early Christians thought of the Old Testament texts as scripture. I guess I'm curious from what position you are coming. Are you a Gnostic? That would seem to fit your "evil false idol" comment. or a Pagan Traditionalist?
There's obviously a huge difference between how Jews and Christians of all stripes view the Old Testament, but I don't think it's controversial to point out that Christianity emerged from Judaism and is in some sense a completion of it.
Regarding those actions you describe, of course people who identify with those things as norms should be dealt with very severely by the law, but many in the Christian tradition would hold that God loves all beings as he created them, even if he hates how they have fallen.
I'm open to any articles or videos you'd like to share that demonstrate that the horrible actions you mention are fundamentally part of the Jewish faith. I just haven't seen it yet. I'm skeptical that Zionism (which I'm not a fan of to say the least) and Judaism are completely identical, but again I'd be open to anything you share.
I'm not sure exactly when the term Christian was first used. Paul does not use the word to my knowledge. From what I've read, the term was probably first ascribed to the earliest Christians. It appears there was some debate in the earliest Church regarding who should join. Paul's position was that the "good news" was for Jews and gentiles alike, and of course his position won out. But of course the majority of Jews did not accept Jesus as Messiah, so it is true that it's complicated.
And yes, Jesus shows righteous anger in Gospel accounts re. the "money changers" (and I believe this is likely based on a real historical event), but this doesn't mean that he hated the people doing it. Rather, he hated what they **did.
That's an interesting line of argument. Craig's Kalam argument isn't my favorite of the Cosmological arguments to work with. Not that I don't think it's good. But I think you can have a more focused discussion when you work with cosmological arguments that focus more closely on necessity vs. contingency. Craig's argument goes into a lot of detail from contemporary science that I don't think is necessary. I'm not saying that his argument doesn't work, it's just not my preferred way of addressing the issue.
So he hated his own disciples, and himself?
I don't really recall Jesus hating anyone in the Gospels.
Yes Jesus almost certainly existed. The view that he didn't is very very fringe among historians. Of the few that assert that he never existed (the mythicists), I've read some of their stuff and am simply not convinced.
The real debate surrounds what Jesus actually said and did. That makes for fun investigation.
I tend to agree with this. I think the MSM ultimately did not like Trump because of his approach to foreign policy.
That's an interesting theory. One could argue the shakiness of the signature and the awkward writing found in Shakespeare's Will was the result of his old age and illness, but I don't really know one way or another.
I've been doing a little research and the earliest thing I can find so far is a reference to Stonehenge is in Henry of Huntingdon's Historium Anglorum , which was written in the mid 1100s. So it would appear Stonehenge has been around since at least this time.
Haven't found anything earlier.
Thanks I'll look into that.
I like your phrase, the end of the "rabbit hole." I've really just started to investigate the world from a "conspiratorial" position so I don't have rock solid beliefs on any of this, but I've thought something similar: where does the Rabbit hole end?
Some say Jews. Some say Cabal/Luciferians. Some say a non-human species.
So lets say for the sake of argument you are right about where the Rabbit hole ends. That means we know how things have gone wrong, but what world-view do you think we should adopt? How should one live one's life, and what should society look like?
In all my time looking up conspiracy theories, I just never could be interested in the moon landing stuff -- one way or another. And the flat earthers/space-is-fake crowd, what is their overarching worldview? Some sort of Paganism? Fundamentalist Christianity?
I just never could really see the point of it.
(Alien invasions, Roswell, etc. is another story.)
Couldn't this be settled by looking for the first written statements about Stonehenge? If we try to locate the first written acknowledgment of Stonehenge, then we can determine if it existed before 1950.
Wow, really nicely stated.
Not familiar with the subject matter discussed with this one:
"You don't claim your scientists were not talking about dark rituals and opening portals to other dimensions, you claim they might cause a black hole and then call it a conspiracy theory."
Anyone have any articles on this?
Who do you think we should look to as the truly great scientists? What do you think is the most promising theoretical system?
Do you have any recommended reading? New to all of this.
Yes, we seem to be getting slower and more mentally defective. Sometimes I wonder if our modern diets are making us neurotic, docile, and slow.
Austism is a tricky phenomena to get one's head around in my moderately informed opinion. It's been quite difficult to pin down a neuroanatomical basis for autism (though this is not say that autism does not have a neuroanatomical basis). Over diagnosis also seems to be a problem.
It looks like there's been murky stuff going on for a while. But 2020 was like nothing we've seen before.
Also, not at all a fan of Gore but I have some questions about the veracity of the 2000 election outcome,
You make some good points. I was actually thinking of making a similar point to your first sentence does in my first reply. Anyone who is loving, desires a peaceful and free society, and is working hard to help his/her family (without hurting others), is good in my book.
And I want to point out that accusations of antisemitism are sometimes made for completely cynical reasons. Israel is so thoroughly deep state you could criticize it all day.
You see something similar with the Chinese Communist Party. They’ve cynically latched on to identity politics to dismantle criticisms of their horrific actions.
Some solid stuff there, but it’s a touch antisemitic. I feel that aspect of NWO theories undermines the overall cause, and limits potential audience. No Jewish background myself, but I know plenty at close range who couldn’t care less about advocating for globalist policies.
I think it’s important to note that many of these elite bloodlines that are “Jewish” may in fact not actually be. I don’t think, though of course I can’t know for certain, that they really think of themselves in those terms. And there’s a good amount of evidence that they don’t really care about the Jewish people at large.
Not at all a specialist in genetics or biology, but have had some schooling in those subjects. It’s true that there could be some defects from overly insular breeding (especially more directly incestuous relationships). This is because it enhances the probability of an offspring being homozygous dominant for a disease carrying allele (like hemophilia). Basically, insular breeding makes problematic traits in the gene pool more likely to be expressed. That being said, from what I’ve read, some now think the dangers of this might have been overstated a bit. Even though that kind of strict adherence to bloodlines opens up the risk for defects, it doesn’t inevitably lead to defects.
There’s definitely been some medical problems you can point to with royals and aristocrats, but overall most don’t have major health problems that I’m aware of. But they may have some other problems like the OP is pointing out.
I think it’s a really interesting theory. He might be on to something.
If you don't have even slight degree of skepticism about the vaccine, and it doesn't seem you have much interest in other conspiracies from your post history, why would you choose to devote so much time on a conspiracy page?