Thanks, I did enjoy it. Pretty good song too by Les and Sean, I was surprised.
Him and Jay Dyer
First they took Santa Klaus from us, now they want to take our space mythology brought to you by Crowleyan degenerate Jack Parsons, baddie turned good Werner von Braun and oddball eastern European director Stanley Kubrick. Going to the moon is a cold war propaganda pipe dream and no one before that needed to feel good about themselves so who cares besides soy-infused scientismo goobers who trust the Science (triple boosted) and follow NASA on reddit?
Three words for you, Mulder: Van Allen belt
I'm pretty convinced it's fake and Russia knew it from the get go but here's a tough question for every boomer out there: why didn't they say anything until now? If USSR and USA were indeed in an arms race and were sworn enemies, why didn't the ruskies expose the fake Apollo missions when they used every possibility to attack American culture and progress in their propaganda?
I have the answer here: because the cold war was just as fake and gay as the space program. There was a war but it was an enormous psy op waged by the transnational technocratic elite against the populations on both sides. They freely shared scientists and technologies under the guise of espionage. This is what Orwell wrote about but most people are too dumb to understand. The great postwar America Trump talks about was a psy op and a giant experiment. Kennedy was in on it too but people like Greg here fawn over that shill just because tptb got rid of him due to internal conflicts.
Shout it from the rooftops.
I know about gematria and I don't care much for kabbalah or Pythagorean mysteries. My argument is that meaning is not found in names but in the concepts they point to. Names aren't arbitrary too but there isn't some secret numerical code to crack behind language to get to the ultimate meaning. This is reductionism. Meaning and truth is in the Word, who is Christ, the Logos and it is holistic. This is not to say there aren't deliberate codes in some texts like in Revelation and the number of the beast for example. But its a whole other thing to argue language is constructed that way.
Time is relative, just not to man.
What is time relative to then?
Newtonian mechanics is limited to the natural world obviously and Newton doesn't make claims about metaphysics. The problem with relativity and any modern "theory of everything" is that it rejects metaphysics on one hand but delves deep into it and tries to explain metaphysical concepts through physics (dark matter, ultimate nature of reality, the nature of time and space, causality beginning and ending of the universe, black holes). It has transgressed its limitations and went into philosophy and religion territory. This explains why much of modern science is tied to occult practices and movements like Thelema and theosophy (look at the origins of NASA and what Jack Parsons did).
Most scientismo spergs don't even realize this because they have zero knowledge of anything outside their field and think philosophy is a bunch of gobbledygook.
But I agree that general relativity can have some application. It's usefulness and profundity is vastly overstated though.
Imagine how many academia nerds believe this. And normies talk about the medieval period as the "Dark ages" of superstition and ignorance. People are too stupid and degenerate now to understand the vast knowledge and wisdom their predecessors possessed. Once again Christianity is proven correct - rejection of God makes one an irrational fool who falls for absurdities. We're the retarded children of kings. This is the ultimate Dunning-Kruger effect.'
Btw, wtf is "spacetime" made of? It has to be some material to make sense in a materialist worldview? It is claimed to have all the properties of material and it's always demonstrated by some piece of fabric that bends when a heavy object is placed on it. Is it something like magical fairy dust? It's all myth building and stupid ass rhetoric which has nothing to do with true science.
You can summarize an answer if you have understanding of the matter. I don't tell you "go read the Bible" when I'm arguing about Christianity, right?
I asked you a point blank question that can be answered with one paragraph - how is Christ's name related to the sun or the moon? You can at least quote a passage from the book. Also the book itself won't give me an answer about your epistemology and a justification of your worldview.
Read my edit and engage with it at least - don't just link me a 500 pager on esotericism and gnosticism. It may be a good read but this is not a book club.
That doesn't tell me much except that there were religions and cults that worshipped the sun and the moon as well as other natural objects. I don't disagree with that. You make a logical leap when you equivocate Christianity to those cults because of some superficial resemblance and your conclusion is arbitrary - it could very well be the case that Christianity is the true religion and all the pagan cults tried to explain God using the world around them and mythologizing the celestial objects. You start with a naturalistic presupposition about what religion is and how it came to be, that it evolved and was not revealed since the beginning of time and that no single religion is entirely true (all presuppositions common in perennialism and comparative religion studies). There's no such thing as neutral ground and all evidence is theory laden and viewed through a paradigm. So why is your paradigm the correct one?
How is Christ's name related to the sun or the moon?
He's an illegal. This one is on Biden.
Just when I thought that theory can't get any dumber.
General relativity is dumb. It deals with subjective perception and not objective states and universals as if reality is ultimately relative and not absolute. But if that's true, then general relativity itself is subjective and not always the case, i.e. it's not a universal natural law like Newtonian mechanics. It's just as stupid as all relativism like saying "All truth is relative", which is a performative contradiction.
Do objects behave differently when you observe them and does your observation change the actual physical reality (whatup Schrodinger)? This is some magical kabbalah thinking for ya. There's a small bridge to cross between this and the troons making up their own reality because everything is relative to their subjective perception. Is it any wonder the jew Einstein came up with such nonsense? Jewed-up physics par excellence and normies (even high IQ science spergs) fall for it.
Christ is likened to the sun by some Early Church fathers. Being the second person of the Godhead, He is eternal and the light He brings is also eternal and uncreated. The sun is an astronomical created inanimate object and the light it emits is purely physical.
So no, Christ is not the sun but the fathers liken Him to it as an analogy and a symbol. Christ is a divine person who assumed human nature in order to save humanity from death (the result of Adam's fall) and bring it in communion with God. He is not similar to Ishtar, Osiris, Apollo, Saturn, Mithra or any of those demon gods that pagans worship. Even if other religions had some notion of God their knowledge was incomplete led them to erroneous doctrines. Christianity is not sun worship in any way shape or form. The Christian calendar is cyclical because God made the world that way, so it reflects that basic reality of nature.
Maybe people deserve the punishment or maybe they bring it on them through their own sin and willful ignorance. Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
He's right though. According to OUR Church Fathers, Christ was born on 25th of December and this has been the Christian tradition since the IVc. I'm not sure who made you the authority on this one and how does your interpretation trump that of the Church Christ established Himself?
Doesn't sound like Christ is the Sun then because He was resurrected in the spring.
Utter bullshit.
Christians have been celebrating the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ on 25th of December since the IVc. (under pope Sylvester). St. John Chrysostom explains how that date was arrived at - John the Baptist was conceived during the Feast of Tabernacles (23 September). According to Luke 1, Annunciation was 6 months after that on 25 of March + 9 months of pregnancy = 25 December.
Jeremiah 10:2-5 is about making idols out of wood and metals, not about decorating a fir tree no matter how hard you weird sectarians try to shoehorn such an interpretation in. Christmas is not rooted in pagan traditions - it coincided with Sol Invictus and incorporated/consecrated it thus making it way easier to convert pagans to Christianity.
I think it's a good thing because more prots will realize how fake and gay their Christianity is. This will incentivize them to seek out actual traditional Christianity within the true historical Church that has kept the faith uncorrupted for 2000 years.
This guys looks like he's working for the jews though. He's the perfect ADL "Look at all the rampant antisemitism in the West - we must do something about it" goon.
Gospels first and foremost.
The Church has declared 25th of December to be Christ's birthday in the IVc. St. John Chrysostom explains how that date was arrived at - John the Baptist was conceived during the Feast of Tabernacles (23 September). According to Luke 1, Annunciation was 6 months after that in 25 of March + 9 months of pregnancy = 25 December.
I don't. All I know is there is a contradiction there and RFK will either abandon his big pharma crusade or Trump's admin will join it. A lot of anti-establishment people (both left and right) support RFK and if he does a 360 on this it will look very bad. That's basic logic.
That was a jab at you saying "our religion". I don't believe we share a religion too, fren. My religion is Christianity within the historic apostolic Church Christ established. You know, teh Church that gave you the Bible you do freestyle interpretations on.