In an earlier posts, we saw that the Ten Commandments only apply among Christians. Later on, we saw that White Christians did enslave Whites of another religion. Given the fact that Christian slavery doesn’t look at race, does this mean that Black Christians have the right to enslave White Atheists (or White Muslims, for that matter)? A colorblind Dominionist like Dave Barton would have to agree.
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
oogenhand 
In light of your correct views on dual morality, I’m curious what you think about the idea of rights generally speaking. I say they don’t really exist and if the black christians are able to enslave white atheists, good for them.
The very idea of rights does presume a framework of Judeo-Christian moral absolutes, that is true. But why do you think my views on dual morality are true, as most people would disagree?
I don’t have a good answer for you, other than the fact that not using dual morality means we die.
A black preacher in Oakland a couple years ago essentially said Christianity gives blacks the right to riot in the streets over “injustice,” meaning the trial didn’t go how they wanted after a white cop accidentally killed a black guy.
The point is Christianity can be interpreted in a lot of self-serving ways based on agendas. Mainstream white Christianity used to be racist and only consider Christian whites to be the true nation of Christ. That’s what made it possible for American settlers to get rid of the Indians, whom they saw as “Canaanites” who happened to be in the way of their “promised land” where they’d build “the New Jerusalem.”
Why did they consider them to be “Canaanites”? Why did they use the Old Testament over the New Testament? It seems to be a kind of DSCI before this was really formalized in the 20th century.
The pilgrims and other Christian white settlers may not have actually used the term Canaanites, but the concept is the same: God delivered them from oppressive Egypt (Europe, the Old World) to the promised land (America), where they were to establish Israel, with themselves, the white Christians, cast in the role of the true nation of Israel, and if there were some aboriginal, non-Chosen people who happened to already be there, God permitted (maybe even commanded) wiping them out. I believe that’s how a lot of the settlers thought about what they were doing during the period of 1500-1900.
Mainstream white Christianity at that time was a faith of survival and life compared to today’s faith of surrender and death for whites. Like William Pierce said, if you think about it, the early white settlers had a stark choice after the third of fourth time Indians massacred them and destroyed their crops: Either they or the Indians would have to go. So the settlers rolled up their sleeves and did what had to be done to survive in a hostile environment. I see a lot of people in the WN world bash Christianity, but I don’t think Christianity is the problem; I think it’s destructive interpretations of Christianity that are the problem.
But the destructive interpretations are closer to the New Testament text. Matthew 5 as a particular egregious example. Even if you follow the CI-line of considering whites Israelites, you still have the problem of the New Testament abrogating the Old Testament. You have to have something to abrogate the cheek-turning. Only by coupling abrogation to dissimulation you stand a chance. Oddly, NT literalists have large families, while Jesus didn’t have any biological children. And it is exactly the large families which require wars of conquest and a dual morality.
OTOH, many people in the Muslim world convert to Christianity BECAUSE they want a peaceful, loving religion. And, let’s face it, in its historical form, Paganism was neither a racial religion. In a way, Asatru is closer to Islam than to Christianity.
Re: 5:25 comment, I’m not a biblical scholar, but somehow medieval and early-modern Christians figured out ways to interpret Scripture that gave them permission not only to defend themselves and their property but to even take Other People’s Stuff. Getting back to your original question, I’m sure somehow black Christians could interpret Scripture to give themselves permission to enslave white atheists, probably by concluding that Christian morals don’t apply to non-Christians, or even to non-black Christians.
Julius Evola goes into some detail in “Revolt Against the Modern World” about how the knightly medieval code of chivalry got around the cheek-turning nonsense, and present-day Russian Orthodox Father Matt Johnson (over at Voice of Reason radio) asserts that cheek-turning only applies within Christendom. He further claims that if cheek-turning applied outside Christianity, then the 1,000-year, Christian, militarily powerful Byzantine Empire couldn’t have existed. Makes sense to me.
Sometimes I think the words can get in the way of Christianity’s true benefit to white folks: spiritual collectivism, which is what it’s really all about in my book. I’ve considered myself to be an Odinist for the last several years and still do, but I don’t think you’re ever going to be able to completely separate Christianity from white people. The Jewish Communists tried in the early Soviet Union and failed miserably.
So unfortunately, if you want to talk to ordinary white folks about matters of the spirit, you have to talk to them in the spiritual language they’re familiar with and understand: Christianity. Maybe the best you can do is try to come up with something like Positive Christianity as existed in the Third Reich. I won’t be able to get back to the computer for about half a day but look forward to your reply.
Black people do have invented their own version of Dual Seedline Identity, in which Blacks AND Hispanics are considered Israelites, while Whites and Jews are considered Edomites, to be enslaved. They are not open about their ideas about Arabs, but there are versions which mention the Arab slave trade. Black Hebrews consider Black Muslims to be competitors.
The proof: In the Bible, Israelites are often confused with Egyptians. Everybody knows, of course, that Egyptians are Black.