Excerpted from the chapter “My Own Spiritual Awakening”
of Nature’s Eternal Religion by Ben Klassen:
Now I began to realize that the whole basis of this age-old struggle was race. It was the Jewish race using all the weapons at its command, and it did have a huge arsenal to destroy, mongrelize and enslave the mongrelized product of the White Race.
At this time I had not yet suspected that their most powerful weapon of all was their skillful use of Christianity on the White Race.
I decided to form a new political party polarized around the issue of the White Race. This I did, and formed the Nationalist White Party.
I had the immediate hostility of the Birch Society, which did not at all surprise me. What did surprise me now was I found that the strongest opposition came not from the Jews (as I had expected) but from the Christians. Every time we would discuss the issue of race, somehow or other Christianity and Christian principles would crop up so that in the end we wound up in a hassle about religion rather than trying to get down to the basic issue of the struggle against the Jews. This despite the fact that I had taken a pro-Christian stand. Continually I was told that the Jews were God’s chosen people; that the niggers, too, were God’s creatures; that racial discrimination was un-Christian, that “our Savior” was a Jew, the bible said “I will curse them that curse thee, and bless them that bless thee,” etc., etc.
This was a surprising new development. Whereas up to this time, I had regarded Christianity as something rather innocuous, and perhaps a time-consuming nuisance, it now suddenly hit me like a bolt out of the blue that Christianity was one of the most powerful weapons that the Jews had in their arsenal.
Now I began to study the bible all over again and particularly focused on the Sermon on the Mount. To my surprise I found that it contained nothing but real bad, suicidal advice.
Whereas before, I had heard and read all the bits and pieces of it, it had never occurred to me to examine what this kind of advice would do to a nation and to a race. Now I began to realize that such suicidal advice as “turn the other cheek,” “love your enemies,” “sell all that thou hast and give it to the poor,” “judge not lest ye be judged,” and “resist not evil,” was real suicidal advice. I now dug deeper into it and I found that the so-called Apostles, as well as the man purported to be Christ himself, were all of Jewish origin. Strangely, though, they had never sold their suicidal ideas to the Jews—on the contrary, they had sold it to the greatest civilization of ancient times, namely the Romans.
Then a lot of other things began to fall into place. Looking at Roman history it became clear to me that whereas Rome had established a great civilization, had conquered the world, was completely supreme, that when Christianity hit it like a plague, it began to crumble and fall apart. And after studying the underlying suicidal ideas that Christianity had perpetrated upon the Romans, I could easily understand why the Romans no longer cared to defend their Empire, nor to meet their earthly responsibilities. It became clear to me why the whole great White Empire disintegrated under the influence of this new Jewish poison.
I now felt like an excited detective who unexpectedly had stumbled on the greatest mystery, the most sinister conspiracy in the history of mankind. I began to look more and more towards the eternal laws of Nature for the solution. I began to study the Old and the New Testament with feverish and renewed interest. I studied the history of the races—the great White Race, the Jews, the niggers. I traced the rise and decline of civilizations. Like a detective, I began to feel that all the pieces, at last, were beginning to fall into place.
The more I dug into this, the more all the mosaic pieces began to fit together. I began to get a multitude of answers to questions that had eluded me throughout my life.
Studying Nature’s laws, studying religions and studying history and adding this to the experiences of my own lifetime, I found that I had finally made a breakthrough. My search had been rewarded by a multitude of answers—including the big one—namely, what is our purpose in life. The more I studied the Jewish plague, Christianity, religion, and the laws of Nature, the more compelling the solution thrust itself upon me. I suddenly realized that I had achieved a devastating breakthrough that was sweeping in its implications, compelling in its simplicity, and so overwhelmingly obvious that I wondered why I hadn’t seen the picture a long time ago.
It became abundantly clear to me that what the White Race needed was a completely new approach to the whole problem of extricating itself from the sinister Jewish conspiracy. And in order to get this new approach it seemed overwhelmingly clear that what the White Race really needed was a new religion, a new philosophy of life and a new Weltanschauung. It also occurred to me that my whole life experience had taught me and prepared me to do this fundamental job, namely, of formulating the new religion that was so necessary to the survival of the White Race. It also became overwhelmingly clear to me that to found a new party based on race while trying to coexist with Jewish Christianity was impossible. Every weapon that we needed in such a struggle was already undermined and neutralized by the basic concepts of Christianity itself.
I began to discuss my ideas with friends. I argued and debated with Christian preachers. To my further surprise, I found them completely at a loss to explain the numerous basic questions I threw at them, and usually they became hopelessly trapped in their own set of lies. I corresponded with former Kosher Konservative friends of mine and they, too, either conceded my position on Jews and Christianity, or were hopelessly driven to the wall.
It was then I decided to compile my creed into a book. I decided to formulate a new religion for the White Race that would lead it out of the quagmire of Jewish entrapment, out of despair and degradation, and into the bright light of greatness, to the heights of the wonderful destiny that Nature herself, in her great wisdom, had destined for this magnificent race.
It’s too late to form a new religion, but we could
at least follow Manu Rodríguez’s wise advice.
15 replies on “Jesus was a Jewish liberal”
As Manu said in one of his essays translated for this blog:
Christianity was for us a Horse of Troy, a poisoned gift, for us. It was the weapon used by the Jews to softly introduce their world into our minds and hearts and to assert their cause (they’re the “chosen” people); to undermine our confidence in ourselves and sow the doubt and bad conscience about our traditions; to dissolve our cultural identity, divide us, weaken us, deconstruct us. This was the strategy of Saul, the Apostle of the “gentiles.” Yes, it had its risks and disadvantages for themselves, but it was a worth try. They achieved their purposes. Ultimately, the Jewish tradition was imposed on our peoples.
With the New Testament came also the Old Testament, the whole Jewish world—which ended up devouring us. The “good news,” the “gospel” was the “luminous” lure.
Christianity is a Judaism for the gentiles: a half-Judaism, a decaffeinated Judaism… (see the complete article at “The God who unleashes”).
Should have gotten rid of Christianity in 732 AD.
All your present problems would have come to pass.
You’d all be race mixed mongols and muslim.
You don’t understand. No mongrels, whether Christian slaves or not, in the Roman Empire—no Islamic invasions in the first place. Islam only filled a vacated place (Orcs as a result of Isildur’s sin if you want to see it lyrically).
And the Church hated Charles Martel by the way even after his big victory over Muslims for having confiscated Church property.
I apologize to those who have clicked “wise advice” at the bottom of the entry. I didn’t mean to link the whole category “Manu Rdgz.” (my mistake), but only this specific letter:
I have fixed it anyway.
Yes but its impossible to win following our established *current* christian church ideals and principles.
The only solution I see is to restore more of the indigenous european religious ideals into “The West’s Religion”. By this I mean open recognition of the old pre-christian spirituality of Europe.
Also the open rejection of false ideals the modern church is promoting under the protection of its religious banner.
I will never give up my belief that Jesus Christ is the Redeemer promised by God during the Fall of Eden. Yes, Christianity is the poisonous fruit of toxic Judaism, but that does not mean Jesus Christ was a fraud; it just means that the Pharisee, Saul of Tarsus hijacked His movement.
Just sit down and read Saul of Tarsus’ antics as The Apostle to the Gentiles in the Book of Acts and it is a real eye-opener. I believe that Saint Stephen was not the last apostle whose death Saul engineered. I also suspect that he instigated the death of James, brother of Jesus Christ, as well. He was constantly stirring up trouble for James in Jerusalem. And one by one, the original apostles, when they were not trying to stop his antics in Rome, turned away from him.
But I digress. To me, the biggest tragedy in WN history was that Ben Klassen did not find a way to create a “Christian” church which could incorporate his Creationist beliefs rather than falling away completely from it. I believe he made the mistake of further ceding the field of Christianity to increasing Zionism until it finally mutated into the Jew-worshiping Judeo-Xtian obscenity that it is now. JMO.
The war between James and Saul was a war between Phariseic and ebionite- Essene Judaism and the Pharisees won. James wanted Jews to keep to themselves and become vegetarians, Saul wanted jews to mix with Gentiles and eat meat, they were opposites. So Saul turned a messianic movement within the judaism of it’s day on it’s head against the jews who were his enemies, jews who were what he believed to be a direct threat to Phariseic Judaism. By presenting himself to gentiles as being anti-jewish, even anti-semetic he could secure phariseism among non-jews and combat the Essene version of judaism which was being led by James, and he chose the nice guy, Jesus as a perfect counter action against the palestinian movement which he hated.
By making gentiles believe in the sacrifice of jesus he thus did away with the Essene opinion that animal sacrifice was invalid.
In essence he gave the gentiles bad information, according to the Ebionites led by James it was even criminal.
James and his followers did not think that they’re revolution was intended for non-jews, and if they were to adopt it, it would be their free choice and would include jewish purity regulations, vegetarianism and would in no way intrude on their racial identity, it was a spiritual-purity based asceticism being practiced by James and his followers.
If James had won and not Saul, Rome never would have spread Christianity all over the world, and Jamesian style Ebionitism would simply be a spiritual path for individuals, much like Islam (for non-Arabs) and Hinduism (for non-Hindus).
Paul was a Pharisee who saw the whole movement James was leading as a danger to Phariseeism, the Nazirenes were to him a threat, and Jesus, not only being a Nazirene but teaching non-violence made Saul of Tarsus enraged. He did not like the Nazirenes and what they were doing, he did not like them when he was merely a Pharisee and when he “fell off his horse” he still hated them, and if they were gonna transform judaism, he was going to raise a Gentile army against them.
Phariseic thought says that “there must be sacrifice”, God needs blood, just as humans need meat. Even when Saul developed his new religon, he still remained a Pharisee. So now instead of depending on the blood of animals for remission of sin (which Nazirenes, Essenes, and Ebionites rejected) he made Jesus the sacrifice.
As a Pharisee, Saul was very materialistic. Really what the Pharisse’s hated about the Nazirenes was that they were vegetarians, and did not participate in animal sacrifice, so Pharisee’s felt they were abondoning Judaism. Pharisse’s like Saul saw that the Nazirenes were becomeing a
danger, because they were getting popular. Jesus, James and their whole family where very popular and well known, to the Pharisse’s this was a direct threat to their authority and egotistic point of view.
We were lied to about 1st century Judean history, terribly lied to.
We were taught that once upon a time there was this man named Jesus, and these old cranky Pharisse’s did not like Jesus, and that all the Jews saw him as “foreign”, and teaching something new that these short sighted souls could not identify, because of their religon.
Indeed Jesus was simply spreading the ideas of his culture, the nazirenes to all the Jews. Much like the child of a old 60’s hippie comes to class and turns all the kids into hippies! This was the concern of these Pharesee’s, that “this thing may spread”. So they were not merely suspicious of Jesus because of his radical ideas, but because they knew he was a “Nazirene” and under the cloak of non-violent ideas–which the pharisee’s opposed, he was also bringing Nazirene culture with him. Much like Prabupad under the cloak of “Krishna Conciousness” was also introducing Western people to Vedic culture.
The Pharisee’s made allot of money off the animal sacrifices, if James the Just who was already a very respected character in Jewish life, and Jesus could succeed in convincing other Jews not to participate in animal sacrifices, the Pharesee’s would be financially ruined.
This was a dangerous movement that needed to be watched, that was the opinion of the Pharisee’s. The problem was that it was getting popular, much more popular than the Gospels tell us.
James, under the cloak of “national fame” was turning many Jews into vegetarians and therefor messing up things for the Pharisee’s, and Jesus, through his non-violent preaching was not only turning many jews away from violence, but you can bet that he was also teaching animal rights too. In any case both brothers, one under the cloak of national pride, and the other under the cloak of non-violence, were introducing Jews en-mass to Nazirene culture and ideas.
That was the conflict, it was not simply Jesus against “the Jews”, it was an entire sect of Jews that were a problem for the Pharisee’s–Nazirene culture.
People argue about “what is true christianity”, what is true Judaism?
Most of what we call Judaism is a collection of rules and laws about how to do things, not rejecting the things in themselves, oh no, but how to do it, in other words how to do things that a true initiate would not do in the first place, it is a religon of the people, not of the superior individuals who revolutionize human life.
This is where arrogance comes in, because if you think you are better than a butcher because you “pour all the blood out” in my estimation you are mistaken.
If someone was going to hurt you would you care if they said a prayer first? No, but the one who is hurting you would!
A true initiate can see that within what we call “Judaism” are kernals of “God’s plan” of redemption, mostly credited not to a people, but a group of individuals like David, Solomon, the prophets….it is really these individuals who put forth the ideas that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam claim is their platform of faith.
“Isaiah’s mountain” describes a future world where there is no violence, imagine that. a relgion filled with violence claims to be the one to put an end to violence!
All the prophets at one time at another put down animal sacrifice.
The problem is that judaism puts it’s best individuals in their place, it is essencialy a rational faith, “their prophets serve them, not the other way around”. Lets admit, that if you take all the bad things out, you are only left with the good, in this respect, if all the bad was taken out of Judaism, it would be a perfect religon. It would not only be moral, clean, and undeflied, but would also be compassionate–free of error.
Hindus by majority are vegetarian out of spiritual conviction and compassion that Krishna has for living things, but they worship idols (which I don’t see as evil). Judaism, If practiced correctly, would not be against idolatry, simply above it, and it would be vegetarian, I mean it’s supposed to be perfect right?
Hitler once said “when I enter a Church it is not with the idea of overturning idols, but to find beauties in which I am interested!”
He knew they were idols, he knew that most Catholics did not, but he was they’re for a pagan reason! To find beauty in these statues!
He knew they were idols, which the Catholic Church insists are not, but that was his personal knowlege, which also proves that he understood the mystery of the Semites (Arabs and Jews), and that one piece of knowlege that they seem to have, which all Aryans lack.
This is what true judaism would be, not the nasty intolerance of a bunch of envious ugly faces, simply a knowlege that yes, these are idols, but they are beautiful! And better to worship an idol than kill an animal.
Don’t make a idol of anti-idolatry! For that is more dumb than to worship an idol.
Righteousness and compassion and are supposed to be the most important things.
“Rejecting idolatry” is stupid, makes ugly people feel better and justified in oppressing the beautiful, plus, only ugly people “see through the pretty people”. It is bullshit.
Let the pretty people enjoy their idols I say, and let the ugly people “be above it”.
Ovcourse Hitler was no nieve Aryan, he was certainly versed in Semetic knowlege.
“He knew what they knew”, and he knew that “the Aryans did not know”.
So, Judaism, a religon that has so much violence, certainly no “better” than it’s pagan counterparts as far as “kindness” and “perfection” go, also has within it’s contents a clear plan to redeem humanity and creation as described by Isaiah. The problem is that people love the very things that prevent any type of “Isaiah paradise” from emerging.
Instead a stream of animal sacrifices and wars are what you will generally find in the old testament.
That is the problem, how can average people be influenced to be saints when their holy book contains so much violence?
Also, if one is a believer in “righteous violence”, how can one truly do that when it tells you to kill your kid if he or she mouths off?
Thus, if you follow the bible, you can neither be a saint, nor a practicer of “righteous violence”…..at best you can be a practicer of misguided, and overeactive violence. Is it better than being a confirmed criminal?
One thing is for sure, many very corrupt people have thrived on the confusion of right and wrong presented in the Bible.
The Bible is not some Druid book, it claims to have perfect truth.
In ancient society, there was not much room for compassion, and certain things needed to be done, like fighting invaders, hunting animals for food, you needed to be tough or you and your tribe could not survive, this was absolute truth to ancient people. Now the Bible claims absolute truth “not of this world”…..perfect. Above and better than the misguided. Ancient people did what had to be done and that was their faith. If I say….”this is for survival” it can justify many things, some things that would not be nessacary in a perfect world. But if I say: this is nice, and this is not nice, you know exactly what I am talking about even if you are only in kindergarten. Is hurting a animal nice?
Ovcourse not, but if someone thinks it is nessacary than they don’t care if “it is nice”
It is the direct confusion of what is right and what is wrong that the Bible promotes, even a 4 year old can see that. Not only that, but cruelty is even expanded when it is not neccessary in the Bible.
We need to fix this.
What Hitler was doing, was actually a western form of what the Essenes were doing 2000 years ago. They were vegetarians, racially aware, and believed in a war between the “sons of light against the sons of darkness”. Much like Hitler fought America, The Essenes were to fight Rome, just as Nazi’s fought the Russians and other Slav’s, the Essenes
were gonna fight the Arabs–line of Ishmael. Ironically the Essenes also saw the majority of their own racial people as spiritually sons of darkness. The Essenes were very nationalistic, extremely obsessed with bodily purity, they would not even let the crippled come near them. Ovcourse The Nazirenes were a more liberal version of the Essenes, only they were pacifists and had families—they reproduced. The Essenes did not reproduce, they were stricktly spiritual, and like the Nazirenes and Ebionites, they rejected animal sacrifice, which had become a central part of Judaism.
So “the Essenes” were in my perception the same as the Nazis, they believed in a “righteous war” against the wicked and the inferior, and they were truly perfect, if there was such a thing as “righteous violence” (which Jesus did not believe in) they would be a representative of that. So this put them in opposition to the Pharisse’s because to the Essenes, they were also “sons of darkness”.
Jesus, although he was teaching a much more peaceful–compassionate
version of Essene ideas, he was still seen by the Pharisee’s as a “Nazirene troublemaker”.
The Essenes saw that bodily purity would lead to spiritual purity, and Jesus saw that spiritual purity, would lead to bodily purity, but what separated Jesus from the Essenes was his instance of compassion for the unrighteous, while the Essenes wanted them exterminated.
Jesus and the Essenes had the same enemy, the only difference was that Jesus wanted to forgive them (love thy enemy) and the Essenes wanted them gone, but they had the same enemy.
Between the Essenes and Jesus, Judaism could have really been upgraded, having righteousness from the Essenes, and compassion from Jesus, thus knocking out the Pharisee’s from both angles.
Jesus thought they were too judgmental, and not representing the purity of the kingdom of God, and the Essenes saw them as in error, and loving all the wrong things. For one thing is for sure the Essenes loved all the right things.
The oppressor uses violence, and the oppressed uses violence too, but it is a different type of violence.
Christianity confused all that, if we are talking about right and wrong, then Essenes were the true version of what the Pharisee’s were the false representatives of. If we are talking about compassion, kindness and things like that, then Paul made these things secondary at best, and he also hated the “true righteousness” of the Essenes and the Nazirenes. Plus, in the Essene program, there is a place for jesus and what he taught, in fact it connects to the Isaiah prophesy of a perfect future world with no war, no violence, vegetarian, and this fits right into the Essene prophesy of the perfect future world, the “golden age” that they were preparing for, and within the Nazi program, indeed all the violence they engaged in they believed was pushing them into the “golden age” where everything Jesus taught would be common practice. A future vegetarian world was their goal, according to Jesus, they were using the wrong methods, as he would have told the Essenes, even though like the Essenes, some Nazi’s actually wanted the right things, the things that Jesus preached, Hitler himslef was such a person.
A paradox it seems.
Jesus was teaching Essene princables, the only difference was that he had compassion on the people who were wrong, does not mean he thought they were right! Christians have misrepresented him, saying that he was a “simple Jew” who wanted Pharisee’s to have compassion, and believe he was the son of God–ovcourse. If you are starting off incorrect, you can’t claim to have a solution if your platform is wrong from the start.
Jesus came for the sick, not for those who had their shit together, the Essenes for all their faults were very well, they had their shit together, they did not need Jesus.
If we are talking about “correct” than Essenes were correct.
Jesus was correct, he was also compassionate.
The Pharisee’s were neither correct, nor compassionate.
Essenes were true conservatives, and Jesus was a true liberal with the personal righteousness of a conservative, but that was his personal trait, his message was liberal, more liberal than James the Just his brother as well, certainly more liberal than Paul.
He was like a hippie who does not have illicit sex or do drugs but is a “peace-nick”. Hippies loved the trees, animals, the earth from a peacnick point of view, the Nazi’s loved trees, animals, and the earth from a “Aryan” point of view, they liked many of the same things, and certainly had the same enemy, how to deal with this enemy was how they differed, also the hippie movement was not racist, and the nazi one was.
Essenes, James, and his movement were racists, and the Nazis were to the hippies what the Essenes were to the followers of Jesus.
Jesus was a peace-loving liberal version of the Essenes, as the hippies were liberal un-racially identified tree huggers and animal lovers.
Just goes to show that “in the begining” the liberal and conservative was just like the male and the female, they were united, racial purity went hand in hand with vegetarianism….in Eden it was so.
In our world today we view vegetarianism as a irrational kindness, much like Americans once saw civil rights.
So even if vegetarianism was originally conservative, it is now a liberal issue.
Just wanted to see if the post went through
I wish you hadn’t bothered.
[…] Via The West’s Darkest Hour […]