web analytics
Bible Catholic Church Christendom Karlheinz Deschner Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (books) Literature New Testament Theology

Christianity’s Criminal History, 83

Below, an abridged translation from the third volume of
Karlheinz Deschner’s Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums.

God as the author?
The New Testament is the most printed and (perhaps) most read book of modern times. It has been translated into more languages than any other book. It has been interpreted, says the Catholic Schelkle, with an intensity ‘that surpasses everything. Would not any other book have been exhausted long ago with such exhaustive exegesis?’
Is it possible, apart from its Jewish ancestors, that it offers with some good things so many contradictions, legends, myths; so much secondary transformation and writing work; so many parallels, as shown by the History of the Synoptic Tradition by Bultmann with the tales of universal literature—starting with the old Chinese fictions, through the stories of Indians and gypsies, the tales of the seas of the south to the Germanic legends, with so many inappropriate remarks and nonsense—that many men have taken it so seriously, and many still take seriously?
The New Testament is, not only formally but also in terms of its content, so diverse and contradictory that the concept of a ‘New Testament theology’ became, a long time ago, something more than problematic. In any case, there is no unitary doctrine of the New Testament but great deviations, inconsistencies, notable discrepancies, even in regard to the ‘testimony of Christ’ itself. Only the fact that the Lord is attested gives the whole a highly heterogeneous unity. In view of this, speaking of inspiration or inerrancy leaves speechless even those of us who take it for laughter!
At the Council of Florence (February 4, 1442), the Council of Trent (4th session of April 8, 1546) and Vatican Council I (3rd session on April 24, 1870), the Roman Catholic Church has made the doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible, which carries inerrancy, a dogma of faith. In this last conclave they decreed that ‘the Sacred Scriptures, written by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, have God as author’. Therefore, the ecclesiastical theologians flatly deny the contradictions or even the simple possibility of falsifications in the Bible.
Contradictions and inerrancy, falsification and sanctity, illegitimacy and canonicity, hardly harmonise among themselves. Also, the high moral and religious dignity attributed to the biblical authors, their presumed conscience of the strict truth, is wrongly combined with all that. The ‘authority’ of their books is based and has been based precisely on ‘faithfully reproducing the prophecies about Christ by the prophets and the testimony of Christ by the apostles’ (Von Campenhausen). This is how the apologists have defended and still defend themselves, usually with eloquent words, against accusations of falsification.
Even a scholar not exempt of criticism such as Arnold Meyer, at the end of his article on religious pseudoepigraphy, not precisely in favour of the Churches, avoids the word ‘falsifications’—which I always prefer to the decent babblings of ‘serious’ science—and ‘prefers to speak of an ancient form of the creative literary force, which strives to give again the word to old figures, in a way as real and effective as possible, so that the truth finds today the same as yesterday a dignified voice and a successful defence’.
In fact, the fabrications of Christians—and of Jews—must be judged in a much more rigorous way than those of the pagans. Although the latter possessed sacred books, for example in Orphism or Hermeticism, these books did not have the meaning of a revealed religion. On the other hand, the Jewish and Christian revelations, the doctrines of the prophets and of Jesus, were obligatory; inviolable.
However, the Christians modified the writings of the New Testament and also of the Fathers of the Church, the texts of the ecclesiastical conclaves. In fact, they fabricated totally new treaties in the name of Jesus, of his disciples, of the Fathers of the Church; they falsified full acts of the councils.
It is significant that Norbert Brox (a Catholic theologian!) still calls in 1973 and 1977 ‘uncertain’ the scientific investigation of proto-Christian pseudo-epigraphy. He wrote: ‘All these efforts try to save themselves from the calamity of having to attribute to authors, with proven ethical and religious pretensions, a dubious behaviour in which they do not believe; and they want to delimit, from the whole mass of falsifications, an integral area: religiously motivated and beyond all suspicion’.

______ 卐 ______

Liked it? Take a second to support this site.

16 replies on “Christianity’s Criminal History, 83”

I often go on bitter nights
To Wotan’s oak in the quiet glade
With dark powers to weave a union –
The runic letter the moon makes with its magic spell
And all who are full of impudence during the day
Are made small by the magic formula!
Adolf Hitler, 1915

“The New Testament is the most printed and (perhaps) most read book of modern times. It has been translated into more languages than any other book. It has been interpreted, says the Catholic Schelkle, with an intensity ‘that surpasses everything.’ Would not any other book have been exhausted long ago with such exhaustive exegesis?” [ . . . ] In fact, the fabrications of Christians—and of Jews—must be judged in a much more rigorous way than those of the pagans.

These fabrications would therefore be “Judeo-Christian,” a perfect description for how these stories have been grossly misinterpreted. Unfortunately, all this intensive study by the goyim has invariably overlooked Jewish cultural influence and religious aspects of the Bible. Outside the Jews, that provide little of their knowledge of what this book is actually about, no one seems to grasp the literary essence of the Bible’s stories. I used to discuss The Conspiracy of Man with an old Jew, and from time to time, he would say, “You know, my rabbi used to tell me that.” Considering how far outside the Christian narrative the Conspiracy of Man is, this makes for quite a statement coming from a Jew.
This is what Jews say about Jesus’ crucifixion

Yeshua also willingly subjected himself to the religious authority of His day, the Sanhedrin. When He was commanded by the High Priest to confess his identity during his “trial,” Yeshua apparently complied (Matt. 26:63-64). Yeshua did this in order to fulfill the requirement of the Torah and to become a sacrificial victim on behalf of Temple Judaism (for more information, see: Yeshua’s Pidyon ha-ben ceremony).

This is the basic premise of The Conspiracy of Man yet, unlike these Jews, how many Christian scholars can, or will, tell you Jesus died as the final blood sacrifice of the “Paschal lamb” to permanently absolve Temple Jews, and only Temple Jews, of their sins?
The word “Torah” is literally translated as both “law” and “instruction.” Yet, how many vaunted scholars begin their research with the premise that the Torah is a book of legal instruction and not an historical narrative? The Torah contains Judaism’s original laws of Moses. The later books are nothing more than commentary on the law accompanied by prophetic ravings about what happens when Jews fail to observe them. This tradition of endless commentary expansion on the original Old Testament was faithfully carried on in the later Midrash, Gemara and Talmud.
The Old and New Testament are completely different, diametrically opposed, texts. Think of the New Testament as the antidotal recipe to the Old Testaments’ religo-cultural poison and you have the fundamental concept underlying the New Testament’s true purpose. Jesus said he came to “fulfill” Torah law, thus ending its contractual obligations for the blood sacrifice.
New Testament opposition to the old must be viewed from the legal perspective of being a complete replacement of ancient, Levirate law. Jesus speaks of this in a parable about mending garments and putting the “old wine” of Torah law into new context. Here Jesus is clearly saying his new law must completely replace the old law and not just be incorporated into the Torah’s legal framework.

No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse. Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.

This entire narration in Matthew and Mark concerns various legal aspects of Levirate law that Jesus openly scorns and rejects. It ends with Jesus’ ultimate rejection of the onerous Para Aduma, where he raises Jairus’ daughter from the dead.

“He said unto them, Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn. But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose. And the fame hereof went abroad into all that land.” (Matthew 9:24-26)

And again in John:

These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. John 11:11

The word “sleepeth” makes it clear that both the girl and Lazarus are not physically dead, but legally dead, as decreed by a Temple priest. Jesus’ authoritative rebuke of the Torah’s sacrificial law would have most assuredly spread his fame.
Studying the Bible from any other perspective than that of the ancient Jew/Hebrew/Israelite, provides nothing but a hopeless mish-mash of misinformation. This explains the reasons for the impossible, unprecedented, loony myths, instead of the physically related underpinnings of these stories.
The Bible is perhaps history’s worst piece of literary trash; badly worded and badly composed with horrendous lack of continuity, verbose with lack of explanation, contradictions, inerrancy, falsification and sanctity, illegitimacy and canonicity, that serve to drive all but the most dedicated and devout away. Stories jump mysteriously around, with characters and events disappearing then reappearing in later chapters. Yet this makes perfect sense for an oral tradition where a storyteller was present to fill in necessary details for a very small group of elect, priestly initiates.
Once again, one must turn to the Jews for proper understanding of the Torah’s oral tradition.

The written Torah, like all other writing, is subject to interpretation. For example, consider this statement in the written Torah: “This shall be for you the beginning of months” (Ex. 12:2). But which month is being referred to here? The Torah is silent and the matter must be settled by oral Torah. Or consider the prohibition to “work” on the Sabbath to keep it holy. How are we to define the idea of work or promote the idea of holiness? The written Torah only provides commandments against lighting a fire, cutting down a tree, plowing and harvesting, but does sanctifying the Sabbath mean just refraining from just these things? The oral Torah enjoins us to read the weekly Torah portion, to light Sabbath candles, and to attend synagogue to offer prayer. Consider further the laws of inheritance or the execution of the various civil laws of Israel. The Torah assumes people will get married but it does not provide any details about the marriage ceremony itself. Or ‏consider the commandment to wear “tefillin” on the arm and on the head between the eyes (Deut. 6:8). There are no textual details regarding what tefillin are, how they are made, or how they are to be worn. The only way we know about them is through oral Torah. The same could be said regarding affixing a mezuzah upon your doorposts and gates (Deut. 6:9) What – exactly– should be written, and where should it be affixed? In short, it’s impossible to understand the commandments of the written Torah without making interpretative decisions about issues not explicitly addressed in it.
There is a story that illustrates this point. A pagan came to Hillel seeking to convert but was troubled with the idea of the Oral Law. The first day, Hillel taught him the correct order of the Hebrew Alphabet. The next day he reversed the letters. The convert was confused: “But yesterday you said the opposite!” Hillel replied, “You now see that the Written Word alone is insufficient. We need the Oral Tradition to explain God’s Word.”
The interpretation of God’s words could “fill the world with books” (Eccl. 12:12, John 21:25), and therefore the oral Torah is considered infinite, just as the ways of the LORD are considered infinite. This explains why the oral Torah (as expressed in the two Talmuds) is at least 50 times the size of the written Torah. This also explains the importance of dialog and community in understanding Torah. Indeed, the written Torah is considered to be an abridgment or subset of the much more vast oral Torah. Since the sum of Torah could never be completely written down in a scroll, we therefore have the role of oral Torah as the authoritative expression of the Jewish interpretative tradition. “Torah,” then, does not refer to the written scroll of Moses or to ongoing commentary and discussion of these writings among the Jewish community: it refers to both.

However, Christians modified the writings of the New Testament and also of the Fathers of the Church, the texts of the ecclesiastical conclaves. In fact, they fabricated totally new treaties in the name of Jesus, of his disciples, of the Fathers of the Church; they falsified full acts of the councils.

Bingo! We have a winner here. The New Testament has had its elements of truth twisted and distorted to the point virtually all real meaning behind the stories have been lost to mythological mysteries that serve only the Christians’ ruling hierarchy.

Thanks for this. Rabbi Tovia Singer – who tries to disprove the New Testament from the old – discusses a lot of this stuff. I would actually recommend listening to him.
The Mitzvot-or laws- of Torah require interpretation. The talmud is simply the rabbinical magisterium of the Old Testament. Jesus refers to this magisterium by saying that we should obey the Pharisees as they sit in Moses’ seat. They possess the AUTHORITY to interpet Torah. Jesus recognised the Rabbinate, it would seem.
Hebraicists will also tell you that ‘Torah’ contains the radical meaning of ‘arrow.’ A Jew is aiming the arrow of his soul to Adonai. The arrow – or law – is a straight and narrow path that one must keep to. Jews – in contrast to Pauline Christians – ARE saved by the works of the law. Salvation consists of Adonai allowing you to live in Palestine in THIS life. My Hebrew is insufficient to confirm whether ‘Torah’ also contains the sense of ‘arrow’.

Hebraicists will also tell you that ‘Torah’ contains the radical meaning of ‘arrow.’ A Jew is aiming the arrow of his soul to Adonai. The arrow – or law – is a straight and narrow path that one must keep to. Jews – in contrast to Pauline Christians – ARE saved by the works of the law.

Fascinating. Christians often say, “sin is like an arrow missing the mark.” This is undoubtedly a derivation of the Jews’ interpretation of the law that defined sin. On the other hand, your arrow went straight to the mark when you wrote:
“Jews – in contrast to Pauline Christians – ARE saved by the works of the law.”
This is by far the most critical aspect of understanding the Bible, especially the New Testament; it’s all about Temple law. Thank you for the insight on the arrow analogy.

“Christians often say, “sin is like an arrow missing the mark.””
“Missing the mark” is morally neutral. Sin is not. Christians only say this because in the NT they appropriated the Greek word ἁμαρτία (hamartia) to denote sin. In their revolt against classical civilization, they destroyed not only pagan temples and altars, but corrupted the Greek language too.

In that documentary, I posted “Christian Dilemmas” they say that in Hebrew, eating the fruit of knowledge was not a sin. It was simply a mistake. Like “missing the target.” According to them, this was never how sin entered the world according to old-testament Judaism: only death.
According to them, all of Christian Christology and Soteriology is predicated upon a wrong interpretation of the Eden story. Christ supposedly is “the new Adam” and – in Catholicism – Mary is the New Eve mutans EVA nomen; reversing [the curse of sin] that EVE’s name signifies.

In that documentary, I posted “Christian Dilemmas” they say that in Hebrew, eating the fruit of knowledge was not a sin. It was simply a mistake. Like “missing the target.” According to them, this was never how sin entered the world according to old-testament Judaism: only death.

Remember, although Adam and Eve were cast out of Eden for eating the fruit, they took its knowledge with them. Therefore, clarity on this matter lies in the “fruit” the “tree of knowledge” bore. What was this knowledge of “good and evil?”
It really quite simple, the Jewish progenitors’ knowledge of good and evil is described in the remaining Torah. It is the knowledge of wealth, law, greed, subversion, manipulation, lying and how to play it upon those gullible goyim cultures based on concepts like altruism, truth, justice, and fair play. One can look around to find this “knowledge” working everywhere, in every aspect of their existence.
Unlike the vast herds of goyim, Jews are focused only on the material world and what can be obtained from it. Jews are the first to be suspicious of anything failing to meet the physical standards of the material world. As pathological liars, Jews are first to suspect and fear they are being lied to. As pathological deceivers, Jews are first to suspect and fear they are being deceived. As pathological thieves, Jews are the first to suspect and fear others are stealing from them.
Such racial traits are the reason Jews do not buy into their own Biblical bullshit. Being pragmatically grounded in the material world, Jews know better. They know their ancestors were the same breed of pathological liars, deceivers and thieves as themselves, so why would they believe their Bible’s absurd stories of magic and mysticism?
Note that magic is based on slight of hand that deceives the observer. Jews have long been known as the magicians that mastered this deceptive slight of hand. The Bible describes the Jews’ magical tricks, so why wouldn’t they know and understand the real world techniques behind the descriptions described therein?
Therefore, why would Jews see this knowledge from Eden as “sinful” when their culture is based on the process of Biblical “evil,” the destroyer, diametrically opposed to the “good” of goyim cultures that are the creators? Jews view this story as the manner in which Adamic man used the lord’s knowledge to overcome the lord himself.
Of course, as inverters of cultures, Jews see their use of the knowledge as a force of strength and therefore “good” by their standards, while the goyim’s knowledge is weak and failing, leading the gullible goyim to their justified fate at the hand of their Jew lord and master.
The Lord God of Eden was not the creator, the god above, the “Elohim,” but an Egyptian king or Pharaoh, which explains why this lord was not omniscient, failing to initially perceive the subterfuge of his priestly administrator, described only by his uraeus head piece. How can one know this? By clear delineation of Eden in other Bible passages.
Genesis 2:11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; Genesis 2:12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.
Note the grading of the gold as good? Here’s a challenge, name another place anywhere in the region inhabited by the ancient Hebrews that can be described as a “garden” with gold graded as “good” in the surrounding region. Egyptian gold is what Abram extorted from Pharaoh with his seester act.

Genesis 13:2 And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold.

As for Onyx stone and bdellium:

“Onyx was used in Egypt as early as the Second Dynasty to make bowls and other pottery items.”
“An Egyptian resin also called bdellium is obtained from the doum-palm, Hyphæne Thebaica, of Upper Egypt.”

Finally there is this revealing passage:
Genesis 13:10 And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar.
This verse provides a clear description of Egypt being the Garden of Eden. This is not comparison of the lord’s garden to Egypt but a comparison of Egypt’s “garden” to the well-watered plain of Jordan, as described in the Biblical authors’ usual twisted, convoluted manner, invariably mistranslated, misinterpreted and misunderstood by gullible goyim focused on religious magic and mysticism. Note this passage presages the destruction of Sodom yet to come.
When one understands the Jews, the Bible’s bloody entrails can be eviscerated using Occam’s shredder.

The story of Abraham is hilarious. He whores out his sister wife Sarah, and uses her as a bioweapon to spread STDs in Egypt. Any other nation would be ashamed to put an obscene story like that in their holy book… but not the Jews. Yahweh’s Holy Whores and Whoremongers. Revillo P. Oliver was great at satirizing the Old-Testament (((Hebrews))).

They interviewed – twice – a critical Hebrew Scholar on NON SEQUITUR; two of their best shows. “Bible Contradictions 1 & 2” . Circumcision is a crude blood pact with the blood-thirsty old-testament demon Adonai/Yahweh. The Jews take a blood oath to Adonai, like the Freemasons, to serve him henotheistically; i.e. Above the other gods like Ba’al and Molech; and he will – eventually – save them by permitting them to live in Palestine. The Jews and Adonai/Hashem/Yahweh are blood brothers.
The above is Rabbi Saul’s favourite topic to write about. To us Europeans we should just condemn circumcision as desert blood-magic superstition, and throw the epistles of Rabbi Saul into the trash.
My preconciliar Catholic brethren will condemn Circumcision as practised by Modern Jews, and condemn the blood oaths of Freemasonry and Mormonism; human and animal sacrifice as practised by Satanists… and then they will try to excuse these same practices in their “Hebrew Ancestors.”
Jewish blood magic should be totally beneath a European’s contempt, and yet homosexual Rabbi Paul – who sliced up Saint Timothy’s penis, and who probably fellated him with wine in his mouth to stop the bleeding – makes “spiritual circumcision” – circumcision of the heart (whatever the fuck THAT is) as a pillar of his insane theology.

“Iūdaeorēs iūdeīs ipsīs christiānīs.”
“With these Christians being more Jewish than the Jews themselves.”
More idiomatically:
“The Christians are more Jewish than the Jews themselves.”
One thing that that documentary, ‘Christian Dilemmas,’ illustrates is that Rabbis do not believe in the inerrancy/infallibility of the old testament. They will freely admit that there are – sometimes embarrassing – errors in the old testament.
Only the Christian believes that the old testament is “God’s preserved Word; ” that – despite observable reality being opposed to this ludicrous opinion – it is “free from error.”
Christians have a higher opinion of “Sacred” Scripture than the nation who composed it. This is a cucked mentality in my humble opinion.

Many Christians sects have now removed Jews as a relevant factor in Bible narration. I am continually astounded at the manner in which Christians dismiss Jews as an irrelevant factor in their religion. No doubt this is due, at least in part, to Jew craftiness.
Perhaps the ultimate demonstration of this delusional state is found in the “Christian Identity” movement where Jesus’ documented Jewish ancestry is denied and Jews are relegated to a role of coincidental irrelevancy. According to CI delusion, ancient Israelites are supposedly non-Semitic Aryans, from whom Jews stole their heritage. Talk about your Christian wack jobs!
I can understand why the church embraces the Bible, as it serves the very same purpose for which it was created by Jewish priests, i.e. garnering wealth and power for those religious authorities wielding its words. Yet I cannot fathom why Christian laity rush to embrace a Jewish book about a Jewish god that serves only the Jews, doing so by lying, deceiving, extorting, plaguing and destroying non-Jews.
The Jews’ god is the antithetical inversion of every aspect of the white mans’ most basic natures. Of course when one believes Jesus is one and the same as the Jews’ OT god YVHV, then such delusions can continue unabated.

This site discusses “Torah” being etymologically similar to “Arrow” or “something thrown.”
I would also recommend listening to some of Jeff A. Benner’s podcasts on his site.
In a Jungian sense, language is a projection of the ethnic soul. Benner discusses the mentality of the Hebrews as evidenced from their language.

“…language is a projection of the ethnic soul.”
Exactly. And the way to corrupt the ethnic “soul” is to first corrupt its language. Examples: niggers are re-christened as “African-Americans”; kikes become “people of the Jewish faith”; and the originary mistake, “missing the mark” becomes sin — a transgression against divine laws that minutely regulate every aspect of life, a worldview in this way smuggled into the white European consciousness along with its associated baggage of guilt, repentance, and atonement.
Language reform precedes thought reform, a necessary part of changing behavior. That’s the technique, unchanged in two thousand years.

“Affirmative action” – Blacks stealing our jobs.
“Anti-Semitism” – The belief by gentiles that Jews may be criticized like any other group.
“Civil rights” – Untermenschen and spoiled white women have more rights than Übermenschen in the New World Order.
“Diversified workforce” – Much fewer white males are to be hired or promoted.
“Disadvantaged” – Unqualified and can’t speak English or French, so give them money.
“Equal treatment and opportunity” – Fewer opportunities for white people.
“Historic grievances” – White people ended slavery, human sacrifice in the American continent and cannibalism in tribal societies.
“Homophobia / gay bashing” – The healthy revulsion by Lot for Sodomite or Gomorrahite behavior.
“Human Rights Commissions” – Inquisitions denying free speech. Thought Police that enforces liberal political doctrine.
“Immigration” – Race replacement. Genocidal levels of immigration.
“Interracial relationship” – White women having non-white babies. Also called racial engineering or soft genocide of white people.
“Misogynist” – Anyone who disagrees with the racially-suicidal empowerment of the feminists.
“Multicultural enhancement” – Destroy all European cultures.
“Politically correct” – Fines and/or jail for anybody not liberal and following the New World Order.
“Respect and tolerance” – Surrender. “Tolerance” for millions of immigrants means demographic genocide for whites.
“Culture of Hate” – Anything pro-white.
“Woman’s choice” – Abortion and genocide of millions of white babies.
Be warned! The first step that a dissident of the anti-white regime should take is to reject the System’s Newspeak, the words that anesthetize our understanding and debase our self-image.

When the Babylonians began to build their tower of Babel, the Jewish god got jealous: “this they begin to do”, that his Heeby-jeebies were incapable of building anything… and so he confounded the language of the Babylonians.
“And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.”
Genisis. KJV.
Confusing and corrupting language has been the Jewish Modus Operandi since the Book of Genesis.

Another point about that Babel story: The Jews will always try to destroy our societies when greatness and permanence is about to be achieved.
On the Dollar Bill, the Great Seal, white men are trying to put the capstone on the Great Pyramid, trying to complete a ‘magnum opus;’ trying to complete a society that will last through the ages: Novus ordo seclorum; per omnia saeculorum.
However, the Jews have never allowed us to place the Capstone upon any of our great societies; to give them permanence and security… not even in Ancient, almost Prehistoric, times… as is recounted in Genesis.
If we see the tower of Babel as an allegory for white Society; and its completion as giving permanence and security to a white society… then we see how the Jews will work to undermine and destroy such a white society before it achieves stability, security and permanence.
Charles Giuliani is correct: the Bible is the ancient protocols, the Jews’ original playbook; the Jews’ original society-subversion manual.

Comments are closed.