2012 Olympic Ceremony. How many satanic and globo homo agenda items can you find?

submitted by send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

This is material for the Retard Right. I don't know why so many want to mythologize the elites as some form of satanic organization that puts secret messages and imagery of their evil plots and plans open in the public. It is falsification of reality. Go to any art show and you will see stuff like this. It is just degenerate modern art aesthetic and modern "artists" are the people who design such shows. It is not secret cult messages from an evil elite running the world.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I concur that a fixation on this alleged aspect of Judeocracy is detrimental to the movement and leads to endless speculation, as seen in Pizzagate, QAnon, and the public's fascination with puzzle films.

The flagrant abuse of symbols in media (i.e. hexagram, in connection with planet Saturn) is merely part and parcel to the old Jewish contempt for the stars and other planets. That's why the ancient thinkers (i.e. Celsus, Porphyry, Julian) found their views so peculiar.

I don't believe the artists and show creators behind "predictive programming" are seriously expecting cosmic events, I think they're just being unconsciously inspired to convey these warnings.

The obsession with symbols must be redirected towards an occupation with problems and ideas; for it is ideas, and not symbols (as erroneously maintained by the Zionist-owned website VigilantCitizen), which shape epochs.

It must especially be noted that Hitler had called out both the churches and Freemasons for their activities in mystic "twilight", contrasted with his own movement's open and airy design (i.e. Ehrentempel).

Admittedly, the Gothic cathedral design with its stained window induces a contemplative disposition into worshipers. There was even a mystical film Leni Riefenstahl made on their behalf, titled The Blue Light.

The subject of satanism must never be addressed from Christian lens, except for propagandist purposes. Satanism is a very real phenomenon which should be divorced from Christian superstitions and (militant) atheist interpreters who view it as hedonism.

Their three most fundamental principles I know of are absolute power, self-assertion, and pragmatism.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Jews are spawns of satan according to Jesus so it makes sense to point it out.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

John 8:44 - Christians ignore the context, this is not an indictment of all Jews. John 8:31 indicates that he was addressing Jews who believed in him, not his Pharisaical adversaries. Narratively, that makes little sense, unless he only had Jewish leaders in mind (John 12:42). The only way it could be refashioned into a general condemnation of Jewry is if you read it as an indictment of the human intellect.

The lie in politics, religion, etc. originated with an one-sided intellectual development and the Jewish intellect (purely destructive) developed as a result of external circumstances (i.e. persecutions, climate). That's why the NS were hesitant to displace them into Siberia, where the harsh climate makes physical development superfluous and forces them to adapt.

Basically, the ability to lie develops from intellectual capacity alone, and the "art" of willful murder developed from cunning. You could probably form a decisive argument against gun control from this pov, since taking away guns doesn't do jack squat about people's penchant to get "creative" with makeshift weapons and devise clever, convoluted murder plans.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

John 8:44 - Christians ignore the context, this is not an indictment of all Jews.

No. We don't. The jews who deny Christ are spawns of satan. This is repeated throughout TNT

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Then by your logic, apostle Peter, who was the first to deny Christ, is of Satan. And by extension, the Catholic Church which has built its foundation on his legacy, is satanic. A write-up I prepared the other day:

Between Peter and Paul, Paul usually receives blame for inventing theology (distortion of Jesus' teachings). Yet we hear from Paul (Galatians 2:12) about Peter hypocritically distancing himself from gentiles and leading fellow Jews astray with this symbolic gesture, fearing men more than god (John 12:42-43). Please note that such leaders were differentiated from the Pharisees. There's even an account of Peter being invited to eat unclean animals (Acts 10:11-16). According to George Nelson's research, only people who are destined to become cannibals receive such visions.

So who really was the traitor? Judas? Then how come we hear nothing about him until his betrayal? It's almost as if he were introduced as a mere plot device, to move it forward.

It seems the title "the Zealot" was originally intended for Peter. Peter's fanaticism (John 13:8-9, 37; 18:10; Matthew 19:13, 18:7) exceeded even Jesus' expectations. Perhaps it wasn't storms or the waters Jesus had tried to calm, but Peter's outbursts.

The most compelling indictment of Peter wasn't in his denials, but in his hindrance of Jesus' intentions:

Matthew 16:22-23 Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!” “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

This rebuke is commonly assumed to be Satan momentarily obsessing Peter and speaking through him. Similar verse in Luke 22:31 (no parallels). Yet in Luke 22:3 & John 13:2, 27, Judas had no speaking roles, he just did what he had to do.

And oddly enough, nothing said about James and John (Luke 9:54-55) being affiliated with Satan. So why was Peter singled out as a representative of Satan, why was this the only time Satan spoke through a man? Who is the antichrist but he who denies knowing Christ (1 John 2:22)?

How is it that the three disciples who accompanied him up the mountain and into the garden were the most fanatical yet they couldn't even manage to keep watch for very long?

1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be evident that they all are not of us.

Is it not possible that the trip to the garden was just a ruse to expose those who didn't want to remain in communion with their brothers? The fanatics clung to Jesus like how flatterers clung to Stalin before coming out into the open and undermining his legacy.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Who is the antichrist but he who denies knowing Christ (1 John 2:22)?

Jews deny Jesus