Posted by: graemebird | April 8, 2016

How could Jesus have died for my sins? How does that make moral sense?

If you look directly at the wall you get a different viewpoint then if you hover above the neighbourhood.  You are correct from the angle you are taking. But consider the history of blood sacrifice. It is an appalling practice in the species generally and particularly strong in Judaism. If the human race could not get over this practice, no ethical society could ever be possible.

The greatest extention of the rebellion against blood sacrifice is “Just  War Theory.” This was proposed by Augustine and developed further by Aquinas and Grotius. The Jews have always rejected this body of thought. We see this with their false flag terrorism. But JUST WAR THEORY is still official Christian theology.

Just war theory is the only hope for our species. Yet JWT could never have come out of the Aztecs or directly from the Jews. JWT had to come out of a tradition that was shot through with the Greek concept of LOGOS and attached most emphatically to the idea of NO MORE.

No more blood sacrifice ever. The last human sacrifice had to come from the highest authority …… and not at HIS behest, which would be cruel and hypocritical. The last ethically mandated blood sacrifice had to be OF the highest authority.  Then the word had to go out that that’s it “THAT IS IT!!!!!!!” and no more.

Now notice the immense subtlety of the saviour. Though he kept his cards close to his chest, he was playing the longest possible game, and we have the hope that he has saved every one of us. In the sense that we still have the hope that he has saved the human species as a whole.

We can see that his cryptic nature, and esoteric lessons, were the correct approach, when we compare Western civilization to the other so-called Great civilisations. GRAND STRATEGY tells us that little is gained by spelling everything out and being overly obvious.

Up until about the 11th century India was a “Great Civilisation.” China is more than a match for the West in the opinion of many fairminded students of history.

But Just War Theory came directly out of the Christian West. It did not and could not come from another tradition, even if that tradition was superior in many ways. It could never come out of evolution strictly speaking. Because evolution must breed a certain cut-throat evil into the hearts of the intelligent organism. JWT could only come out of something so strange and off-key as the story of the Gospels.

It is for this reason that even a good atheist should see the Saviour of Christianity as his (the atheists) saviour as well. Because the instinct for blood sacrifice is deeply imbedded in DNA or at least our human makeup.

But the saviour, by his actions said “one last time and never again” in a way that could affect people in any era, and could influence individuals at every level of sophistication.



  1. What LOGOS are we talking about here? Nike? Adidas? I’m not sure they have anything to do with Greece, apart from the Olympics maybe.

    • Ho ho. Look up the Greek idea of LOGOS in the Brittanica. Its an involved concept. But the guys who composed the Gospels put it front and centre in the theology of the book of John.

      So even though the Christian religion is likely just a combination of superstition and at the start, clever psychological warfare ….. Nonetheless Vespasian and Titus, shot the Hellinism right into Christianity’s DNA. And even though the results of this may have taken a 1000 years to kick in, they were not small results.

  2. Good rant by Mark Steyn from way back. But a little bit dated as the Jew dictatorship closes in and gets more obvious and oppressive:

    • Mr Steyn is a Hebrew, Mr Bird, or at least a mischlinge,

      • Yeah. Thats likely why he hasn’t come clean about the Jews doing 9/11 yet. But he is kind of quiet about that subject. He doesn’t tend to make these big deals about all the false flags that are getting about. So he is a little bit less indecent than a lot of others. Like Bolt and Tim Blair for example. Is Blair a Jew? He is still out there talking like Muslims did 9/11. I thought he had done some sort of building or traidee work some time or other. He is very disappointing. Well they all are. But Steyn is a little bit smart about not talking too much about these terrorist attacks and he’s focusing more on beating up the left over weaponised immigration. He’s not doing Gods work exactly. But he does not make me want to take him out the back and shoot him as a collaborator.

      • I am not allowed to talk to Fisky on Catallaxy at the moment. Maybe you ought to convey to him that he is not quite on his usual firm footing on technical grounds with a debate he is having with Monty. Usually one might dismiss Monty as a dumb lefty. But here I would have a bit each way with their debate:

        “Just to revise. Y = C + I + G + (X-M). At the moment (X-M) is negative. So slapping a tariff on imports cannot possibly reduce GDP.”

        Right. If the GDP metric is your thing, then this would be valid, since probably the reduction to imports would exceed the reduction to exports. But supposing the tariff were on producer goods, rather than finished goods? Then the tariff would massively reduce exports as well, and throw a lot of people out of work.

        We don’t want to go for just one metric. One reason we thought we ought to reduce tariffs was to stimulate exports. This probably worked to some extent. One metric is to think almost purely about increasing exports. Monty has a point Fisky. Because think of the GFC. GDP held up during the GFC, but both exports, and imports went into the toilet. Which is one reason job growth collapsed.

        You cannot get too confident with your thinking here. The tariff ought to try and avoid intermediate goods. And the only reason to back it in the first place is to have it as a negotiating measure to increase exports. Thats why in the hands of Trump and his big shot negotiators we can consider this matter with an open mind. What he is trying to do is not increase X-M, well yes he is to some extent. But since he is using it as a negotiating ploy, and not an end in itself, his main goal is to leverage up X. Its all about making these guys an offer they cannot refuse when it comes to making it easier for the Americans to crank up X.

        Now check what Monty’s view of the scenario is. He thinks that it will likely lead to less X and less M on all sides. Which would mean a lot less jobs for everyone and it would kind of mimic what happened during the GFC. If Trump puts the tariff on intermediate goods that is the likely result almost immediately. So don’t be too confident about this sort of thing. We want to run surpluses. But we don’t want to run them via tariffs, quotas or subsidies. We need to be a bit smarter about this sort of thing, and in this case you ought to be realising that Monty does have a few pointers.

      • Note how that when we see “one of the good guys” like this who has gotten some Jew in him …. Well there are Anglos who have been saying the sort of things he says for a long time. But they are never going to to be allowed to be successful under these circumstances. A lot of what he is saying is a rehash of Patrick Buchanan. Compared to what I would have had to deal with if I had gotten as prominent as him, its not that much. Okay its true they are reeling him in now and they may get his house. But we get a false impression that Jews are smarter than the rest of us. Because you see how it works in science. The inbred troglodytes just obstruct obstruct obstruct until one of their own tribe looks like he might get all the credit. Then they go quiet on that fellow. So then the rest of us jump at that fellow, heap great praise on him, and it gives the wrong impression that the inbreeds may be conveying some sort of net good on the rest of us.

        Mises, Rothbard, and Reisman are exceptional. But mostly even the good-guy Jews are recognised simply because whitey who was saying the same stuff earlier is made unemployable.

  3. Obama’s Mother said to have been pinpointing people for Suharto to murder in Indonesia.

    • Source? Or are you just making shit up (again)?

      • You know I have forgotten where I got that one from. Sorry. Cannot source that one for you. If I find it again I will let you know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: