Hey, there Steemit. This video was banned by Youtube so I’ll link from Bitchute. I’m going to blog a lengthy reply as to why it’s not antisemitic and post it here on Steemit.
First some thoughts on the analogies. I’m not saying the church throughout its history was innocent; far from it, I’m saying that from the Gnostic perspective, the European church was symbolic of innocence (Oliver), or better yet—the purity or Sattva of Christ. I also want to make clear that from the gnostic view it was the archons who’ve set up the economic conditions for hardship and strife (begetting the actions of Fagan) which really does set up the conditions for humanity to behave badly. The RCC certainly played a part in this by setting up laws against the Jews which effectively ghettoized them. But the archons are neither friends to Jews or gentiles. They are playing all of us and none more abused than the followers of an evil Yahweh— no matter how the religion that protects him is framed—Judaism, the RCC, or Islam. It’s all the blind leading the blind.
Suppose, for a moment, that Yahweh is real and evil...This leaves a certain tribe in an unenviable situation. Throughout history most have been in denial about this although the Gnostics were not and many of them were Jewish. So what’s left? Well, at that point there is a very good reason to argue that God doesn’t exist! But do you see the problem with the motivation here? It also rejects reality and sets up a false narrative rather than except the truth of life in the evil matrix. Do you see how this condition sets up the ‘blind leading the blind scenario?'
Let Bobby educate you on the meaning of GOOD as it relates to theology:
And let Dharma nation educate you on the collective energies of civilizational evil:
Now let’s touch on the evils of the fiat currency system and how it destroys any attempt at a healthy civilization while also causing environmental disaster. From my view, it is in no way anti-semitic to point this out; rather, and in fact, it’s a moral imperative to do so.
More controversy:
11. Moral Hazard – Baron Acton observed in 1887 that “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Since fiat currencies are created by monetary monopolies ex nihilo, e.g., through loan contracts, they provide a legal means of obtaining something for virtually nothing. As a result, those responsible for fiat currencies enjoy almost unlimited influence over economic and, therefore, political life. Sadly, human beings can never be good stewards of a currency system that provides one group in society with the means to obtain something for nothing. In fact, societies dominated by immoral fiat currency schemes eventually develop a something-for-nothing culture; a culture of entitlement in which, rather than producing wealth, everyone endeavors to live at the expense of everyone else.
From this excellent paper on why fiat currencies are evil and destructive to societies and the earth. https://www.financialsense.com/contributors/ron-hera/fifteen-fundamental-problems-with-fiat-currencies
My assertion about the social media giants as an extension of the fiat currency Ponzi scheme isn’t all that off the mark. One is a monopoly on currency and one is attempting to monopolize the human noosphere/mind (internet)... You do protest too much! Also, a quick glance at the heads of the Fed does show that it wasn’t entirely Jewish, although since 1970 it has been (is stating facts anti-semitic?)...Here is the context for this section where a commenter also accused me.
At the end of this video I suggest that modern atheist movements were funded and backed by the central banking cartels. Certainly Marxism was the Jewish revolutionary spirit in action. Darwinism applied wrongfully to the economic sphere has helped to justify and normalize what is in fact a predatorial economic model. And the new right-wing atheists are all zionist backed and funded, in my opinion, as you rarely hear them critiquing our current economic model while conspicuously and consistently attacking Christianity, and Islam; while rarely ever critiquing Judaism, or, it’s so rarely critiqued by the new atheists that my perception here is likely not off the mark...
I’ll finish with this: any sane society would allow the freedom to express that someone is a goddamn liar! It’s just a thought expressed. It may not be a nice thought but that’s all it is, and if someone says ‘you’re a goddamn liar and I want to kill you’ any sane society would investigate the context of the expression. Is it a six-year old child angry at a parent because a parent abused the child? Was it a drunken figure of speech by a hockey player at a pub after the game when a referee walked by him? Policing words isn’t the way to deal with difficult issues.
Now, I don’t really think Gotama was a real historical person, I doubt Jesus was either as depicted by the RCC; it was centuries later that Nargajuna wrote in what he thought the Buddha taught; and it was Paul much later that wrote in what he thought Jesus taught, and both more or less inverted what these supposed masters taught. I shouldn’t be put in jail for not believing any of these historical narrative. I certainly don’t believe the narratives in the Torah; if anything all the evidence proves Moses was a Hykso’s Hebrew warring pharaoh. Like Thomas Paine, I don’t believe very much that is written in the Bible, and that IS the correct assessment of that book from the forty years of inquiry I’ve put into it. I also don’t believe the official narratives of the 20th century which clearly and factually have the Jews sitting on the top of that Egyptian money pyramid. It’s simply immoral and repugnant to call it a crime to question ANY historical narrative! Especially when any given person calling bullshit does not advocate any type of violence whatsoever. I belong to the Ahimsa non-violent school of spirituality; which, 0f course, puts me at odds with the violent Yahweh and any of its followers who promote violence as a remedy to tough questions concerning the nature of reality. Moreover, world Jewry has endless amounts of dispute and quarrel over all kinds of things and especially with anything to do with the Jesus figure whom they love to say wasn’t who Christian’s say he was. Should they be jailed for their skepticism? Of course not! So why should I be jailed for mine? Why do they get special privilege in yet another field of human inquiry? The fact is that any inquiry into the nature of reality that hasn’t spent significant investigation into the Jewish question is amateurism when it comes to spiritual philosophy. And when these inquiries lead to differing conclusions about the J.Q. there shouldn’t be blocks put up by either side. It’s those who want to control the narrative that have the problem and are acting badly; it’s those who when the answers don’t align with their narrative on the J.Q., who then become abusive and nasty. And that is how the Demiurge rolls!