The Plot Against Christ: An Update

Dr Lasha Darkmoon — Darkmoon.me April 7, 2018

This is sequel to my previous article ‘The Plot Against Christ’, originally published on the Truthseeker. Since Christianity is now being fiercely attacked as a “slave religion” and mocked every day in the mass media by aggressive atheists and humanists, I now consider myself a persecuted Christian. Will Christians  have to go to prison soon, like those who dare to critique the state of Israel  and the Holocaust? Are all religious and political dissidents now advised to get ready for martyrdom?
Fishers of men

“I will make you fishers of men.” (Matt. 4:19)

In my recent article, The Plot Against Christ, I set out the basic grievances the Christ bashing brigade had against Christianity, the chief one being that Christianity was a “slave religion” invented by Jews to keep the goyim in eternal subjection by turning them into pacifist wimps and sissies. This is what Christ is allegedly said to have done through his Sermon on the Mount, in which he enjoins Christians “to turn the other cheek” and “love your enemies”.
Let me refresh your memories by repeating two anti-Christian quotes, one by White Nationalist leader Dr William Pierce and a second even more extreme quote by Friedrich Nietzsche.
First, here is Dr William Pierce:
For more than two centuries it [Christianity] festered in the sewers and catacombs of Rome, along with dozens of other alien religious sects from the Levant; its first adherents were Rome’s slaves, a cosmopolitan lot from all the lands conquered by the Romans. It was a religion designed to appeal to slaves: blessed are the poor, the meek, the wretched, the despised, it told them, for you shall inherit the earth from the strong, the brave, the proud, and the mighty; there will be pie in the sky for all believers, and the rest will suffer eternal torment. It appealed directly to a sense of envy and resentment of the weak against the strong.
A Frank of the seventh or eighth century would tremble in superstitious awe before some fragment of bone or vial of dried blood which the Church had declared a sacred relic with miracle-working powers—but if you smote him on the cheek you would have a fight on your hands, not another cheek turned. As for the brotherhood of man and equality in the eyes of the Lord, the Germans had no time for such nonsense; when confronted with non-Whites, they instinctively reached for the nearest lethal weapon.
The slave morality preached in the Roman catacombs was like a time bomb ticking away in Europe—a Trojan horse brought inside the fortress, waiting for its season. That season came, and the damage was done. Today Christianity is one of the most active forces working from within to destroy the White race.
The inversion of natural values inherent in the exalting of the botched, the unclean, and the poor in spirit in the Sermon on the Mount—the injunction to “resist not evil”—all are prescriptions for racial suicide. Indeed, had a fiendishly clever enemy set out to concoct a set of doctrines intended to lead the White race to its destruction, he could hardly have done better.
—  Extracts from William Pierce’s Who We Are (emphasis added). For convenience, these quotes can be checked online by clicking on Cesar Tort’s splendid abridgement of the book in several chapters, here.
The perception is that, in a world in which only the fittest survive, Christianity is the great weakener. If you want to be strong and get ahead in this dog-eat-dog world, dump Christianity.
Dr Pierce’s ideas — based on a perverted simplification of Darwinism associated with Ragnar Redbeard’s possibly satirical Might Is Right or The Survival of the Fittest (1890) — are beautifully expressed and obviously sincere. Many people before him, however, had entertained similar views. Dr Pierce’s beliefs are clearly influenced not only by the discredited Ragnar Redbeard but by Nietzsche who had expressed similar sentiments in his Antichrist (1895).
Here is what Nietzsche has to say:
Christianity remains to this day the greatest misfortune of humanity. Our age knows better. What was formerly merely sickly now becomes indecent—it is indecent to be a Christian today. I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough—I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race.
— Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist (emphasis added).
—  §  —
Marching in lockstep with Nietzsche and Dr Pierce, we have thousands of people today whose ancestors were devout Christians but who have renounced Christianity with fear and loathing, seeing it as a source of every evil. One such individual is JB Campbell, founder of the militia movement in America — a self-confessed extremist who has frequently railed against the Jews. He has managed somehow to escape imprisonment as a political firebrand and is a popular speaker on various internet radio programs. His avowedly extremist website, Extremism Online, is still intact.
If I quote him here at length, it is because he is in many ways typical, representative of an entire class of Christ bashers. His views are the views of tens of thousands of White Nationalists who, in my humble opinion, have misdiagnosed Christianity as the root cause of our collective sickness.
And what exactly is this sickness?
The sickness consists of a widely held perception of a crippling “Jewish domination” which we goyim could easily shake off, if only we could free ourselves from the shackles of Christianity — from the “mind-forged manacles” of a Jew-created religion cunningly designed to keep us in thrall.
Here we have a startling inconsistency in the reasoning of the Christ bashers: we are told, on the one hand, that Christianity is a “Jew-created religion” designed to keep Christians under the Jewish yoke, and then we are told in the next breath that Jews have been trying to destroy Christianity by ideological means for centuries. Does this make sense? Why create something so dangerous that you need to spend the next 2000 years trying to destroy it?
Are the Jews trying to destroy Christianity or they trying to preserve it as a mind-forged manacle?
They cannot be doing both things.
Let JB Campbell speak for himself:
Before we can destroy Judaism, in theory, Christianity must be rejected for the disgrace that it is. Not just Christian Zionism but the idea of surrendering to be executed by our deadly enemies, which is the story of Jesus. Christianity is the cancer of the intellect.
Our children have to be taught about Jews and the danger of Christianity so that they can defend themselves from Jewish Rule.
Jesus’ actions were, and are, models to be emulated. That’s what makes the faith so deadly for its believers. Wasn’t every one of his early followers executed?  Some of them were put to death by Saul of Tarsus, the man who was to write most of the New Testament! It’s really too much. How could such a passive, self-destructive idea be attractive to people, unless they somehow see it as a license — an excuse for cowardice?
And I think Jesus did teach this sort of pacifism in his Sermon on the Mount.
Humanity needs role models who teach us how to overthrow tyranny. Religion shouldn’t allow us to be cowards. It should glorify heroism. Heroism is the only thing that can get us out of this disaster which was created by the Jews and enabled by the Christians.
Christianity is by definition impotent and worse than useless. It has been our undoing because the role model, Jesus Christ, surrendered to be tortured to death. And this is the central part of his perfection.
Regarding your points in defense of Christianity: to me, there is no defense. There is no way to excuse or minimize the damage done. It is only human nature to defend yourself against aggression. Whether by design or default, Christianity removed this natural human tendency by holding up Jesus as the perfect being whose every action and statement was perfection.  Jesus refused to defend himself and this example was followed by his disciples and eventually by millions of believers over the centuries to come.
You say Jews hate Christianity. They don’t hate it – it’s their primary weapon against us. They hate us and drove us into this faith that weakens us and removes our will not only to win but just to survive.
(From  previous comments placed on this site by JB Campbell)
I have to hand it to Mr Campbell. He writes like an angel. This is beautifully put. Eloquent. Above all, it is convincing. I am almost convinced myself, but not quite! Because it just doesn’t stand up to critical analysis. It is fine in theory, as a working hypothesis, but in practice it fails.
I have already pointed out the numerous flaws in the anti-Christian position here. For a start, it is factually wrong—if not bordering on absurdity—to assert that Christ’s pacifist teachings have emasculated all Christians and turned them into wimps and sissies. Little better than men in skirts. People who say such things clearly have some sort of cognitive disorder. As I have already said, and I repeat:
One has only to look at the blood-soaked history of Europe and America to see that Christians are among the most belligerent people on earth, waging wars almost incessantly and killing off vast numbers of people without agonizing too much about it. The Crusades were not fought by pathologically altruistic Christians. Nor was the British Empire, on which the sun never set, acquired by exemplary Christians with a sword in one hand and a New Testament in the other.
In short, Christianity has had no effect whatever in turning its adherents into sissies. If this is why the Jews “invented” Christianity—to sissify Christians—they failed spectacularly.
The Sermon on the Mount, ironically, didn’t even turn Christ into a sissy. For if Christ had followed his own teachings at all times he would hardly have taken a whip to the moneychangers in the temple. The same man who said “Blessed are the peacemakers” also said “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword!
—  §  —
People who object to Christianity on the entirely spurious grounds that its injunctions — “love your enemies” and “turn the other cheek” — are guaranteed to sissify Christians or turn them into snowwflakes, have been unable to provide a single historical instance where Christians have meekly lain down and allowed another hostile nation to treat them like doormats.
On the contrary, we have provided above the example of the British Empire, an empire founded on Christianity and steeped in the Christian ethos, that was never once tempted during its acquisition of its vast territories to love its enemies and turn the other cheek. If it had done so, it would never had acquired an empire at all.
A compelling historical instance will provide incontrovertible proof that Christians, when savagely attacked, will forget all their fine moral principles and respond at once with equal if not greater savagery.
The Brits had acquired India through conquest, telling themselves that they were helping to spread the advantages of a technologically superior Christian civilization to the natives, without asking the natives if they wished to be conquered and civilized in the first place. In 1857 the natives rebelled. Suffice to say that the Indians had many valid grievances against their Christian benefactors. They had put up with much rough love and had borne for many years the yoke of Pax Britannica with patience, but in May 1857 the worm finally turned. They went on the rampage. This event came to be known as the Indian Mutiny. Order was finally restored by the Christian victors in mid-1858. The result of this unpleasant brouhaha was the transfer of government from the rapacious East India Company to the British Crown, which knew how to deal with the Indians in a slightly more reasonable and understanding way. It was not until 1947 that the Brits, shattered and chastened by the appalling bloodbath of World War Two, decided to cut their losses and quit India for good.
First, understand that the British rulers of India were a Christian people in every sense of the word. You had to be a Christian to be a member of Parliament or teach at the great universities. When the Brits in India reacted with unchristian savagery to the mutiny of their Indian subjects, it was Queen Victoria who protested as a Christian, confessing to “feelings of sorrow and indignation at the unchristian spirit shown [by British soldiers toward the Indian mutineers].” And it was General Havelock, who helped to end the rebellion and died during the process, who said to his son, “Harry, see how a Christian can die!” (A.N. Wilson, The Victorians, p. 219, 217)
Did these exemplary Christians “love their enemies” and “turn the other cheek” toward the Indian mutineers? No, they did not! When push came to shove, they reverted to the savagery of their primitive instincts. Let A.N. Wilson describe how they behaved when under attack. I will quote him at length in order to prove my point that Christianity does NOT emasculate Christians or destroy their fighting spirit.
The ruthlessness of British reprisals, the preparedness to ‘punish’ Indians of any age or sex, regardless of whether they had any part in the rebellion, is a perpetual moral stain on the Raj…. The British decided to meet cruelty with redoubled cruelty, terror with terror, blood with blood.
Muslims had been stripped, tied to the ground and ‘branded over every part of their bodies with red-hot coppers’…. Sewing Muslims into pigskins, or smearing them with pork fat before execution, was another torture favoured by the British…. Rape and pillage were encouraged by the British officers before old women and children were burnt alive in their villages. Officers boasted that they had ‘spared no one’, or that ‘peppering away at niggers’ was a pastime they ‘enjoyed amazingly’. Many Indians had the experience of being lashed, standing, to the mouth of a cannon and blown apart by grapeshot….
Prisoners were made to lick the blood from the floor of the Bibighar while a European soldier whipped their backs with a whip…. Brahmins would be made to lick parts of the floor previously moistened with water  by ‘untouchables’ ‘We broke his caste.’ wrote one Major Bingham. ‘We stuffed pork, beef and everything which would possibly break his caste down his throat, tied him as tight as we could by the arms and told the guard to be gentle with him… The guard treated him gently. I only wonder he lived to be hung, which I had the pleasure of witnessing.’
— A.N. Wilson, The Victorians, pp. 207-215
One could provide thousands of other examples of war atrocities practiced by Christians from the Crusades onwards—Christians who were familiar with Christ’s injunctions to “love your enemies” and “turn the other cheek”. The fact that these high-minded moral injunctions, all very well in theory, have no application whatsoever in practice, is clearly lost on the virulent Anti-Christian lobby.
—  §  —
Here is a great Russian writer on a crowded prison train, rumbling eastward toward Siberia, wondering what the gods held in store for him in the grim Gulag Archipelago. When I read this poignant passage from the Life of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, I was deeply moved.
At a quiet station called Torbeyevo… Solzhenitsyn caught sight of a small peasant woman in the usual shabby clothing: her slanting eyes indicated a Mordovian or Chuvash. Suddenly the prisoners, who were lying on the top bunks, “sat up to attention: large tears were streaming from the woman’s eyes. Having made out our silhouettes… she lifted a small, work-calloused hand and blessed us with the sign of the cross, again and again. Her diminutive face was wet with tears. As the train started to move again, she still went on making the sign of the cross, until she was lost to view.” (Quoted in AN Wilson’s God’s Funeral, p. 440)
Ah, Mother Russia! Last bastion of the old Christianity! The same primitive Christianity that had “infected” Tolstoy and Dostoevsky had pierced the heart of the great Solzhenitsyn. One look from the tear-filled eye of an old peasant woman had taught him more than he would learn from a thousand theological tomes.
This is what it’s all about: the tear in the peasant’s eyePersonal experience of the numinous and sacred. To sit once again under the tree of life and drink anew of the living waters.

Source

Dr Lasha Darkmoon (b.1978) is an Anglo-American ex-academic with higher degrees in Classics whose political articles and poems have been translated into several languages. Most of her political essays can be found at The Occidental Observer and The TruthSeeker. Her own website, Darkmoon.me, is now within the top 1 percent of websites in the world according to the Alexa ranking system.

One response to “The Plot Against Christ: An Update”

  1. […] An Update […]