/pol/shit, Or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the shitposting

In my experience Native Americans and Blacks are racist towards Whites.

"White boy"
---
"Why you hanging around with white people all the time?" one said to another after talking to me.

I live in the most native american area in the US and almost all native americans are just darker whites pretending to be native because we are mixed race due to all of the ethnic influences. I have never encountered native on white racism at all, in regards to blacks why would you blame them because the south all homogenized them into having no heritage at all in the US?
 
I live in the most native american area in the US and almost all native americans are just darker whites pretending to be native because we are mixed race due to all of the ethnic influences. I have never encountered native on white racism at all, in regards to blacks why would you blame them because the south all homogenized them into having no heritage at all in the US?

I'm not blaming anyone. I am speaking of personal experiences I have had during my life. I got the shit beat out of me by Natives on two different occasions just for being White. Shit happens. People act like shit like that does not happen. Well, shit ain't like where you are buddy. It's different everywhere.
 
Most modern "racism" I've seen is usually just someone being completely ignorant and shallow minded; like alot of older asian folk who would simply judge a race based on what their history thought them, sjws seem to be like that as well.
 
Most modern "racism" I've seen is usually just someone being completely ignorant and shallow minded; like alot of older asian folk who would simply judge a race based on what their history thought them, sjws seem to be like that as well.

Personal experience does not matter to them. Only facts provided by Liberal college studies.

fbos0680-jpg.10167

Just playing this mod and reading the thread when...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity."
Deuteronomy 25:11f. The Bible remains as absolute Truth.
 
"11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity."
Deuteronomy 25:11f. The Bible remains as absolute Truth.

I used that quote recently over on Codex...
 
"11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity."
Deuteronomy 25:11f. The Bible remains as absolute Truth.

The word "kaph" is the Hebrew word for "palm" which is "hand" when used in the correct context. It also means "sole" (of the foot) and "socket." That's a mistranslation and the correct use of the word there is the third meaning; "socket" (of the hip). If a women touched a man improperly she forfeited her right to bear children under the law and shall not be pitied. That's where "eye for an eye" comes in as she could very well harm the man by grabbing him by the genitals and render him sterile.

If the punishment were indeed cutting off her hand then it would violate the law "eye for an eye" as mutilation is not the same as forcefully grabbing someone.

So no, it's not cutting off her hand but instead 'cutting off' her access to lineage. They used the wrong meaning of "kaph" because they're dumbassess and ignorance like this makes people think ancient Israel were barbarians.
 
The word "kaph" is the Hebrew word for "palm" which is "hand" when used in the correct context. It also means "sole" (of the foot) and "socket." That's a mistranslation and the correct use of the word there is the third meaning; "socket" (of the hip). If a women touched a man improperly she forfeited her right to bear children under the law and shall not be pitied. That's where "eye for an eye" comes in as she could very well harm the man by grabbing him by the genitals and render him sterile.

If the punishment were indeed cutting off her hand then it would violate the law "eye for an eye" as mutilation is not the same as forcefully grabbing someone.

So no, it's not cutting off her hand but instead 'cutting off' her access to lineage. They used the wrong meaning of "kaph" because they're dumbassess and ignorance like this makes people think ancient Israel were barbarians.
That's interesting. Is there any Bible translation that translates this properly? Not even the New World Translation, which is supposed to be pretty close to the original sources, does it well then.
 
That's interesting. Is there any Bible translation that translates this properly? Not even the New World Translation, which is supposed to be pretty close to the original sources, does it well then.

New World Translation is like the New International version and all the others; heavily distorted. I use King James and even then I have to be careful. Best thing to do is actually learn Hebrew. :shrug:

Examples of distortion and manipulation are; the scriptures having the name of God but then being replaced with "Lord" and Yeshua with the bastardized version of "Jesus." Bunch of rubbish.
 
New World Translation is like the New International version and all the others; heavily distorted. I use King James and even then I have to be careful. Best thing to do is actually learn Hebrew. :shrug:

Examples of distortion and manipulation are; the scriptures having the name of God but then being replaced with "Lord" and Yeshua with the bastardized version of "Jesus." Bunch of rubbish.

So what do you think of islam and judaism as religions? You mentioned about how you left christianity before but you sound much honestly actually closer to the former religions in your religious viewpoints or something.
 
Closest I can do is look at the latin Vulgata, since I know Latin but I'm too lazy to learn Hebrew or Arameic. From a quick glance all the german and english translations I can find it matches the latin text, but I guess every single translation is wrong.
 
Cause and effect is too post modern.
Remember, it's the people screaming about concentration camps being bad the ones that are intolerant and not the ones running the concentration camps that are the racist dipshits.

Most modern "racism" I've seen is usually just someone being completely ignorant and shallow minded; like alot of older asian folk who would simply judge a race based on what their history thought them, sjws seem to be like that as well.
I mean, there is the rise in hate crimes in Europe and the US against muslims and latinos respectively, the literal neo nazis that have crawled out of their holes in the past couple of years and the still prevalent problem of racial profiling by cops.
 
New World Translation is like the New International version and all the others; heavily distorted. I use King James and even then I have to be careful. Best thing to do is actually learn Hebrew. :shrug:

Examples of distortion and manipulation are; the scriptures having the name of God but then being replaced with "Lord" and Yeshua with the bastardized version of "Jesus." Bunch of rubbish.
That's one of the issues I have with religions, since when you look at it from a historical context, almost all major religions are regional beliefs that have been expaned into cultures and areas where they actually don't belong and simply replaced beliefs that predated them, like Norse mythology or ancient Greek Mythology and so on. Christianity for example is just like Islam a middle eastern belief based on the traditions and customs of that region and time, which might have made sense for that particular area a few thousand years ago. Christians in Israel or Lebanon today, are very different to Christians in Germany due to that fact. If you really wanted to stay true to the religion, then you would have to actually read the old texts, in the language where they have been written down. But that's somewhat very difficult to do, after 2000 years.
 
So what do you think of islam and judaism as religions? You mentioned about how you left christianity before but you sound much honestly actually closer to the former religions in your religious viewpoints or something.

Want my brutally honest opinions on them? Well, don't complain - you asked.

Islam is trash no matter how you look at it. Completaly racist towards anyone and everything that isn't Islamic. Judaism is the same. You see, Judaism is what the Pharisees that Yeshua (Jesus) condemned so much practiced. The religion wasn't given to Israel by the Fathers or God but instead finds its origin in the pagan religions and superstitions the Israelites brought with them when they left Babylon.

It is no coincidence these are the folks that took Christ to the cross and why He was so against them. The Talmud is a book they hold in higher regard than the actual scriptures and is full of racist, xenophobic garbage towards everyone that isn't Jewish.

If you compare how the Talmud teaches how to treat the "goyim" to how the Quran teaches to treat non Muslims, you would be hard-pressed to find differences. Both groups just happen to hate each other on ideological positions and of course, land.

People in Western society are, of course, oblivious to the beliefs and practices of these groups and Jews in particular have great pull in the U.S. thanks to families like the Rothchild(s) who own the physical land of Israel. Also thanks to things like the "Anti-Defamation League," Jews have enjoyed great success in the West and dumb Americans (especially dumb Christian Americans) throw their support behind the illegal nation of Israel.

By the ignorant and uninformed I would be called an "anti-semitist" for simply speaking facts. A word that is quickly thrown at any who condemn Israel's actions alongside others like "homophobic," "fake news" and "conspiracy theorist."

Want me to go deeper? Most "Jews" today aren't even real Jews. Ashkenazi Jews, who make up 90% of American Jews and 50% of Israeli Jews, are really nomads (suspected to be from Kazakhstan) that converted to Judaism in the 6th century and have been passing themselfs off as "Jews" to get support from dumb Christians ever since.

People think that there was only one genocide against the Jews by the Romans in the year 70 but in fact there was another one in the 2nd century which sealed their fates to only a handful of survivors and those went on to integrate into other races and from then on the last tribe of Israel ceased to be.

Closest I can do is look at the latin Vulgata, since I know Latin but I'm too lazy to learn Hebrew or Arameic. From a quick glance all the german and english translations I can find it matches the latin text, but I guess every single translation is wrong.

Pretty much, yes. That's what happens when a different culture that knows nothing of the language or background cultural context of the work start translating and running their mouths as if they had spoken to God themselfs. Then you get people who read the misinterpreted work and say "wow this god is real evil."

I don't mean to offend you @Hassknecht, of course. You appear very open minded and accepted my correction, but that's the kind of thing I have to put up with both in the internet and in real life when people discover I'm a "Christian" (I loathe the term).

My faith isn't something I openly advertise.

That's one of the issues I have with religions, since when you look at it from a historical context, almost all major religions are regional beliefs that have been expaned into cultures and areas where they actually don't belong and simply replaced beliefs that predated them, like Norse mythology or ancient Greek Mythology and so on. Christianity for example is just like Islam a middle eastern belief based on the traditions and customs of that region and time, which might have made sense for that particular area a few thousand years ago. Christians in Israel or Lebanon today, are very different to Christians in Germany due to that fact. If you really wanted to stay true to the religion, then you would have to actually read the old texts, in the language where they have been written down. But that's somewhat very difficult to do, after 2000 years.

I couldn't agree more. Although I don't get the bit about replacing beliefs that predated them. What do you mean by that?
 
Last edited:
It's interesting how often customs are seen as religious facts though, like a marriage between 2 people and in America and Europe the 'nuclear' family is almost everywhere the universal representation of perfect christian family values, even though the christian belief would allow for both polygamy and monogamy to be possible, if you take the Bible as reference.
 
Back
Top