The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Congressional Prayer Ends: Amen and Awomen
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO), a Methodist minister, gives the opening invocation:

As I’ve been pointing out for years, American culture is getting more childish.

How long until Congressional prayers end “Amxn,” which will make many people feel more sophisticated and grown-up?

Not quite getting it, Rep. Hank Johnson (D-AL) would end his prayers: “A Mexican.”

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) would insist that all prayers in the House of Representatives end “A Black women.”

 
Hide 133 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Well, we know politicians don’t mean what they say.

    Now, to save time, we won’t even understand what they are saying…

  2. Somehow I knew, even before watching the video evidence, that the perpetrator of this particular bit of linguistic violence would be a member of the C.B.C.

    (For the anti-abbreviationists, that’s the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.)

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Paco Wové
    @Gary in Gramercy

    *(For Fuck's Sake)

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy

    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Gary in Gramercy


    For the anti-abbreviationists, that’s the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.
     
    I prefer the term "caucus of colored congress critters". It better suits the level of dignity at which these clowns invariably operate.

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy, @Dr. X

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Gary in Gramercy

    "What the fuck does WTF mean?"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt-fITvdivA

    , @duncsbaby
    @Gary in Gramercy

    Thanks, I still do a mental hiccup when reading CBC in some political article and wonder what the hell Canadian television has to do with it.

    , @Eustace Tilley (not)
    @Gary in Gramercy

    A priest in an ape skin's a fool;
    An ape in black vestments is cool.
    God made pickin' cotton
    For thems as ain't gotten
    De brains fo' de Vinitee School.

    Replies: @3g4me

  3. They’re going to need a prayer this week.

  4. I always thought Amen was Hebrew (he-brew ,oh no!)………America ,it’s about to get all stupid up in here.

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    @tyrone


    "I always thought Amen was Hebrew..."
     
    IIRC, the word is from Aramaic. However, I agree with your implicit assessment that, even judging by the low standards usually set by our congress critters, this whole kerfluffle is an epic demonstration of ignorance and stupidity.

    Replies: @kaganovitch

    , @syonredux
    @tyrone

    Yep:


    amen (interj.)
    Old English, from Late Latin amen, from Ecclesiastical Greek amen, from Hebrew amen "truth," used adverbially as an expression of agreement (as in Deuteronomy xxvii.26, I Kings i.36), from Semitic root a-m-n "to be trustworthy, confirm, support."
     
    https://www.etymonline.com/word/amen

    Replies: @International Jew

    , @brabantian
    @tyrone

    Before it went into the Hebrew - Greek - Latin chain, the word 'Amen' is from ancient Egyptian

    Egyptian god Amun, his name also sometimes spelled 'Amen' as well as 'Amon', then becoming joined with Ra to be one great solar creator god, Amun-Ra

    For obvious reasons Judaics - Abrahamics would like to prefer that it be 'their' word ... Ancient Jews were of course obsessed with then 'greatest of all civilisations' Egypt, writing or perhaps as some claim fabricating the Exodus stories ... the oldest 'Hebrew bible' we have is actually the Greek Septuagint, allegedly a 'translation' of 'lost Hebrew', but many think a fabrication seeking to glamourise Jews by writing a story in which the great power of Egypt was beaten by divinely-backed Jews
    https://i.ibb.co/B46LxXR/Amun-Egyptian-god.jpg

    Replies: @For what it's worth, @Allen, @nebulafox

  5. As I’ve been pointing out for years, American culture is getting more childish.

    As I’ve been pointing out for years, if you betray your own race and turn power over to others, who are in fact more childish, what else do you expect?

    No HBD’er would care about the fate of Whites as such, just how the disappearance of Whites would fit into their spiffy technocratic goon fantasies. Suffice it to say, getting rid of White people as a governing polity leads to eternal childish violence.

    Thank you, Big Brain People close to the Canadian border!

    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @RichardTaylor

    Despite what people on all sides may think, HBD aware and pro-White are not the same thing. Just ask Jack D, or, perhaps even, Steve.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @RichardTaylor


    Thank you, Big Brain People close to the Canadian border!

     

    Who preferred to invite squareheads rather than woolly heads. Say what you will about nutty Ellis Island Europeans, but they actually work. Things get done.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

  6. How did Key and Peele sneak into Congress? On a more serious note, is there any ceremony, any institution, any public display of spiritness that’s not degraded and cheapened by the inclusion of these buffoons? It’s an Iron Law now.

  7. OH! ,yes , and God is not mocked…..looking forward to coming judgement.

  8. Justinot was only kidding, but folks did wonder at first:

    (Tis was before he lost the “popular vote” for reelection.

  9. It is the end of satire.

    • Agree: Kyle
  10. How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word ‘amen’ has nothing to do with ‘men’ even if he didn’t know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn’t make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it’s hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it’s way with disastrous results.)

    • Replies: @vhrm
    @Altai


    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word ‘amen’ has nothing to do with ‘men’ even if he didn’t know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?
     
    He's not just "a man" in this case. He is Rep Emanuel Cleaver and is/was a Methodist pastor.

    "received a Master of Divinity (M.Div.) degree from St. Paul School of Theology."
    "was the pastor at the St. James United Methodist Church in Kansas City, Missouri from March 1972 until June 2009." (per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_Cleaver )

    So i'm guessing he knows the word has nothing to do with men and women.

    My first reaction too is to be outraged by the wokeness run amok. But then maybe he's just riffing on it on it on purpose even knowing the origin.
    It's still woke and obnoxious but not necessarily out of ignorance of the context.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Altai

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called "The Sonrise Church."

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @James O'Meara, @Lockean Proviso, @Craig Nelsen, @BB753, @Fluesterwitz, @Barnard

    , @Jimbo
    @Altai

    To ask the question is to answer it.

    , @Fox
    @Altai

    Quite a few years ago someone used the word 'niggardly" (can't remember the specifics) and boy did that lead to a storm of 'pundits' (aka wise guys), black opiners and intellectual guttersnipes. I think the affair was ended after several days of overheated ether waves with an 'apology', i.e., throwing in the towel in the face of the onslaught of mentally deranged and congenitally stupid people constituting the "leading circles". It did not make any difference that it was pointed out that 'niggard' was a word of Norwegian origin meaning 'stingy' (in which sense it was used) and completely unrelated to the N-word.
    I think this trend has been introduced by the advertisement industry where oftentimes seemingly cute homonyms are used to create a slight disturbance in one's thinking, forcing one to more actively perceive of the product that is being advertised and thus make it stick more. Using the numeral '4' to replace the function word 'for' is an example for this. It opened the door for unfocused thinking, hence such utterly stupid creations as 'Awoman', but also 'herstory' etc, always delivered with a deeply serious mien such as only the not-so-bright can produce at any occasion because they do believe that their shallowness is profundity.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Rob McX, @Fluesterwitz

    , @anon
    @Altai

    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word ‘amen’ has nothing to do with ‘men’ even if he didn’t know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    United Methodist. Plus, he's an ordained pastor in that church.

    , @Charlotte
    @Altai

    He’s a United Methodist pastor.

    , @Peter D. Bredon
    @Altai

    "How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word ‘amen’ has nothing to do with ‘men’ even if he didn’t know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?"

    How could a man (i.e., normal, that is, White) not understand, now that would be a question. As for a black man, why the puzzle?

    , @S. Anonyia
    @Altai

    Honestly, arrogance is your answer. It doesn't take a genius to look up the etymology, he probably just assumes he is so wonderful that he can come up with whatever new spin on his prayer that he wants and it will be universally applauded. Have worked with younger versions of his type before- spelling errors and uneven, hazy writing is what to expect. No fact-checking. Think anything they produce is gold.

    , @Ed
    @Altai

    They're so stupid.

  11. @Gary in Gramercy
    Somehow I knew, even before watching the video evidence, that the perpetrator of this particular bit of linguistic violence would be a member of the C.B.C.

    (For the anti-abbreviationists, that's the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.)

    Replies: @Paco Wové, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Achmed E. Newman, @duncsbaby, @Eustace Tilley (not)

    *(For Fuck’s Sake)

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    @Paco Wové

    "Do I have to spell it out?

    C-H-E-E-S-E-A-N-D-O-N-I-O-N-S,

    O, no!"

    ----The Rutles, "Cheese and Onions"

  12. Like I said Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian.
    “Peter was considered along with James the Just and John the Apostle as pillars of the Church.[44] Legitimised by Jesus’ appearance, Peter assumed leadership of the group of early followers, forming the Jerusalem ekklēsia mentioned by Paul.[25][26] He was soon eclipsed in this leadership by James the Just, “the Brother of the Lord.”[27][28] According to Lüdemann, this was due to the discussions about the strictness of adherence to the Jewish Law, when the more conservative faction of James the Just[45] took the overhand over the more liberal position of Peter, who soon lost influence.[28][note 2] According to Dunn, this was not an “usurpation of power”, but a consequence of Peter’s involvement in missionary activities.[47] The early Church historian Eusebius (c. AD 325) records Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 190) as saying,

    For they say that Peter and James (the Greater) and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem.[48]

    James D. G. Dunn proposes that Peter was a “bridge-man” between the opposing views of Paul and James the Just [italics original]:

    For Peter was probably in fact and effect the bridge-man (pontifex maximus!) who did more than any other to hold together the diversity of first-century Christianity. James the brother of Jesus and Paul, the two other most prominent leading figures in first-century Christianity, were too much identified with their respective “brands” of Christianity, at least in the eyes of Christians at the opposite ends of this particular spectrum.[49]”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter

    • Replies: @HA
    @anonsasmaug

    "He was soon eclipsed in this leadership by James the Just, 'the Brother of the Lord.'"

    Setting aside the pointless crack about foreignness, according to one school of thought on the foundations of Islam, it actually originated among a Nazareen sect of Christians (albeit very Judeocentric ones, on the far end of the spectrum of views you noted) whose origins trace back to the followers of James the Just.


    In the 1st century, another major strand was woven into the web of apocalyptic Jewish messianism: the followers of James the Just -- who was not an apostle but the blood cousin of Jesus and the first bishop in Jerusalem --- exalted him above the apostles and even claimed that the destruction of the Temple was the result of his being stoned to death by zealots in 62 AD. After James’s death, some of his followers reinterpreted Christianity in a radically Judeocentric way, one that led to the Nazareen ideology...Jerome called them “semi-Jews." The Church Fathers, from Irenaeus to Jerome, speak of the Ebionites or Nazareens as heretics, and they are alluding to them when they warn against “Judaizers.” They knew that the Nazareens denied the divinity of Christ while accepting the Virgin Birth, that they practiced circumcision, that they reproached rabbinical Jews for altering the texts of the Bible to hide the fact that Jesus was the messiah, and that they prayed toward Jerusalem. All these things the Muslims would do after them, except that they eventually changed their quibla and prayed toward Mecca. Origen says that the Nazareens refused to drink wine... Interestingly, when Jerome describes the fleshly pleasures anticipated by the Nazareens in that kingdom, they sound a lot like the pleasures Muslims believe await them in paradise....
     
    Under this version of Islam's creation, Muhammad originally came preaching about the impending return of the Messiah:

    Muhammad’s success is confirmed by the Chronicle of Jacob of Edessa (before 692) and also by Doctrina Jacobi (before 640). In the latter we learn that some rabbinical Jews arriving in Yatrib in 625 or 627 found the Arabs there already impregnated with the Nazareen ideology and their chieftain Muhammad “proclaiming the coming of the messiah” with such charism that they were all united firmly under his authority. The Chronography of Theophane (who died in 817) states that in 622 some rabbinical Jews known to the Byzantines attached themselves to Muhammad: they saw him as one of “their prophets,” the one who, as Malachy 3:23 foretold, would precede the messiah.
     
    Later on, when the Messiah that Muhammad foretold failed to return, a new "official story" of Islam was devised in which Muhammad himself was the last of the prophets, and all these Nazareen influences and rabbinical affiliations were excised and burned.

    Again, I don't see what any of that has to do with the "foreignness" of Christianity to Europeans or anyone else, given that it contains influences from all over, be they
    Canaanite, Egyptian, Jewish, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, and who knows what else -- maybe even Buddhist, depending on how far west Ashoka's missionaries traveled.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    , @Peter D. Bredon
    @anonsasmaug

    "Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian."

    Nonsense even if popular among the "edgy" alt-right. Christianity is Indo-European, a Hellenic mystery religion possessed from its very inception with an Indo-European cosmological sense (dying and reborn god). That's why Jews hated it, and still do, as you may have noticed.

    It is as Indo-European as Wotanism (which, by the way, is not "authentically German" but hales from Anatolia).

    Replies: @Hugo Silva, @anonsasmaug, @Templar, @Allen

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @anonsasmaug

    It is a bit more complex.

    If we stick to more or less rational discourse & read sacred texts in historical context, here is what it boils down to:

    We don't know Zarathustra's exact dates & will never know. So, I accept what is a consensus (sort of) among historians: he is placed somewhere between 1500 BC and 1000 BC. He (and his followers), during reform of the old religion of the Magi, had invented key concepts of Western religions' ideology (resurrection, the Evil One, Guardian Angels/fravashi, the World Savior, ...). The oldest Hebrew religious texts are written somewhere around 900 BC (parts of Pentateuch/Torah) & later, most "universalist" & prophetic writings belonging to the post-exilic period (ca. 550-500 BC etc.). Ancient Judaic notions about life don't include angels (who are nothing more than representations of Yahweh), resurrection, the Great Evil One, .. These concepts are mentioned in OT only 3-5 times & are completely marginal side-effects of Persian influence. This can be seen in normative Judaism, which remains a down-to-earth religion; true, Pharisees had assimilated, in a diluted version, some Iranian & Greek ideas. Just, Sadducees (the party which lost, ideologically- something like Mensheviks) were truer heirs to original Hebrew religion (no afterlife, no supernatural mess, no nothing).


    I'm well aware that Christian believers will find this unacceptable, but I've long since come to an unoriginal conclusion: Christianity is the triumphant renovated Zoroastrianism. It is not a continuation of Judaism mixed with some Hellenic ideas derived from Neoplatonism & Orphism.
    Ideologically, Christians owe most of their world-view to Zarathustra & his followers: 1) dualism (not di-theism), 2) angelology, 3) the World Savior, not a local Messiah, 4) figure of the Evil One, who is more like Zoroastrians' Ahriman than traditional Hebrew Satan, 5) great final conflagration, very visual & scary apocalypse- again, more Persian than Judaic, 6) fierce sense of election of God's favorite group of people, which dwarfs Jewish chosen people story- again, Zoroastrian, 7) image of Heaven & Hell, which is absent in classical Judaism, 8) resurrection of the dead.

    Of course, Christians don't care - theologically- for fire; they have a strong sense of guilt (unlike classic Zoroastrians); phraseologically & iconographically, Christians derive their mythology from Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, but: take away Zoroastrian ideas from Christianity & you'll be left with zero, zippo, zilch.

    Normative Judaism is not the birthplace of Christianity; Essenes & other intertestamental pro-Persian sectarians are.

    Of course, I would be more satisfied had we retained old Hellenic synthesis of Plato, Proclus, Plotinus, Orphism, Hermetism, Greek tragedians, .... and dumped this silly world-view which leads to fanaticism & imbecility, as well as hyper-emotionalism. But we should also notice that Europeans have, after the initial confusion, absorbed & transformed this heritage to such a degree that it bears - in spirit, not in iconography - no great resemblance either to Hebrew or Iranian roots. Scholars usually write that Christianity has two great sources, Hebrew & Hellenic. I'm not so sure. I would say it is a clumsy synthesis of Hebraized Zoroastrianism & Hellenism.

    Or, as a sage had said: Christianity started in Palestine as a fellowship of followers; it moved to Greece and became a philosophy of thinkers; it moved to Italy and became the institution of an Empire; it moved to Europe and became a cultural ethos; and it came to America and became a business enterprise.

    Replies: @Charlotte

  13. And no A-nonbinary? Whoopsie! Cancelled.

  14. If Kelly Loeffler had any balls, that clip would be running on every Georgia TV station, 24/7, until the runoff on Tuesday.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    @Gary in Gramercy

    Kelly doesn’t (have any balls, either physically or politically!). Her husband, the Liege Lord of the New York Stock Exchange, may or may not, have one!

  15. Slightly OT, but relevant I think. Here is a headline I copied from an article from The Telegraph:

    Democrats propose ban on ‘he’ and ‘she’ and all gender-specific words in new rules for Congress

    Apparently, this is one of the first things the House will do in the new session, while the country is being devastated by COVID. We have become a deeply unserious country. Our leaders cannot solve any of the problems we face, and so they turn to silly cultural issues like this to try and distract people.

    China is engaged in the right strategy to become the preeminent global power: let the US slowly continue its slide to impotence, and continue to build up its own power. But, I worry that as China continues to see things like this, it will be tempted to go for the knockout, and invade Taiwan or something similarly dangerous.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    @NJ Transit Commuter


    China is engaged in the right strategy to become the preeminent global power: let the US slowly continue its slide to impotence, and continue to build up its own power.
     
    PRC isn't exactly making friends in the world.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53RO4qjKmMc
    , @Buffalo Joe
    @NJ Transit Commuter

    NJ, last year Berkeley passed an ordinace that changed the word "Manhole" and "Mandoor" to access opening. Doesn't sound like a big thing until you remember all plans and bid packages will have to be reprinted to reflect this.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @black sea

  16. Throughout the Old Testament are references to “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” This formulation is often used in Christian prayer, although a few years ago our priest (Episcopalian, natch) started adding “of Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah,” i.e. the wives of the three patriarchs in question.

    I thought that was bad enough. But “awomen”? Ha ha ha ha ha!!!

    I assume that the Miriam-Webster online dictionary will be updated to include this word by 9:00 PM tonight.

    • LOL: Hibernian
    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Gilbert Ratchet

    Reform and some Conservative Jewish congregations also have added the matriarchs to prayers nowadays.

    Replies: @Dissident

    , @Saint Louis
    @Gilbert Ratchet

    What? No Keturah or Hagar? Bigot.

  17. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word ‘amen’ has nothing to do with ‘men’ even if he didn’t know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    He’s not just “a man” in this case. He is Rep Emanuel Cleaver and is/was a Methodist pastor.

    “received a Master of Divinity (M.Div.) degree from St. Paul School of Theology.”
    “was the pastor at the St. James United Methodist Church in Kansas City, Missouri from March 1972 until June 2009.” (per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_Cleaver )

    So i’m guessing he knows the word has nothing to do with men and women.

    My first reaction too is to be outraged by the wokeness run amok. But then maybe he’s just riffing on it on it on purpose even knowing the origin.
    It’s still woke and obnoxious but not necessarily out of ignorance of the context.

    • Agree: Occasional lurker
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @vhrm

    He knows what it actually means, but is cynically working the system. Cleaver, confronted about party corruption one time, responded to the effect of "Yes, everybody does it; deal with it."

  18. It’s the masks, Steve. It’s very hard to think straight when you’re getting so little O2 for months on end. Were it not for that, I believe these people could probably expound on the virtues of the Federalist Papers… or not.

    • LOL: Kylie
  19. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called “The Sonrise Church.”

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    • Replies: @James O'Meara
    @Jonathan Mason

    https://i.redd.it/631qvp3ipfox.jpg

    , @James O'Meara
    @Jonathan Mason

    "Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns."

    "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock (petras) I will build my church."

    , @Lockean Proviso
    @Jonathan Mason

    From the increasingly prescient Idiocracy, "St. God's Memorial Hospital":

    https://i.etsystatic.com/12562986/r/il/9ba6fa/1272326845/il_300x300.1272326845_alyx.jpg

    Replies: @Rob McX

    , @Craig Nelsen
    @Jonathan Mason

    I thought this example from Baltimore was admirably straightforward.

    https://craignelsen.com/img/buildings/thank_god_for_jesus.jpg

    , @BB753
    @Jonathan Mason

    "Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do"

    Lutherans have (borrowed) saints, too.
    Is this the reason there are thousand of reformed and evangelical churches? Because the only way to come up with a new name for your church is to split off and create a new denomination?

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    , @Fluesterwitz
    @Jonathan Mason

    Is "Amen and awoman" not kind of heteronormative, homophobic even?

    , @Barnard
    @Jonathan Mason

    A lot of the churches desperate to be seen as trendy try to come up with names that don't include the denomination and tell you very little about the church. Names like "Grace Church" or "Mercy Church"People joke that they are "Random Action Verb Churches."

  20. He read from a script. It sounded like he didn’t even know what was written there before he read it. I could say unkind things about his intelligence, but would rather say those unkind things about the person who wrote the script.

    On the bright side, at least he didn’t blurt out something about Guam tipping over and sliding into the sea.

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    @Cato

    "On the bright side, at least he didn't blurt out something about Guam tipping over and sliding into the sea."

    I think that was Hank Johnson -- a man so catastrophically dumb he had NBA star Derrick Rose take his SAT's for him.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    , @J.Ross
    @Cato

    I admire the hell out of Dennis Prager but one of the times I really admired him was when he was talking about this incident and pointed out (I didn't catch it first time) that the [something like field level Naval officer the congresscritter was talking to] did not flinch, did not smirk, did not suffer a Strzok, did not call the guy an idiot, did not later blab on the equivalent of social media, but with perfect professionalism perfect bearing, responded, "No sir we do not anticipate that."

    Replies: @Joe Stalin, @Pericles

  21. @NJ Transit Commuter
    Slightly OT, but relevant I think. Here is a headline I copied from an article from The Telegraph:

    Democrats propose ban on 'he' and 'she' and all gender-specific words in new rules for Congress
     
    Apparently, this is one of the first things the House will do in the new session, while the country is being devastated by COVID. We have become a deeply unserious country. Our leaders cannot solve any of the problems we face, and so they turn to silly cultural issues like this to try and distract people.

    China is engaged in the right strategy to become the preeminent global power: let the US slowly continue its slide to impotence, and continue to build up its own power. But, I worry that as China continues to see things like this, it will be tempted to go for the knockout, and invade Taiwan or something similarly dangerous.

    Replies: @Joe Stalin, @Buffalo Joe

    China is engaged in the right strategy to become the preeminent global power: let the US slowly continue its slide to impotence, and continue to build up its own power.

    PRC isn’t exactly making friends in the world.

  22. @tyrone
    I always thought Amen was Hebrew (he-brew ,oh no!)………America ,it's about to get all stupid up in here.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'..., @syonredux, @brabantian

    “I always thought Amen was Hebrew…”

    IIRC, the word is from Aramaic. However, I agree with your implicit assessment that, even judging by the low standards usually set by our congress critters, this whole kerfluffle is an epic demonstration of ignorance and stupidity.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    IIRC, the word is from Aramaic.

    Nah , it appears in the bible Deut.27:24 among other places.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...

  23. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    To ask the question is to answer it.

  24. @Gary in Gramercy
    Somehow I knew, even before watching the video evidence, that the perpetrator of this particular bit of linguistic violence would be a member of the C.B.C.

    (For the anti-abbreviationists, that's the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.)

    Replies: @Paco Wové, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Achmed E. Newman, @duncsbaby, @Eustace Tilley (not)

    For the anti-abbreviationists, that’s the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.

    I prefer the term “caucus of colored congress critters”. It better suits the level of dignity at which these clowns invariably operate.

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    Alliteration for the illiterate (the C.B.C., not you). Nice.

    , @Dr. X
    @Jus' Sayin'...


    I prefer the term “caucus of colored congress critters”.
     
    I prefer "congressnegroes."
  25. Whenever the Congressional Black Caucus is called to “order”, I guess we can call him the Very Right Reppin’ Reverend from Missouri.

  26. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    Quite a few years ago someone used the word ‘niggardly” (can’t remember the specifics) and boy did that lead to a storm of ‘pundits’ (aka wise guys), black opiners and intellectual guttersnipes. I think the affair was ended after several days of overheated ether waves with an ‘apology’, i.e., throwing in the towel in the face of the onslaught of mentally deranged and congenitally stupid people constituting the “leading circles”. It did not make any difference that it was pointed out that ‘niggard’ was a word of Norwegian origin meaning ‘stingy’ (in which sense it was used) and completely unrelated to the N-word.
    I think this trend has been introduced by the advertisement industry where oftentimes seemingly cute homonyms are used to create a slight disturbance in one’s thinking, forcing one to more actively perceive of the product that is being advertised and thus make it stick more. Using the numeral ‘4’ to replace the function word ‘for’ is an example for this. It opened the door for unfocused thinking, hence such utterly stupid creations as ‘Awoman’, but also ‘herstory’ etc, always delivered with a deeply serious mien such as only the not-so-bright can produce at any occasion because they do believe that their shallowness is profundity.

    • Replies: @James O'Meara
    @Fox

    "Using the numeral ‘4’ to replace the function word ‘for’ is an example for this."

    I wonder if this is also related to similar "hip" slang like "Menace 2 Society," "Boys II Men" etc. (A racial pattern seems to emerge). This was originally supposed to indicate one was down with the ghetto slang, but it seems to have metastasized in the world of social media (of course) with the plethora of abbreviations used on IM's, Twitter, etc. Cause or Effect?

    Replies: @Fox

    , @Rob McX
    @Fox

    As Henry Ford might say, herstory is bunk.

    Replies: @Fox

    , @Fluesterwitz
    @Fox

    Xmass sounds like something out of a modern marketing department but is much older.

    Replies: @Fox

  27. @Cato
    He read from a script. It sounded like he didn't even know what was written there before he read it. I could say unkind things about his intelligence, but would rather say those unkind things about the person who wrote the script.

    On the bright side, at least he didn't blurt out something about Guam tipping over and sliding into the sea.

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy, @J.Ross

    “On the bright side, at least he didn’t blurt out something about Guam tipping over and sliding into the sea.”

    I think that was Hank Johnson — a man so catastrophically dumb he had NBA star Derrick Rose take his SAT’s for him.

    • LOL: Cato
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @Gary in Gramercy

    'I think that was Hank Johnson — a man so catastrophically dumb he had NBA star Derrick Rose take his SAT’s for him.'

    It's actually mildly surprising that these creatures would be so stupid.

    Look at their photos: most are only an eighth or a quarter black. They shouldn't be noticeably worse than white congressmen.

    Of course, I suppose if the pool is small enough...

    If, say, your white congressman is drawn from a population of a hundred thousand whites, he could be pretty sharp. If there are only ten thousand or so octoroons and quadroons in the district, there'd be fewer really sharp ones -- and a lot of those would get hoovered up to be vice-president in charge of being black at Omnicorp or whatever. There'd be just a few odds and ends left to enter politics.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @S. Anonyia

  28. @tyrone
    I always thought Amen was Hebrew (he-brew ,oh no!)………America ,it's about to get all stupid up in here.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'..., @syonredux, @brabantian

    Yep:

    amen (interj.)
    Old English, from Late Latin amen, from Ecclesiastical Greek amen, from Hebrew amen “truth,” used adverbially as an expression of agreement (as in Deuteronomy xxvii.26, I Kings i.36), from Semitic root a-m-n “to be trustworthy, confirm, support.”

    https://www.etymonline.com/word/amen

    • Thanks: Cortes, tyrone
    • Replies: @International Jew
    @syonredux

    Yeah. It's unclear just what part of speech it is (and therefore how to inflect it) but my best guess at how you'd make it feminine would be "amni".

  29. @Cato
    He read from a script. It sounded like he didn't even know what was written there before he read it. I could say unkind things about his intelligence, but would rather say those unkind things about the person who wrote the script.

    On the bright side, at least he didn't blurt out something about Guam tipping over and sliding into the sea.

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy, @J.Ross

    I admire the hell out of Dennis Prager but one of the times I really admired him was when he was talking about this incident and pointed out (I didn’t catch it first time) that the [something like field level Naval officer the congresscritter was talking to] did not flinch, did not smirk, did not suffer a Strzok, did not call the guy an idiot, did not later blab on the equivalent of social media, but with perfect professionalism perfect bearing, responded, “No sir we do not anticipate that.”

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    @J.Ross

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5dkqUy7mUk

    , @Pericles
    @J.Ross

    Maybe they're used to it.



    It was a good question. Feinstein seemed sharp and focussed. For decades, she has been the epitome of a female trailblazer in Washington, always hyper-prepared. But this time, after Dorsey responded, Feinstein asked him the same question again, reading it word for word, along with the Trump tweet. Her inflection was eerily identical. Feinstein looked and sounded just as authoritative, seemingly registering no awareness that she was repeating herself verbatim. Dorsey graciously answered the question all over again.

     

    https://archive.vn/HjkuR

    (NB: The above article seems to be 'under revision'. I had to look around a bit to get the complete version. At least I think it is.)
  30. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word ‘amen’ has nothing to do with ‘men’ even if he didn’t know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    United Methodist. Plus, he’s an ordained pastor in that church.

  31. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    He’s a United Methodist pastor.

  32. @NJ Transit Commuter
    Slightly OT, but relevant I think. Here is a headline I copied from an article from The Telegraph:

    Democrats propose ban on 'he' and 'she' and all gender-specific words in new rules for Congress
     
    Apparently, this is one of the first things the House will do in the new session, while the country is being devastated by COVID. We have become a deeply unserious country. Our leaders cannot solve any of the problems we face, and so they turn to silly cultural issues like this to try and distract people.

    China is engaged in the right strategy to become the preeminent global power: let the US slowly continue its slide to impotence, and continue to build up its own power. But, I worry that as China continues to see things like this, it will be tempted to go for the knockout, and invade Taiwan or something similarly dangerous.

    Replies: @Joe Stalin, @Buffalo Joe

    NJ, last year Berkeley passed an ordinace that changed the word “Manhole” and “Mandoor” to access opening. Doesn’t sound like a big thing until you remember all plans and bid packages will have to be reprinted to reflect this.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Buffalo Joe

    I noticed that you follow Berzerkely, California closely, Joe, with your regular perusal of the Berkeleyside. Is it that they don't have cartoons anymore in your local newspaper, or are you a glutton for punishment?

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    , @black sea
    @Buffalo Joe

    Dear Berkeley,

    We don't think the words Manhole or Mandoor mean what you think they mean.


    With Regards,

    San Francisco

  33. This will be our congressional prayer in about 10 years:

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    @Mike Tre

    I wait with bated breath for his take on Kris Kristofferson's "Sunday Morning Coming Down." Especially its opening lines:

    "Well, I woke up Sunday morning
    With no way to hold my head that didn't hurt.
    And the beer I had for breakfast wasn't bad
    So I had one more for dessert. "

    , @Cortes
    @Mike Tre

    Tom Leonard produced the Glaswegian Sign of the Cross:

    “Name of the Father
    And of the Son
    And of the Holy
    Ghostie Men”

  34. Robin Williams does the “awoman” joke in his 1979 album reality, what a concept. First time I heard it.

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    @Anon7

    The only Robin Williams joke likely to resonate with any member of the C.B.C. is the one about cocaine being "God's way of telling you that you have too much money."

  35. @Buffalo Joe
    @NJ Transit Commuter

    NJ, last year Berkeley passed an ordinace that changed the word "Manhole" and "Mandoor" to access opening. Doesn't sound like a big thing until you remember all plans and bid packages will have to be reprinted to reflect this.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @black sea

    I noticed that you follow Berzerkely, California closely, Joe, with your regular perusal of the Berkeleyside. Is it that they don’t have cartoons anymore in your local newspaper, or are you a glutton for punishment?

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Ach, you too funny. Berkeley is soooo different from WNY that I am drawn like a moth to their flaming disfunction. Amazed that people actually think like they do. Stay safe my friend.

  36. Another proud moment in Black history.

    • Agree: 3g4me
  37. @Gary in Gramercy
    Somehow I knew, even before watching the video evidence, that the perpetrator of this particular bit of linguistic violence would be a member of the C.B.C.

    (For the anti-abbreviationists, that's the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.)

    Replies: @Paco Wové, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Achmed E. Newman, @duncsbaby, @Eustace Tilley (not)

    “What the fuck does WTF mean?”

    • LOL: Ben tillman, bomag
  38. @Paco Wové
    @Gary in Gramercy

    *(For Fuck's Sake)

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy

    “Do I have to spell it out?

    C-H-E-E-S-E-A-N-D-O-N-I-O-N-S,

    O, no!”

    —-The Rutles, “Cheese and Onions”

  39. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Gary in Gramercy


    For the anti-abbreviationists, that’s the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.
     
    I prefer the term "caucus of colored congress critters". It better suits the level of dignity at which these clowns invariably operate.

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy, @Dr. X

    Alliteration for the illiterate (the C.B.C., not you). Nice.

  40. @Gary in Gramercy
    If Kelly Loeffler had any balls, that clip would be running on every Georgia TV station, 24/7, until the runoff on Tuesday.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes

    Kelly doesn’t (have any balls, either physically or politically!). Her husband, the Liege Lord of the New York Stock Exchange, may or may not, have one!

  41. @anonsasmaug
    Like I said Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian.
    "Peter was considered along with James the Just and John the Apostle as pillars of the Church.[44] Legitimised by Jesus' appearance, Peter assumed leadership of the group of early followers, forming the Jerusalem ekklēsia mentioned by Paul.[25][26] He was soon eclipsed in this leadership by James the Just, "the Brother of the Lord."[27][28] According to Lüdemann, this was due to the discussions about the strictness of adherence to the Jewish Law, when the more conservative faction of James the Just[45] took the overhand over the more liberal position of Peter, who soon lost influence.[28][note 2] According to Dunn, this was not an "usurpation of power", but a consequence of Peter's involvement in missionary activities.[47] The early Church historian Eusebius (c. AD 325) records Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 190) as saying,

    For they say that Peter and James (the Greater) and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem.[48]

    James D. G. Dunn proposes that Peter was a "bridge-man" between the opposing views of Paul and James the Just [italics original]:

    For Peter was probably in fact and effect the bridge-man (pontifex maximus!) who did more than any other to hold together the diversity of first-century Christianity. James the brother of Jesus and Paul, the two other most prominent leading figures in first-century Christianity, were too much identified with their respective "brands" of Christianity, at least in the eyes of Christians at the opposite ends of this particular spectrum.[49]"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter

    Replies: @HA, @Peter D. Bredon, @Bardon Kaldian

    “He was soon eclipsed in this leadership by James the Just, ‘the Brother of the Lord.’”

    Setting aside the pointless crack about foreignness, according to one school of thought on the foundations of Islam, it actually originated among a Nazareen sect of Christians (albeit very Judeocentric ones, on the far end of the spectrum of views you noted) whose origins trace back to the followers of James the Just.

    [MORE]

    In the 1st century, another major strand was woven into the web of apocalyptic Jewish messianism: the followers of James the Just — who was not an apostle but the blood cousin of Jesus and the first bishop in Jerusalem — exalted him above the apostles and even claimed that the destruction of the Temple was the result of his being stoned to death by zealots in 62 AD. After James’s death, some of his followers reinterpreted Christianity in a radically Judeocentric way, one that led to the Nazareen ideology…Jerome called them “semi-Jews.” The Church Fathers, from Irenaeus to Jerome, speak of the Ebionites or Nazareens as heretics, and they are alluding to them when they warn against “Judaizers.” They knew that the Nazareens denied the divinity of Christ while accepting the Virgin Birth, that they practiced circumcision, that they reproached rabbinical Jews for altering the texts of the Bible to hide the fact that Jesus was the messiah, and that they prayed toward Jerusalem. All these things the Muslims would do after them, except that they eventually changed their quibla and prayed toward Mecca. Origen says that the Nazareens refused to drink wine… Interestingly, when Jerome describes the fleshly pleasures anticipated by the Nazareens in that kingdom, they sound a lot like the pleasures Muslims believe await them in paradise….

    Under this version of Islam’s creation, Muhammad originally came preaching about the impending return of the Messiah:

    Muhammad’s success is confirmed by the Chronicle of Jacob of Edessa (before 692) and also by Doctrina Jacobi (before 640). In the latter we learn that some rabbinical Jews arriving in Yatrib in 625 or 627 found the Arabs there already impregnated with the Nazareen ideology and their chieftain Muhammad “proclaiming the coming of the messiah” with such charism that they were all united firmly under his authority. The Chronography of Theophane (who died in 817) states that in 622 some rabbinical Jews known to the Byzantines attached themselves to Muhammad: they saw him as one of “their prophets,” the one who, as Malachy 3:23 foretold, would precede the messiah.

    Later on, when the Messiah that Muhammad foretold failed to return, a new “official story” of Islam was devised in which Muhammad himself was the last of the prophets, and all these Nazareen influences and rabbinical affiliations were excised and burned.

    Again, I don’t see what any of that has to do with the “foreignness” of Christianity to Europeans or anyone else, given that it contains influences from all over, be they
    Canaanite, Egyptian, Jewish, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, and who knows what else — maybe even Buddhist, depending on how far west Ashoka’s missionaries traveled.

    • Thanks: Ron Mexico, S. Anonyia
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @HA

    >Later on, when the Messiah that Muhammad foretold failed to return, a new “official story” of Islam was devised in which Muhammad himself was the last of the prophets, and all these Nazareen influences and rabbinical affiliations were excised and burned.

    Barring a time machine, this will be nothing more than a theory. But it is quite possible that the proto-Islamic movement wanted to occupy the Holy Land (which they viewed as their patrimony, as descendants of Abraham) in preparation for a coming apocalypse. The Arabs never imagined they'd end up fully conquering one empire and dismembering another. Understandably, they weren't going to be reviving the Davidic state after such a windfall, and they didn't want to end up blending into the populace like the Germanic peoples did after the Western empire fell, so Islam became a more differentiated faith. I'd hazard that the process wasn't quite as deliberate as this, given the fluidity of religious belief at the time, of course, but you get the idea.

    Through this lens, Islam as we know it was a creation of the Arab conquests, not the other way around. As the centuries went on, Zoroastrian influence got more significant at the expense of the initial mix of Jewish millenarianism and apocalyptic Eastern heterodox Christianity. Persian culture and thought woulud have a similar impact on Islam that Greco-Roman philosophy and culture had on Christianity: a lot of the ritual purity stuff normative in Muslim cultures, such as viewing dogs as unclean, has Zoroastrian origins, for example. Put this way, fully-formed Christianity and Islam are half-brothers: Jewish mother, but Greco-Roman vs. Persian father.

  42. @J.Ross
    @Cato

    I admire the hell out of Dennis Prager but one of the times I really admired him was when he was talking about this incident and pointed out (I didn't catch it first time) that the [something like field level Naval officer the congresscritter was talking to] did not flinch, did not smirk, did not suffer a Strzok, did not call the guy an idiot, did not later blab on the equivalent of social media, but with perfect professionalism perfect bearing, responded, "No sir we do not anticipate that."

    Replies: @Joe Stalin, @Pericles

  43. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    “How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word ‘amen’ has nothing to do with ‘men’ even if he didn’t know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?”

    How could a man (i.e., normal, that is, White) not understand, now that would be a question. As for a black man, why the puzzle?

  44. @Anon7
    Robin Williams does the “awoman” joke in his 1979 album reality, what a concept. First time I heard it.

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy

    The only Robin Williams joke likely to resonate with any member of the C.B.C. is the one about cocaine being “God’s way of telling you that you have too much money.”

  45. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Gary in Gramercy


    For the anti-abbreviationists, that’s the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.
     
    I prefer the term "caucus of colored congress critters". It better suits the level of dignity at which these clowns invariably operate.

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy, @Dr. X

    I prefer the term “caucus of colored congress critters”.

    I prefer “congressnegroes.”

  46. @anonsasmaug
    Like I said Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian.
    "Peter was considered along with James the Just and John the Apostle as pillars of the Church.[44] Legitimised by Jesus' appearance, Peter assumed leadership of the group of early followers, forming the Jerusalem ekklēsia mentioned by Paul.[25][26] He was soon eclipsed in this leadership by James the Just, "the Brother of the Lord."[27][28] According to Lüdemann, this was due to the discussions about the strictness of adherence to the Jewish Law, when the more conservative faction of James the Just[45] took the overhand over the more liberal position of Peter, who soon lost influence.[28][note 2] According to Dunn, this was not an "usurpation of power", but a consequence of Peter's involvement in missionary activities.[47] The early Church historian Eusebius (c. AD 325) records Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 190) as saying,

    For they say that Peter and James (the Greater) and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem.[48]

    James D. G. Dunn proposes that Peter was a "bridge-man" between the opposing views of Paul and James the Just [italics original]:

    For Peter was probably in fact and effect the bridge-man (pontifex maximus!) who did more than any other to hold together the diversity of first-century Christianity. James the brother of Jesus and Paul, the two other most prominent leading figures in first-century Christianity, were too much identified with their respective "brands" of Christianity, at least in the eyes of Christians at the opposite ends of this particular spectrum.[49]"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter

    Replies: @HA, @Peter D. Bredon, @Bardon Kaldian

    “Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian.”

    Nonsense even if popular among the “edgy” alt-right. Christianity is Indo-European, a Hellenic mystery religion possessed from its very inception with an Indo-European cosmological sense (dying and reborn god). That’s why Jews hated it, and still do, as you may have noticed.

    It is as Indo-European as Wotanism (which, by the way, is not “authentically German” but hales from Anatolia).

    • Replies: @Hugo Silva
    @Peter D. Bredon

    Wotanism is from Anatolia? Could you develop that idea!

    , @anonsasmaug
    @Peter D. Bredon

    Jews hated the "Pagans" too and especially it's "witches" or any woman who fought alongside their kindred men and were very important in their society. I should say were important, that foreign religion destroyed all that and created a hatred for the white woman in the white man first.
    ist of Celtic Goddesses
    Aine (Irish) – Goddess of love, growth, cattle and light. ...
    Badb (Irish) - A shape-shifting, warrior goddess who symbolises life and death, wisdom and inspiration. ...
    Blodeewedd (Welsh) – Was created by magic from nine blossoms becoming the wife of Llew Llaw.
    Norse
    Freya. Freya ('lady') was the Norse goddess of love, fertility, sorcery, gold, war and death. ...
    Frigg. Frigg ('beloved one') was the consort of Odin and the goddess of love, marriage and motherhood. ...
    Gefion. ...
    Idun. ...
    Sif. ...
    Sigyn. ...
    Eir. ...

    , @Templar
    @Peter D. Bredon

    Judaism seems to have been very heavily influenced by Persian Zoroastrianism. The Persians allowed Jews to return home after the Babylonian exile and you could make a case for saying that Jewish monotheism really stems from this period
    Persian,Parsee,Farsi.... Pharisee?
    The Persians of course were the original Iranians/Aryans. The Shahs father change the name of Persia to Iran during the 1930s in response to the rise of Hitler and the vogue for Aryanism.

    Replies: @For what it's worth

    , @Allen
    @Peter D. Bredon

    Not this again. Claims that Christianity is derived from a "dying and rising" god mythology was cutting edge in the 19th century but is way outdated today (and only really popular with internet sceptics who have never actually studied the area).

    First, Jonathan Z. Smith's seminal 1987 article "Dying and Rising Gods" largely put to rest the idea that there were a multitude of "dying and rising" gods in ancient pagan mythologies. His article has been conveniently reposted here:

    https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/dying-and-rising-gods

    More recently, T.N.D. Mettinger argued that Dumuzi, Baal, and Melqar did die and return to life, but he acknowledges that he is in the minority and most scholars reject the very concept of "dying and rising gods". Regardless, Mettinger is adamant that these examples had no influence on the much later resurrection narratives about Jesus:

    "The dying and rising gods were closely related to the seasonal cycle. Their death and return were seen as reflected in the changes of plant life. The death and resurrection of Jesus is a one-time event, not repeated, and unrelated to seasonal changes . . . There is, as far as I am aware, no prima facie evidence that the death and resurrection of Jesus is a mythological construct, drawing on the myths and rites of the dying and rising gods of the surrounding world. While studied with profit against the background of Jewish resurrection belief, the faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus retains its unique character in the history of religions."

    Mettinger, The Riddle of Resurrection p. 221.

    Even an atheist/sceptic like Bart Ehrman dismisses the idea that pagan mythologies influenced stories about Jesus' resurrection:

    "First, it is important to realize that the reason there are disagreements among scholars (at least with someone like Mettinger) is that the evidence for such gods is at best sparse, scattered, and ambiguous, not abundant, ubiquitous, and clear. If there were any such beliefs about dying and rising gods, they were clearly not widespread and available for all to see.

    Such gods were definitely not widely known and widely discussed among religious people of
    antiquity as is obvious from the fact that they are not clearly discussed in any of our sources. On
    this everyone should be able to agree. Even more important, there is no evidence that such gods
    were known or worshipped in rural Palestine, or even in Jerusalem, in the 20s CE. Anyone who
    thinks that Jesus was modeled on such deities needs to cite some evidence—any evidence at all—
    that Jews in Palestine at the alleged time of Jesus's life were influenced by anyone who held such
    views. One reason that scholars do not think that Jesus was invented as one of these deities is
    precisely that we have no evidence that any of his followers knew of such deities in the time and
    place where Jesus was allegedly invented. Moreover, as Mettinger himself acknowledges, the
    differences between the dying and rising gods (which he has reconstructed on slim evidence) and
    Jesus show that Jesus was not modeled on them, even if such gods were talked about during Jesus's
    time. "

    Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth p. 98-99.

  47. @Jonathan Mason
    @Altai

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called "The Sonrise Church."

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @James O'Meara, @Lockean Proviso, @Craig Nelsen, @BB753, @Fluesterwitz, @Barnard

  48. @Jonathan Mason
    @Altai

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called "The Sonrise Church."

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @James O'Meara, @Lockean Proviso, @Craig Nelsen, @BB753, @Fluesterwitz, @Barnard

    “Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.”

    “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock (petras) I will build my church.”

    • Thanks: Hibernian
  49. @Fox
    @Altai

    Quite a few years ago someone used the word 'niggardly" (can't remember the specifics) and boy did that lead to a storm of 'pundits' (aka wise guys), black opiners and intellectual guttersnipes. I think the affair was ended after several days of overheated ether waves with an 'apology', i.e., throwing in the towel in the face of the onslaught of mentally deranged and congenitally stupid people constituting the "leading circles". It did not make any difference that it was pointed out that 'niggard' was a word of Norwegian origin meaning 'stingy' (in which sense it was used) and completely unrelated to the N-word.
    I think this trend has been introduced by the advertisement industry where oftentimes seemingly cute homonyms are used to create a slight disturbance in one's thinking, forcing one to more actively perceive of the product that is being advertised and thus make it stick more. Using the numeral '4' to replace the function word 'for' is an example for this. It opened the door for unfocused thinking, hence such utterly stupid creations as 'Awoman', but also 'herstory' etc, always delivered with a deeply serious mien such as only the not-so-bright can produce at any occasion because they do believe that their shallowness is profundity.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Rob McX, @Fluesterwitz

    “Using the numeral ‘4’ to replace the function word ‘for’ is an example for this.”

    I wonder if this is also related to similar “hip” slang like “Menace 2 Society,” “Boys II Men” etc. (A racial pattern seems to emerge). This was originally supposed to indicate one was down with the ghetto slang, but it seems to have metastasized in the world of social media (of course) with the plethora of abbreviations used on IM’s, Twitter, etc. Cause or Effect?

    • Replies: @Fox
    @James O'Meara

    I think at some point it was novel, clever and perhaps a bit funny (as with 2 for 'to', 4 for 'for), but then, in a feedback loop, it amplified itself by increased use and lost the original exceptional and funny aspect. It led to confused thinking and as we see now, to very shallow 'deep' thinking, pseudo-philosophizing and ever more absurd revelations about "inequalities", "discriminations", "supremacy", "injustices" and what have you.
    Words may sound the same but have a different meaning that is clear from the context they are used in and from their spelling but now the sounding is the decisive distinctive mark. That aspect of discrimination in speech and thinking has been principally eliminated. Clearly, it's all about some simple-minded intuition. The people talking in this way, instead of being laughed out of the forum they are addressing, are rewarded. Education, the rigors of training and disciplined thinking are all in the way of feeling one's way through life, all the while someone else is providing the material basis for such an aimless and shamanic life.
    What is interesting about it is that the people enabling this bizarre show had themselves gone through years of schooling, study, training and presumably thinking, but they apparently did never grasp the essence of discipline necessary in thought if it is at all to bear fruit, not even the basics. Education and training did not touch their true self, which they apparently did not want to hone, refine, prepare for a life with others, but considered merely a necessary inconvenience or even burden to gain access to a life away from the quiet workbench or other place where actual work is done, skill is a must and joy in accomplishment is an experience. Otherwise they would not participate in such events which one would normally give the predicate 'clownish', but since no one laughs, one has to give it instead the predicate 'depraved', intellectually depraved, morally depraved, spiritually depraved, ethically depraved, just depraved.
    They would walk out when someone ends a prayer with A-men and A-woman, regardless of any adherence to Christian faith. They would acutely feel the embarrassment, but they did not, they do not.

  50. Feminists have complained that the word “history” is sexist, assuming it’s root is “his story”.
    Etymology of “history” – from the Greek “historia” meaning inquiry or knowledge from inquiry.
    Etymology of “his” – from Old English “he”
    Good luck explaining to a feminist the difference between Old English and Ancient Greek.

    Likewise with the word “rape seed” (from which we get Canola oil).
    Etymology of “rape” in rape seed – rape is from the Latin word for turnip, rapa or rapum
    Etymology of “rape” as in sexual assault – from the Latin rapere, meaning to snatch or carry off
    Good luck explaining to a feminist that words that sound alike can have different origins and meanings.

  51. @vhrm
    @Altai


    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word ‘amen’ has nothing to do with ‘men’ even if he didn’t know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?
     
    He's not just "a man" in this case. He is Rep Emanuel Cleaver and is/was a Methodist pastor.

    "received a Master of Divinity (M.Div.) degree from St. Paul School of Theology."
    "was the pastor at the St. James United Methodist Church in Kansas City, Missouri from March 1972 until June 2009." (per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_Cleaver )

    So i'm guessing he knows the word has nothing to do with men and women.

    My first reaction too is to be outraged by the wokeness run amok. But then maybe he's just riffing on it on it on purpose even knowing the origin.
    It's still woke and obnoxious but not necessarily out of ignorance of the context.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    He knows what it actually means, but is cynically working the system. Cleaver, confronted about party corruption one time, responded to the effect of “Yes, everybody does it; deal with it.”

  52. @Buffalo Joe
    @NJ Transit Commuter

    NJ, last year Berkeley passed an ordinace that changed the word "Manhole" and "Mandoor" to access opening. Doesn't sound like a big thing until you remember all plans and bid packages will have to be reprinted to reflect this.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @black sea

    Dear Berkeley,

    We don’t think the words Manhole or Mandoor mean what you think they mean.

    With Regards,

    San Francisco

  53. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    Honestly, arrogance is your answer. It doesn’t take a genius to look up the etymology, he probably just assumes he is so wonderful that he can come up with whatever new spin on his prayer that he wants and it will be universally applauded. Have worked with younger versions of his type before- spelling errors and uneven, hazy writing is what to expect. No fact-checking. Think anything they produce is gold.

  54. @Altai
    How could a black man of his age possibly not understand the word 'amen' has nothing to do with 'men' even if he didn't know the exact definition. What kind of church did he go to?

    Also, the pluralistic prayer is just sad and pathetic looking. All those speech writers and media people and you couldn't make it look anything other than a sad mess, which, if I were Russia or China, would make me feel safe in the knowledge that the US will soon collapse socially and politically into itself. (Though, perhaps the real danger is a US which socially, politically and economically collapses with a lag before it's hyperpower military declines, leading to it relying on force of arms to get it's way with disastrous results.)

    Replies: @vhrm, @Jonathan Mason, @Jimbo, @Fox, @anon, @Charlotte, @Peter D. Bredon, @S. Anonyia, @Ed

    They’re so stupid.

  55. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @tyrone


    "I always thought Amen was Hebrew..."
     
    IIRC, the word is from Aramaic. However, I agree with your implicit assessment that, even judging by the low standards usually set by our congress critters, this whole kerfluffle is an epic demonstration of ignorance and stupidity.

    Replies: @kaganovitch

    IIRC, the word is from Aramaic.

    Nah , it appears in the bible Deut.27:24 among other places.

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    @kaganovitch

    You're right. I checked some other sources. Amen appears in Hebrew Texts and worship long before Aramaic became the Lingua Franca of Palestine. Thanks for correcting a long-standing misapprehension.

    Replies: @kaganovitch

  56. @Jonathan Mason
    @Altai

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called "The Sonrise Church."

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @James O'Meara, @Lockean Proviso, @Craig Nelsen, @BB753, @Fluesterwitz, @Barnard

    From the increasingly prescient Idiocracy, “St. God’s Memorial Hospital”:

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Lockean Proviso

    LOL. But the makers of the film naively thought it would take 500 years to get to that level of stupidity.

  57. This is a variation of the logic that got niggardly cancelled.

    • Agree: PhysicistDave
  58. I wonder if someone can make a Wokenator browser extension that will do a simple find/replace on “men” with “BlackWomen” or something of the sort. Just to make it clear to any simpletons yet on the fence as to whether or not our “elites” are as ridiculous as they seem…

    E.g., here’s a snippet from a NY Times article on COVID vaccinations run through said hypothetical Wokenator browser extension:

    In an emailed stateBlackWoment, Dr. Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at the Food and Drug Administration, endorsed only the strictly scheduled two-dose regiBlackWomens that were tested in clinical trials of the vaccines.

    Ray Jordan, a spokesman for Moderna, said the company could not comBlackWoment on altering dosing plans at this time.

    • Replies: @Craig Nelsen
    @Matthew Kelly

    You, sir, are sadly underwoke. Please allow me:


    In an emailed stateBlackWoment, Dr. Peter Marks, director of tBlackShe Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at tBlackShe Food and Drug Administration, endorsed only tBlackShe strictly scBlackSheduled two-dose regiBlackWomens that were tested in clinical trials of tBlackShe vaccines.

    Ray Jordan, a spokesman for Moderna, said tBlackShe company could not comBlackWoment on altering dosing plans at tBlackHer time.
     
  59. This is why we need math, science, and civics tests in order to vote.

    Or at least, at the bare minimum, realize that making it ever easier to vote (mail-in ballots, motor voter) is a really stupid idea.

    • Agree: S. Anonyia
  60. @James O'Meara
    @Fox

    "Using the numeral ‘4’ to replace the function word ‘for’ is an example for this."

    I wonder if this is also related to similar "hip" slang like "Menace 2 Society," "Boys II Men" etc. (A racial pattern seems to emerge). This was originally supposed to indicate one was down with the ghetto slang, but it seems to have metastasized in the world of social media (of course) with the plethora of abbreviations used on IM's, Twitter, etc. Cause or Effect?

    Replies: @Fox

    I think at some point it was novel, clever and perhaps a bit funny (as with 2 for ‘to’, 4 for ‘for), but then, in a feedback loop, it amplified itself by increased use and lost the original exceptional and funny aspect. It led to confused thinking and as we see now, to very shallow ‘deep’ thinking, pseudo-philosophizing and ever more absurd revelations about “inequalities”, “discriminations”, “supremacy”, “injustices” and what have you.
    Words may sound the same but have a different meaning that is clear from the context they are used in and from their spelling but now the sounding is the decisive distinctive mark. That aspect of discrimination in speech and thinking has been principally eliminated. Clearly, it’s all about some simple-minded intuition. The people talking in this way, instead of being laughed out of the forum they are addressing, are rewarded. Education, the rigors of training and disciplined thinking are all in the way of feeling one’s way through life, all the while someone else is providing the material basis for such an aimless and shamanic life.
    What is interesting about it is that the people enabling this bizarre show had themselves gone through years of schooling, study, training and presumably thinking, but they apparently did never grasp the essence of discipline necessary in thought if it is at all to bear fruit, not even the basics. Education and training did not touch their true self, which they apparently did not want to hone, refine, prepare for a life with others, but considered merely a necessary inconvenience or even burden to gain access to a life away from the quiet workbench or other place where actual work is done, skill is a must and joy in accomplishment is an experience. Otherwise they would not participate in such events which one would normally give the predicate ‘clownish’, but since no one laughs, one has to give it instead the predicate ‘depraved’, intellectually depraved, morally depraved, spiritually depraved, ethically depraved, just depraved.
    They would walk out when someone ends a prayer with A-men and A-woman, regardless of any adherence to Christian faith. They would acutely feel the embarrassment, but they did not, they do not.

  61. @syonredux
    @tyrone

    Yep:


    amen (interj.)
    Old English, from Late Latin amen, from Ecclesiastical Greek amen, from Hebrew amen "truth," used adverbially as an expression of agreement (as in Deuteronomy xxvii.26, I Kings i.36), from Semitic root a-m-n "to be trustworthy, confirm, support."
     
    https://www.etymonline.com/word/amen

    Replies: @International Jew

    Yeah. It’s unclear just what part of speech it is (and therefore how to inflect it) but my best guess at how you’d make it feminine would be “amni”.

  62. @Gary in Gramercy
    @Cato

    "On the bright side, at least he didn't blurt out something about Guam tipping over and sliding into the sea."

    I think that was Hank Johnson -- a man so catastrophically dumb he had NBA star Derrick Rose take his SAT's for him.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    ‘I think that was Hank Johnson — a man so catastrophically dumb he had NBA star Derrick Rose take his SAT’s for him.’

    It’s actually mildly surprising that these creatures would be so stupid.

    Look at their photos: most are only an eighth or a quarter black. They shouldn’t be noticeably worse than white congressmen.

    Of course, I suppose if the pool is small enough…

    If, say, your white congressman is drawn from a population of a hundred thousand whites, he could be pretty sharp. If there are only ten thousand or so octoroons and quadroons in the district, there’d be fewer really sharp ones — and a lot of those would get hoovered up to be vice-president in charge of being black at Omnicorp or whatever. There’d be just a few odds and ends left to enter politics.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Colin Wright

    Look at their photos: most are only an eighth or a quarter black. They shouldn’t be noticeably worse than white congressmen.

    You've never seen a quadroon in the flesh I take it.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    , @S. Anonyia
    @Colin Wright

    These guys don’t look like quadroons or octoroons. Quadroons look like Puerto Ricans or darker North Africans. Octoroons would just register as “vaguely exotic.”

    Replies: @Colin Wright

  63. @Gary in Gramercy
    Somehow I knew, even before watching the video evidence, that the perpetrator of this particular bit of linguistic violence would be a member of the C.B.C.

    (For the anti-abbreviationists, that's the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.)

    Replies: @Paco Wové, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Achmed E. Newman, @duncsbaby, @Eustace Tilley (not)

    Thanks, I still do a mental hiccup when reading CBC in some political article and wonder what the hell Canadian television has to do with it.

  64. A lot of people see the stupidity of so many Democratic Caucus members as a bug. The people who actually run and own the party, however, see it as a feature.

    • Replies: @black sea
    @Wilkey

    I agree. The people who run our largest corporations and institutions are pretty good at getting their way. And they don't just wander around moping about the fact that, despite their best efforts, the lumpenproletariat keeps electing a bunch of morons.

    They know very well that you don't need, or want, a genius to take orders. You want a compliant mediocrity who's just happy to be there and subservient to those who got him there.

    Replies: @Not Only Wrathful

  65. @Mike Tre
    This will be our congressional prayer in about 10 years:

    https://youtu.be/JeFoS40l4wc

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy, @Cortes

    I wait with bated breath for his take on Kris Kristofferson’s “Sunday Morning Coming Down.” Especially its opening lines:

    “Well, I woke up Sunday morning
    With no way to hold my head that didn’t hurt.
    And the beer I had for breakfast wasn’t bad
    So I had one more for dessert. ”

  66. @Jonathan Mason
    @Altai

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called "The Sonrise Church."

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @James O'Meara, @Lockean Proviso, @Craig Nelsen, @BB753, @Fluesterwitz, @Barnard

    I thought this example from Baltimore was admirably straightforward.

  67. @Wilkey
    A lot of people see the stupidity of so many Democratic Caucus members as a bug. The people who actually run and own the party, however, see it as a feature.

    Replies: @black sea

    I agree. The people who run our largest corporations and institutions are pretty good at getting their way. And they don’t just wander around moping about the fact that, despite their best efforts, the lumpenproletariat keeps electing a bunch of morons.

    They know very well that you don’t need, or want, a genius to take orders. You want a compliant mediocrity who’s just happy to be there and subservient to those who got him there.

    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
    @black sea

    I think you're going to big scale. It is the leadership within the parties that don't want all Chiefs and no Indians. Imagine being Nancy Pelosi and trying to corral a few hundred all sharp and extra ambitious representatives. It'd be impossible.

  68. @Matthew Kelly
    I wonder if someone can make a Wokenator browser extension that will do a simple find/replace on "men" with "BlackWomen" or something of the sort. Just to make it clear to any simpletons yet on the fence as to whether or not our "elites" are as ridiculous as they seem...

    E.g., here's a snippet from a NY Times article on COVID vaccinations run through said hypothetical Wokenator browser extension:


    In an emailed stateBlackWoment, Dr. Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at the Food and Drug Administration, endorsed only the strictly scheduled two-dose regiBlackWomens that were tested in clinical trials of the vaccines.
    ...
    Ray Jordan, a spokesman for Moderna, said the company could not comBlackWoment on altering dosing plans at this time.
     

    Replies: @Craig Nelsen

    You, sir, are sadly underwoke. Please allow me:

    In an emailed stateBlackWoment, Dr. Peter Marks, director of tBlackShe Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at tBlackShe Food and Drug Administration, endorsed only tBlackShe strictly scBlackSheduled two-dose regiBlackWomens that were tested in clinical trials of tBlackShe vaccines.

    Ray Jordan, a spokesman for Moderna, said tBlackShe company could not comBlackWoment on altering dosing plans at tBlackHer time.

  69. Listen closely to the clip and you will verify that the Congressional parson’s invocation (to Allah, not to YHVH) ends not with “Ay-men and Ay-women” but with “Ay-men [plural] and Ay-woman [singular]”. Sexist!

  70. This is a small step for ewomancipation, but … but a giant leap for womankind.

  71. @J.Ross
    @Cato

    I admire the hell out of Dennis Prager but one of the times I really admired him was when he was talking about this incident and pointed out (I didn't catch it first time) that the [something like field level Naval officer the congresscritter was talking to] did not flinch, did not smirk, did not suffer a Strzok, did not call the guy an idiot, did not later blab on the equivalent of social media, but with perfect professionalism perfect bearing, responded, "No sir we do not anticipate that."

    Replies: @Joe Stalin, @Pericles

    Maybe they’re used to it.

    It was a good question. Feinstein seemed sharp and focussed. For decades, she has been the epitome of a female trailblazer in Washington, always hyper-prepared. But this time, after Dorsey responded, Feinstein asked him the same question again, reading it word for word, along with the Trump tweet. Her inflection was eerily identical. Feinstein looked and sounded just as authoritative, seemingly registering no awareness that she was repeating herself verbatim. Dorsey graciously answered the question all over again.

    https://archive.vn/HjkuR

    (NB: The above article seems to be ‘under revision’. I had to look around a bit to get the complete version. At least I think it is.)

  72. @black sea
    @Wilkey

    I agree. The people who run our largest corporations and institutions are pretty good at getting their way. And they don't just wander around moping about the fact that, despite their best efforts, the lumpenproletariat keeps electing a bunch of morons.

    They know very well that you don't need, or want, a genius to take orders. You want a compliant mediocrity who's just happy to be there and subservient to those who got him there.

    Replies: @Not Only Wrathful

    I think you’re going to big scale. It is the leadership within the parties that don’t want all Chiefs and no Indians. Imagine being Nancy Pelosi and trying to corral a few hundred all sharp and extra ambitious representatives. It’d be impossible.

  73. @Jonathan Mason
    @Altai

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called "The Sonrise Church."

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @James O'Meara, @Lockean Proviso, @Craig Nelsen, @BB753, @Fluesterwitz, @Barnard

    “Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do”

    Lutherans have (borrowed) saints, too.
    Is this the reason there are thousand of reformed and evangelical churches? Because the only way to come up with a new name for your church is to split off and create a new denomination?

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @BB753


    Is this the reason there are thousand of reformed and evangelical churches?

     

    No. The Reformed have generally not gotten all that worked up about church names. For example, Grand Rapids, MI, a popular destination for Dutch Reformed settlers, has (at least) a 'Fifth Reformed Church'. Most Dutch-American enclaves of any size have a 'First Reformed Church', which is usually the 'mother church' for that area, i.e. the initial one founded at the time of settlement. Then the next church could easily be 'Second Reformed', and so on, until somebody decided it might be nice to vary things just a bit and pick some kind of different name. Clearly, not a lot of agonizing over naming was going on.

    These days the Reformed (and Christian Reformed, a splinter denomination) are slightly more varied in their naming, but they tend to either pick generic geographical names, e.g. 'Neighborhood/Town/Suburb Name Here Reformed', or abstract theological concepts, e.g. 'Grace Reformed', 'Hope Reformed', 'Covenant Reformed', and so on.

    Reformed churches split because their members have traditionally tended to care a lot about what may seem to other Christians rather fine, even abstruse, points of doctrine. And when factions in a church can't agree, it's relatively easy to go separate ways, since congregations have a lot of autonomy within the broader denominational structures.

    Replies: @Enemy of Earth, @BB753

  74. @Mike Tre
    This will be our congressional prayer in about 10 years:

    https://youtu.be/JeFoS40l4wc

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy, @Cortes

    Tom Leonard produced the Glaswegian Sign of the Cross:

    “Name of the Father
    And of the Son
    And of the Holy
    Ghostie Men”

  75. Let’s all take a moment to say a prayer for those fools … may God rest their souls, and soon.

  76. It’s no fun being an atheist any more.

    Criticizing theism used to be like being in a tough boxing match.

    With believers like this guy, attacking his belief is like attacking a piece of tissue paper.

    Wet tissue paper.

    Where is a real man like St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas when you need an adversary worth fighting?

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @PhysicistDave

    They still exist, but not in the US, the promised land of Hamburger Christianity.

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/519oe8ConkL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

  77. @PhysicistDave
    It's no fun being an atheist any more.

    Criticizing theism used to be like being in a tough boxing match.

    With believers like this guy, attacking his belief is like attacking a piece of tissue paper.

    Wet tissue paper.

    Where is a real man like St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas when you need an adversary worth fighting?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    They still exist, but not in the US, the promised land of Hamburger Christianity.

  78. @Fox
    @Altai

    Quite a few years ago someone used the word 'niggardly" (can't remember the specifics) and boy did that lead to a storm of 'pundits' (aka wise guys), black opiners and intellectual guttersnipes. I think the affair was ended after several days of overheated ether waves with an 'apology', i.e., throwing in the towel in the face of the onslaught of mentally deranged and congenitally stupid people constituting the "leading circles". It did not make any difference that it was pointed out that 'niggard' was a word of Norwegian origin meaning 'stingy' (in which sense it was used) and completely unrelated to the N-word.
    I think this trend has been introduced by the advertisement industry where oftentimes seemingly cute homonyms are used to create a slight disturbance in one's thinking, forcing one to more actively perceive of the product that is being advertised and thus make it stick more. Using the numeral '4' to replace the function word 'for' is an example for this. It opened the door for unfocused thinking, hence such utterly stupid creations as 'Awoman', but also 'herstory' etc, always delivered with a deeply serious mien such as only the not-so-bright can produce at any occasion because they do believe that their shallowness is profundity.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Rob McX, @Fluesterwitz

    As Henry Ford might say, herstory is bunk.

    • Replies: @Fox
    @Rob McX

    I think that not just Henry Ford would say that.

  79. @tyrone
    I always thought Amen was Hebrew (he-brew ,oh no!)………America ,it's about to get all stupid up in here.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'..., @syonredux, @brabantian

    Before it went into the Hebrew – Greek – Latin chain, the word ‘Amen’ is from ancient Egyptian

    Egyptian god Amun, his name also sometimes spelled ‘Amen’ as well as ‘Amon’, then becoming joined with Ra to be one great solar creator god, Amun-Ra

    For obvious reasons Judaics – Abrahamics would like to prefer that it be ‘their’ word … Ancient Jews were of course obsessed with then ‘greatest of all civilisations’ Egypt, writing or perhaps as some claim fabricating the Exodus stories … the oldest ‘Hebrew bible’ we have is actually the Greek Septuagint, allegedly a ‘translation’ of ‘lost Hebrew’, but many think a fabrication seeking to glamourise Jews by writing a story in which the great power of Egypt was beaten by divinely-backed Jews

    • Thanks: S. Anonyia
    • LOL: Dissident
    • Replies: @For what it's worth
    @brabantian

    No, that's just made-up horse shit. The word means "truth" and is used in assenting to what someone else said. Your claim is as stupid as the claim it refers to men.

    , @Allen
    @brabantian

    First, there is no linguistic connection between the Hebrew "amen" and the Egyptian "Amun" and no legitimate linguist would make that argument.

    For starters, the Hebrew "amen" begins with the vowel "aleph" while "Amun" (despite the English transliteration) actually starts with the vowel "yodh".

    You can consult the Oxford English Dictionary, the Brown-Drivers-Biggs Hebrew Lexicon, or even the Altägyptisches Wörterbuch (for the Egyptian), but none support any etymological link between "amen" and "Amun"

    Second, your claims about the Hebrew Bible are deeply confused. The earliest Biblical texts we have are the Dead Sea Scrolls. Now the Septuagint is a Greek translation begun in approximately 3rd century B.C. (it initially only included the Pentateuch but later included all other Old Testament texts). There are arguments that the Septuagint reflects an earlier edition of the Hebrew text than what was codified as the Masoretic text but this argument depends on textual variants among certain copies of the Dead Sea Scrolls that match Septuagint variants (although to non-scholars these textual variants are fairly minor). For a detailed discussion I would recommend Emmanuel Tov's masterful Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible.

    Regardless, actual scholars vary considerably over the precise dating Old Testament books (and which can be definitively dated before the Babylonian/Persian exile) but no legitimate scholar would argue for a wholesale fabrication in the 3rd century. At a bare minimum the close connections between Genesis and other ancient Near Eastern literature (such as Atrahasis, Enki and Enlil, and Gilgamesh) make the late fabrication you allege virtually impossible.

    , @nebulafox
    @brabantian

    >perhaps as some claim fabricating the Exodus stories …

    I think it is important to remember how memories were kept alive in a world where literacy was the domain of scribes and priests, not even kings. (This is a huge part of why I think Jesus and Muhammad existed as historical individuals, whereas Achilles and Moses and Arjuna might be a mixture of folk legend and several people.) Did Achilles fight Scamander? Probably not. Was there a warrior that Achilles was based off of? Possibly. Was there a conflict that the Trojan War was based off of? Probably: just one of many memories preserving the Bronze Age Collapse that would be passed down until Homer compiled them into one of the greatest pieces of literature in human history. As the centuries went by, the tale got taller, but that historical core is still there.

    Similarly, there might not have been an Exodus as we think of it. But there was definitely a period of Egyptian hegemony over the lands that would become Israel-and we're helped by Pharaoh Merneptah, who was kind enough to record the list of people he bragged about crushing for posterity, including the proto-Israelites. The Judaic priests had received the tales over the course of centuries, and wrote them down. Even the Great Flood might have been based off of Sumerian memories of the Persian Gulf becoming flooded with water during the end of the last Ice Age. The digs that the Iranians have been working on over the last decade record similar tales: it's hard to think that was not based off an authentic memory that would have looked, to a human being existing at the time, very much like the end of their world.

  80. Otis wasn’t ashamed to say Amen over and over.

    • Thanks: Gary in Gramercy
  81. @Lockean Proviso
    @Jonathan Mason

    From the increasingly prescient Idiocracy, "St. God's Memorial Hospital":

    https://i.etsystatic.com/12562986/r/il/9ba6fa/1272326845/il_300x300.1272326845_alyx.jpg

    Replies: @Rob McX

    LOL. But the makers of the film naively thought it would take 500 years to get to that level of stupidity.

  82. @brabantian
    @tyrone

    Before it went into the Hebrew - Greek - Latin chain, the word 'Amen' is from ancient Egyptian

    Egyptian god Amun, his name also sometimes spelled 'Amen' as well as 'Amon', then becoming joined with Ra to be one great solar creator god, Amun-Ra

    For obvious reasons Judaics - Abrahamics would like to prefer that it be 'their' word ... Ancient Jews were of course obsessed with then 'greatest of all civilisations' Egypt, writing or perhaps as some claim fabricating the Exodus stories ... the oldest 'Hebrew bible' we have is actually the Greek Septuagint, allegedly a 'translation' of 'lost Hebrew', but many think a fabrication seeking to glamourise Jews by writing a story in which the great power of Egypt was beaten by divinely-backed Jews
    https://i.ibb.co/B46LxXR/Amun-Egyptian-god.jpg

    Replies: @For what it's worth, @Allen, @nebulafox

    No, that’s just made-up horse shit. The word means “truth” and is used in assenting to what someone else said. Your claim is as stupid as the claim it refers to men.

  83. @Peter D. Bredon
    @anonsasmaug

    "Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian."

    Nonsense even if popular among the "edgy" alt-right. Christianity is Indo-European, a Hellenic mystery religion possessed from its very inception with an Indo-European cosmological sense (dying and reborn god). That's why Jews hated it, and still do, as you may have noticed.

    It is as Indo-European as Wotanism (which, by the way, is not "authentically German" but hales from Anatolia).

    Replies: @Hugo Silva, @anonsasmaug, @Templar, @Allen

    Wotanism is from Anatolia? Could you develop that idea!

  84. @Jonathan Mason
    @Altai

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called "The Sonrise Church."

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @James O'Meara, @Lockean Proviso, @Craig Nelsen, @BB753, @Fluesterwitz, @Barnard

    Is “Amen and awoman” not kind of heteronormative, homophobic even?

  85. @Fox
    @Altai

    Quite a few years ago someone used the word 'niggardly" (can't remember the specifics) and boy did that lead to a storm of 'pundits' (aka wise guys), black opiners and intellectual guttersnipes. I think the affair was ended after several days of overheated ether waves with an 'apology', i.e., throwing in the towel in the face of the onslaught of mentally deranged and congenitally stupid people constituting the "leading circles". It did not make any difference that it was pointed out that 'niggard' was a word of Norwegian origin meaning 'stingy' (in which sense it was used) and completely unrelated to the N-word.
    I think this trend has been introduced by the advertisement industry where oftentimes seemingly cute homonyms are used to create a slight disturbance in one's thinking, forcing one to more actively perceive of the product that is being advertised and thus make it stick more. Using the numeral '4' to replace the function word 'for' is an example for this. It opened the door for unfocused thinking, hence such utterly stupid creations as 'Awoman', but also 'herstory' etc, always delivered with a deeply serious mien such as only the not-so-bright can produce at any occasion because they do believe that their shallowness is profundity.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Rob McX, @Fluesterwitz

    Xmass sounds like something out of a modern marketing department but is much older.

    • Replies: @Fox
    @Fluesterwitz

    It came into use at about 1930.

    Replies: @Fluesterwitz

  86. @Gary in Gramercy
    Somehow I knew, even before watching the video evidence, that the perpetrator of this particular bit of linguistic violence would be a member of the C.B.C.

    (For the anti-abbreviationists, that's the Congressional Black Caucus, FFS.)

    Replies: @Paco Wové, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Achmed E. Newman, @duncsbaby, @Eustace Tilley (not)

    A priest in an ape skin’s a fool;
    An ape in black vestments is cool.
    God made pickin’ cotton
    For thems as ain’t gotten
    De brains fo’ de Vinitee School.

    • Thanks: Gary in Gramercy
    • Replies: @3g4me
    @Eustace Tilley (not)

    @82 Eustace Tilley (not): Oh well done, Sir!

  87. @Jonathan Mason
    @Altai

    Actually American religion, especially African American Christianity enjoys making puns.

    For example I have seen churches called "The Sonrise Church."

    Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do.

    Sometimes they just called themselves the Church of God, which is extremely unimaginative.

    So amen and awomen is just a feeble attempt at making a joke to capture the attention of a bored congregation.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @James O'Meara, @Lockean Proviso, @Craig Nelsen, @BB753, @Fluesterwitz, @Barnard

    A lot of the churches desperate to be seen as trendy try to come up with names that don’t include the denomination and tell you very little about the church. Names like “Grace Church” or “Mercy Church”People joke that they are “Random Action Verb Churches.”

  88. @Peter D. Bredon
    @anonsasmaug

    "Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian."

    Nonsense even if popular among the "edgy" alt-right. Christianity is Indo-European, a Hellenic mystery religion possessed from its very inception with an Indo-European cosmological sense (dying and reborn god). That's why Jews hated it, and still do, as you may have noticed.

    It is as Indo-European as Wotanism (which, by the way, is not "authentically German" but hales from Anatolia).

    Replies: @Hugo Silva, @anonsasmaug, @Templar, @Allen

    Jews hated the “Pagans” too and especially it’s “witches” or any woman who fought alongside their kindred men and were very important in their society. I should say were important, that foreign religion destroyed all that and created a hatred for the white woman in the white man first.
    ist of Celtic Goddesses
    Aine (Irish) – Goddess of love, growth, cattle and light. …
    Badb (Irish) – A shape-shifting, warrior goddess who symbolises life and death, wisdom and inspiration. …
    Blodeewedd (Welsh) – Was created by magic from nine blossoms becoming the wife of Llew Llaw.
    Norse
    Freya. Freya (‘lady’) was the Norse goddess of love, fertility, sorcery, gold, war and death. …
    Frigg. Frigg (‘beloved one’) was the consort of Odin and the goddess of love, marriage and motherhood. …
    Gefion. …
    Idun. …
    Sif. …
    Sigyn. …
    Eir. …

  89. @Gilbert Ratchet
    Throughout the Old Testament are references to "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." This formulation is often used in Christian prayer, although a few years ago our priest (Episcopalian, natch) started adding "of Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah," i.e. the wives of the three patriarchs in question.

    I thought that was bad enough. But "awomen"? Ha ha ha ha ha!!!

    I assume that the Miriam-Webster online dictionary will be updated to include this word by 9:00 PM tonight.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Saint Louis

    Reform and some Conservative Jewish congregations also have added the matriarchs to prayers nowadays.

    • Replies: @Dissident
    @Jack D


    Reform and some Conservative Jewish congregations also have added the matriarchs to prayers nowadays.
     
    Are you sure it it is indeed only some of the Conservative ones? And if it is in fact only some now, how long before it will be many, then most, and then nearly all?

    When the movement known as Conservative Judaism began, it was to the right of what today would be characterized as the left-fringe of Modern-Orthodoxy (or Open Orthodoxy, as I believe the most radical fringe of what previously was the left-most fringe of Modern-Orthodoxy now call themselves).

    Even what is called Reform Judaism has long veered well beyond the point of recognizable connection to what its founder* had envisioned.

    In the realm of Judaism (and that which purports to be Judaism), Conservative is to Reform what, in the political realm, conservative is to liberal, or Republican to Democrat. That is, characterized by an inevitable shift over {x-number of years} from nominal/de jure/ostensible/purported opposition, to acceptance-- grudging at first, to eventual embrace and championing. Is there any Woke position for which we won't one day hear "The Conservative case for"?

    (*Moses Mendelsohn, the individual credited with the founding of the Haskalah (Hebrew: enlightenment) movement within Judaism, is also credited as the founder of so-called Reform Judaism. Mendelsohn is reported to have personally maintained throughout his lifetime a level of halakhic observance that would have rivaled that of many purportedly Orthodox Jews.)

  90. @Eustace Tilley (not)
    @Gary in Gramercy

    A priest in an ape skin's a fool;
    An ape in black vestments is cool.
    God made pickin' cotton
    For thems as ain't gotten
    De brains fo' de Vinitee School.

    Replies: @3g4me

    @82 Eustace Tilley (not): Oh well done, Sir!

  91. @Peter D. Bredon
    @anonsasmaug

    "Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian."

    Nonsense even if popular among the "edgy" alt-right. Christianity is Indo-European, a Hellenic mystery religion possessed from its very inception with an Indo-European cosmological sense (dying and reborn god). That's why Jews hated it, and still do, as you may have noticed.

    It is as Indo-European as Wotanism (which, by the way, is not "authentically German" but hales from Anatolia).

    Replies: @Hugo Silva, @anonsasmaug, @Templar, @Allen

    Judaism seems to have been very heavily influenced by Persian Zoroastrianism. The Persians allowed Jews to return home after the Babylonian exile and you could make a case for saying that Jewish monotheism really stems from this period
    Persian,Parsee,Farsi…. Pharisee?
    The Persians of course were the original Iranians/Aryans. The Shahs father change the name of Persia to Iran during the 1930s in response to the rise of Hitler and the vogue for Aryanism.

    • Replies: @For what it's worth
    @Templar

    "The Persians allowed Jews to return home after the Babylonian exile and you could make a case for saying that Jewish monotheism really stems from this period
    Persian,Parsee,Farsi…. Pharisee?"

    You know, you can actually look up the etymology for Pharisee. It's a Hebrew word with a Hebrew meaning. Nothing to do with Persian, Parsee, or Farsi. What you're doing there is just as baseless as the A-men/A-women thing.

  92. Saying “amen, and awomen” isn’t a childish act of silliness. It’s an act of violence.

    They want to destroy everything (or they cannot control themselves) either way it’s going to be bad.

    Large sections of the black population have given up in trying to control themselves and handed control of black America over to white people. Blacks want it that way. But if whites refuse to any longer control blacks it’s going to be chaos, because they won’t control themselves.

  93. @kaganovitch
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    IIRC, the word is from Aramaic.

    Nah , it appears in the bible Deut.27:24 among other places.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...

    You’re right. I checked some other sources. Amen appears in Hebrew Texts and worship long before Aramaic became the Lingua Franca of Palestine. Thanks for correcting a long-standing misapprehension.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    It's from root cognate to English 'truth/trust'. Variants are 'אמונה' (Emunah)= faith, 'מאמין' (ma'amin) =believer etc.

  94. @RichardTaylor

    As I’ve been pointing out for years, American culture is getting more childish.
     
    As I’ve been pointing out for years, if you betray your own race and turn power over to others, who are in fact more childish, what else do you expect?

    No HBD'er would care about the fate of Whites as such, just how the disappearance of Whites would fit into their spiffy technocratic goon fantasies. Suffice it to say, getting rid of White people as a governing polity leads to eternal childish violence.

    Thank you, Big Brain People close to the Canadian border!

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Reg Cæsar

    Despite what people on all sides may think, HBD aware and pro-White are not the same thing. Just ask Jack D, or, perhaps even, Steve.

    • Agree: RichardTaylor
  95. @Colin Wright
    @Gary in Gramercy

    'I think that was Hank Johnson — a man so catastrophically dumb he had NBA star Derrick Rose take his SAT’s for him.'

    It's actually mildly surprising that these creatures would be so stupid.

    Look at their photos: most are only an eighth or a quarter black. They shouldn't be noticeably worse than white congressmen.

    Of course, I suppose if the pool is small enough...

    If, say, your white congressman is drawn from a population of a hundred thousand whites, he could be pretty sharp. If there are only ten thousand or so octoroons and quadroons in the district, there'd be fewer really sharp ones -- and a lot of those would get hoovered up to be vice-president in charge of being black at Omnicorp or whatever. There'd be just a few odds and ends left to enter politics.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @S. Anonyia

    Look at their photos: most are only an eighth or a quarter black. They shouldn’t be noticeably worse than white congressmen.

    You’ve never seen a quadroon in the flesh I take it.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @Art Deco

    'You’ve never seen a quadroon in the flesh I take it.'

    Eric Holder? Colin Powell?

    Or were they Octoroons?

    Most of the 'blacks' most whites actually interact with are anywhere from half-black to an eighth black -- the average would be a quadroon.

  96. “As I’ve been pointing out for years, American culture is getting more childish.”

    A couple of days ago I made a similar point to a cousin, in this case about The Left and their tendency towards infantilism.

  97. @Colin Wright
    @Gary in Gramercy

    'I think that was Hank Johnson — a man so catastrophically dumb he had NBA star Derrick Rose take his SAT’s for him.'

    It's actually mildly surprising that these creatures would be so stupid.

    Look at their photos: most are only an eighth or a quarter black. They shouldn't be noticeably worse than white congressmen.

    Of course, I suppose if the pool is small enough...

    If, say, your white congressman is drawn from a population of a hundred thousand whites, he could be pretty sharp. If there are only ten thousand or so octoroons and quadroons in the district, there'd be fewer really sharp ones -- and a lot of those would get hoovered up to be vice-president in charge of being black at Omnicorp or whatever. There'd be just a few odds and ends left to enter politics.

    Replies: @Art Deco, @S. Anonyia

    These guys don’t look like quadroons or octoroons. Quadroons look like Puerto Ricans or darker North Africans. Octoroons would just register as “vaguely exotic.”

    • Agree: 3g4me
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @S. Anonyia

    'These guys don’t look like quadroons or octoroons. Quadroons look like Puerto Ricans or darker North Africans. Octoroons would just register as “vaguely exotic.”'

    So what would you call Colin Powell? Eric Holder? Susan Rice? Meghan Markle?

    Surely not black.

    Replies: @3g4me

  98. @anonsasmaug
    Like I said Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian.
    "Peter was considered along with James the Just and John the Apostle as pillars of the Church.[44] Legitimised by Jesus' appearance, Peter assumed leadership of the group of early followers, forming the Jerusalem ekklēsia mentioned by Paul.[25][26] He was soon eclipsed in this leadership by James the Just, "the Brother of the Lord."[27][28] According to Lüdemann, this was due to the discussions about the strictness of adherence to the Jewish Law, when the more conservative faction of James the Just[45] took the overhand over the more liberal position of Peter, who soon lost influence.[28][note 2] According to Dunn, this was not an "usurpation of power", but a consequence of Peter's involvement in missionary activities.[47] The early Church historian Eusebius (c. AD 325) records Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 190) as saying,

    For they say that Peter and James (the Greater) and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem.[48]

    James D. G. Dunn proposes that Peter was a "bridge-man" between the opposing views of Paul and James the Just [italics original]:

    For Peter was probably in fact and effect the bridge-man (pontifex maximus!) who did more than any other to hold together the diversity of first-century Christianity. James the brother of Jesus and Paul, the two other most prominent leading figures in first-century Christianity, were too much identified with their respective "brands" of Christianity, at least in the eyes of Christians at the opposite ends of this particular spectrum.[49]"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter

    Replies: @HA, @Peter D. Bredon, @Bardon Kaldian

    It is a bit more complex.

    If we stick to more or less rational discourse & read sacred texts in historical context, here is what it boils down to:

    We don’t know Zarathustra’s exact dates & will never know. So, I accept what is a consensus (sort of) among historians: he is placed somewhere between 1500 BC and 1000 BC. He (and his followers), during reform of the old religion of the Magi, had invented key concepts of Western religions’ ideology (resurrection, the Evil One, Guardian Angels/fravashi, the World Savior, …). The oldest Hebrew religious texts are written somewhere around 900 BC (parts of Pentateuch/Torah) & later, most “universalist” & prophetic writings belonging to the post-exilic period (ca. 550-500 BC etc.). Ancient Judaic notions about life don’t include angels (who are nothing more than representations of Yahweh), resurrection, the Great Evil One, .. These concepts are mentioned in OT only 3-5 times & are completely marginal side-effects of Persian influence. This can be seen in normative Judaism, which remains a down-to-earth religion; true, Pharisees had assimilated, in a diluted version, some Iranian & Greek ideas. Just, Sadducees (the party which lost, ideologically- something like Mensheviks) were truer heirs to original Hebrew religion (no afterlife, no supernatural mess, no nothing).

    I’m well aware that Christian believers will find this unacceptable, but I’ve long since come to an unoriginal conclusion: Christianity is the triumphant renovated Zoroastrianism. It is not a continuation of Judaism mixed with some Hellenic ideas derived from Neoplatonism & Orphism.
    Ideologically, Christians owe most of their world-view to Zarathustra & his followers: 1) dualism (not di-theism), 2) angelology, 3) the World Savior, not a local Messiah, 4) figure of the Evil One, who is more like Zoroastrians’ Ahriman than traditional Hebrew Satan, 5) great final conflagration, very visual & scary apocalypse- again, more Persian than Judaic, 6) fierce sense of election of God’s favorite group of people, which dwarfs Jewish chosen people story- again, Zoroastrian, 7) image of Heaven & Hell, which is absent in classical Judaism, 8) resurrection of the dead.

    Of course, Christians don’t care – theologically- for fire; they have a strong sense of guilt (unlike classic Zoroastrians); phraseologically & iconographically, Christians derive their mythology from Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, but: take away Zoroastrian ideas from Christianity & you’ll be left with zero, zippo, zilch.

    Normative Judaism is not the birthplace of Christianity; Essenes & other intertestamental pro-Persian sectarians are.

    Of course, I would be more satisfied had we retained old Hellenic synthesis of Plato, Proclus, Plotinus, Orphism, Hermetism, Greek tragedians, …. and dumped this silly world-view which leads to fanaticism & imbecility, as well as hyper-emotionalism. But we should also notice that Europeans have, after the initial confusion, absorbed & transformed this heritage to such a degree that it bears – in spirit, not in iconography – no great resemblance either to Hebrew or Iranian roots. Scholars usually write that Christianity has two great sources, Hebrew & Hellenic. I’m not so sure. I would say it is a clumsy synthesis of Hebraized Zoroastrianism & Hellenism.

    Or, as a sage had said: Christianity started in Palestine as a fellowship of followers; it moved to Greece and became a philosophy of thinkers; it moved to Italy and became the institution of an Empire; it moved to Europe and became a cultural ethos; and it came to America and became a business enterprise.

    • Replies: @Charlotte
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Interesting. In Tom Shippey’s book on JRR Tolkien, Shippey concluded, IIRC, that Tolkien’s worldview was more dualistic than conventionally Christian, despite his devout Catholicism. Maybe he intuited that.

  99. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @kaganovitch

    You're right. I checked some other sources. Amen appears in Hebrew Texts and worship long before Aramaic became the Lingua Franca of Palestine. Thanks for correcting a long-standing misapprehension.

    Replies: @kaganovitch

    It’s from root cognate to English ‘truth/trust’. Variants are ‘אמונה’ (Emunah)= faith, ‘מאמין’ (ma’amin) =believer etc.

    • Agree: Dissident
  100. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Buffalo Joe

    I noticed that you follow Berzerkely, California closely, Joe, with your regular perusal of the Berkeleyside. Is it that they don't have cartoons anymore in your local newspaper, or are you a glutton for punishment?

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Ach, you too funny. Berkeley is soooo different from WNY that I am drawn like a moth to their flaming disfunction. Amazed that people actually think like they do. Stay safe my friend.

  101. @Fluesterwitz
    @Fox

    Xmass sounds like something out of a modern marketing department but is much older.

    Replies: @Fox

    It came into use at about 1930.

    • Replies: @Fluesterwitz
    @Fox

    I got it slightly wrong. Xmas (one 's' only) dates back at least to the 16th century, Merriam Webster says 1551. The 2s version produces certainly more profane search results and may be the one connected with marketing.

    Replies: @Fox

  102. @Gilbert Ratchet
    Throughout the Old Testament are references to "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." This formulation is often used in Christian prayer, although a few years ago our priest (Episcopalian, natch) started adding "of Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah," i.e. the wives of the three patriarchs in question.

    I thought that was bad enough. But "awomen"? Ha ha ha ha ha!!!

    I assume that the Miriam-Webster online dictionary will be updated to include this word by 9:00 PM tonight.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Saint Louis

    What? No Keturah or Hagar? Bigot.

  103. @Templar
    @Peter D. Bredon

    Judaism seems to have been very heavily influenced by Persian Zoroastrianism. The Persians allowed Jews to return home after the Babylonian exile and you could make a case for saying that Jewish monotheism really stems from this period
    Persian,Parsee,Farsi.... Pharisee?
    The Persians of course were the original Iranians/Aryans. The Shahs father change the name of Persia to Iran during the 1930s in response to the rise of Hitler and the vogue for Aryanism.

    Replies: @For what it's worth

    “The Persians allowed Jews to return home after the Babylonian exile and you could make a case for saying that Jewish monotheism really stems from this period
    Persian,Parsee,Farsi…. Pharisee?”

    You know, you can actually look up the etymology for Pharisee. It’s a Hebrew word with a Hebrew meaning. Nothing to do with Persian, Parsee, or Farsi. What you’re doing there is just as baseless as the A-men/A-women thing.

  104. Knowing that Rep./Rev Cleaver hails from the UMC I was not surprised to hear nonsense escape his lips. I did find it telling that he referred to “the monotheistic god, Brahma.” Praying to a false god proves he is not a Christian just a pagan.

  105. Black people generally corrupt and ruin anything that is given to them. Music has degenerated from classical to rap (garbage) when they have control. Dance has gone from ballet or waltz to twerking. The cities that they have taken control of crumble to dust. Why should religion be any different? They don’t understand and nor should we expect them to.

    • Replies: @3g4me
    @Arthur Biggs

    @105 Arthur Biggs: It's all pearls before swine or lipstick on a pig (pick your preferred quotation).
    Different sub-species need to inhabit different continents.

  106. @BB753
    @Jonathan Mason

    "Very amusing, but Protestant churches do have a hard time finding names for themselves, because they cannot just stick the name of a saint on a church which is what Catholics and Anglicans do"

    Lutherans have (borrowed) saints, too.
    Is this the reason there are thousand of reformed and evangelical churches? Because the only way to come up with a new name for your church is to split off and create a new denomination?

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    Is this the reason there are thousand of reformed and evangelical churches?

    No. The Reformed have generally not gotten all that worked up about church names. For example, Grand Rapids, MI, a popular destination for Dutch Reformed settlers, has (at least) a ‘Fifth Reformed Church’. Most Dutch-American enclaves of any size have a ‘First Reformed Church’, which is usually the ‘mother church’ for that area, i.e. the initial one founded at the time of settlement. Then the next church could easily be ‘Second Reformed’, and so on, until somebody decided it might be nice to vary things just a bit and pick some kind of different name. Clearly, not a lot of agonizing over naming was going on.

    These days the Reformed (and Christian Reformed, a splinter denomination) are slightly more varied in their naming, but they tend to either pick generic geographical names, e.g. ‘Neighborhood/Town/Suburb Name Here Reformed’, or abstract theological concepts, e.g. ‘Grace Reformed’, ‘Hope Reformed’, ‘Covenant Reformed’, and so on.

    Reformed churches split because their members have traditionally tended to care a lot about what may seem to other Christians rather fine, even abstruse, points of doctrine. And when factions in a church can’t agree, it’s relatively easy to go separate ways, since congregations have a lot of autonomy within the broader denominational structures.

    • Thanks: BB753
    • Replies: @Enemy of Earth
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    The Christian Reformed Church experienced a major split in 1924 when Herman Hoeksema left to form the Protestant Reformed Church followed by like minded folk. Hoeksema was probably the most brilliant systematic theologian in this century.

    The split was the result of disagreement over the concept of "common grace" expressed in three doctrinal points adopted by the CRC. The PRC itself would suffer divisions, especially in the 1950s.

    My father-in-law was "in fellowship" with a faction of Plymouth Brethren. PBs have been notorious for doctrinal splits throughout their history. In conversation about this with him he told me, "The closer a group gets to truth, divisions will occur."

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @BB753
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    "Reformed churches split because their members have traditionally tended to care a lot about what may seem to other Christians rather fine, even abstruse, points of doctrine."

    It's not like there's been a dearth of theologians and theological disputes among the Western and Eastern Catholics (Orthodox) for the last two thousand years.
    Is it unconceivable that Calvinism was founded on wrong principles, and thus Calvinists will never find the Truth?

  107. @brabantian
    @tyrone

    Before it went into the Hebrew - Greek - Latin chain, the word 'Amen' is from ancient Egyptian

    Egyptian god Amun, his name also sometimes spelled 'Amen' as well as 'Amon', then becoming joined with Ra to be one great solar creator god, Amun-Ra

    For obvious reasons Judaics - Abrahamics would like to prefer that it be 'their' word ... Ancient Jews were of course obsessed with then 'greatest of all civilisations' Egypt, writing or perhaps as some claim fabricating the Exodus stories ... the oldest 'Hebrew bible' we have is actually the Greek Septuagint, allegedly a 'translation' of 'lost Hebrew', but many think a fabrication seeking to glamourise Jews by writing a story in which the great power of Egypt was beaten by divinely-backed Jews
    https://i.ibb.co/B46LxXR/Amun-Egyptian-god.jpg

    Replies: @For what it's worth, @Allen, @nebulafox

    First, there is no linguistic connection between the Hebrew “amen” and the Egyptian “Amun” and no legitimate linguist would make that argument.

    For starters, the Hebrew “amen” begins with the vowel “aleph” while “Amun” (despite the English transliteration) actually starts with the vowel “yodh”.

    You can consult the Oxford English Dictionary, the Brown-Drivers-Biggs Hebrew Lexicon, or even the Altägyptisches Wörterbuch (for the Egyptian), but none support any etymological link between “amen” and “Amun”

    Second, your claims about the Hebrew Bible are deeply confused. The earliest Biblical texts we have are the Dead Sea Scrolls. Now the Septuagint is a Greek translation begun in approximately 3rd century B.C. (it initially only included the Pentateuch but later included all other Old Testament texts). There are arguments that the Septuagint reflects an earlier edition of the Hebrew text than what was codified as the Masoretic text but this argument depends on textual variants among certain copies of the Dead Sea Scrolls that match Septuagint variants (although to non-scholars these textual variants are fairly minor). For a detailed discussion I would recommend Emmanuel Tov’s masterful Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible.

    Regardless, actual scholars vary considerably over the precise dating Old Testament books (and which can be definitively dated before the Babylonian/Persian exile) but no legitimate scholar would argue for a wholesale fabrication in the 3rd century. At a bare minimum the close connections between Genesis and other ancient Near Eastern literature (such as Atrahasis, Enki and Enlil, and Gilgamesh) make the late fabrication you allege virtually impossible.

  108. @Peter D. Bredon
    @anonsasmaug

    "Christianity is as foreign to the European as it is to the Mayan or the Indian."

    Nonsense even if popular among the "edgy" alt-right. Christianity is Indo-European, a Hellenic mystery religion possessed from its very inception with an Indo-European cosmological sense (dying and reborn god). That's why Jews hated it, and still do, as you may have noticed.

    It is as Indo-European as Wotanism (which, by the way, is not "authentically German" but hales from Anatolia).

    Replies: @Hugo Silva, @anonsasmaug, @Templar, @Allen

    Not this again. Claims that Christianity is derived from a “dying and rising” god mythology was cutting edge in the 19th century but is way outdated today (and only really popular with internet sceptics who have never actually studied the area).

    First, Jonathan Z. Smith’s seminal 1987 article “Dying and Rising Gods” largely put to rest the idea that there were a multitude of “dying and rising” gods in ancient pagan mythologies. His article has been conveniently reposted here:

    https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/dying-and-rising-gods

    More recently, T.N.D. Mettinger argued that Dumuzi, Baal, and Melqar did die and return to life, but he acknowledges that he is in the minority and most scholars reject the very concept of “dying and rising gods”. Regardless, Mettinger is adamant that these examples had no influence on the much later resurrection narratives about Jesus:

    “The dying and rising gods were closely related to the seasonal cycle. Their death and return were seen as reflected in the changes of plant life. The death and resurrection of Jesus is a one-time event, not repeated, and unrelated to seasonal changes . . . There is, as far as I am aware, no prima facie evidence that the death and resurrection of Jesus is a mythological construct, drawing on the myths and rites of the dying and rising gods of the surrounding world. While studied with profit against the background of Jewish resurrection belief, the faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus retains its unique character in the history of religions.”

    Mettinger, The Riddle of Resurrection p. 221.

    Even an atheist/sceptic like Bart Ehrman dismisses the idea that pagan mythologies influenced stories about Jesus’ resurrection:

    “First, it is important to realize that the reason there are disagreements among scholars (at least with someone like Mettinger) is that the evidence for such gods is at best sparse, scattered, and ambiguous, not abundant, ubiquitous, and clear. If there were any such beliefs about dying and rising gods, they were clearly not widespread and available for all to see.

    Such gods were definitely not widely known and widely discussed among religious people of
    antiquity as is obvious from the fact that they are not clearly discussed in any of our sources. On
    this everyone should be able to agree. Even more important, there is no evidence that such gods
    were known or worshipped in rural Palestine, or even in Jerusalem, in the 20s CE. Anyone who
    thinks that Jesus was modeled on such deities needs to cite some evidence—any evidence at all—
    that Jews in Palestine at the alleged time of Jesus’s life were influenced by anyone who held such
    views. One reason that scholars do not think that Jesus was invented as one of these deities is
    precisely that we have no evidence that any of his followers knew of such deities in the time and
    place where Jesus was allegedly invented. Moreover, as Mettinger himself acknowledges, the
    differences between the dying and rising gods (which he has reconstructed on slim evidence) and
    Jesus show that Jesus was not modeled on them, even if such gods were talked about during Jesus’s
    time. ”

    Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth p. 98-99.

  109. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @BB753


    Is this the reason there are thousand of reformed and evangelical churches?

     

    No. The Reformed have generally not gotten all that worked up about church names. For example, Grand Rapids, MI, a popular destination for Dutch Reformed settlers, has (at least) a 'Fifth Reformed Church'. Most Dutch-American enclaves of any size have a 'First Reformed Church', which is usually the 'mother church' for that area, i.e. the initial one founded at the time of settlement. Then the next church could easily be 'Second Reformed', and so on, until somebody decided it might be nice to vary things just a bit and pick some kind of different name. Clearly, not a lot of agonizing over naming was going on.

    These days the Reformed (and Christian Reformed, a splinter denomination) are slightly more varied in their naming, but they tend to either pick generic geographical names, e.g. 'Neighborhood/Town/Suburb Name Here Reformed', or abstract theological concepts, e.g. 'Grace Reformed', 'Hope Reformed', 'Covenant Reformed', and so on.

    Reformed churches split because their members have traditionally tended to care a lot about what may seem to other Christians rather fine, even abstruse, points of doctrine. And when factions in a church can't agree, it's relatively easy to go separate ways, since congregations have a lot of autonomy within the broader denominational structures.

    Replies: @Enemy of Earth, @BB753

    The Christian Reformed Church experienced a major split in 1924 when Herman Hoeksema left to form the Protestant Reformed Church followed by like minded folk. Hoeksema was probably the most brilliant systematic theologian in this century.

    The split was the result of disagreement over the concept of “common grace” expressed in three doctrinal points adopted by the CRC. The PRC itself would suffer divisions, especially in the 1950s.

    My father-in-law was “in fellowship” with a faction of Plymouth Brethren. PBs have been notorious for doctrinal splits throughout their history. In conversation about this with him he told me, “The closer a group gets to truth, divisions will occur.”

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Enemy of Earth

    I always wondered why my father, a lifelong Congregationalist, was attending a Presbyterian church when he died. This was in NY's Capital District, where Dutch met Puritan, so it's not like there weren't plenty of Congregationalist and Reformed congregations to choose from. Perhaps the UCC merger distressed him.

    Heck, his town had a Dutch name, and his mother a Dutch maiden name. But she was part Scot and Scots-Irish, too, and near-Mayflower. A Calvinist stew!

  110. @Bardon Kaldian
    @anonsasmaug

    It is a bit more complex.

    If we stick to more or less rational discourse & read sacred texts in historical context, here is what it boils down to:

    We don't know Zarathustra's exact dates & will never know. So, I accept what is a consensus (sort of) among historians: he is placed somewhere between 1500 BC and 1000 BC. He (and his followers), during reform of the old religion of the Magi, had invented key concepts of Western religions' ideology (resurrection, the Evil One, Guardian Angels/fravashi, the World Savior, ...). The oldest Hebrew religious texts are written somewhere around 900 BC (parts of Pentateuch/Torah) & later, most "universalist" & prophetic writings belonging to the post-exilic period (ca. 550-500 BC etc.). Ancient Judaic notions about life don't include angels (who are nothing more than representations of Yahweh), resurrection, the Great Evil One, .. These concepts are mentioned in OT only 3-5 times & are completely marginal side-effects of Persian influence. This can be seen in normative Judaism, which remains a down-to-earth religion; true, Pharisees had assimilated, in a diluted version, some Iranian & Greek ideas. Just, Sadducees (the party which lost, ideologically- something like Mensheviks) were truer heirs to original Hebrew religion (no afterlife, no supernatural mess, no nothing).


    I'm well aware that Christian believers will find this unacceptable, but I've long since come to an unoriginal conclusion: Christianity is the triumphant renovated Zoroastrianism. It is not a continuation of Judaism mixed with some Hellenic ideas derived from Neoplatonism & Orphism.
    Ideologically, Christians owe most of their world-view to Zarathustra & his followers: 1) dualism (not di-theism), 2) angelology, 3) the World Savior, not a local Messiah, 4) figure of the Evil One, who is more like Zoroastrians' Ahriman than traditional Hebrew Satan, 5) great final conflagration, very visual & scary apocalypse- again, more Persian than Judaic, 6) fierce sense of election of God's favorite group of people, which dwarfs Jewish chosen people story- again, Zoroastrian, 7) image of Heaven & Hell, which is absent in classical Judaism, 8) resurrection of the dead.

    Of course, Christians don't care - theologically- for fire; they have a strong sense of guilt (unlike classic Zoroastrians); phraseologically & iconographically, Christians derive their mythology from Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, but: take away Zoroastrian ideas from Christianity & you'll be left with zero, zippo, zilch.

    Normative Judaism is not the birthplace of Christianity; Essenes & other intertestamental pro-Persian sectarians are.

    Of course, I would be more satisfied had we retained old Hellenic synthesis of Plato, Proclus, Plotinus, Orphism, Hermetism, Greek tragedians, .... and dumped this silly world-view which leads to fanaticism & imbecility, as well as hyper-emotionalism. But we should also notice that Europeans have, after the initial confusion, absorbed & transformed this heritage to such a degree that it bears - in spirit, not in iconography - no great resemblance either to Hebrew or Iranian roots. Scholars usually write that Christianity has two great sources, Hebrew & Hellenic. I'm not so sure. I would say it is a clumsy synthesis of Hebraized Zoroastrianism & Hellenism.

    Or, as a sage had said: Christianity started in Palestine as a fellowship of followers; it moved to Greece and became a philosophy of thinkers; it moved to Italy and became the institution of an Empire; it moved to Europe and became a cultural ethos; and it came to America and became a business enterprise.

    Replies: @Charlotte

    Interesting. In Tom Shippey’s book on JRR Tolkien, Shippey concluded, IIRC, that Tolkien’s worldview was more dualistic than conventionally Christian, despite his devout Catholicism. Maybe he intuited that.

  111. @Fox
    @Fluesterwitz

    It came into use at about 1930.

    Replies: @Fluesterwitz

    I got it slightly wrong. Xmas (one ‘s’ only) dates back at least to the 16th century, Merriam Webster says 1551. The 2s version produces certainly more profane search results and may be the one connected with marketing.

    • Replies: @Fox
    @Fluesterwitz

    Thank you for this information. I would not have thought that the X standing for Christ had been used that far back. It appears that it was not meant in a sacrilegious way.

  112. @RichardTaylor

    As I’ve been pointing out for years, American culture is getting more childish.
     
    As I’ve been pointing out for years, if you betray your own race and turn power over to others, who are in fact more childish, what else do you expect?

    No HBD'er would care about the fate of Whites as such, just how the disappearance of Whites would fit into their spiffy technocratic goon fantasies. Suffice it to say, getting rid of White people as a governing polity leads to eternal childish violence.

    Thank you, Big Brain People close to the Canadian border!

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Reg Cæsar

    Thank you, Big Brain People close to the Canadian border!

    Who preferred to invite squareheads rather than woolly heads. Say what you will about nutty Ellis Island Europeans, but they actually work. Things get done.

    • Troll: RichardTaylor
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @Reg Cæsar

    'Who preferred to invite squareheads rather than woolly heads. Say what you will about nutty Ellis Island Europeans, but they actually work. Things get done.'

    It's amusing to realize that applies to literally all major ethnic and racial groups -- with the exception of blacks.

    'Say what you will about _________, but they actually work. Things get done.'

    You can fill in the blank with almost anything you like -- from Jews to Poles to Chinese to Guatemalans. The phrase will work. Just don't stick in 'black' (or, admittedly, Pacific Islander).

  113. @Enemy of Earth
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    The Christian Reformed Church experienced a major split in 1924 when Herman Hoeksema left to form the Protestant Reformed Church followed by like minded folk. Hoeksema was probably the most brilliant systematic theologian in this century.

    The split was the result of disagreement over the concept of "common grace" expressed in three doctrinal points adopted by the CRC. The PRC itself would suffer divisions, especially in the 1950s.

    My father-in-law was "in fellowship" with a faction of Plymouth Brethren. PBs have been notorious for doctrinal splits throughout their history. In conversation about this with him he told me, "The closer a group gets to truth, divisions will occur."

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I always wondered why my father, a lifelong Congregationalist, was attending a Presbyterian church when he died. This was in NY’s Capital District, where Dutch met Puritan, so it’s not like there weren’t plenty of Congregationalist and Reformed congregations to choose from. Perhaps the UCC merger distressed him.

    Heck, his town had a Dutch name, and his mother a Dutch maiden name. But she was part Scot and Scots-Irish, too, and near-Mayflower. A Calvinist stew!

  114. Congressional Prayer Ends: Amen and Awomen

    Does this mean the 117th Congress will push the Equal Rights Awomendwoment on us for a second time?

    It’s enough to make one womenstruate. Things once undreamt-of will be womandatory.

    • Replies: @Alan D
    @Reg Cæsar

    I find that this issue is a night-mare (that word is already correct!), and I am going to girl-cott the whole business.

    If the Rep. Rev. Cleaver really was joking (see #116), I hope that he sees this thread - if so he will get plenty of material!

  115. anon[320] • Disclaimer says:

    The Rep. Rev. Cleaver is deeply disappointed in all of us. Deeply disappointed that some took his lighthearted pun too seriously. Disappointed! Deeply!

    https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article248266055.html

    “I concluded with a lighthearted pun in recognition of the record number of women who will be representing the American people in Congress during this term as well as in recognition of the first female Chaplain of the House of Representatives whose service commenced this week,” said Cleaver, who led the search committee that selected Grun Kibben, the former chief chaplain of the Navy, for the role.

    Cleaver said he was “deeply disappointed that my prayer has been misinterpreted and misconstrued by some to fit a narrative that stokes resentment and greater division among portions of our population.”

    He noted that his full prayer, which called for peace and an end to tribalism in Congress, had received little attention compared to the final word.

    “Rather than reflecting on my faithful requests for community healing and reversion from our increasingly tribal tendencies, it appears that some have latched on to the final word of this conversation in an attempt to twist my message to God and demean me personally,” Cleaver said.

    “In doing so, they have proven one point of my greater message — that we are all ‘soiled by selfishness, perverted by prejudice and inveigled by ideology.’”

  116. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @BB753


    Is this the reason there are thousand of reformed and evangelical churches?

     

    No. The Reformed have generally not gotten all that worked up about church names. For example, Grand Rapids, MI, a popular destination for Dutch Reformed settlers, has (at least) a 'Fifth Reformed Church'. Most Dutch-American enclaves of any size have a 'First Reformed Church', which is usually the 'mother church' for that area, i.e. the initial one founded at the time of settlement. Then the next church could easily be 'Second Reformed', and so on, until somebody decided it might be nice to vary things just a bit and pick some kind of different name. Clearly, not a lot of agonizing over naming was going on.

    These days the Reformed (and Christian Reformed, a splinter denomination) are slightly more varied in their naming, but they tend to either pick generic geographical names, e.g. 'Neighborhood/Town/Suburb Name Here Reformed', or abstract theological concepts, e.g. 'Grace Reformed', 'Hope Reformed', 'Covenant Reformed', and so on.

    Reformed churches split because their members have traditionally tended to care a lot about what may seem to other Christians rather fine, even abstruse, points of doctrine. And when factions in a church can't agree, it's relatively easy to go separate ways, since congregations have a lot of autonomy within the broader denominational structures.

    Replies: @Enemy of Earth, @BB753

    “Reformed churches split because their members have traditionally tended to care a lot about what may seem to other Christians rather fine, even abstruse, points of doctrine.”

    It’s not like there’s been a dearth of theologians and theological disputes among the Western and Eastern Catholics (Orthodox) for the last two thousand years.
    Is it unconceivable that Calvinism was founded on wrong principles, and thus Calvinists will never find the Truth?

    • Agree: Hibernian
  117. @Arthur Biggs
    Black people generally corrupt and ruin anything that is given to them. Music has degenerated from classical to rap (garbage) when they have control. Dance has gone from ballet or waltz to twerking. The cities that they have taken control of crumble to dust. Why should religion be any different? They don't understand and nor should we expect them to.

    Replies: @3g4me

    @105 Arthur Biggs: It’s all pearls before swine or lipstick on a pig (pick your preferred quotation).
    Different sub-species need to inhabit different continents.

  118. @Fluesterwitz
    @Fox

    I got it slightly wrong. Xmas (one 's' only) dates back at least to the 16th century, Merriam Webster says 1551. The 2s version produces certainly more profane search results and may be the one connected with marketing.

    Replies: @Fox

    Thank you for this information. I would not have thought that the X standing for Christ had been used that far back. It appears that it was not meant in a sacrilegious way.

  119. @Rob McX
    @Fox

    As Henry Ford might say, herstory is bunk.

    Replies: @Fox

    I think that not just Henry Ford would say that.

  120. @Art Deco
    @Colin Wright

    Look at their photos: most are only an eighth or a quarter black. They shouldn’t be noticeably worse than white congressmen.

    You've never seen a quadroon in the flesh I take it.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    ‘You’ve never seen a quadroon in the flesh I take it.’

    Eric Holder? Colin Powell?

    Or were they Octoroons?

    Most of the ‘blacks’ most whites actually interact with are anywhere from half-black to an eighth black — the average would be a quadroon.

  121. @S. Anonyia
    @Colin Wright

    These guys don’t look like quadroons or octoroons. Quadroons look like Puerto Ricans or darker North Africans. Octoroons would just register as “vaguely exotic.”

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    ‘These guys don’t look like quadroons or octoroons. Quadroons look like Puerto Ricans or darker North Africans. Octoroons would just register as “vaguely exotic.”’

    So what would you call Colin Powell? Eric Holder? Susan Rice? Meghan Markle?

    Surely not black.

    • Replies: @3g4me
    @Colin Wright

    @122 Colin Wright: The term you're looking for is Mulatto.

  122. @Reg Cæsar
    @RichardTaylor


    Thank you, Big Brain People close to the Canadian border!

     

    Who preferred to invite squareheads rather than woolly heads. Say what you will about nutty Ellis Island Europeans, but they actually work. Things get done.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    ‘Who preferred to invite squareheads rather than woolly heads. Say what you will about nutty Ellis Island Europeans, but they actually work. Things get done.’

    It’s amusing to realize that applies to literally all major ethnic and racial groups — with the exception of blacks.

    ‘Say what you will about _________, but they actually work. Things get done.’

    You can fill in the blank with almost anything you like — from Jews to Poles to Chinese to Guatemalans. The phrase will work. Just don’t stick in ‘black’ (or, admittedly, Pacific Islander).

  123. @Reg Cæsar

    Congressional Prayer Ends: Amen and Awomen
     
    Does this mean the 117th Congress will push the Equal Rights Awomendwoment on us for a second time?

    It's enough to make one womenstruate. Things once undreamt-of will be womandatory.

    Replies: @Alan D

    I find that this issue is a night-mare (that word is already correct!), and I am going to girl-cott the whole business.

    If the Rep. Rev. Cleaver really was joking (see #116), I hope that he sees this thread – if so he will get plenty of material!

  124. OT

    Some of you know that I am far from being an anti-judaist. But, too many members of that tribal people make it harder & harder to maintain that position. It is not “every single time” – I know- but it is exasperatingly frequent.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-wants-boost-democracy-shelve-093003464.html

    Daniel Benjamin

    Biden Wants to Boost Democracy. He Should Shelve the Summit and Look to Europe.

    …………………….
    The United States, having aided and abetted Hungary and Poland during the Trump years and having cast the EU as a “foe,” in Trump’s words, now needs to show its backing for the EU majority.

    Doing so will not topple the governments in Budapest and Warsaw overnight, nor should anyone want that kind of disruption. But it will turn up the political heat on these regimes, underscoring that their position in the West is imperiled by their own policies.
    …………………….

    Well ….

    • Replies: @Dissident
    @Bardon Kaldian


    Some of you know that I am far from being an anti-judaist.
     
    Much as our respective views on Judaism and any number of related as well as other matters may differ, I have long recognized you as someone well above the reflexive, simplistic, immature, utterly tedious magic key thinking that is, to varying degrees, exhibited by many who post here. It might also be germane to establish, before proceeding, my position that it is in the rather vast expanse between the cartoonish "Jews can do no right/ are always to blame for everything" mindset, and its inverse "Jews can do no wrong/ are never to blame for anything", that the reasonable, responsible, intelligent, credible and accurate ground lies. That I maintain such a position is, I believe, corroborated by many of my past comments.

    But, too many members of that tribal people make it harder & harder to maintain that position. It is not “every single time” – I know- but it is exasperatingly frequent.
     
    In response to the characterization of Jews as a "tribal people":

    Ultimately, while Judaism can be classified as a religion, and perhaps as an ethnicity as well, entities of and related-to Judaism, Jews and Jewishness are not easily mapped to distinct, discrete classifications of religion, race, ethnicity, nationality, etc. as commonly understood and accepted. As I have repeatedly pointed-out, those of us who fall within the broad category of identifying as or (at least potentially) being identified by others as Jews cannot even agree on how to define one.

    Those who argue that Judaism is primarily or even exclusively a tribal identity rather than a religion are guilty of (a) conflating what are two overlapping but nonetheless distinct concepts, and (b) ignoring or glossing-over facts such as that Judaism accepts sincere, committed converts of just about any birth, while it rejects born-Jews who renounce or flout the religion to a degree that they are deemed as apostates or heretics. Even one whose transgressions merely place him in the lesser category of wanton/flagrant public sinner is still excluded from the community to a considerable, if not overwhelming degree. To the extent that such ostracization is not enforced (or not de facto enforced) in practice (which, admittedly, is often the reality on the ground) it is generally due to one or more of the following reasons: (a) ignorance of the relevant Judaic laws; (b) ambiguity or apprehension over their practical application; (c) laxity, esp. that motivated by disincentives to enforcement; (d) valid rabbinic ruling under which the culpability of the individual-in-question for his transgressions is at least largely mitigated based upon his background and circumstances in life; (e) means justifies the end rationale in which the potential for drawing the individual closer and inspiring him to repentance is deemed the over-riding consideration. A variant of this is fear that censuring or rebuffing the individual would drive him toward active hostility, possibly even violence. Such calculations may or not, depending upon the specific factors involved, be halakhicaly valid.

    For those interested in the topic, I highly recommend Is Judaism a Nationality?, a YouTube video of a lecture delivered by Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro in September 2019 at the International Council for Middle East Studies' (ICMES) Faith, Community and Culture conference held in British Colombia.

    Incidentally, I hope you will forgive me for suggesting, respectfully, that if you must post such visually assaulting, dizzying animated images as the one you have attached to your post here, if you could at least place them behind the "MORE!" tag. I'm sure that I would not be alone in appreciating such a courtesy.

    Replies: @anon, @Bardon Kaldian

  125. @Jack D
    @Gilbert Ratchet

    Reform and some Conservative Jewish congregations also have added the matriarchs to prayers nowadays.

    Replies: @Dissident

    Reform and some Conservative Jewish congregations also have added the matriarchs to prayers nowadays.

    Are you sure it it is indeed only some of the Conservative ones? And if it is in fact only some now, how long before it will be many, then most, and then nearly all?

    When the movement known as Conservative Judaism began, it was to the right of what today would be characterized as the left-fringe of Modern-Orthodoxy (or Open Orthodoxy, as I believe the most radical fringe of what previously was the left-most fringe of Modern-Orthodoxy now call themselves).

    Even what is called Reform Judaism has long veered well beyond the point of recognizable connection to what its founder* had envisioned.

    In the realm of Judaism (and that which purports to be Judaism), Conservative is to Reform what, in the political realm, conservative is to liberal, or Republican to Democrat. That is, characterized by an inevitable shift over {x-number of years} from nominal/de jure/ostensible/purported opposition, to acceptance– grudging at first, to eventual embrace and championing. Is there any Woke position for which we won’t one day hear “The Conservative case for”?

    (*Moses Mendelsohn, the individual credited with the founding of the Haskalah (Hebrew: enlightenment) movement within Judaism, is also credited as the founder of so-called Reform Judaism. Mendelsohn is reported to have personally maintained throughout his lifetime a level of halakhic observance that would have rivaled that of many purportedly Orthodox Jews.)

  126. @HA
    @anonsasmaug

    "He was soon eclipsed in this leadership by James the Just, 'the Brother of the Lord.'"

    Setting aside the pointless crack about foreignness, according to one school of thought on the foundations of Islam, it actually originated among a Nazareen sect of Christians (albeit very Judeocentric ones, on the far end of the spectrum of views you noted) whose origins trace back to the followers of James the Just.


    In the 1st century, another major strand was woven into the web of apocalyptic Jewish messianism: the followers of James the Just -- who was not an apostle but the blood cousin of Jesus and the first bishop in Jerusalem --- exalted him above the apostles and even claimed that the destruction of the Temple was the result of his being stoned to death by zealots in 62 AD. After James’s death, some of his followers reinterpreted Christianity in a radically Judeocentric way, one that led to the Nazareen ideology...Jerome called them “semi-Jews." The Church Fathers, from Irenaeus to Jerome, speak of the Ebionites or Nazareens as heretics, and they are alluding to them when they warn against “Judaizers.” They knew that the Nazareens denied the divinity of Christ while accepting the Virgin Birth, that they practiced circumcision, that they reproached rabbinical Jews for altering the texts of the Bible to hide the fact that Jesus was the messiah, and that they prayed toward Jerusalem. All these things the Muslims would do after them, except that they eventually changed their quibla and prayed toward Mecca. Origen says that the Nazareens refused to drink wine... Interestingly, when Jerome describes the fleshly pleasures anticipated by the Nazareens in that kingdom, they sound a lot like the pleasures Muslims believe await them in paradise....
     
    Under this version of Islam's creation, Muhammad originally came preaching about the impending return of the Messiah:

    Muhammad’s success is confirmed by the Chronicle of Jacob of Edessa (before 692) and also by Doctrina Jacobi (before 640). In the latter we learn that some rabbinical Jews arriving in Yatrib in 625 or 627 found the Arabs there already impregnated with the Nazareen ideology and their chieftain Muhammad “proclaiming the coming of the messiah” with such charism that they were all united firmly under his authority. The Chronography of Theophane (who died in 817) states that in 622 some rabbinical Jews known to the Byzantines attached themselves to Muhammad: they saw him as one of “their prophets,” the one who, as Malachy 3:23 foretold, would precede the messiah.
     
    Later on, when the Messiah that Muhammad foretold failed to return, a new "official story" of Islam was devised in which Muhammad himself was the last of the prophets, and all these Nazareen influences and rabbinical affiliations were excised and burned.

    Again, I don't see what any of that has to do with the "foreignness" of Christianity to Europeans or anyone else, given that it contains influences from all over, be they
    Canaanite, Egyptian, Jewish, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, and who knows what else -- maybe even Buddhist, depending on how far west Ashoka's missionaries traveled.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    >Later on, when the Messiah that Muhammad foretold failed to return, a new “official story” of Islam was devised in which Muhammad himself was the last of the prophets, and all these Nazareen influences and rabbinical affiliations were excised and burned.

    Barring a time machine, this will be nothing more than a theory. But it is quite possible that the proto-Islamic movement wanted to occupy the Holy Land (which they viewed as their patrimony, as descendants of Abraham) in preparation for a coming apocalypse. The Arabs never imagined they’d end up fully conquering one empire and dismembering another. Understandably, they weren’t going to be reviving the Davidic state after such a windfall, and they didn’t want to end up blending into the populace like the Germanic peoples did after the Western empire fell, so Islam became a more differentiated faith. I’d hazard that the process wasn’t quite as deliberate as this, given the fluidity of religious belief at the time, of course, but you get the idea.

    Through this lens, Islam as we know it was a creation of the Arab conquests, not the other way around. As the centuries went on, Zoroastrian influence got more significant at the expense of the initial mix of Jewish millenarianism and apocalyptic Eastern heterodox Christianity. Persian culture and thought woulud have a similar impact on Islam that Greco-Roman philosophy and culture had on Christianity: a lot of the ritual purity stuff normative in Muslim cultures, such as viewing dogs as unclean, has Zoroastrian origins, for example. Put this way, fully-formed Christianity and Islam are half-brothers: Jewish mother, but Greco-Roman vs. Persian father.

  127. @brabantian
    @tyrone

    Before it went into the Hebrew - Greek - Latin chain, the word 'Amen' is from ancient Egyptian

    Egyptian god Amun, his name also sometimes spelled 'Amen' as well as 'Amon', then becoming joined with Ra to be one great solar creator god, Amun-Ra

    For obvious reasons Judaics - Abrahamics would like to prefer that it be 'their' word ... Ancient Jews were of course obsessed with then 'greatest of all civilisations' Egypt, writing or perhaps as some claim fabricating the Exodus stories ... the oldest 'Hebrew bible' we have is actually the Greek Septuagint, allegedly a 'translation' of 'lost Hebrew', but many think a fabrication seeking to glamourise Jews by writing a story in which the great power of Egypt was beaten by divinely-backed Jews
    https://i.ibb.co/B46LxXR/Amun-Egyptian-god.jpg

    Replies: @For what it's worth, @Allen, @nebulafox

    >perhaps as some claim fabricating the Exodus stories …

    I think it is important to remember how memories were kept alive in a world where literacy was the domain of scribes and priests, not even kings. (This is a huge part of why I think Jesus and Muhammad existed as historical individuals, whereas Achilles and Moses and Arjuna might be a mixture of folk legend and several people.) Did Achilles fight Scamander? Probably not. Was there a warrior that Achilles was based off of? Possibly. Was there a conflict that the Trojan War was based off of? Probably: just one of many memories preserving the Bronze Age Collapse that would be passed down until Homer compiled them into one of the greatest pieces of literature in human history. As the centuries went by, the tale got taller, but that historical core is still there.

    Similarly, there might not have been an Exodus as we think of it. But there was definitely a period of Egyptian hegemony over the lands that would become Israel-and we’re helped by Pharaoh Merneptah, who was kind enough to record the list of people he bragged about crushing for posterity, including the proto-Israelites. The Judaic priests had received the tales over the course of centuries, and wrote them down. Even the Great Flood might have been based off of Sumerian memories of the Persian Gulf becoming flooded with water during the end of the last Ice Age. The digs that the Iranians have been working on over the last decade record similar tales: it’s hard to think that was not based off an authentic memory that would have looked, to a human being existing at the time, very much like the end of their world.

  128. @Colin Wright
    @S. Anonyia

    'These guys don’t look like quadroons or octoroons. Quadroons look like Puerto Ricans or darker North Africans. Octoroons would just register as “vaguely exotic.”'

    So what would you call Colin Powell? Eric Holder? Susan Rice? Meghan Markle?

    Surely not black.

    Replies: @3g4me

    @122 Colin Wright: The term you’re looking for is Mulatto.

  129. @Bardon Kaldian
    OT

    Some of you know that I am far from being an anti-judaist. But, too many members of that tribal people make it harder & harder to maintain that position. It is not "every single time" - I know- but it is exasperatingly frequent.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-wants-boost-democracy-shelve-093003464.html

    Daniel Benjamin

    Biden Wants to Boost Democracy. He Should Shelve the Summit and Look to Europe.

    .........................
    The United States, having aided and abetted Hungary and Poland during the Trump years and having cast the EU as a “foe,” in Trump’s words, now needs to show its backing for the EU majority.

    Doing so will not topple the governments in Budapest and Warsaw overnight, nor should anyone want that kind of disruption. But it will turn up the political heat on these regimes, underscoring that their position in the West is imperiled by their own policies.
    .........................

    Well .... https://media3.giphy.com/media/yV5xcSTmtVPBS/giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47e3f5a9a023e4407034ffcba47087dc47cfc8074d&rid=giphy.gif

    Replies: @Dissident

    Some of you know that I am far from being an anti-judaist.

    Much as our respective views on Judaism and any number of related as well as other matters may differ, I have long recognized you as someone well above the reflexive, simplistic, immature, utterly tedious magic key thinking that is, to varying degrees, exhibited by many who post here. It might also be germane to establish, before proceeding, my position that it is in the rather vast expanse between the cartoonish “Jews can do no right/ are always to blame for everything” mindset, and its inverse “Jews can do no wrong/ are never to blame for anything“, that the reasonable, responsible, intelligent, credible and accurate ground lies. That I maintain such a position is, I believe, corroborated by many of my past comments.

    But, too many members of that tribal people make it harder & harder to maintain that position. It is not “every single time” – I know- but it is exasperatingly frequent.

    In response to the characterization of Jews as a “tribal people”:

    Ultimately, while Judaism can be classified as a religion, and perhaps as an ethnicity as well, entities of and related-to Judaism, Jews and Jewishness are not easily mapped to distinct, discrete classifications of religion, race, ethnicity, nationality, etc. as commonly understood and accepted. As I have repeatedly pointed-out, those of us who fall within the broad category of identifying as or (at least potentially) being identified by others as Jews cannot even agree on how to define one.

    Those who argue that Judaism is primarily or even exclusively a tribal identity rather than a religion are guilty of (a) conflating what are two overlapping but nonetheless distinct concepts, and (b) ignoring or glossing-over facts such as

    [MORE]
    that Judaism accepts sincere, committed converts of just about any birth, while it rejects born-Jews who renounce or flout the religion to a degree that they are deemed as apostates or heretics. Even one whose transgressions merely place him in the lesser category of wanton/flagrant public sinner is still excluded from the community to a considerable, if not overwhelming degree. To the extent that such ostracization is not enforced (or not de facto enforced) in practice (which, admittedly, is often the reality on the ground) it is generally due to one or more of the following reasons: (a) ignorance of the relevant Judaic laws; (b) ambiguity or apprehension over their practical application; (c) laxity, esp. that motivated by disincentives to enforcement; (d) valid rabbinic ruling under which the culpability of the individual-in-question for his transgressions is at least largely mitigated based upon his background and circumstances in life; (e) means justifies the end rationale in which the potential for drawing the individual closer and inspiring him to repentance is deemed the over-riding consideration. A variant of this is fear that censuring or rebuffing the individual would drive him toward active hostility, possibly even violence. Such calculations may or not, depending upon the specific factors involved, be halakhicaly valid.

    For those interested in the topic, I highly recommend Is Judaism a Nationality?, a YouTube video of a lecture delivered by Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro in September 2019 at the International Council for Middle East Studies’ (ICMES) Faith, Community and Culture conference held in British Colombia.

    Incidentally, I hope you will forgive me for suggesting, respectfully, that if you must post such visually assaulting, dizzying animated images as the one you have attached to your post here, if you could at least place them behind the “MORE!” tag. I’m sure that I would not be alone in appreciating such a courtesy.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Dissident

    while it rejects born-Jews who renounce or flout the religion to a degree that they are deemed as apostates or heretics.

    Which Judaism is that? I've been in college towns where the local Jewish congregation had absolutely no problem at all with "out" homosexuals participating in the full life, including all celebrations.

    Right now, I'm thinking of one, particular day when I walked across a campus behind a few Jewish people. One of them was a flagrantly public homosexual, and he was just thrilled about how wonderful the booths (Sukkot) had been that year. His companions all agreed, including a married, Jewish faculty member. No rejection at all. Probably the whole community was Reform, but your generalization above doesn't mention the Reform / Conservative / Orthodox / etc. splits. Just "Judaism".

    From my perspective you are not telling the truth. In fact, you are attempting to hide things. Or you are wishing very hard.

    Replies: @Dissident

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @Dissident

    I'll answer by just re-posting a fusion of my earlier two comments. I don't want to go into religious/ethnic squabbles because I've long since formed my opinion I don't see the reason to change..

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61bKOryvxNL._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

    All things considered, a very good book. I disagree with some contentions & perhaps a non-negligible part is either obsolete or simply wrong (it would take me too long to analyze..).
    Patai is, in my opinion, right about the question: who is a Jew? The answer: someone who considers himself/herself a Jew and whom others consider to be that, too. Jewish history up to the 19th C is not very difficult to explain: this is a very Near East story of a chosen community under their god with whom they have an S & M relationship and whose main concern is that they remain separate from surrounding peoples by following various rituals & taboos. Jews thought they were better than the rest, but that’s the way all human collectives work (Hindus, especially Brahmins, Muslims, classical & modern Chinese ..). What is more interesting is that modern Jews, as a group, continue to survive & they stick together as before. They’ve lost their faith (God, chosen group,..)- and yet, they don’t assimilate. Of course, Israel being a nation-state is something perfectly natural; on the other hand, there is an increase in intermarriage in affluent West, but I don’t think that Jews will be swallowed by assimilation- the net result will remain either positive for them or somewhere around zero.

    Probably there are two reasons for their continual survival as a distinct entity in a secularized modern Western world. One is ordinary cultural nationalism, a sense of national pride in belonging to an ancient people who had influenced much of world history through their religious culture (Bible & Christianity), plus a big number of highly influential Jewish individuals in the past 150-200 years in world culture. You don’t have to believe in religious old stories to feel an elevated sense of pride in historical accomplishments of your group. On the other hand, a group which has a bigger chunk of creative titans, Germans, are deflated & almost defeated because of constant “guilting” of that nation through media demonization of Deutschtum after 1945. Germans should, if they want to survive, get rid of the WW2 narrative, expel all occupying forces & get nukes.

    Another strong element in Jewish survival is their tragedy during WW2. They are kept together as a rather paranoid community of remembered pain & persecution. Even without media pumping of the story, it is real enough & will function as a very efficient anti-corrosive when the real threat of their dissolution among surrounding peoples or ethnic groups appears. The role of Israel as an endangered nation-state is also a powerful ralling cry.Be as it may, I would recommend this Patai’s work (that said, I am skeptical about the whole Abraham story & the notion that Hebrew language is an adopted Canaanite language; the part on the Italian Renaissance influence seems absurd. The portions on Hellenism & Arab Muslim influences, on the other hand, are extremely well written).

    I’ve long since come to the conclusion:

    1. the vast majority of Jews or people of Jewish extraction are OK. Moreover, they are creative & valuable contributors to the society where they reside.

    2. but there is a segment of Jews, whether ethnically conscious or not, which is profoundly alien & inimical to the Western world (not so much in Islamic & similar cultures). This segment is very influential (or has become) & it is incurable in its hatred towards the Western historical identity (under West, I include all European Christendom, east & west, as well as their descendants). There is no grand plan for anything. It’s just that tribal Jewish activists, when they acquire power, tend to be bad news & they may form a hostile elite or sub-elite.

    Some Jewish persons have noticed that, too: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/american-jewrys-disgraceful-hypocrisy/


    American Jewry’s Disgraceful Hypocrisy

  130. anon[482] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dissident
    @Bardon Kaldian


    Some of you know that I am far from being an anti-judaist.
     
    Much as our respective views on Judaism and any number of related as well as other matters may differ, I have long recognized you as someone well above the reflexive, simplistic, immature, utterly tedious magic key thinking that is, to varying degrees, exhibited by many who post here. It might also be germane to establish, before proceeding, my position that it is in the rather vast expanse between the cartoonish "Jews can do no right/ are always to blame for everything" mindset, and its inverse "Jews can do no wrong/ are never to blame for anything", that the reasonable, responsible, intelligent, credible and accurate ground lies. That I maintain such a position is, I believe, corroborated by many of my past comments.

    But, too many members of that tribal people make it harder & harder to maintain that position. It is not “every single time” – I know- but it is exasperatingly frequent.
     
    In response to the characterization of Jews as a "tribal people":

    Ultimately, while Judaism can be classified as a religion, and perhaps as an ethnicity as well, entities of and related-to Judaism, Jews and Jewishness are not easily mapped to distinct, discrete classifications of religion, race, ethnicity, nationality, etc. as commonly understood and accepted. As I have repeatedly pointed-out, those of us who fall within the broad category of identifying as or (at least potentially) being identified by others as Jews cannot even agree on how to define one.

    Those who argue that Judaism is primarily or even exclusively a tribal identity rather than a religion are guilty of (a) conflating what are two overlapping but nonetheless distinct concepts, and (b) ignoring or glossing-over facts such as that Judaism accepts sincere, committed converts of just about any birth, while it rejects born-Jews who renounce or flout the religion to a degree that they are deemed as apostates or heretics. Even one whose transgressions merely place him in the lesser category of wanton/flagrant public sinner is still excluded from the community to a considerable, if not overwhelming degree. To the extent that such ostracization is not enforced (or not de facto enforced) in practice (which, admittedly, is often the reality on the ground) it is generally due to one or more of the following reasons: (a) ignorance of the relevant Judaic laws; (b) ambiguity or apprehension over their practical application; (c) laxity, esp. that motivated by disincentives to enforcement; (d) valid rabbinic ruling under which the culpability of the individual-in-question for his transgressions is at least largely mitigated based upon his background and circumstances in life; (e) means justifies the end rationale in which the potential for drawing the individual closer and inspiring him to repentance is deemed the over-riding consideration. A variant of this is fear that censuring or rebuffing the individual would drive him toward active hostility, possibly even violence. Such calculations may or not, depending upon the specific factors involved, be halakhicaly valid.

    For those interested in the topic, I highly recommend Is Judaism a Nationality?, a YouTube video of a lecture delivered by Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro in September 2019 at the International Council for Middle East Studies' (ICMES) Faith, Community and Culture conference held in British Colombia.

    Incidentally, I hope you will forgive me for suggesting, respectfully, that if you must post such visually assaulting, dizzying animated images as the one you have attached to your post here, if you could at least place them behind the "MORE!" tag. I'm sure that I would not be alone in appreciating such a courtesy.

    Replies: @anon, @Bardon Kaldian

    while it rejects born-Jews who renounce or flout the religion to a degree that they are deemed as apostates or heretics.

    Which Judaism is that? I’ve been in college towns where the local Jewish congregation had absolutely no problem at all with “out” homosexuals participating in the full life, including all celebrations.

    Right now, I’m thinking of one, particular day when I walked across a campus behind a few Jewish people. One of them was a flagrantly public homosexual, and he was just thrilled about how wonderful the booths (Sukkot) had been that year. His companions all agreed, including a married, Jewish faculty member. No rejection at all. Probably the whole community was Reform, but your generalization above doesn’t mention the Reform / Conservative / Orthodox / etc. splits. Just “Judaism”.

    From my perspective you are not telling the truth. In fact, you are attempting to hide things. Or you are wishing very hard.

    • Replies: @Dissident
    @anon


    but your generalization above doesn’t mention the Reform / Conservative / Orthodox / etc. splits. Just “Judaism”.
     
    You would be correct that I did not make explicit mention of such distinctions in the specific comment of mine that you replied-to. Nonetheless, I did in said comment, just a little further down from where you quoted me, write,

    To the extent that such ostracization is not enforced (or not de facto enforced) in practice (which, admittedly, is often the reality on the ground) it is generally due to one or more of the following reasons:
     
    and then proceeded to carefully enumerate no fewer than five distinct reasons. I then proceeded to link-to and recommend a YouTube video of a lecture of a rabbi who is quite clearly and conspicuously unambiguously Orthodox. Moreover, in an earlier comment in this thread, one appearing just a little above the one you replied-to, I made explicit and detailed reference to the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform subsets within "the realm of Judaism (and that which purports to be Judaism)". That parenthetical note was not the only part of my writing in which my position that authentic Judaism is limited-to (and does not even include all of) that which falls under the Orthodox umbrella was at least strongly implied.

    I’ve been in college towns where the local Jewish congregation had absolutely no problem at all with “out” homosexuals participating in the full life, including all celebrations.
     
    What you describe would be hardly surprising or revealing to anyone who is aware of the reality that practically all non-Orthodox and even some nominally, fringe Orthodox Jewish synagogues/denominations embrace "LGBTQ" insanity to a considerable degree at a minimum. For Reform, at least, such embrace has been maximal and both fully de jure as well as de facto for as much as two decades or more now.

    From my perspective you are not telling the truth. In fact, you are attempting to hide things. Or you are wishing very hard.
     
    In replying to my post, were you interested in engaging civilly, in good faith? Or were you merely motivated by a desire to lash-out in hostility and score cheap rhetorical points? If the former, you might consider that such intentions are ill-conveyed by hastily resorting to accusations or insinuations of bad faith as you have done here.
  131. @Dissident
    @Bardon Kaldian


    Some of you know that I am far from being an anti-judaist.
     
    Much as our respective views on Judaism and any number of related as well as other matters may differ, I have long recognized you as someone well above the reflexive, simplistic, immature, utterly tedious magic key thinking that is, to varying degrees, exhibited by many who post here. It might also be germane to establish, before proceeding, my position that it is in the rather vast expanse between the cartoonish "Jews can do no right/ are always to blame for everything" mindset, and its inverse "Jews can do no wrong/ are never to blame for anything", that the reasonable, responsible, intelligent, credible and accurate ground lies. That I maintain such a position is, I believe, corroborated by many of my past comments.

    But, too many members of that tribal people make it harder & harder to maintain that position. It is not “every single time” – I know- but it is exasperatingly frequent.
     
    In response to the characterization of Jews as a "tribal people":

    Ultimately, while Judaism can be classified as a religion, and perhaps as an ethnicity as well, entities of and related-to Judaism, Jews and Jewishness are not easily mapped to distinct, discrete classifications of religion, race, ethnicity, nationality, etc. as commonly understood and accepted. As I have repeatedly pointed-out, those of us who fall within the broad category of identifying as or (at least potentially) being identified by others as Jews cannot even agree on how to define one.

    Those who argue that Judaism is primarily or even exclusively a tribal identity rather than a religion are guilty of (a) conflating what are two overlapping but nonetheless distinct concepts, and (b) ignoring or glossing-over facts such as that Judaism accepts sincere, committed converts of just about any birth, while it rejects born-Jews who renounce or flout the religion to a degree that they are deemed as apostates or heretics. Even one whose transgressions merely place him in the lesser category of wanton/flagrant public sinner is still excluded from the community to a considerable, if not overwhelming degree. To the extent that such ostracization is not enforced (or not de facto enforced) in practice (which, admittedly, is often the reality on the ground) it is generally due to one or more of the following reasons: (a) ignorance of the relevant Judaic laws; (b) ambiguity or apprehension over their practical application; (c) laxity, esp. that motivated by disincentives to enforcement; (d) valid rabbinic ruling under which the culpability of the individual-in-question for his transgressions is at least largely mitigated based upon his background and circumstances in life; (e) means justifies the end rationale in which the potential for drawing the individual closer and inspiring him to repentance is deemed the over-riding consideration. A variant of this is fear that censuring or rebuffing the individual would drive him toward active hostility, possibly even violence. Such calculations may or not, depending upon the specific factors involved, be halakhicaly valid.

    For those interested in the topic, I highly recommend Is Judaism a Nationality?, a YouTube video of a lecture delivered by Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro in September 2019 at the International Council for Middle East Studies' (ICMES) Faith, Community and Culture conference held in British Colombia.

    Incidentally, I hope you will forgive me for suggesting, respectfully, that if you must post such visually assaulting, dizzying animated images as the one you have attached to your post here, if you could at least place them behind the "MORE!" tag. I'm sure that I would not be alone in appreciating such a courtesy.

    Replies: @anon, @Bardon Kaldian

    I’ll answer by just re-posting a fusion of my earlier two comments. I don’t want to go into religious/ethnic squabbles because I’ve long since formed my opinion I don’t see the reason to change..

    All things considered, a very good book. I disagree with some contentions & perhaps a non-negligible part is either obsolete or simply wrong (it would take me too long to analyze..).
    Patai is, in my opinion, right about the question: who is a Jew? The answer: someone who considers himself/herself a Jew and whom others consider to be that, too. Jewish history up to the 19th C is not very difficult to explain: this is a very Near East story of a chosen community under their god with whom they have an S & M relationship and whose main concern is that they remain separate from surrounding peoples by following various rituals & taboos. Jews thought they were better than the rest, but that’s the way all human collectives work (Hindus, especially Brahmins, Muslims, classical & modern Chinese ..). What is more interesting is that modern Jews, as a group, continue to survive & they stick together as before. They’ve lost their faith (God, chosen group,..)- and yet, they don’t assimilate. Of course, Israel being a nation-state is something perfectly natural; on the other hand, there is an increase in intermarriage in affluent West, but I don’t think that Jews will be swallowed by assimilation- the net result will remain either positive for them or somewhere around zero.

    Probably there are two reasons for their continual survival as a distinct entity in a secularized modern Western world. One is ordinary cultural nationalism, a sense of national pride in belonging to an ancient people who had influenced much of world history through their religious culture (Bible & Christianity), plus a big number of highly influential Jewish individuals in the past 150-200 years in world culture. You don’t have to believe in religious old stories to feel an elevated sense of pride in historical accomplishments of your group. On the other hand, a group which has a bigger chunk of creative titans, Germans, are deflated & almost defeated because of constant “guilting” of that nation through media demonization of Deutschtum after 1945. Germans should, if they want to survive, get rid of the WW2 narrative, expel all occupying forces & get nukes.

    Another strong element in Jewish survival is their tragedy during WW2. They are kept together as a rather paranoid community of remembered pain & persecution. Even without media pumping of the story, it is real enough & will function as a very efficient anti-corrosive when the real threat of their dissolution among surrounding peoples or ethnic groups appears. The role of Israel as an endangered nation-state is also a powerful ralling cry.Be as it may, I would recommend this Patai’s work (that said, I am skeptical about the whole Abraham story & the notion that Hebrew language is an adopted Canaanite language; the part on the Italian Renaissance influence seems absurd. The portions on Hellenism & Arab Muslim influences, on the other hand, are extremely well written).

    I’ve long since come to the conclusion:

    1. the vast majority of Jews or people of Jewish extraction are OK. Moreover, they are creative & valuable contributors to the society where they reside.

    2. but there is a segment of Jews, whether ethnically conscious or not, which is profoundly alien & inimical to the Western world (not so much in Islamic & similar cultures). This segment is very influential (or has become) & it is incurable in its hatred towards the Western historical identity (under West, I include all European Christendom, east & west, as well as their descendants). There is no grand plan for anything. It’s just that tribal Jewish activists, when they acquire power, tend to be bad news & they may form a hostile elite or sub-elite.

    Some Jewish persons have noticed that, too: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/american-jewrys-disgraceful-hypocrisy/

    American Jewry’s Disgraceful Hypocrisy

    • Thanks: Dissident
  132. @anon
    @Dissident

    while it rejects born-Jews who renounce or flout the religion to a degree that they are deemed as apostates or heretics.

    Which Judaism is that? I've been in college towns where the local Jewish congregation had absolutely no problem at all with "out" homosexuals participating in the full life, including all celebrations.

    Right now, I'm thinking of one, particular day when I walked across a campus behind a few Jewish people. One of them was a flagrantly public homosexual, and he was just thrilled about how wonderful the booths (Sukkot) had been that year. His companions all agreed, including a married, Jewish faculty member. No rejection at all. Probably the whole community was Reform, but your generalization above doesn't mention the Reform / Conservative / Orthodox / etc. splits. Just "Judaism".

    From my perspective you are not telling the truth. In fact, you are attempting to hide things. Or you are wishing very hard.

    Replies: @Dissident

    but your generalization above doesn’t mention the Reform / Conservative / Orthodox / etc. splits. Just “Judaism”.

    You would be correct that I did not make explicit mention of such distinctions in the specific comment of mine that you replied-to. Nonetheless, I did in said comment, just a little further down from where you quoted me, write,

    To the extent that such ostracization is not enforced (or not de facto enforced) in practice (which, admittedly, is often the reality on the ground) it is generally due to one or more of the following reasons:

    and then proceeded to carefully enumerate no fewer than five distinct reasons. I then proceeded to link-to and recommend a YouTube video of a lecture of a rabbi who is quite clearly and conspicuously unambiguously Orthodox. Moreover, in an earlier comment in this thread, one appearing just a little above the one you replied-to, I made explicit and detailed reference to the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform subsets within “the realm of Judaism (and that which purports to be Judaism)”. That parenthetical note was not the only part of my writing in which my position that authentic Judaism is limited-to (and does not even include all of) that which falls under the Orthodox umbrella was at least strongly implied.

    I’ve been in college towns where the local Jewish congregation had absolutely no problem at all with “out” homosexuals participating in the full life, including all celebrations.

    What you describe would be hardly surprising or revealing to anyone who is aware of the reality that practically all non-Orthodox and even some nominally, fringe Orthodox Jewish synagogues/denominations embrace “LGBTQ” insanity to a considerable degree at a minimum. For Reform, at least, such embrace has been maximal and both fully de jure as well as de facto for as much as two decades or more now.

    From my perspective you are not telling the truth. In fact, you are attempting to hide things. Or you are wishing very hard.

    In replying to my post, were you interested in engaging civilly, in good faith? Or were you merely motivated by a desire to lash-out in hostility and score cheap rhetorical points? If the former, you might consider that such intentions are ill-conveyed by hastily resorting to accusations or insinuations of bad faith as you have done here.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS