The "Judeo-Christianity" does not exist. Nineteen centuries ago ceased to be of some importance, if they ever had. And it's the last fourteen communities "Judeo-Christian" survivors in southern Arabia, were exterminated or absorbed by the Mohammedan sect. However, the term seems to have been gradually rising in recent years at the hands of some "think tanks." These "think tanks", however, have acquired a new meaning: that which estimates that Jews and Christians have a common religious origin and, therefore, maintain the same philosophy of life, the same values, a unique cultural identity and belong to one civilization, the "Judeo-Christian." But this, although it is intended to stale, is a new civilization, profoundly ahistorical, a virtual civilization, forced and forged to argue contemporary geo-strategic alliances, to find allies in the fight against the growing threat Mohammedan and justify the "Christian blood" spilled in defense borders and interests of others.
The ideologues of this "neojudeocristianismo" emerge after 1945 and reach their greatest triumph twenty years later. Earlier would have been unthinkable that the Church as an institution to accept the alliance, even conceptual, against an enemy that time was not theirs and unless a conflict that neither he nor she had been going beyond the merely human. Similarly, it is clearly inconceivable that before these dates a Christian walk carrying two thousand years to accept his view of the world sharing the deicide people, besides the fact that the very idea of \u200b\u200bcivilization was going to be quite confusing. Civilization "Judeo-Christian" was unthinkable before Auschwitz and impossible before Vatican II. Until then the term itself is not used beyond the very limited ways of philosophers, religious historians, theologians, ... and always in a very determined scholar, never an intention global geopolitics.
But things have changed. Today the term "Judeo-Christian" desnortado has permeated the Western world, is regularly used quite naturally by the media (with special delight for the Catholic Right and liberal), has been taken by our leaders and intellectuals as ancient irrefutable reality, and real jihadist threat has facilitated their assimilation popular. It is even accepted as a valid anti-Islamic alliance between some who not long ago showed visceral objections to Israel. Today that Maccabi Tel-Aviv Euroleague basketball plays or Noah to represent their country at Eurovision is seen as completely normal as a result of this "reality" two millennia.
The thesis that I defend in this article probably will not like some fundamentalist Christians, but also please the neo-pagan "adorapiedras" and "esculperrunas." And is that the past becomes stubborn when trying to shape the present desires. So this article aims to remind the reader a series of historical evidence, but for the power of propaganda, of which no one is safe, "should have been internalized completely natural for any average European, namely: 1) that Christianity is more than a faith and a religious faith is a cultural and ideological fact has shaped our identity for two millennia, and without which it is simply impossible to conceive of European civilization, or past or present, or future. 2) that Christianity is the younger brother of Judaism, nor is it a Jewish sect, not what is historical, not philosophical, but mostly it is not as popular religion. 3) that neither Christianity western or eastern come from those early Jewish groups who believed in Jesus, but of communities pagan Greeks and Romans who were Christianized in the early centuries of our era. And derived from the above, 4) that today's Christianity may be, or not-friend of the Jewish people and the State of Israel, but in no case be compelled to be by ties of spiritual closeness fictional or historical.
One of the most popular victories in the New World Order is that Christianity is considered as only one faith, one of many, without any special historical significance for Europe, a factor which, as just belongs to the framework of private and personnel performing it, therefore, should not interfere with the public sphere of politics. Thus, being something that everyone should develop in the privacy of your home and its temple, criticism or complaint to the religion in question would not necessarily be considered as an attack on the foundations of our civilization, or English identities and Europe, which, little by little, after other similar minimizations, are being reduced only to a legal and administrative issue. The reality, however, is precisely the reverse: culture, identity, religion and politics are not the same, but are inseparable from the principle of times and it will be until the Day of Judgement, but we sell otherwise.
" Every culture has it linked to a particular religion, without whose understanding is impossible to know the culture itself ." This axiom is one of the basic concepts of modern academic anthropology. Indeed, ideologues of the apron deists and therefore know what they want, legislating the treatment they should receive the religion by political power, not just confine it to the private sphere, but gradually replaced by a new religion public: Secularism and the Great Architect of Reason, "the goddess with the head in the clouds and feet covered in blood", as defined Karl Popper. That is why disparage a religion or equating all religions as equal, is nothing but an attack, by act or commonplace, to the waterline of the culture to which it is linked, more effective even if it is from within that culture, as is happening in Europe today. Because, as already noted, religion is much more than a faith. This is understood and many of our ancient scholars, such as Plato, hypercritical the myths of the Hellenic official theology, but a thorough knowledge of the ethical and political importance that religion has as one of the pillars on which rests the whole civic community develops. And so today have understood so little suspicious characters or Parafascist criptocristianos as the Marxist philosopher Gustavo Bueno English or Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci liberal. Both have publicly acknowledged as denominational atheist, but at the same time, as culturally Christian, and considered the recent assaults against Christianity not as an affront to the religion itself, but an attack-conscious or unconscious, depending on the emitter- against all our against our civilization and identity (if it is true that the two sin in the use of the term "Judeo-Christianity" here we are claiming).
However, what saddens me most, and what brings me here is the attitude towards Christianity, and their supposed Jewishness, others maintain that we are closer. Some "comrades" have internalized this neoconcepto uncritically so much as an absolute truth, accepting that Christianity and Judaism are all one, that, driven by cheap and essential anti-Zionism have become fucking anti-Christian, that is, they have turned against each other same as if Christianity was a foreign entity to this Spain and Europe that both claim to defend. So much so that more than one dare not congratulate Christmas, do not know if semihebrea considered a party, or for fear of some sort of pogrom by their peers. And I do not mean that they have adopted an attitude anticlerical, antivaticanista or antineoconciliar, which could certainly be acceptable, recommend and share, but they are incapable of understanding that can be atheist or agnostic, and, while culturally Christian unable to accept that Christmas, and a religious festival, is arguably a cultural event filled with paganism. Moreover, although I had for centuries been a conviction for blasphemy, today, I dare say that you can be pagan and Christian at once, because, indeed, as we shall see, popular Christianity continues to be the most authentic way possible paganism XXI century.
imagine that so wrong and endófoba position was reached after a process that has been a series of concepts dogmatize Nietzsche, which has been time travel ramires certain aspects of thought and Benoist has bad read, in which they have forgotten at least eight centuries of English history, and has unthinkingly swallowed the appropriate dose of demagoguery pro-Palestinian victimization. This is a scary place, then, accompanied by the renowned wonder that more than one professes to Hamas or Hizbullah, then to convert to Islam can be only two steps, the first one to discover some salafi currents. Would not be the first to go that way. And for the record I do not try to convert anyone to Christianity, or push them to attend Mass, as the writer does not, "but to be aware that certain attitudes contribute to the historical and political context which we are profoundly counterproductive to our future. So these items are aimed precisely at them, those who believe that subject or not they are doing is because they are not Christians.
Thus, when more than a year ago opened Agora by Alejandro Amenabar, unfortunately I was not surprised to note that the anti-Christian position that kept some "comrades" when commenting on the movie on web forums, no very different from that prevalent among liberal circles, so imbued with Masonic secularism self-destructive, even came to use the same language and arguments, and identical topics and resources. For the "our" forgive them and try to correct them because they seem to be unaware of what do, and nobody else will try to burn his snuggling too embers. For the others, it is God who provides.
Next time I will make a brief excursus to analyze the film because, although this is not the cause of this cluster, when it leads to an explanation of its central thesis.
Mozárabivs
Mozárabivs
--------------------------------
BITIBAjK Gentile
---------------------------------
0 comments:
Post a Comment