Saturday, June 15, 2019 ... Deutsch/Español/Related posts from blogosphere

Jesus had a reason for a men-only last supper

The amount of censorship by the Big Tech companies that have teamed up with each other and with the totalitarian Left has been incredible in recent weeks. Last night, Soph's new YouTube videos were erased within a day. A 100% polite vegan who loves black pigeons was also silenced for "extreme or repeated hate speech" for a day, before the YouTube account was restored in the wake of a huge backlash.

Pinterest has internally and indefensibly labeled a pro-life group, Live Action, as "pornography" to be capable of erasing it from their platform. Eric Cochran was the whistleblower at Pinterest who was immediately fired and escorted by guards, without an explanation. Project Veritas, a news group that just tried to cover the Pinterest censorship, was silenced on YouTube: their video was blurred in an Orwellian way. The number of such stories is huge. It's impossible to enumerate them, let alone write detailed accounts of each.

Professor Ricardo Duchesne was fired from University of New Brunswick because his books dared to provide the reader with deep evidence that the Western civilization had some traits that no other – and Asian – civilizations could boast. That's white supremacy and it is apparently banned! His dismissal was guaranteed by a mob that doesn't do much scholarly work and may be summarized as a bunch of malicious, lying, and useless parasites sucking dollars from the stupid Canadian taxpayer.

Lots of worrisome news of this new totalitarian type are served by Paul Joseph Watson on his @prisonplanet Twitter account and his new website. Just the top 5 news in a list over there: Facebook bans comments that only say "Honk". A Brazilian duo of Lesbians has first castrated a boy (plus created a hole which they called the "vagina") and they murdered him – certain feminists aren't just like the Nazis, they're like the Nazi killers from concentration camps. A supporter burned thousands of Brexit Party votes. A Muslim invited to Germany by Angela Merkel has aggressively attacked a random German lad with a bottle – a "revenge for Afghanistan". A female left-wing comedian urged milkshake to be replaced with a battery acid in the milkshake attacks. And so on and so on.

The totalitarian Left has gotten so aggressive and apparently self-confident that we may have the last opportunity to stop them before they really cripple the world and turn it into a 1984 dystopia for a very, very long time.

I want to discuss two somewhat less frustrating events – which are nevertheless events fitting the general trend – and both of them have something to do with the Catholic Church.

A temptation for a reform

First, after some years of hesitation, Comrade Pope Francis has finally changed the Lord's Prayer. "Father, hallowed be your name...". Where did the text come from? Well, it's in the Bible, more precisely in Gospels of Luke and Matthew. In both cases, the text is communicated to the believers in a straightforward way: someone asks Jesus how they should pray and Jesus simply tells them Lord's Prayer. This is how you should pray.

The original text is in Greek and the most important later translation is in Latin – most other languages got their translation of the Lord's Prayer from Latin. I use the Lord's Prayer as my #1 excerpt to compare languages in the same language family. It's pretty cool to hear that poem in all the Slavic languages – which have their characteristic flavors but we may still passively understand most of it, especially if we know what they are trying to say.

Pater Noster [=Father Our] isn't just the Latin name of the Lord's Prayer. It's also a very cool elevator that never stops – you just jump into a moving one and then jump out of a moving one – and as you can see e.g. in the video above, Pater Noster is still a standard elevator in 29 official buildings (mostly ministries) of Prague, one Pilsner city hall building, and 30 other Czech buildings. Americans are totally terrified of being beheaded there (see comments under this video with 25M views) – just to be sure, no one has ever been beheaded by a Pater Noster, at least not in Czechia LOL. But the Czech man Mr Janek Rubeš pretending to be Yankee above (incredibly enough, he used to have a near-failing grade in English) was even brave enough to make the loop (I first did this experiment when I was 3) – if you're worried, the direction of your body doesn't change so you go sideways. ;-)

But I digress. Near the end, Pater Noster – let me use the "Roman Missal" lithurgical translation – says: ne nos inducas in tentationem; ...
If you click above, Google Translate will immediately tell you that it indeed translates as
...lead us not into temptation; ...
Great, that's exactly what the most widespread English, Czech, and other translations say. Pope Francis didn't like it so he "officially" changed it to not let us fall into temptation; ...
Can you spot the difference? And why did the Pope care so much – so that such a substantial change to the Christianity's main prayer was made for the first time in thousands of years? Well, the difference is simple. "Lead us not into temptation" indicates that God has the ability or potential to lead us into temptation. But Pope Francis – thinking about the sexual scandals – protested: God would never ever tempt us. God has no responsibility for the sexual scandals. Instead, it's Satan who tempts us.

Room of the Last Supper, a map

Great. But God is still the top boss. On top of that, God should be omnipotent. So He surely has the ability or potential to lead us to temptation, too! You can easily see that if Francis disagrees with the previous sentence, he directly attacks the omnipotence of God, a dogma of the Catholic faith, and should be burned at stake as a heretic. He should also be burned at stake for being a leftist in many other respects but I digress again.

While Satan is more directly associated with temptation, the two formulations really are precisely equivalent once you take all other axioms of Catholicism into account. If God allows someone to be led into temptation (e.g. by the Satan), then God makes a decision that the person should be led into temptation, so directly or indirectly, God – the top boss of everything in the Universe and beyond – actually leads the person into temptation Himself!

He i.e. God also bears the full responsibility for such "enabled temptation" but it doesn't matter much because no one can fire Him or otherwise punish Him, anyway.

If Pope Francis had at least 5% of my skills in theology, he would also know that the texts must really be considered equivalent. Even though his "new" translation is arguably closer to the Greek original, there was nothing wrong with the previous Latin translation and the derived ones. The actual reason why the Holy Father prefers his new awkward formulation is that he wants God – his alleged immediate boss – not to be connected with any responsibility for the sexual scandals. It's someone else, someone who is completely outside the Catholic Church and has nothing to do with Pope Francis, who needs to be blamed.

So don't bother Francis with the sexual scandals, talk directly to Satan if you want to deal with these sins – Francis is nice and politically correct. That's the real message of the edit of the prayer.

It's all about appearances.

So although this bizarre modification of the Lord's Prayer seems "unrelated" to the Zeitgeist and the frantic assault of the new totalitarian Left against all cornerstones of our society, it's not really independent. The most general reasons for "this kind of change" are exactly the same as the reasons behind the censorship and other manifestations of the political correctness that has run amok.

Last supper: a boys only club

Just today, our media were filled with the news that a bishop in Chile was de facto fired. The auxiliary bishop of Santiago has been in a job for less than a month. He replaced someone else who was fired because of some sexual scandals that also plague the Catholic Church in Chile.

But this guy, Carlos Eugenio Irarrázabal, was fired for a different reason: the feminists did it. What was his wrongthink? In the first TV interview, he started with observations such as:
There were no women seated at the table at the Last Supper and we have to respect that.

Jesus Christ made decisions, and they were not ideological. And we want to be faithful to Jesus Christ. Perhaps women like to be in the back room.
So Mr Eugenio (the really last name is too hard) has dared to say that Jesus had some reasons for His acts, including the ban on women in the last dining hall, and Christians should respect Jesus and His decisions. Imagine the heresy – heresy against feminism, just to be sure that we are on the same frequency.

You should click at the image to see a very hi-res version of "Last Supper", one of the most famous paintings in the Western civilization. It's displayed in Milan and Leonardo da Vinci created it in the 1490s. Well, some people are eating a dinner or something – which turned out to be the only food that Jesus Christ has ever excreted in the Heaven (do your research of Jesus' guts schedule in the Holy Scripture; and realize that one doesn't need to eat in the Heaven but they still need restrooms for the recently arrived immigrants; my fundamentalist Christian ex-GF was actually puzzled by the operation of restrooms in the Heaven, most Christians aren't this curious).

OK, who are the guys on the painting? In the middle, you have some person of an unclear sex. It could be a woman but it's not. It's Jesus Christ. The remaining 12 people are grouped into 4 groups of 3. Leonardo was well aware of the fact that 4 times 3 equals 12. The person on the left side from Jesus (from our perspective) looks even more feminine than Jesus.

So some pieces of art that reflect our left-wing Zeitgeist have spread the "theory" that it's a woman, Mary Magdalene, the prostitute that Jesus has probably intimately known. But it's complete nonsense. If you analyze the individual people, you will find out that Judas and all the other disciples were present and the highly feminine disciple is... John.

It's not really shocking that John looks effeminate (I don't mean John Archer): Leonardo loved to paint effeminate men. It's even possible (make your research) that he had employed a male effeminate (and perhaps) gay model or models to do some of his most famous paintings – including Mona Lisa. OK, so this woman was meant to be John.

Why? Because the Bible speaks a clear language. Judas called Jesus and the disciples for a party on Friday night and all the disciples attended. It seemed better to leave the women in the backroom and the women were apparently OK with it. During Leonardo's life, and especially in the 1490s, it would be unthinkable for Leonardo to bastardize the Bible by placing a woman at the table although the Bible clearly says that there have been 12+1 men.

Now, we are entering a similarly if not more hysterical Inquisition system. Now, bishops get fired for daring to say that Jesus wasn't a complete idiot and He had some reasons to choose the composition of the guests in this way. Just try to appreciate how insanely weak the church has become. The Catholic Church – that used to have the power to execute people for minor heresies and with this power, feminism would be cured off the face of Earth within a year – isn't allowed to say that Jesus Christ, a top guru of the church, had some meritocratic reasons for His decisions.

Feminists implicitly insist that Jesus Christ was a sexist pig as well – and if you're a bishop and you dare to disagree with this thesis about the chauvinist discrimination by the misogynist Jesus, the feminists just make you fired by contacting their Feminazi comrade Francis in the Vatican! It's this bad. Does the Vatican really need the historical center of Rome if it has been reduced to a minor regional executive bureau of a feminist NGO?

It's very bad but I have been surprised for some time that it's not "bad enough" i.e. that Christianity itself is doing relatively fine in this era of #MeToo exhibitionists and similar psychopaths. How is it possible that Christianity is allowed to exist at all? Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was clearly male and probably straight. It seems that God apparently had no daughters – probably because of His own choice – and to make it worse, God the Father Himself wants to be considered male, too.

On top of that, all 12 disciples of Jesus were male. Popes and bishops and all the hierarchy has to be male. The overrepresentation of men in the Catholic stories and hierarchies is even stronger than in theoretical physics. The most important women were Mary and Mary Magdalene. The second penis-challenged person or what's the politically correct term for a lady was a prostitute and the most important achievement of the first one was to have a baby with a father that looked like an unlikely explanation of her pregnancy to everyone around her. Are these two ladies sufficiently good role models for girls who may want to become bishops, Popes, disciples, offspring of God, or Gods themselves? How is it possible that Christianity – clearly a cornerstone of the Patriarchal arrangement of the Western civilization – has been allowed to exist by the feminists?

My hypothesis is that the latter have very slow brains and so far, they haven't realized that men were and are actually overrepresented in the power club of the Bible. If some feminist is capable of reading my blog, I may be helping to cause some huge trouble to all the Christian Churches because the full-blown feminist witch hunts against Jesus and His allied sexist pigs may start tomorrow if not tonight. The feminists aren't good at thinking but they're stellar at parroting and creating a mass hysteria. I apologize in advance but maybe it's a fate that the end of Christianity had to start with this blog post. ;-)

Add to Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (0) :

(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){ (i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o), m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m) })(window,document,'script','//','ga'); ga('create', 'UA-1828728-1', 'auto'); ga('send', 'pageview');