US Presidential Candidate Suggests Palestinian State Should Be Created In Sinai

[StonyArabia]

Lol whut?

Most Red Indian groups in Chile right now enjoy a higher quality of life compared so Somalis or Iranians for example. Stop comparing. XD

Bullshit. Most Red Indians for example in Canada are highly marginalized and often are on the bottom of every statistics. They could not vote, they could not even go to schools with mainstream population. Also due to socio-historical fact they often fill up the jails, due to high criminality. Many of them suffer from the trauma of the colonization and forced assimilation. In Chile there is often conflict over land to this day. Somalis and Iranians are far better off because they control their own destiny.

[curupira]

The Sinai:

https://www.google.com/search?site=&...07.fe8efMnIedc

[Longbowman]

Who cares what non-Israelis/Palestinians think about it?

[Longbowman]

The self absorbed "Chosen People", the modern fake Jews who are mostly descended from European converts to Judaism, bullying the true Hebrews, the Palestinians who simply changed religion to Islam sickens me.

Not sure how 'fake' we are, I'm paternally Ashkenazi and share YDNA with Maleficent.

I know as a Christian you almost have to envy us for being Chosen (why the inverted commas? Don't you revere the OT, too?) because you had Judaeo-Paganism imposed on you by the grandsons of Rome without regard for your native religion, but seriously, even if you were right, what's the point? It's done now, there are over six million Jews there, accept it and move on.

You made good points, however you have no right in saying that only conversion to Islam will help the Palestinian cause considering that the Christian claim to the Middle East predates Islam. Most of the holy sites of Christians (barring Rome, the seat of the Papacy) are in the Levant. Christians have more of a right to the Levant than Muslims. Muslims' holy sites are way down south in Medina and Mecca, not at Jerusalem.

So you should fuck off and not proselytize to her when she's of a religion and breed which has more legitimate rights being native to the Holy Land than the invader Muslim from Arabia.

Interesting, so since her religion was in the Levant first, she has more right to be there? Curious argument, my man, curious argument. I wonder if there are other religions that applies to.

[Selurong]

Not sure how 'fake' we are, I'm paternally Ashkenazi and share YDNA with Maleficent.

Ok, I changed my opinion about Jews. You're not totally fake. You AJs are not totally fake Jews but are merely half-fake Jews (Due to the European part that you have, which are descended from European converts to Judaism[who betrayed their Christian parents]).

Whereas the Palestinians who are racially Jews who had admixed with Arabs (Who are fellow Semites BTW) and are Islamized are more racially pure, compared to AJs who are Semites mixed with Indo-European Caucasians. Thus, by the Jew's own blood-claim to the Holy Land, the Palestinians outclass them by purity of blood. Although Jews allegedly hold to purity of religion...

However, in this regard, Jews in the holy land are a sign of contradiction especially considering that 54% of Jews are irreligious or atheist. Vis-a-vis most Palestinians who are religious.

We are seeing an abomination of an irreligious state, that officially outlaws and despises Christianity as well as Islam, replacing and persecuting their more racially-pure and more religious cousins, the Palestinians.

An IRRELIGIOUS STATE in the FUCKING HOLY LAND!

I know as a Christian you almost have to envy us for being Chosen (why the inverted commas? Don't you revere the OT, too?) because you had Judaeo-Paganism imposed on you by the grandsons of Rome without regard for your native religion,

The first Christians were all Jews anyway at it was the very same Jews who decided that...


Galatians 3:27-29

27For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.

And by the way, in at least my ethnicity, the Visayans, we were not forced into Christianity by the Spanish. We had a common Muslim enemy, they in the Emirate of Granada and us in the Sultanate of Brunei, so we faced the same Muslim scum.

When they Christianized us, there were no "forced conversions" but rather we acculturated to an allied culture, of which we admired, since they kicked out the Semitic Muslims from the Spanish Peninsula. A feat which we sought to replicate in kicking out the Muslims that have destroyed Nalanda in India and already invaded Indianized Southeast Asia.

We are not some weak ethnicity mind you.

We went to war against Imperial China.

And before we became Visayans and made Imperial China cry. When were still Srivijayans we guarded the Strait of Malacca, which was much harder than defending the Holy Land at that time since we were sandwiched between the hostile militaries of ginormous China and India with populations and technology 1000x larger and more advanced than that of the Romans that crushed ancient Israel.

So, I expunge the notion that Christianity was forced upon us as if we were a weak subservient people, which we obviously were not. As politically, our conversion to Christianity was historically sanctioned and also all the more sanctified by the hundreds of years of wars we had with our Muslim and Buddhist neighbors here who surrounded us on all sides.

Look at the map. For most of history, we were the only Catholic nation in the far east.

but seriously, even if you were right, what's the point? It's done now, there are over six million Jews there, accept it and move on.

Do the Palestinians accept the fact that their land was invaded and desecrated by a people less pure than them but then again, claimed that it was their land first?

Interesting, so since her religion was in the Levant first, she has more right to be there? Curious argument, my man, curious argument. I wonder if there are other religions that applies to.

Are you saying that Judaism came there first? Judaism arose in Mesopotamia, the Talmud was written in Babylon. Israel's ethnogenesis was with Abraham and he was born in Ur at Iraq. Whereas Christianity's ethnogenesis was in Jerusalem. Which religion then is more native to the Holy Land? Judaism or Christianity?

Don't interpret this as hate towards you though. I oppose the ideological framework of Zionism but not you in particular.

[Selurong]

Bullshit. Most Red Indians for example in Canada are highly marginalized and often are on the bottom of every statistics. They could not vote, they could not even go to schools with mainstream population. Also due to socio-historical fact they often fill up the jails, due to high criminality. Many of them suffer from the trauma of the colonization and forced assimilation. In Chile there is often conflict over land to this day. Somalis and Iranians are far better off because they control their own destiny.

They live in countries much richer than Somalia or Iran though. And who's to say that the Somalis and Iranians don't suffer from the same oppression of the indigenous the Canadians suffer. Considering that during the Islamic conquest of Iran, the native Iranian Zoroastrians were persecuted and genocided by the Arab Muslim invaders.

[Longbowman]

Ok, I changed my opinion about Jews. You're not totally fake. You AJs are not totally fake Jews but are merely half-fake Jews (Due to the European part that you have, which are descended from European converts to Judaism[who betrayed their Christian parents]).

There is absolutely no proof that the Jews married Christians. In fact it is extremely unlikely to be the case. It is more probable they married pagans. Anyhow you can't be half-fake. If you're descended from the original Hebrews in one way or another you're a proper descendant. Furthermore, the OT allows for conversion - we don't consider converts to be 'fake.'

Whereas the Palestinians who are racially Jews who had admixed with Arabs (Who are fellow Semites BTW) and are Islamized are more racially pure, compared to AJs who are Semites mixed with Indo-European Caucasians. Thus, by the Jew's own blood-claim to the Holy Land, the Palestinians outclass them by purity of blood. Although Jews allegedly hold to purity of religion...

Perhaps they are racially purer, yes. I didn't deny it.

However, in this regard, Jews in the holy land are a sign of contradiction especially considering that 54% of Jews are irreligious or atheist. Vis-a-vis most Palestinians who are religious.

You don't have to believe to be a Jew, or a Catholic, however. It's not a prerequisite. A large number of those Jews are 'cultural' Jews.

We are seeing an abomination of an irreligious state, that officially outlaws and despises Christianity as well as Islam, replacing and persecuting their more racially-pure and more religious cousins, the Palestinians.

Ah, now this is just a lie.

An IRRELIGIOUS STATE in the FUCKING HOLY LAND!

Also a lie. The rabbinate has incredible power over Israelis. You can't even get married unless it's in accordance to Jewish law (though they do recognise marriages from abroad). It's like this, even if every single Israeli became an atheist, currently, the country is still a Jewish [religious] state.

The first Christians were all Jews anyway at it was the very same Jews who decided that...

Heretics are heretics. Even so there is a sharp divide between Judaeo-Christians and the pagans Paul converted.

Galatians 3:27-29

Galatians, like the rest of the NT, is heretical.

http://infidels.org/library/modern/j...adictions.html

And by the way, in at least my ethnicity, the Visayans, we were not forced into Christianity by the Spanish. We had a common Muslim enemy, they in the Emirate of Granada and us in the Sultanate of Brunei, so we faced the same Muslim scum.

1), believe that if you will. 2), you still abandoned YOUR religion to worship some palestinian Jew. 3), even if you converted freely, most peoples did not (see: the Americas).

I am reminded of the words of a great man: Atueey, the Taino cacique who rebelled against the Spanish in 1520 in Puerto Rico and Cuba. Eventually captured and sentenced to burn, he was asked by a priest to accept Jesus so he might go to heaven after his burning (seriously Christian, re-read that sentence and ask yourself how it makes any sense).

Atueey thought for a minute and said, 'do you Spaniards go to heaven?' And the Spaniard replied 'of course, we have accepted Christ.'

So Atueey replied 'then I choose hell.'

Atueey was a brave man who saw Christianity for the lie it is and Christians for the imperialistic liars they are. It's only Christianity and Islam, with their false prophets, that expand as they do. What other religion forces itself on others by the sword? And worse, you then mock other religions for their more pacifist ways! Disgusting.

When they Christianized us, there were no "forced conversions" but rather we acculturated to an allied culture, of which we admired, since they kicked out the Semitic Muslims from the Spanish Peninsula. A feat which we sought to replicate in kicking out the Muslims that have destroyed Nalanda in India and already invaded Indianized Southeast Asia.

So you were Uncle Toms/OWDers, good for you?

We are not some weak ethnicity mind you.

We went to war against Imperial China.

possible raiding ventures of Visayans along the China coast between A.D. 1174 and 1190.

Lol, such big strong brave men. 16 years of hit-and-run, maybe. Bear in mind you're a) an archipelago far away from these places and b) much more populous than ancient Judaea which had around one million inhabitants.

Do the Palestinians accept the fact that their land was invaded and desecrated by a people less pure than them but then again, claimed that it was their land first?

They should convert back to Judaism and away from the idolatrous paganistic beliefs of Christianity and Islam. Come on, Christian, you of all people should appreciate a good crusade. We even got the location right. Purify the Holy Land!

Are you saying that Judaism came there first? Judaism arose in Mesopotamia, the Talmud was written in Babylon. Israel's ethnogenesis was with Abraham and he was born in Ur at Iraq. Whereas Christianity's ethnogenesis was in Jerusalem. Which religion then is more native to the Holy Land? Judaism or Christianity?

The Babylonian Talmud was written in Babylon, the Jerusalem Talmud, however, which came first, was written in Tiberias, which is in Israel, and Judaism did not arise in Mesopomotamia, it is just that many Jews were exiled there after the Babylonian invasion. Seriously, just read the Bible, you heretic. Or a history book. Anyhow the Talmud is just the codified version of preexisting oral law, not the 'ethnogenesis' of Judaism. That would have been when Abraham came to Israel and entered a covenant with God. In Israel. Yes, he was from Ur of the Chaldees but that's not where he circumcised himself.

Christianity isn't a race so it doesn't have an ethnogenesis. Judaism is more native to the Holy Land. Jesus was also native to the Holy Land but Christianity is not 'the teachings of Jesus' but actually Indo-European paganism with a veneer of monotheism. I would say its religio-genesis was in Nicaea, western Anatolia, wouldn't you? I mean about 80% of your tenets (worshipping more than one God, belief in resurrection, belief in an anthropomorphised God), holidays (Christmas, Easter, saint's days), rituals mistletoe, the flames when you elect a pope, genuflecting, lighting candles), positions (Pope = ponitfex, and old Papal position, and wtf are bishops? We don't have those) are lifted from the old Roman pagan structures.

Don't interpret this as hate towards you though. I oppose the ideological framework of Zionism but not you in particular.

And I view Catholicism as heresy (and Christianity and Islam in general) but obviously I have no problem with Catholics, my girlfriend and best friend being members of that Church.

[Selurong]

There is absolutely no proof that the Jews married Christians. In fact it is extremely unlikely to be the case. It is more probable they married pagans. Anyhow you can't be half-fake. If you're descended from the original Hebrews in one way or another you're a proper descendant. Furthermore, the OT allows for conversion - we don't consider converts to be 'fake.'

You allow converts and mixing your race but then again in the Old Testament you guys condemn miscegenation. Which is which?

Perhaps they are racially purer, yes. I didn't deny it.

Its nice we agree on that.

You don't have to believe to be a Jew, or a Catholic, however. It's not a prerequisite. A large number of those Jews are 'cultural' Jews.

Isn't it such a contradiction? An ethnoreligious group that's majorly irreligious.

Ah, now this is just a lie.



Also a lie. The rabbinate has incredible power over Israelis. You can't even get married unless it's in accordance to Jewish law (though they do recognise marriages from abroad). It's like this, even if every single Israeli became an atheist, currently, the country is still a Jewish [religious] state.

OK then, the state is Judeo but its people are irreligious. Still a contradiction.

Heretics are heretics. Even so there is a sharp divide between Judaeo-Christians and the pagans Paul converted.



Galatians, like the rest of the NT, is heretical.

http://infidels.org/library/modern/j...adictions.html

In the eyes of Christians, Talmudic Jews are the heretics who abandoned the true religion. Seriously bro, we can hurl accusations that each of us are heretics according to each other's religions. So let's just drop the heretic claim. It's getting redundant.

1), believe that if you will. 2), you still abandoned YOUR religion to worship some palestinian Jew. 3), even if you converted freely, most peoples did not (see: the Americas).

I am reminded of the words of a great man: Atueey, the Taino cacique who rebelled against the Spanish in 1520 in Puerto Rico and Cuba. Eventually captured and sentenced to burn, he was asked by a priest to accept Jesus so he might go to heaven after his burning (seriously Christian, re-read that sentence and ask yourself how it makes any sense).

Atueey thought for a minute and said, 'do you Spaniards go to heaven?' And the Spaniard replied 'of course, we have accepted Christ.'

So Atueey replied 'then I choose hell.'

Atueey was a brave man who saw Christianity for the lie it is and Christians for the imperialistic liars they are. It's only Christianity and Islam, with their false prophets, that expand as they do. What other religion forces itself on others by the sword? And worse, you then mock other religions for their more pacifist ways! Disgusting.

You act as if Christianity expanded via the sword alone when in fact, in the beginning, Christianity was a persecuted religion in ancient Rome, it only became the official religion of the Roman Empire after hundreds of years of being a secret society, underground sect and intellectual movement. Rome was converted by the Christian martyrs' Satyagraha. That is how Christianity began. How about the more peaceful Judaism? Oh yes it began with lots of bloody wars to annihilate the native people of Palestine.

Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. Deuteronomy 13:12-16

BTW the Spanish didn't eliminate the Amerindians otherwise why are there still native peoples in America speaking their native languages in America? The Aztec, Mixtec and etc people are still alive. What about the Jerichoans or the Canaanites the Jews committed genocide against where are they now? They dont exist anymore.

And by-the-way. The peoples of America also used Catholicism as a nationalist rallying point against Spain.

Take for example the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe

She was the banner of the Mexican Revolution.

Simón Bolívar noticed the Guadalupan theme in these uprisings, and shortly before Morelos's execution in 1815 wrote: "the leaders of the independence struggle have put fanaticism to use by proclaiming the famous Virgin of Guadalupe as the queen of the patriots, praying to her in times of hardship and displaying her on their flags ... the veneration for this image in Mexico far exceeds the greatest reverence that the shrewdest prophet might inspire."[38]

In 1912, Emiliano Zapata's peasant army rose out of the south against the government of Francisco Madero. Though Zapata's rebel forces were primarily interested in land reform – "tierra y libertad" ('land and liberty') was the slogan of the uprising – when his peasant troops penetrated Mexico City they carried Guadalupan banners.[63] More recently, the contemporary Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) named their "mobile city" in honor of the Virgin: it is called Guadalupe Tepeyac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_La...l_significance

This is possible since She was a symbol of both the Old Aztecs (As in her image she wears Aztec clothing) as well as the Spanish (Since Christianity was imported from Spain)
In Mexico, the Lady of Guadalupe played the same role as in Spain were Spaniards rallied under Our Lady of Guadalupe Extramadura

Her role in the Mexican revolution was like the role of Our Lady of Guadalupe Extramadura in Spain, in inspiring the Reconquista.

If it were the Semitics (Jews or Arabs) who invaded America, there would be no trace of the Lady of Guadalupe and her people [Since the Iconoclast Arabs and Jews would probably burn her image and genocide its natives; just like what the Jews did to the extinct Canaanites or the Arabs did to the extinct Zoroastrians and Byzantines]

So you were Uncle Toms/OWDers, good for you?

Uncle Tomers? You are saying that we were the Uncle Toms vis-a-vis our neighbors? Hahahaha, give me a break. Firstly, they struck the first blow. When the Indianized Empires of Srivijaya and Majapahit fell in Southeast Asia, those Half-Arab (And Half-Semite) new Sultans that came into Southeast Asia and established Sultanates on the ruins of former Indianized Kingdoms enslaved their more purer cousins and sold them off to the Arabs first.

Let me quote a historical passage of this.

This quote is taken from the Boxer Codex; commissioned by Francisco de Sande a former judge in Mexico who crossed the Pacific and became the Governor-General at Manila.

“… It begins three hundred years (ago), a little more or less, when from the parts and provinces of the Malaya language which lie toward Meca (came) a lord of a city called Cauin. The name of this one was Sultan Yuso (Arabic Yusof), who according to what they say was king of that said city of Cauin, and he and his subjects departed from his kingdom and land bringing with him a great quantity of people in many ships, discovering many lands, and calling himself always king and lord of all the people he brought and calling them slaves. Following his voyage he arrived at the island of Borney on which they had some battles with the native Uisayas (Bisayas) so that they occupied them [the lands]; and having succeeded them (the Uisayas) well, he was settled some days in which he took a tongue of land and the fruits of it and found camphor, which is now to exist in other parts except this kingdom.

“… At the end of some days, he made port in the land of China: and asking permission in order to go ashore, he disembarked and went to see the king of China, whom he recognised as a superior king; and the said king of China conferred in him the title of king and gave him the insignia and royal (coat of) arms which nowadays the said king of Borney has; And seeing that the said Sultan Yuso was a bachelor, he married him to a Chinese woman. Accordingly it appears that the reason he persevered in the said kingdom of (Borney) was that she was a relative of the king of China. The said Chinese woman was lord of a city which was called Namtay in the kingdom of China, and the said Sultan Yuso made this marriage. He bade (farewell) to the king of China; and bringing his wife and the people with him, he returned to Borney, leaving in the said city of Namtay (one) who had charge of the rent as and property of his wife; and so (it is) nowadays although the natives of Namtay do not come with anything (for) the kings of Borney, not because the lords of the said city of Namtay have quit holding them (the rents), and they say the current rents are being held guarded for when some king of Borney might go there for it, the legacy.

“The said Sultan Yuso went to Borney. He settled there with his said slaves or vassals that he brought, and he put the native Uisayas (into) subjection, making them pay tribute. He had sons with the said (Chinese) wife. He died very old: and when he died, he left a tablet of gold. According to what they say it would be a fathom square and thin, on which he left mandates and they inscribed and wrote the kings of descended from him; and so they inscribed this said tablet which the same king kept and by his hand he inscribed his name. This tablet was lost when Doctor Fransisco de Sande, the governor who went from (these) Philippine islands, sacked Borney. It is understood that the old king, father of this one in whose possession it was, buried it or threw into the sea; and since the said king died at that time, he left no clarity (clear information) about what he did with the tablet.”

Source: http://bruneiresources.blogspot.com/...ustice-in.html

WE WERE THE PURER PEOPLE WHO DID NOT SELL OURSELVES TO MUSLIM SCUM FROM THE WEST AND NOW WE ARE THE UNCLE TOMERS?
We were even enslaved under the Muslims (But we were not enslaved under the Spanish due to a Papal ban against slavery of Christians)

And you have the nerve to tell us that we were the enslaved Uncle Tomers?

Give me a fucking break man.

Lol, such big strong brave men. 16 years of hit-and-run, maybe. Bear in mind you're a) an archipelago far away from these places and b) much more populous than ancient Judaea which had around one million inhabitants.

Yes, we are strong and brave men AS well as our fellow Filipino ethnicities. Our Northern Neighbors the Lucoes as well as our Southern neighbors, the Suluanons are brave too.

For Suluanons, when they were still a Rajahnate, they bravely stood up against the Majapahit Empire.

In 1369, the Sulus attacked Majapahit and it's provincePo-ni (Brunei), looting it of treasure and gold. A fleet from Majapahit succeeded in driving away the Sulus, but Po-ni was left weaker after the attack.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultanate_of_Sulu


For the Lucoes, they were the military muscle of insular Southeast Asia during the age of discovery. They were the Supreme-Generals, Business leaders and Diplomats of Southeast Asia.


But as for us. Asides from raiding China. Even after the fall of Sriijaya we were the only ones to resist Islamic expansion until we were reduced into the Visayas islands only.
nevertheless we routinely destroyed armies larger than ourselves.

They should convert back to Judaism and away from the idolatrous paganistic beliefs of Christianity and Islam. Come on, Christian, you of all people should appreciate a good crusade. We even got the location right. Purify the Holy Land!

You Jews are a confusing bunch. First in Spain, you opened the gates of Toledo to invading Arabs and considered them your friends and allies.

[ur=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_and_massacres_during_the_1948_Palestine_w ar]Now, the Jews are massacring Arabs like sworn enemies. [/url]

Such a two-faced untrustworthy historical reputation you have created for yourselves.

The Babylonian Talmud was written in Babylon, the Jerusalem Talmud, however, which came first, was written in Tiberias, which is in Israel, and Judaism did not arise in Mesopomotamia, it is just that many Jews were exiled there after the Babylonian invasion. Seriously, just read the Bible, you heretic. Or a history book. Anyhow the Talmud is just the codified version of preexisting oral law, not the 'ethnogenesis' of Judaism. That would have been when Abraham came to Israel and entered a covenant with God. In Israel. Yes, he was from Ur of the Chaldees but that's not where he circumcised himself.

Thanks for clarifying that. However, Jews are all over the place! Iraq, Egypt, Syria and the Levant. It makes it hard to pinpoint an exact point of ethnogenesis.

Christianity isn't a race so it doesn't have an ethnogenesis. Judaism is more native to the Holy Land. Jesus was also native to the Holy Land but Christianity is not 'the teachings of Jesus' but actually Indo-European paganism with a veneer of monotheism. I would say its religio-genesis was in Nicaea, western Anatolia, wouldn't you? I mean about 80% of your tenets (worshipping more than one God, belief in resurrection, belief in an anthropomorphised God), holidays (Christmas, Easter, saint's days), rituals mistletoe, the flames when you elect a pope, genuflecting, lighting candles), positions (Pope = ponitfex, and old Papal position, and wtf are bishops? We don't have those) are lifted from the old Roman pagan structures.

Well. We're do not worship more than one God. The Trinity makes perfect sense in the Virgin Mary since she united the three persons of God in her being the created daughter of the Divine Father, son of the Christ and spouse of the Holy Spirit. In her, three become one.

Although I agree with you that the Roman Catholic Church is a continuation of ancient Rome especially considering that some of our Popes like Pope Gregory who was born into a wealthy patrician Roman family with close connections to the church. His father, Gordianus, who served as a Senator and for a time was the Prefect of the City of Rome.

Had Patrician or Imperial blood.

Most of our mores is taken from the New Testament as in the sublime Sermon of the Mount and the Pagan practices are the veneer, whereas the Christian soul is the core.

And I view Catholicism as heresy (and Christianity and Islam in general) but obviously I have no problem with Catholics, my girlfriend and best friend being members of that Church.

Well, I view Judaism as huge contradiction in itself and an incomplete religion in relation to Christianity. However, I still respect you as a person and enjoy our debates with one another.

[TheGoldenSon]

first of all, neither randomguy or maleficent even call themselves 'palestinian' but have adopted the Israeli imposed ethnonym "Aramaean".

Secondly, maleficent focuses on disparaging muslim palestinians, and randomguy palestinians of non-levantine ethnicity. Nitpicking and busying themselves with hate the way inmates in prisons hate each other while the CO's watch on.

Even my people knew them under a term "Aramaean" for centuries during the Ottoman Empire, term Palestinian came only around late 80s.

[Longbowman]

You allow converts and mixing your race but then again in the Old Testament you guys condemn miscegenation. Which is which?

The first one, we don't care about miscegenation. Bloody Christians. We don't have the same concept of race as you.

Isn't it such a contradiction? An ethnoreligious group that's majorly irreligious.

A man cannot control whether or not he believes; but he can still follow the codices of his tribe. As a Christian/Muslim you will not understand that the true purpose of religion is guiding us in this life, not the next.

In the eyes of Christians, Talmudic Jews are the heretics who abandoned the true religion. Seriously bro, we can hurl accusations that each of us are heretics according to each other's religions. So let's just drop the heretic claim. It's getting redundant.

But my arguments make sense, historically and going by liturgy, and yours don't. Also the Church does not consider Jews to be heretics, so you're wrong, and just desperate, like most self-hating Catholics, to drag the Jews to your level. Y'see?

You act as if Christianity expanded via the sword alone when in fact, in the beginning, Christianity was a persecuted religion in ancient Rome, it only became the official religion of the Roman Empire after hundreds of years of being a secret society, underground sect and intellectual movement. Rome was converted by the Christian martyrs' Satyagraha. That is how Christianity began. How about the more peaceful Judaism? Oh yes it began with lots of bloody wars to annihilate the native people of Palestine.

We've done some crappy stuff (but we were told to do it by the same God you worship, you double-heretic, so don't point fingers - Christians aren't allowed to criticise the Jews for what they did in the OT ) but we didn't convert anyone by the sword. Never have, never will. You do it all the fuckin' time, even if occasionally you're the ones with the swords pointed at you.

BTW the Spanish didn't eliminate the Amerindians otherwise why are there still native peoples in America speaking their native languages in America? The Aztec, Mixtec and etc people are still alive. What about the Jerichoans or the Canaanites the Jews committed genocide against where are they now? They dont exist anymore.

This is beyond absurd. The Spanish wiped out plenty of tribes, a few survived, a few survived in great numbers, but there was still a very bloody genocide. No, the Aztec are not alive, neither are the Inca or ten thousand other tribes, you Hispanophile uncle Tom. The reality is the Cana'anites were not wiped out and are referenced right throughout the OT and beyond. It is likely they eventually joined Judaism. Groups today that are considered to be Cana'anite derived include the Samaritans and certain Palestinian subgroups.

And by-the-way. The peoples of America also used Catholicism as a nationalist rallying point against Spain.

Because they can never go back to the old ways. Sad but true. They're basically zombies now, soulless zombies. Anyhow this point is totally irrelevant.

If it were the Semitics (Jews or Arabs) who invaded America, there would be no trace of the Lady of Guadalupe and her people [Since the Iconoclast Arabs and Jews would probably burn her image and genocide its natives; just like what the Jews did to the extinct Canaanites or the Arabs did to the extinct Zoroastrians and Byzantines]

You are correct that if Jews had invaded America there would be no Lady of Guadalupe, because we're not pagans. But of course we would never actually have invaded America and if we had we would never have forced anyone to convert so the point is moot. Again, Cana'anites - and Zoroastrians! - are not extinct AND the Byzantines were defeated by the Turks, not the Arabs. Your knowledge of history is shocking.

WE WERE THE PURER PEOPLE WHO DID NOT SELL OURSELVES TO MUSLIM SCUM FROM THE WEST AND NOW WE ARE THE UNCLE TOMERS? Give me a fucking break man.

You had the choice of two slavemasters and freedom and you chose one slavemaster and you want me to pat you on the back for not choosing the other slavemaster?

Asides from raiding China

which probably never even happened according to your own source

You Jews are a confusing bunch. First in Spain, you opened the gates of Toledo to invading Arabs and considered them your friends and allies.

Because of Christian persecution. You're not our friends.

[ur=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_and_massacres_during_the_1948_Palestine_w ar]Now, the Jews are massacring Arabs like sworn enemies. [/url]

It's weird how 1,400 years can change so much, isn't it?

Such a two-faced untrustworthy historical reputation you have created for yourselves.

No, we're faced with little Christian shits like you who want to appropriate our culture for their own genocide and then have the fucking nerve to attack us for things in the Old Testament (which first of all you accept as orders from God and second of all was written at a time when everyone was doing it). Then you list two or three incidents from 1948, all of three years after the Catholic Adolf Hitler killed six million of us. You're the scum of the earth. I hope the wretched stench of Christianity, the plague that has cursed this planet, fades away, and may the bones of millions of Pagan Europeans, of Indian Subcontinentals, of Native Americans, of Jews, of Protestants, of Catholics, of Cathars and other so-called 'heretics,' of Palestinians that you slaughtered in the Crusades (protip: around ten times the amount we've ever killed, and of Africans, of the Africans killed for rubber by the Belgians, of the ones prevented from using condoms by that white-hatted cocksucker who sits on his Pagan Roman throne cry out for joy that the vile heresy is finally gone.

Thanks for clarifying that. However, Jews are all over the place! Iraq, Egypt, Syria and the Levant. It makes it hard to pinpoint an exact point of ethnogenesis.

No it doesn't, you idiot. The historical record is quite clear. You're a priest, presumably you've read the Old Testament.

Well. We're do not worship more than one God. The Trinity makes perfect sense in the Virgin Mary since she united the three persons of God in her being the created daughter of the Divine Father, son of the Christ and spouse of the Holy Spirit. In her, three become one.

The Trinity makes no sense at all (why would Mary even be a virgin? Only Pagans revere virgins) and you are all pagan heretics and if there is a hell you will burn in it. Luckily, there isn't, because Hell, like most of your ideas, is pagan nonsense.

Most of our mores is taken from the New Testament as in the sublime Sermon of the Mount and the Pagan practices are the veneer, whereas the Christian soul is the core.

Now you're agreeing with me but trying to shift the ratio, much like the Church itself. Such intellectual dishonesty. This is why church attendance in Europe is less than 10%.

Well, I view Judaism as huge contradiction in itself and an incomplete religion in relation to Christianity. However, I still respect you as a person and enjoy our debates with one another.

I like you but I honestly view Christianity as a plague, and a laughable one, theologically speaking (I also see Islam as a plague, but not laughably, theologically). It's honestly the most absurd major religion of which I know, and I do view most practicioners, except Levantine Christians, as traitors to their blood.

I mean, read the link I sent you. All those internal contradictions, to say nothing of the thousands of external ones. It's a really stupid book.