It's a piece of art, and, what's more, a piece of 'degenerated art' :
modern 'art' is what 'shocks', 'silences' and 'offends', in order to
make money. In this sense, these aprocryphal books are pre-modern. By
these standards, racist barflies are artists, their way, without
their knowing it. Racial consciousness is not aggressive per se. Such
verbal violence toward an ethnic person is a product of mere
zoological racism, and no equivalent to it can be found in pre-
Christian Roman writings nor in the parts of the Veda which refer to
autochthonous peoples. It can be explained, for instance, by the
story of God's condemnation of Ham and curse on his descendants
(Genesis 5:32, 9:20-27)(Ham is regarded as the ancestor of the
Egyptians (Mizraim), Libyans (Put), Ethiopians (Cush))
More generally, one fails to see how an anti-genotheism such as
this 'Judaism light' which Christianity was, is and always be could
promote an inner attitude which it tried its best, more or less
openly, to undermine and to destroy, and to which its early
representatives were instinctively allergic. At this point, we felt
like quoting an excerpt from the forthcoming 'Heathen Imperialism'
on 'early Christianity' (it seems to us that it's been quite a while
since Westerners have been conditioned to learn to differentiate
between 'modern Christianity' and 'ancient Christianity'). For now, a
hint at the articles of Engels 'On the History of Early Christianity
and The Book of Revelation' will do ; he noticed the similarity
between the early Christian movement and the early Socialist
movement, pointing out that the author of 'The Book of Revelation'
saw himself as a Jew (see 'Revelation' 2:9 and 3:9), and that this is
not a book of love but a book of hate, promising retribution (Hell)
against the Romans who had heeled the Jewish uprising. This element
of hate can also be found in the leftist movements since the French
Revolution. It is behind Lenin's terror. There is a parallel between
what the Zealot fundamentalist movement has been doing to the West in
recent centuries, and what the Christians did to the Roman Empire
before Constantine's so-called 'conversion'. To quote a writer who
has studied thoroughly and with sharpness
the 'Protocols', "Christianity began as a breakaway Jewish sect
fusing Plato's God with Yahweh, spreading rapidly amongst people who
had earlier converted to Judaism but found its pollution laws silly.
It deconstructed the religious worldview of the empire, its
metaphysics and value system, shielding itself all the while in the
guise of victim. After Constantine, the Church gained power and
turned the tables, switching from Victim to Enforcer." Evola would
not have contradicted him.
Please also see our older posts on so-called 'Aryan Christianity' as
well as message 239, in which we drew some people's attention to the
striking parallel drawn by Jean Doresse in 'The Secret Books of the
Egyptian Gnostics' between the tactics of 1920-30's Trotskyist Left
oppositionists in their battle against Stalinism and the methods used
by early Gnostics in their conflict against the Roman Catholic Church.
--- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "brightimperator"
<brightimperator@...> wrote:
>
> One of the earliest of the apocryphal acts of the apostles, The
Acts
> of Peter, gives us a hint of the ancient White Christian experience
> of "negritude" and a sobering perspective on theological
> universalism. Marcellus describes to Peter a dream that featured an
> evil-looking woman:
>
>
http://www.gnosis.org/library/actpete.htm
>
> And Marcellus turned to sleep for a short space, and awoke and said
> unto Peter: O Peter, thou apostle of Christ, let us go boldly unto
> that which lieth before us. For just now when I turned myself to
> sleep for a little, I beheld thee sitting in a high place and
before
> thee a great multitude, and a woman exceeding foul, in sight like
an
> Ethiopian (Aethiopissimam), not an Egyptian, but altogether black
> (nigram) and filthy, clothed in rags, and with an iron collar about
> her neck and chains upon her hands and feet, dancing. And when thou
> sawest me thou saidst to me with a loud voice: Marcellus the whole
> power of Simon and of his God is this woman that danceth; do thou
> behead her. And I said to thee: Brother Peter, I am a senator of a
> high race, and I have never defiled my hands, neither killed so
much
> as a sparrow at any time. And thou hearing it didst begin to cry
out
> yet more: Come thou, our true sword, Jesu Christ, and cut not off
> only the head of this devil (daemonis), but hew all her limbs in
> pieces in the sight of all these Whom I have approved in thy
service.
> And immediately one like unto thee, O Peter, having a sword, hewed
> her in pieces: so that I looked earnestly upon you both, both on
thee
> and on him that cut in pieces that devil, and marvelled greatly to
> see how alike ye were. And I awaked, and have told unto thee these
> signs of Christ. And when Peter heard it he was the more filled
with
> courage, for that Marcellus had seen these things, knowing that the
> Lord alway careth for his own. And being joyful and refreshed by
> these words, he rose up to go unto the forum.
>
> Moronic mainline modernist Christians enslaved to cultural
Bolshevism
> are sure to be "shocked", "silenced" and "offended" by this ancient
> account of hyperaggressive Christian racial consciousness... How to
> explain such violence toward an ethnic person? Remember, this text
> was written in the early formative years of Christianity and was
> intended to inspire and edify, an entirely acceptable part of early
> Christian discourses. The harsh reality of the White Christian
> attitude to the savage negroid here couldn't be more evident...
> Let us learn to differentiate between modern Christianity and
ancient
> Christianity. All the institutions of modernity, from freemasonry,
> education, government, etc., to religion itself, have been
> infiltrated and mutilated by counter-traditional forces...
>