Is Mumbasa the same place as Mombasa? I lived there as a child, in the brief interval when Africa was under civilised rule, before Obama was born there. I have fond memories of the lovely white sandy beaches backed by coconut palms, the sunny sea, the old Portuguese Fort Jesus, and the dirty Arab dhows sailing in and out of the port.
Are you being sent to open a new Russian front in Africa - like General Surovikin? Is being sent to Libya the Russian equivalent of being sent to Coventry?
I visited Mombasa by ship from Bombay , third class in 1975. I woke up on the floor of the first class bar still clasping an empty gin bottle. The ship was docked and all the passengers had left the vessel. Unfortunately I got no further than the sleazy portside bars and was trying as hard as I could to contract AIDS whilst being drunk and stoned for quite a bit of the time. I removed myself to Nairobi on a bus with spear wielding Masai. My previous behaviour continued and in desperation I took a flight to South Africa. Upon arrival that lovely white suprematist state locked me up in the immigration jail at Jo'burg airport. My guard was a hunch back sporting a Luger...........such was life when we were still free to roam.
Mumbasa and Mombasa are two different places...continents actually. I visited Mombasa back in the late 80's on a Navy ship. My recollection of the place was that it was kind of a beach town. There was also no ice...strange that.
I think this is the right decision. Anyone who matters realistically has $7/month. Also, I suspect that you lost subscribers not of your own fault, but because nothing alarming is happening on the front right now.
Nah people just really like being told what they want to hear. There's nothing like being validated. The Anglo Kremlinist 5th dimensionist blogs are all doing great. The fact that the Ukrainians haven't made any big break throughs yet on the front is only made possible by the blood and selflessness of Russian troops, it has nothing whatsoever to do with good planning on the Kremlins part. If 5D huffers could be bothered to read actual Russian Patriotic pages they would be well aware that conditions on the front are appalling right now and just 2or3 days ago we started hearing about shell hunger again. So while the front isn't moving much alarming stuff is going on and it isn't simply Russian shooting Ukrainian fish in a barrel.
Personally I believe the war is managed from the central bank owning layer above the nation state, and they want this thing to go on for a very long time as a blood offering to the Demiurge and to steal as much from U.S. taxpayers as possible. I link to Assange's comment below about how these types of wars work...
Rurik I'm glad you aren't an incel loser like Rolo was but Lauren Boebert is a rough riding dog. At least riley got himself a beautiful full bodied spray tanned Armenian woman with a bloated vax face. His affair with simonyan is proof that patriots are still in control of RT.
Most people only want to cheer their chosen teams to victory. Cheerleaders benefit from this.
No successful commentator will point out that none of the countries involved are run in the interests of their people, and that somehow, mysteriously, they are all merely provinces in the Empire of Zog. All the analyses based on national interest are irrelevant. There might be a small market niche for one who could describe and assess the desires of the dominant clans in the ruling Tribe. Do they desire a rapid victory for one side, or are they content with long-continued blood-letting and profiteering?
Half a million dead goyim in a year and a half may merely stimulate YHVH's bloodlust. It looks as if The Shoigu is equipping Russian forces to maintain at least this level of death-dealing for a long time. One thousand dead Ukies and one hundred dead Russkis per day may suffice to empty the area in preparation for Heavenly Jerusalem by mid century. There's only about ten million Ukie men left, so they can be be eliminated at about this rate by the desired date.
I think you read the tea leaves correctly, as to the long-term prospects of this platform. And your analysis of the culture wars -- i.e., that you can take the side of one puppet vs the other and give a play-by-play analysis of the choreographed fights among the puppets and be rewarded for it, but the real danger is pulling back the curtain on the real puppet masters, which seem to be the cartel bosses working for a certain demon or elohim named Yahweh (the master of puppetmasters in this realm) -- is definitely spot on, as I have just belatedly begun to discover. You're making the right move. Get what you can, while you can, before Yahweh's henchmen shut this platform down too.
Sep 18, 2023·edited Sep 18, 2023Liked by Rurik Skywalker
Hi Rolo, for what it's worth, traffic growth has slowed for me as well as for other Substack authors. I assume this is due to Twitter basically banning linking to Substack as well as probable search engine de-boosting and other measures to chain dissidents into echo chambers.
I agree with Jonathon below that during lulls in fighting of the Not War (which will probably go on for many years to wash $$ from the U.S. taxpayer base, per Assange who discussed the concept of the Forever War here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IGU_7alJ80 ) it may make sense to expand the topics you cover, which you may already be starting... But I think you will have to keep some articles free if the hope is to continue to grow your subscriber base, both free and paid. Sometimes writing and growth is more of a struggle than other times. Just my 2 cents.
I’ve been here since the beginning and don’t plan on leaving. Your writing is authentic which is hard to find. I don’t need to be fed a lie so I feel better and honestly can’t understand why others seem to need this. When people lie to me I get offended, go figure.
I came here for the 'deep' stuff and will stick around for more. The Great Patriotic War by Whites against Whites in the interest of non-Whites never much interested me.
Sep 18, 2023·edited Sep 19, 2023Liked by Rurik Skywalker
Your decision to focus on those who "get it" reminds me of the case for "don't waste your time" recently made by NLF:
"""In a similar vein, Substack author Sanfedisti had an interesting post recently* about his limits on his willingness to debate with liberals, who he believes wants to murder and destroy him. He writes:
"I have never been interested in speaking to people who do not already agree with me, or at least who do not share a similar perspective. What I do not do, ever, is speak to leftists.
The left exists as an anti-civilizational force whose goal is no less than the total obliteration of your life, family, nation, history, religion, ethnos, people, and the permanent erasure of all that ever came from any of it. And you want me to talk?…
The answer cannot be to give these diabolical plots the legitimacy of civil discourse. The answer is to reject entirely the premise and the person whole-cloth."""
Martyanov's commentators are not really interested in RS, but the stalker Srbad continues to tell them about his dislike of you, and perhaps prematurely gloat over your failure:
...' Well, my favourite fake Russian idiot Rolo/Rurik Slavskiy - whoever the fuck this prick really is - has announced the de-facto shutting down of his blog. What a shame. I mean, what a huge fucking shame. Guess Z-ANON won aye?'
...' - his blog is on Substack called the Slavlands Chronicles, & the piece is titled how the blog is going into "dark mode" - subscribers only. You'll find it if you look for it.
He is not saying explicitly that he is shutting it down, because he would be admitting failure, but that is what he is doing by going subscriber only when he has about 20 regular readers.
And, I posted a comment here months ago stating how he would do this, by re-naming the blog, going subscriber only, & shutting it down, as a failed psy op - & that is exactly what he has done.'
"No friends but the mountains"?
If you annoy both the Yawhists and the materialist 'ex-commies' maybe you're doing something right. May The Force be with you!
Do what feels right. It's served you well enough so far. I don't comment much because frankly I don't really see a need to comment on things I agree with.
I'm just happy having a source that's miserable and realistic and calls out the problems on "our side" (hah), so that we can operate in the light of truth rather than getting bamboozled by purposefully misplaced hopes.
I’m sticking around as a paid sub. Although I enjoy the challenge of attempting to decipher some of your more cryptic remarks and references, perhaps going paid-sub only will allow you to be more blunt and direct. But in any case I find your perspective and insight valuable and definitely worth the price of admission.
Zionism is a word that is in common use, with a meaning that is not the meaning you give it. So when you use that word, one has no idea that you are creating your own definition for it, nor is there any clue that one should seek out something you have written somewhere else on the chance that you have defined it for yourself. This has nothing to do with the substance of what you are saying. Typically, if a person wants to refer to a concept that is important to them, they will give it a unique name, like "Skywalker Zionism" or something like that. Then the reader will say to him or herself, gee, I wonder what that means, and start to look it up.
If a person has made relevant arguments, it is also customary to provide references to specific locations, so that a reader does not have to read EVERYTHING for those precious few relevant morsels. Your essay on morality, for example, says nothing about the definition of Zionism. How much hunting is a person supposed to do?
These are common courtesies and customs for writing. Nothing farfetched here, just how most professional writers work.
So next .....
Which of these are "all MY books": Hebrew Bible? New Testament? Talmud? Apocrypha? Pseudepigrapha? I need to know which books I recognize as authoritative before I can make any admissions. BTW: Are you saying that every book of the New Testament was written by a Jew?
I think we both mean my Savior is Jesus Christ. Yes, He is. Yes, He was Jewish. But you act as though you are having to squeeze a confession out of me on this point, when it is common knowledge, from His genealogy, in the New Testament. Have you found people who really think He is not?
I'm actually afraid to discuss the Jewishness of the prophets unless I'm sure you don't have a surprise definition of "prophet." You know, like Zionism.
And you're really going to have to put pencil to paper on the last one, because you tell me my traditions are Jewish, and I still need you to tell me what my traditions are.
And what in the world is encompassed by that little word, "etc."? I admit my etc's are all Jewish? I'm not being silly about this. Anyone who takes you seriously would ask these questions.
Yes, you are right. I should clarify my own position, now that you have asked. In my time zone it is getting past beddy-bye time, but I will write a concise statement for you and post it tomorrow.
The Bible is all about Zionism ie Jewish divinely-ordained nationalism. Yahweh is the god of Zion and Christians worship this Jewish god and his son, Yeshua. All Christians are theological Zionists. They claim to be "Spiritual Jews or Spiritual Israel" who have been grafted on to the true Jewish faith. their gripe with non-Christian Jews is that they are doing their own religion wrong by not recognizing the jewish messiah.
Some Christians are not political Zionists though, that is true.
You say, "The Bible is all about Zionism i.e. Jewish divinely-ordained nationalism". If when you say "all about" you mean the ultimate goal of God's dealing with humanity, as described in the Bible, then this is not a correct statement. Jewish nationalism is NOT what the Bible is "about." The ultimate goal, or endpoint, of God's work, as described in the Bible, is not to form a Jewish nation, dead stop. Not at all. One could go on at length about the difficulty with this interpretation, not the least of which is - why would it be necessary for the Messiah to be crucified if the point was to form a Jewish nation? One of the revelations of the New Testament was that there was something more important going on than national Israel.
Yahweh is not Jewish. You are inverting concepts, taking modern meanings and reading them back into history, where they have no place - like the word "Zionism." And now, the word "Jewish." For example, in an earlier post, you wanted me to admit that all prophets are Jewish. Moses is a prophet (Deut. 34:10). However, Moses was NOT Jewish. He was a Levite. "Jews" were not even a "thing" during the time of Moses. The descendants of Abraham were Hebrews, Israelites. Similarly, when Yahweh revealed Himself to Abraham, Judah had not yet even been born. There is a difference between being the God of the Jews and being a Jewish God and it is a significant difference. Similarly, when you say Yahweh is the God of Zion, I have no idea what you mean. "Zion" is a geographical location that has taken on a broader theological meaning. I am not aware of any proclamation by Yahweh that He is the God of Zion. I have done a search on the text and can't find it.
You say, "All Christians are theological Zionists. They claim to be Spiritual Jews or Spiritual Israel" I am a Christian, and I have never claimed that I am a Spiritual Jew or a part of some Spiritual Israel. So your statement is false on its face. If you ignore me and speak of all other Christians, in the broad sense of people who use that label, then you are talking about everyone from Russian Orthodox Christians to New York City Presbyterians to Polish Catholics, to Coptic Christians, to Southern Baptists, to the underground church in China, and African charismatic groups. If you were to approach them all and tell them they are Spiritual Jews, most of them wouldn't even know what you are talking about. I can tell that you are referring to Romans 11, and although Paul is making a point about Gentiles and Jews, he is not establishing a doctrine of a spiritual Jew. See Galatians 3:28, "There 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." This is the overarching theological concept, and it does not say, "you have all become spiritual Jews." It says, there is NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK.
I'm going to make a suggestion, that the terms used be correct with respect to their historic context. If you talk about Old Testament Zionists, you will inevitably sound like someone who does not know what they are talking about. The same with the other terms you use. I'm not able to speak in those terms, because it makes ME look like I don't know what I'm talking about, like referring to Jews before that term was even coined.
Also, if the Bible is the source document for Christianity, then the only legitimate approach (and the only logical one) is to refer to the book, chapter and verse that makes a statement that you claim says something, so that others can go to the verses and understand what you are talking about, and then the meaning can be discussed.
By way of analogy, I have taken physics classes where it was necessary to grade on a curve because most of the class got no more than 30% of the questions on the final exam correct. So what good does it do to talk about what "all" physics students believe when they obviously have not mastered the material and the majority of them can't answer the questions correctly. Instead, I go to page whatever of the text, which is the reference point for the exam, and I point to what it says, so that I don't have to concern myself with what a secondary and mostly incorrect source - the students - have to say about the matter. It doesn't matter what "Christians" think. Who cares, unless you are doing a religious survey or something. What matters is what the Bible states, as a document. It is objective, it is available, it can be analyzed and discussed in an intelligent manner.
If you will use terminology from the text, then that will eliminate the second problem of trying to figure out how you are coming up with new phrases and what they mean. Otherwise, we are discussing concepts that have no external reference - they exist in your head. To have broader relevance, and to be able to carry out a conversation in the public space, that people will take seriously, it has to be about more than novel words and phrases that you have come up with.
My background: I am a biblical Christian. That means what I believe is based on what the Bible teaches. Period. I do not belong to any denomination or church. I am not an evangelical, I am not a fundamentalist. I disagree, in a material way, with both of those groups. You insisted, in a previous post, that my traditions are Jewish, and my point to you, in answering, was that I have no "traditions." (In any event, "Christian" traditions are distinctly NOT Jewish. Christmas and Easter are pagan in origin).
I won't give you a doctrinal recitation, but will summarize my core beliefs - Jesus Christ is the incarnate Son of God who was crucified to pay for my sins. I am saved through obedient faith in Him. A person who chooses to follow Jesus Christ, as I have, is given the Holy Spirit, who causes that person to be transformed into the likeness of Christ, in terms of character. The end result of faith in Jesus Christ is eternal life. Faith in Jesus Christ is a total commitment, taking priority over all allegiances in this world. My life is described by Galatians 2:20, "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me." I do not use the term "inerrant" with respect to the Bible because the Bible itself does not use that term. I do believe the Bible is God breathed, that everything it teaches is true.
With respect to any particular points of belief or practice, I would suggest that, instead of telling me what I believe or think, you ask first and let me answer for myself.
Take what I have written in the spirit in which I am writing it - I am assuming you are serious about the points you make, so I am holding you to a higher standard than someone who just wants to spout unsubstantiated concepts off the top of their head. I'm taking your intent seriously. I hope you will take my comments in the same spirit.
The Bible is not about God it is about Yahweh who is a regional ethnic deity who was assigned by the council of elohim to the people of jacob. I didn't read the rest. You worship a Jewish god. Let us start right there. Why do you deny this?
I'm not going to go in circles with you, Rurik. You make a statement, I respond with an answer that speaks to what you wrote, you don't read it, you repeat yourself, you repeat your mistakes, and you think this is a conversation? This is like standing around with a thug who has a two-by-four and some sort of bizarre obsession with Zionism, demanding to put words in my mouth. Like I said, I have no vested interest in any of this. Good luck with your new substack strategy.
You may have pursued this already, but given your largish subscriber base, the best way to grow will be to get on others' podcasts. I found out about your blog on the James Corbett Show.
He does a frequent show with a similar journalist (also James) who has a show called "Media Monarchy."
The guy from the Higher Side Chats may have you on to talk about occultism of the elites, and the illusion of the conflict between the Western and Eastern elites, or something like that.
Also, another idea is to find some other bloggers you respect, and do some articles that analyze your favorite articles by them with the agreement that they'll do the same for you on their blog. Of course, there's some risk your readers will jump ship to another blogger, but overall it's likely you'll gain more than you lose with this approach.
As readers, we're quite siloed. You spend a ton of time researching and writing, but if you want to make this sustainable, perhaps spend a little more time blowing holes in the silos.
You may like his recent podcast with the Raw Egg Nationalist.
I also wonder if some of the well-meaning but underinformed journalists like the hosts of Redacted would be open to speaking with someone with your perspective. I suspect they may be too concerned with optics and maintaining an oversimplified view of the Ukraine war, but it'd definitely be a big boost to your subscribers to get on a show like that.
Yeah, weird social dynamic there. Influencers need to seek out and welcome the Z Anon Vampire in, after which said vampire can feed off their viewers for the rest of their lives. For the Higherside chat guy, it's good you have a book and are a talented writer. Seems like he's a big reader, to put it mildly. I also don't think he buys into the good elite/bad elite fantasy.
Is Mumbasa the same place as Mombasa? I lived there as a child, in the brief interval when Africa was under civilised rule, before Obama was born there. I have fond memories of the lovely white sandy beaches backed by coconut palms, the sunny sea, the old Portuguese Fort Jesus, and the dirty Arab dhows sailing in and out of the port.
Are you being sent to open a new Russian front in Africa - like General Surovikin? Is being sent to Libya the Russian equivalent of being sent to Coventry?
I visited Mombasa by ship from Bombay , third class in 1975. I woke up on the floor of the first class bar still clasping an empty gin bottle. The ship was docked and all the passengers had left the vessel. Unfortunately I got no further than the sleazy portside bars and was trying as hard as I could to contract AIDS whilst being drunk and stoned for quite a bit of the time. I removed myself to Nairobi on a bus with spear wielding Masai. My previous behaviour continued and in desperation I took a flight to South Africa. Upon arrival that lovely white suprematist state locked me up in the immigration jail at Jo'burg airport. My guard was a hunch back sporting a Luger...........such was life when we were still free to roam.
Mumbasa and Mombasa are two different places...continents actually. I visited Mombasa back in the late 80's on a Navy ship. My recollection of the place was that it was kind of a beach town. There was also no ice...strange that.
I think this is the right decision. Anyone who matters realistically has $7/month. Also, I suspect that you lost subscribers not of your own fault, but because nothing alarming is happening on the front right now.
Nah people just really like being told what they want to hear. There's nothing like being validated. The Anglo Kremlinist 5th dimensionist blogs are all doing great. The fact that the Ukrainians haven't made any big break throughs yet on the front is only made possible by the blood and selflessness of Russian troops, it has nothing whatsoever to do with good planning on the Kremlins part. If 5D huffers could be bothered to read actual Russian Patriotic pages they would be well aware that conditions on the front are appalling right now and just 2or3 days ago we started hearing about shell hunger again. So while the front isn't moving much alarming stuff is going on and it isn't simply Russian shooting Ukrainian fish in a barrel.
Personally I believe the war is managed from the central bank owning layer above the nation state, and they want this thing to go on for a very long time as a blood offering to the Demiurge and to steal as much from U.S. taxpayers as possible. I link to Assange's comment below about how these types of wars work...
Rurik I'm glad you aren't an incel loser like Rolo was but Lauren Boebert is a rough riding dog. At least riley got himself a beautiful full bodied spray tanned Armenian woman with a bloated vax face. His affair with simonyan is proof that patriots are still in control of RT.
LOL!
Most people only want to cheer their chosen teams to victory. Cheerleaders benefit from this.
No successful commentator will point out that none of the countries involved are run in the interests of their people, and that somehow, mysteriously, they are all merely provinces in the Empire of Zog. All the analyses based on national interest are irrelevant. There might be a small market niche for one who could describe and assess the desires of the dominant clans in the ruling Tribe. Do they desire a rapid victory for one side, or are they content with long-continued blood-letting and profiteering?
Half a million dead goyim in a year and a half may merely stimulate YHVH's bloodlust. It looks as if The Shoigu is equipping Russian forces to maintain at least this level of death-dealing for a long time. One thousand dead Ukies and one hundred dead Russkis per day may suffice to empty the area in preparation for Heavenly Jerusalem by mid century. There's only about ten million Ukie men left, so they can be be eliminated at about this rate by the desired date.
I think you read the tea leaves correctly, as to the long-term prospects of this platform. And your analysis of the culture wars -- i.e., that you can take the side of one puppet vs the other and give a play-by-play analysis of the choreographed fights among the puppets and be rewarded for it, but the real danger is pulling back the curtain on the real puppet masters, which seem to be the cartel bosses working for a certain demon or elohim named Yahweh (the master of puppetmasters in this realm) -- is definitely spot on, as I have just belatedly begun to discover. You're making the right move. Get what you can, while you can, before Yahweh's henchmen shut this platform down too.
Hi Rolo, for what it's worth, traffic growth has slowed for me as well as for other Substack authors. I assume this is due to Twitter basically banning linking to Substack as well as probable search engine de-boosting and other measures to chain dissidents into echo chambers.
I agree with Jonathon below that during lulls in fighting of the Not War (which will probably go on for many years to wash $$ from the U.S. taxpayer base, per Assange who discussed the concept of the Forever War here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IGU_7alJ80 ) it may make sense to expand the topics you cover, which you may already be starting... But I think you will have to keep some articles free if the hope is to continue to grow your subscriber base, both free and paid. Sometimes writing and growth is more of a struggle than other times. Just my 2 cents.
I’ve been here since the beginning and don’t plan on leaving. Your writing is authentic which is hard to find. I don’t need to be fed a lie so I feel better and honestly can’t understand why others seem to need this. When people lie to me I get offended, go figure.
Maybe focus on some metaphysics soon?? :)
I came here for the 'deep' stuff and will stick around for more. The Great Patriotic War by Whites against Whites in the interest of non-Whites never much interested me.
Your decision to focus on those who "get it" reminds me of the case for "don't waste your time" recently made by NLF:
"""In a similar vein, Substack author Sanfedisti had an interesting post recently* about his limits on his willingness to debate with liberals, who he believes wants to murder and destroy him. He writes:
"I have never been interested in speaking to people who do not already agree with me, or at least who do not share a similar perspective. What I do not do, ever, is speak to leftists.
The left exists as an anti-civilizational force whose goal is no less than the total obliteration of your life, family, nation, history, religion, ethnos, people, and the permanent erasure of all that ever came from any of it. And you want me to talk?…
The answer cannot be to give these diabolical plots the legitimacy of civil discourse. The answer is to reject entirely the premise and the person whole-cloth."""
Substitute narrative-believer for liberal.
* Safendisti quote source: https://positionanddecision.substack.com/p/end-of-discussion
** NeoLiberalFeudalism quote source: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/navigating-schmitts-friend-enemy
Martyanov's commentators are not really interested in RS, but the stalker Srbad continues to tell them about his dislike of you, and perhaps prematurely gloat over your failure:
http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2023/09/where-geopolitics-originates.html
...' Well, my favourite fake Russian idiot Rolo/Rurik Slavskiy - whoever the fuck this prick really is - has announced the de-facto shutting down of his blog. What a shame. I mean, what a huge fucking shame. Guess Z-ANON won aye?'
...' - his blog is on Substack called the Slavlands Chronicles, & the piece is titled how the blog is going into "dark mode" - subscribers only. You'll find it if you look for it.
He is not saying explicitly that he is shutting it down, because he would be admitting failure, but that is what he is doing by going subscriber only when he has about 20 regular readers.
And, I posted a comment here months ago stating how he would do this, by re-naming the blog, going subscriber only, & shutting it down, as a failed psy op - & that is exactly what he has done.'
"No friends but the mountains"?
If you annoy both the Yawhists and the materialist 'ex-commies' maybe you're doing something right. May The Force be with you!
it makes me grin from ear to ear that he sat down and read my dark patriot article.
Glad to be onboard. Love your Work. What you do is very important; it needs to continue...One day you will be vindicated...
Do what feels right. It's served you well enough so far. I don't comment much because frankly I don't really see a need to comment on things I agree with.
I'm just happy having a source that's miserable and realistic and calls out the problems on "our side" (hah), so that we can operate in the light of truth rather than getting bamboozled by purposefully misplaced hopes.
I’m sticking around as a paid sub. Although I enjoy the challenge of attempting to decipher some of your more cryptic remarks and references, perhaps going paid-sub only will allow you to be more blunt and direct. But in any case I find your perspective and insight valuable and definitely worth the price of admission.
I only follow the voices in my own head! Ok, nevermind, i'll join him.
Zionism is a word that is in common use, with a meaning that is not the meaning you give it. So when you use that word, one has no idea that you are creating your own definition for it, nor is there any clue that one should seek out something you have written somewhere else on the chance that you have defined it for yourself. This has nothing to do with the substance of what you are saying. Typically, if a person wants to refer to a concept that is important to them, they will give it a unique name, like "Skywalker Zionism" or something like that. Then the reader will say to him or herself, gee, I wonder what that means, and start to look it up.
If a person has made relevant arguments, it is also customary to provide references to specific locations, so that a reader does not have to read EVERYTHING for those precious few relevant morsels. Your essay on morality, for example, says nothing about the definition of Zionism. How much hunting is a person supposed to do?
These are common courtesies and customs for writing. Nothing farfetched here, just how most professional writers work.
So next .....
Which of these are "all MY books": Hebrew Bible? New Testament? Talmud? Apocrypha? Pseudepigrapha? I need to know which books I recognize as authoritative before I can make any admissions. BTW: Are you saying that every book of the New Testament was written by a Jew?
I think we both mean my Savior is Jesus Christ. Yes, He is. Yes, He was Jewish. But you act as though you are having to squeeze a confession out of me on this point, when it is common knowledge, from His genealogy, in the New Testament. Have you found people who really think He is not?
I'm actually afraid to discuss the Jewishness of the prophets unless I'm sure you don't have a surprise definition of "prophet." You know, like Zionism.
And you're really going to have to put pencil to paper on the last one, because you tell me my traditions are Jewish, and I still need you to tell me what my traditions are.
And what in the world is encompassed by that little word, "etc."? I admit my etc's are all Jewish? I'm not being silly about this. Anyone who takes you seriously would ask these questions.
Yes, you are right. I should clarify my own position, now that you have asked. In my time zone it is getting past beddy-bye time, but I will write a concise statement for you and post it tomorrow.
The Bible is all about Zionism ie Jewish divinely-ordained nationalism. Yahweh is the god of Zion and Christians worship this Jewish god and his son, Yeshua. All Christians are theological Zionists. They claim to be "Spiritual Jews or Spiritual Israel" who have been grafted on to the true Jewish faith. their gripe with non-Christian Jews is that they are doing their own religion wrong by not recognizing the jewish messiah.
Some Christians are not political Zionists though, that is true.
You say, "The Bible is all about Zionism i.e. Jewish divinely-ordained nationalism". If when you say "all about" you mean the ultimate goal of God's dealing with humanity, as described in the Bible, then this is not a correct statement. Jewish nationalism is NOT what the Bible is "about." The ultimate goal, or endpoint, of God's work, as described in the Bible, is not to form a Jewish nation, dead stop. Not at all. One could go on at length about the difficulty with this interpretation, not the least of which is - why would it be necessary for the Messiah to be crucified if the point was to form a Jewish nation? One of the revelations of the New Testament was that there was something more important going on than national Israel.
Yahweh is not Jewish. You are inverting concepts, taking modern meanings and reading them back into history, where they have no place - like the word "Zionism." And now, the word "Jewish." For example, in an earlier post, you wanted me to admit that all prophets are Jewish. Moses is a prophet (Deut. 34:10). However, Moses was NOT Jewish. He was a Levite. "Jews" were not even a "thing" during the time of Moses. The descendants of Abraham were Hebrews, Israelites. Similarly, when Yahweh revealed Himself to Abraham, Judah had not yet even been born. There is a difference between being the God of the Jews and being a Jewish God and it is a significant difference. Similarly, when you say Yahweh is the God of Zion, I have no idea what you mean. "Zion" is a geographical location that has taken on a broader theological meaning. I am not aware of any proclamation by Yahweh that He is the God of Zion. I have done a search on the text and can't find it.
You say, "All Christians are theological Zionists. They claim to be Spiritual Jews or Spiritual Israel" I am a Christian, and I have never claimed that I am a Spiritual Jew or a part of some Spiritual Israel. So your statement is false on its face. If you ignore me and speak of all other Christians, in the broad sense of people who use that label, then you are talking about everyone from Russian Orthodox Christians to New York City Presbyterians to Polish Catholics, to Coptic Christians, to Southern Baptists, to the underground church in China, and African charismatic groups. If you were to approach them all and tell them they are Spiritual Jews, most of them wouldn't even know what you are talking about. I can tell that you are referring to Romans 11, and although Paul is making a point about Gentiles and Jews, he is not establishing a doctrine of a spiritual Jew. See Galatians 3:28, "There 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." This is the overarching theological concept, and it does not say, "you have all become spiritual Jews." It says, there is NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK.
I'm going to make a suggestion, that the terms used be correct with respect to their historic context. If you talk about Old Testament Zionists, you will inevitably sound like someone who does not know what they are talking about. The same with the other terms you use. I'm not able to speak in those terms, because it makes ME look like I don't know what I'm talking about, like referring to Jews before that term was even coined.
Also, if the Bible is the source document for Christianity, then the only legitimate approach (and the only logical one) is to refer to the book, chapter and verse that makes a statement that you claim says something, so that others can go to the verses and understand what you are talking about, and then the meaning can be discussed.
By way of analogy, I have taken physics classes where it was necessary to grade on a curve because most of the class got no more than 30% of the questions on the final exam correct. So what good does it do to talk about what "all" physics students believe when they obviously have not mastered the material and the majority of them can't answer the questions correctly. Instead, I go to page whatever of the text, which is the reference point for the exam, and I point to what it says, so that I don't have to concern myself with what a secondary and mostly incorrect source - the students - have to say about the matter. It doesn't matter what "Christians" think. Who cares, unless you are doing a religious survey or something. What matters is what the Bible states, as a document. It is objective, it is available, it can be analyzed and discussed in an intelligent manner.
If you will use terminology from the text, then that will eliminate the second problem of trying to figure out how you are coming up with new phrases and what they mean. Otherwise, we are discussing concepts that have no external reference - they exist in your head. To have broader relevance, and to be able to carry out a conversation in the public space, that people will take seriously, it has to be about more than novel words and phrases that you have come up with.
My background: I am a biblical Christian. That means what I believe is based on what the Bible teaches. Period. I do not belong to any denomination or church. I am not an evangelical, I am not a fundamentalist. I disagree, in a material way, with both of those groups. You insisted, in a previous post, that my traditions are Jewish, and my point to you, in answering, was that I have no "traditions." (In any event, "Christian" traditions are distinctly NOT Jewish. Christmas and Easter are pagan in origin).
I won't give you a doctrinal recitation, but will summarize my core beliefs - Jesus Christ is the incarnate Son of God who was crucified to pay for my sins. I am saved through obedient faith in Him. A person who chooses to follow Jesus Christ, as I have, is given the Holy Spirit, who causes that person to be transformed into the likeness of Christ, in terms of character. The end result of faith in Jesus Christ is eternal life. Faith in Jesus Christ is a total commitment, taking priority over all allegiances in this world. My life is described by Galatians 2:20, "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me." I do not use the term "inerrant" with respect to the Bible because the Bible itself does not use that term. I do believe the Bible is God breathed, that everything it teaches is true.
With respect to any particular points of belief or practice, I would suggest that, instead of telling me what I believe or think, you ask first and let me answer for myself.
Take what I have written in the spirit in which I am writing it - I am assuming you are serious about the points you make, so I am holding you to a higher standard than someone who just wants to spout unsubstantiated concepts off the top of their head. I'm taking your intent seriously. I hope you will take my comments in the same spirit.
The Bible is not about God it is about Yahweh who is a regional ethnic deity who was assigned by the council of elohim to the people of jacob. I didn't read the rest. You worship a Jewish god. Let us start right there. Why do you deny this?
I'm not going to go in circles with you, Rurik. You make a statement, I respond with an answer that speaks to what you wrote, you don't read it, you repeat yourself, you repeat your mistakes, and you think this is a conversation? This is like standing around with a thug who has a two-by-four and some sort of bizarre obsession with Zionism, demanding to put words in my mouth. Like I said, I have no vested interest in any of this. Good luck with your new substack strategy.
You may have pursued this already, but given your largish subscriber base, the best way to grow will be to get on others' podcasts. I found out about your blog on the James Corbett Show.
He does a frequent show with a similar journalist (also James) who has a show called "Media Monarchy."
The guy from the Higher Side Chats may have you on to talk about occultism of the elites, and the illusion of the conflict between the Western and Eastern elites, or something like that.
Also, another idea is to find some other bloggers you respect, and do some articles that analyze your favorite articles by them with the agreement that they'll do the same for you on their blog. Of course, there's some risk your readers will jump ship to another blogger, but overall it's likely you'll gain more than you lose with this approach.
As readers, we're quite siloed. You spend a ton of time researching and writing, but if you want to make this sustainable, perhaps spend a little more time blowing holes in the silos.
can you link higher side chats?
Here ya go: https://www.thehighersidechats.com/
You may like his recent podcast with the Raw Egg Nationalist.
I also wonder if some of the well-meaning but underinformed journalists like the hosts of Redacted would be open to speaking with someone with your perspective. I suspect they may be too concerned with optics and maintaining an oversimplified view of the Ukraine war, but it'd definitely be a big boost to your subscribers to get on a show like that.
Pretty much every time I’ve ever reached out on my own I’ve been ignored I think it’s a faux pas
Yeah, weird social dynamic there. Influencers need to seek out and welcome the Z Anon Vampire in, after which said vampire can feed off their viewers for the rest of their lives. For the Higherside chat guy, it's good you have a book and are a talented writer. Seems like he's a big reader, to put it mildly. I also don't think he buys into the good elite/bad elite fantasy.