It Seems I Lost a Friend on FB

New blog on the kid: Did I Mention Trump Had Commie Tendencies? · HGL's F.B. writings: It Seems I Lost a Friend on FB

I'm not revealing Return to Tradition is called Anthony Stine, he says so on the patreon. I do however take care not to reveal his middle name initial and his face, which are not revealed on the youtube. Well, the face is revealed on some youtubes, but he may remove them or reboot them, so, I prefer discretion.

There the face of Belloc takes the place, and this I inserted instead of his photo on FB, so here is a photoshopped version of the dialogue, not changing the words, only the profile info of Anthony Stine:

Indeed, he removed me from his friends. He can however not remove Chesterton from my friends:

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WORLD
by G.K. Chesterton
https://catholiclibrary.org/library/view?docId=/Contemporary-EN/XCT.152.html

I'll cite the first paragraph of the first chapter:

A book of modern social inquiry has a shape that is somewhat sharply defined. It begins as a rule with an analysis, with statistics, tables of population, decrease of crime among Congregationalists, growth of hysteria among policemen, and similar ascertained facts; it ends with a chapter that is generally called "The Remedy." It is almost wholly due to this careful, solid, and scientific method that "The Remedy" is never found. For this scheme of medical question and answer is a blunder; the first great blunder of sociology. It is always called stating the disease before we find the cure. But it is the whole definition and dignity of man that in social matters we must actually find the cure before we find the disease .

I think you can see how the bill of Trump truly fits this description. So do actual Marxist policies in the countries where Marxism had a monopoly. Or a predominant place, like the French President Vincent Auriol, in whose time homeless were made as invisible, because as unfree, and therefore as "sheltered" from the public, as Trump is initiating.

To some, Marxism simply means solidarity with the poor. In that case, Franco was Marxist. He subsidised living accomodations with tax money and made it pretty hard for a landlord to get rid of a poor tenant. Now, another kind of solidarity with the poor, preached by Chesterton, is not to persecute a poor who no longer is a tenant and also does not own his home, but instead lives without one. The exact fault Mr. Trump is committing. There, as well as with taking interest, Marxism is one with Capitalistic bourgeoisie. Note the tone where Chesterton says "growth of hysteria among policemen" ... the kind of hysteria in which every quarrel between a homeless man and someone passing him by becomes a proof the homeless man is a menace, not that some of those passing him are a nuisance to him. Which even in France they are, as said some of them, and the United States, in many states, is much more Puritan./HGL

PS, the screenshot doesn't show (on your computer or some time in the future)? I'll copy the dialogue, here:

Hans-Georg Lundahl

The Marxist is about Trump's new Soviet policy about the homeless, right?

Anthony P Stine

Hans-Georg Lundahl no, I'm not retarded enough to believe something like that

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I thought you were a fan of Belloc and Chesterton.

Trump's policy remind me of 1910's England, what Chesterton fought against, Prussia, and their fulfilment, the Soviet Union.

His tax policy also mirrors Marxist Sweden.

Anthony P Stine

-Georg Lundahl I am. I'm also not gay enough to call his policies Marxist. I'm not politically or economically illiterate

I'm sorry, his studies in political science may have made him precisely that. And if he just called me gay, he's either voicing a very heavy prejudice against all and any Trump critics ... or relying on calumny.

If he has from priests in Paris that I'm gay, they are committing calumny (and that calumny could be a reason why they avoid me). If they pretend I cross dress, they rely on the poorer judgement of Muslims or Jews less familiar with European historic and geographic variation of the male costume./HGL

---

I tried to notify Anthony Stine via FB mail, on one of my accounts (they are two). About a month ago, I was obliged to change the password on the account, I did so quickly, and then forgot the exact password. As you know computers depend on exact passwords. This means, I was not able to reuse it. I tried to change it again, then I got in a loop about what computer I'm habitually using. For those who speak French, the post LH110 shows screenshots. I'm right now again in a loop of screenshot 5 and 6. Meaning, if he answered, I cannot access his answer./HGL

Let's Recall Our Own Girls, Oppressed by Delayed Marriage If in Certain Situations (Pregnant, In Love, or Otherwise 1 Cor. 7:9)

International Christian Concern

Read more: https://www.persecution.org/2025/06/13/underage-marriage-outlawed-in-islamabad/

[Pray with us. Praise God that underage marriage has been outlawed in Islamabad.]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

The bill addresses the growing concern of female children getting pregnant in their early teens before they can mature or pursue education. It also highlights the widespread issues many girls face, of being kidnapped, forced into marriage, and forced by their captors to convert to Islam. At least 1,000 girls are subject to this annually.

There are two sides to it.

On the one hand, some Christians are better protected, at least if they are in Islamabad.

Also some young teen Muslimas who were not wanting the marriage.

On the other hand the law as such is at least if it were generalised unjust.

In France, every year (my stats are from before the Covid) 1000 girls under 15 get pregnant and 772 of the pregnancies end in abortion. I think that was lower back before 2006, meaning abortion and than 772, when the marital age of girls was raised from 15 to 18.

Traditionally among Christians, 18 has not been the limit.

From Agnes of Sagan*, who married Ludwik I of Brieg to 6 generations later, for instance two daughters of James II of Scotland (not to be confused with James II of England who was James VII of Scotland), there were 32 married women with known ages, or tolerably known, and depending on whether you go with the higher or lower age of a person, the median was either 17 (both n. 16 and 17 were married at 17) or between 17 and 18 (n. 16 was married at 17, n. 17 at 18). The lower quartile similarily varied as either 14 (both 8 and 19 were married at 14), or between 14 and 15 (8 was married at 14, 9 at 15).**

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: Seven Generations Women, Age at First Marriage
https://filolohika.blogspot.com/2023/09/seven-generations-women-age-at-first.html

I am happy the law as such is not applicable outside Islamabad. I'd be even happier if they all converted from Islam, stopped forced marriages and the limit could be lowered to 16 for girls all over the country. Or even lower than 16.

The canonic minimum age for ladies was 12 and the youngest in the sample was 11 or 12 when married. In the Christian Middle Ages.

Notes:

* Henryk IV of Poland is also known as Henryk II of Żagań. Agnes or Agnieszka was his daughter.
** The oldest lady at her marriage was married at 33. 32 and 33 are two outliers, the oldest younger than that were married at 25. And it's questionable if they were two or just one, over 30.

If the Church is Very Reduced, the Pope Is at Some Risk of Being Bamboozled by Bigger Actors

Vatican In Exile

7 h ago

The Filioque

The Visigoths, upon converting from Arianism to Nicene Christianity, adopted the Filioque clause in the Nicene Creed at the Third Council of Toledo in 589, called by King Reccared I (King of Spain and southern France) This addition, meaning "and from the Son," affirmed that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, a point of theological contention that later contributed to the East-West Schism.

Elaboration:
Visigothic Conversion:

The Visigoths, initially adherents of Arianism (which viewed the Son as subordinate to the Father), converted to Nicene Christianity, which affirms the full divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit.

The Filioque Clause:

The Filioque ("and from the Son") clause was added to the Nicene Creed to clarify the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Specifically, it stated that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, not just the Father.

Third Council of Toledo (589):

This council, invoked and controlled by King Reccared I (King of Spain and southern France) held in Visigothic Spain in Toledo 45 miles south of Madrid, marked the official adoption of the Filioque clause into the Western Christian tradition.

Theological Significance:

The Filioque became a point of contention between the Western (Latin) and Eastern (Greek) branches of Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox Church generally rejected the Filioque, emphasizing the Holy Spirit's procession from the Father alone.

Traditional Triadology (Holy balance in the Trinity):

Nicene theology (325 ad) particularly in the East, emphasizes that each person of the Trinity has unique characteristics, but certain attributes (like Godhood and eternality) are shared by all. The filioque, by linking the Spirit's procession to the Son, is seen as introducing a shared characteristic that isn't universal to all three persons, thus upsetting the balance in the Trinity.

East-West Schism:

The Filioque controversy, among other factors, contributed to the Great Schism of 1054, which formally divided the Western (Catholic) and Eastern (Orthodox) churches.

Continued Debate:

While the Filioque is a standard part of the Nicene Creed in the Catholic Church, it remains a point of theological discussion and sometimes disagreement between the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

Painting of King Reccared I below

[painting omitted]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

The Visigoths, upon converting from Arianism to Nicene Christianity, adopted the Filioque clause in the Nicene Creed at the Third Council of Toledo in 589, called by King Reccared I (King of Spain and southern France)

False History.

At the Third Council of Toledo, there was no discussion of the Filioque.

The council opened with a Latin text of the Nicene Creed, and the Filioque was already there.

If it didn't come from the original autograph at Constantinople (Nicaea ended at "and the Holy Ghost, Amen"), it was probably a contamination from the topical creed against Priscillianism, issued by FIRST Council of Toledo, in 400 AD, well before the Visigoths arrived.

I've treated this in the page here, most of which is a Latin text of that creed and my English parallel translation:

Trento - Philaret (Catechisms) : Filioque far older than III Council of Toledo
https://trentophilaret.blogspot.com/p/filioque-far-older-than-iii-council-of.html

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Correction to previous, I spoke as per memory of a text I perused in a book and probably missed parts of.

Filioque is reaffirmed in Toledo III, but was, as mentioned, already affirmed in Toledo I.

Pater ex quo sit filius, ipse vero ex nullo sit alio. Filius quia habeat patrem, sed sine initio et sine diminutione, in ea qua patri coęqualis et coaeternus est divinitate subsistat. Spiritusque sanctus confitendus a nobis, et praedicandus est a patre et filio procedere, et cum patre et filio unius esse substantiae.

Third Synod of Toledo / Synodus Toletana Tertia:
https://www.benedictus.mgh.de/quellen/chga/chga_045t.htm

Credimus [c] in unum verum deum patrem et filium et spiritum sanctum visibilium et invisibilium factorem, per quem creata sunt omnia in caelo et in terra, unum deum et unam esse divinae substantiae trinitatem. Patrem autem non esse filium ipsum, sed habere filium qui pater non sit. Filium non esse patrem, sed filium dei de patris esse natura. Spiritum quoque esse paraclitum, qui nec pater sit ipse, nec filius, sed a patre filioque procedens. Est ergo ingenitus pater, genitus filius, non genitus paraclitus, sed a patre filioque procedens.

First Council of Toledo / Concilium Toletanum primum:
https://www.benedictus.mgh.de/quellen/chga/chga_043t.htm

Tolkien: Neither Woke Nor "Based Conservative" ... More Like "Gentle Traditionalist"

I Have Seen Worse Things from the Late Bergoglio, Than Some of his Economic Advice ... · What an Occasion to Make Clarifications on Fascism · Tolkien: Neither Woke Nor "Based Conservative" ... More Like "Gentle Traditionalist"

The "Gentle Traditionalist" is obviously a reference to a character in Roger Buck's novel.

APSt

I

HGL

I'm sorry, but this gets Tolkien equally wrong, if not more.

1) Tolkien would not have called someone crazy bc of an intellectual error, and would not have exposed a relatively peaceful person, let alone an admirer, to the horrors of psychiatry for such a thing,

2) Tolkien certainly thought that European colonialism was tainted. His point about Numenor being blessed was basically a point about European Christendom being blessed for resisting brutal enemies of the faith ... but the point about Black Numenoreans setting up things in certain parts of Middle-Earth is a point about colonialism gone deeply wrong.

It would be a horrible thing to be for Sauron just to be against Numenor, but it is perhaps even more horrible and certainly possible to be for Sauron as a Numenorean.

I am presuming you know more than just the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, perhaps Unfinished Tales, and at least Silmarillion.

AC

HGL The fall of the Numenoreans (and I mean that spiritually and physically) is a clear reference to how our society decays as turn away from God in favor of selfish pursuits. It had nothing to do with colonialism and everything to do with selfishness and materialistic idolatry. Though it is far worse today, the 1920's was a disgusting and perverse era and, for Tolkein who was a traditionalist Catholic, it was probably downright maddening.

HGL

"It had nothing to do with colonialism"

Sorry, but you are very explicitly contradicting a letter by Tolkien.

The Black Numenoreans are marked out for preferring to dominate the more primitive folks in Middle Earth over brotherly teaching them.

That very clearly has sth to do with colonialism.

Here is Tolkiengateway:

The Black Númenóreans emerged from the King's Men party;[2] they were cruel oppressors and overlords over the primitive Men of Middle-earth. Since they were colonising the continent, they survived the Downfall of Númenor but swiftly diminished.

Tolkien Gateway: Black Númenóreans
https://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Black_N%C3%BAmen%C3%B3reans

HGL, added

Here is Girl Next Gondor giving three videos about the fall of Númenor, here are two of them, partly about the colonialism in Middle-Earth:

Before the Shadow: The Downfall of Númenor [Part One]
GirlNextGondor | 19 July 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDPL-NDvrqg

Glory and Decay: The Downfall of Númenor [Part Two]
GirlNextGondor | 24 Aug 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQuPWhZuYkw

II

HGL

I missed the last part of Miss Woke's second line, it's actually rather gross, but even then I think Tolkien would have refrained from the measure you portray.

What an Occasion to Make Clarifications on Fascism

I Have Seen Worse Things from the Late Bergoglio, Than Some of his Economic Advice ... · What an Occasion to Make Clarifications on Fascism · Tolkien: Neither Woke Nor "Based Conservative" ... More Like "Gentle Traditionalist"

Hans-Georg Lundahl

It is known I self describe as Fascist. Note, Fascist, not National Socialist.

Someone beside me in the cyber played a speech by you know who at a speech climax.

It's possibly unfair to a good painter.

It's also irrelevant for Fascism.

Here is a speech by Mussolini who thought they were safeguarding international peace:

Mussolini Close Ups And Speech In German (1927)
British Pathé | 13 April 2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jgZijUobnY

The notice "1927" is obviously a typo, possibly for 1937. Not sure what year Mussolini visited Germany.

And here is one by Engelbert Dollfuss:

EXCLUSIVE ANNOUNCEMENT BY DOLLFUSS OF AUSTRIA - SOUND
British Movietone | 21 July 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yEXGxWcLnM

Hans-Georg Lundahl

[update]

Just in case some guys PERSIST to confuse Nazi and Fascist, here is a video on acceptance of versus discriminations against people with Downs:

How Were People With Down Syndrome Treated In History?
Disturban History | 25 April 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szQw2T8avRc

The Reich after Hitler's Machtübernahme is mentioned, so were states in the US, first of which Indiana, and every time I reflect on this, I'm so sad a certain guy didn't remain a painter and so happy for one change that Patton brought about.

In the Soviet Union, the project was studied under Lenin, but very fortunately cancelled by Stalin, however the mentality is widespread. In Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark, there was no Patton. Eugenics ended in the 1970's there.

In Mussolini's Italy, there was no such thing, at least before 1938. I have not read the leggi raciali, I don't know if that changed.

In Dollfuss' Austria, there was no such thing.

In Franco's Spain, I think Valleja Najera tried to push for it, but didn't quite succeed, so he had to claim some version of Child Protective Services as "eugenics" ... (in a different context, namely considering revolutionary spirit as a hereditary disease), but even that was pushed back through the Catholic Church.

I am not sure how much of this got introduced by Alexis Carrell, a Protestant, when he became a minister in the Vichy régime. I used to say the régime of Pétain Darlan was OK, that of Pétain Laval wasn't ... but Alexis Carrell got hired before Laval, so, I am not positive about the entire time of Darlan as PM either.

This article explores a new dimension in fascist studies, eugenic studies, and the more mainstream history of Italy, Europe, and modernity. It asks scholars to reconsider the centrality of race and biology to the political programme of Italian fascism in power. Fascism’s ‘binomial theorem’ of optimum population change was characterized as a commitment both to increase the ‘quantity’ (number) and improve the ‘quality’ (biology) of the Italian ‘race’. These twin objectives came to fruition in the new scientific and political paradigm known to contemporaries as ‘biological politics’ and to scholars today as ‘biopolitics’. Fascism, this article contends, attempted to utilize the full force of the new ‘biopower’ of reproductive and biogenetic medicine and science in order to realize the aims of its biopolitical agenda for racial betterment through fertility increase. In Italy, fascism encouraged science to tamper with the processes of human reproduction and to extend genetic understanding of diseases which were seen as ‘conquerable’ without sterilization and euthanasia. It began a biotechnological ‘revolution’ that historians often attribute to twenty-first-century science. By exploring the technical innovations in assisted conception which Italian fascism promoted, this article challenges the assumption in much of the scholarship that there was a huge divide between the ‘old’ eugenics of the interwar period and the ‘new’ genetics of recent decades.

Racial ‘Sterility’ and ‘Hyperfecundity’ in Fascist Italy. Biological Politics of Sex and Reproduction
https://brill.com/view/journals/fasc/1/2/article-p92_3.xml

I Have Seen Worse Things from the Late Bergoglio, Than Some of his Economic Advice ...

I Have Seen Worse Things from the Late Bergoglio, Than Some of his Economic Advice ... · What an Occasion to Make Clarifications on Fascism · Tolkien: Neither Woke Nor "Based Conservative" ... More Like "Gentle Traditionalist"

But Leo XIII and Pius XI, Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno were clearer on not being Communist.

JOL

The Catholic Church (along with most Mainline Protestant Churches) have long challenged the morality of American style laizźe faire capitalism. But for those Catholics and other Christians who actively support the MAGA movement that kind of capitalism is a major plank of their worldview.

DC

Communism worked so well at feeding poor people. The only thing it does is guarantee everyone is equally compelled by gun point to starve to death.

HGL

DC Logic?

"I'm against unbridled Capitalism"
"Oh, you are for Communism?"

It's like the dialogue:

"I'm against Islam"
"Oh, you are an Atheist?"

Islam and Atheism aren't the sole two religious systems. Even if some Muslims like to think so. And Communism and Capitalism aren't the sole two Economic systems. Heard of Fascism? Peronism is a form of Fascism (at least in the opinion of the Swedish Fascist Per Engdahl), and Bergoglio was pretty obviously a Peronist, even his opponents in the Catholic Church have noted that. Peronism and Communism are not the same. Perón's Argentina supported Franco's Spain economically, at a certain point, when Spanish harvests were low after the Civil War, which Communism would never have done.

Somewhere between Islam and Atheism, you might also find a third option, like Christianity, ever heard of it?

DC

HGL, yes, I am orthodox. We suffered quite a few million martyrs from atheistic socialist communism's manifest blessings. We are also quite familiar with living under the benevolence of Islam. We suggest you do not get chummy with either. They love martyring Christians. You certainly will find out wether your Christianity is real or not. Christianity is a relationship of union and communion with Christ that transforms you. It is not an govt/ economic model of redistribution of wealth.

The thing about Islam and communism is your usually invited to join at gunpoint and that gunpoint is never very far away to help remind you their paradise doesn't like people leaving it. Christ on the other hand always honors your free will choice to leave Him. When Jihadi's have to fatwa your heinie and commies shoot you crossing their iron curtains ,your paradise on earth isn't working very well. Let's try to not assume that Christian's need to think remotely like yourself about your politics, economical and worldview to still be right with Christ.

HGL

"It is not an govt/ economic model of redistribution of wealth."

It is also not a a fitness régime but it still involves fasting which is a kind of fitness régime.

So, it could involve some limits on government and economy and therefore promote some things too.

First, Our Lord did not only tell His Apostles to convert souls, He told them to convert nations, and that typically means societies and governments.

Second, given that Christian government are, if not the main at least one purpose, anxillary but not totally beside the point, one can discuss what Christianity has to say to Christian governments.

Third, this should obviously involve banning abortions, it can however also involve banning class warfare, whether it be the proletarian agressor, as in BLM protests, or the Capitalist agressor, as in sweating and underpaying workers, and as in disloyal means of outcompeting the smaller and healthier competition.

A Christian may miss this and be in a state of grace, but this is usually the result of ignorance.

JCE

DC Jesus turned over the tables. He did not see the value of clinging to wealth. He called for love of neighbors… and no, not just your relatives or close friends. Helping the needy. And welcoming the stranger. (You know, like those from a different place… rather than sending them to jail…). If he stood in front of you today, dark skinned, challenging us all to share with each other, how long would it take you to put him on a cross? Not long, I imagine.

You might also remember that he challenged the men ready to kill a woman who made decisions they criticized… to throw the first stone… if they never made a mistake.

He also turned to the women who recognized him. They did much of the early leading and were trusted by him. Yet, as his supposed followers became an organization, they fell into old habits, making their own rules and repetitive requirements, putting women in a lesser category. Making beautiful buildings. Reinterpreting Jesus teachings — and then making “their” rules, not his teachings, the requirement for proving their faith. Not actually faith by following his teachings, but their own interpretations.

DC

JCE, I suggest you read the Bible again in a thematic manner. Look with the idea that Christ came to earth with the mission to undo the works of the devil brought about by the introduction of sin and death that separated God from Man. That Jesus restored man so that man may return to Paradise and be atoned or restored to being AT ONE with God as it was before the fall. That these books or testaments are testimony to God's work towards that goal. Preparing by prophesy, law and rites to bring you in preparation to Christ working in history.

What He brings is salvation/ restoration to God. Christ became man so that man can become like God. His Church is the Place He created to be the vehicle that serves you in this journey( WAY) to salvation in Christ. It is not a social welfare organization. It is not a governmental power to create "good" as defined by the morals of the day. And the devil offered all earthly governmental power to Jesus if He for go his death and simply worship the devil. Satan offers full belly's and equality and safety for all, Simply surrender to Him.

Jesus offers humility and obedience, the devil offers you outrage, anger, Restoration of wrongs, injustices and equality of outcomes. Quite sure the walls of hell will be grafittied with the quotes of Marx, Mao, the Beatles, Gloria Steinum, and the muzak in the elevators will play Imagine by the Beatles, I did it my way by Sinatra and all the sloppy feminist empowerment music from such notable as Beyonce and Cardi B.

WAP, now there's a message that empowers women. Study the word of God so that might transform YOU. You're in no condition to judge what state of righteousness is in others who you might foolishly presume is contrary to God's intentions.

JCE

DC Excuse me. I’m a retired ordained minister with a Master’s of Divinity. Graduated top of my class. I know the Bible. (And I’d gone to church through my childhood and read completely through the Bible when I was about 13.) I learned about the research on the times of Jesus and why there are biblical stories which seem contradictory. And the changes in it over centuries. So… I’m not just picking and choosing what some particular churches try to pound into my head, to go along with their views. I’m not just “trained”. I’m educated. The misuse of the Bible really hurts.

HGL

DC "Christ came to earth with the mission to undo the works of the devil"

Like the sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance. These being:

• murder
• sin against nature
• oppressing widows and orphans
• withholding justly earned wages

Or like dishonesty, one species thereof being taking of interest.

Have you read St. John Chrysostom? His work was highly influential on Monsignor Ignaz Seipel's Wirtschaftsethische Lehre der Kirchenväter.

Also, manmade starvation is murder. Within less than one century there were three of them in Europe.

• Capitalism with Protestant prejudice created one in Ireland
• Russian Magnates' admiration for Industrial Capitalism created one in the Volga valley, and Lenin rubbed his hands for the Revolutionary Potential
• Communists taking over the Volga Valley only averted a second starvation there by displacing it to Kuban and Ukraine, which had decent crops.

Usually, when you hear of manmade starvations, you only hear of the third and don't hear all of the story.

DC

HGL, yes, quite familiar with St. John Chrysostrum, we say his liturgy every Sunday.

If your familiar with orthodox thought you would realize that to combat sin you start with yourself, Not others. To many people prefer to destroy the choices of others rather than control their own sinful habits that contribute to sin. Siezing my means of production has never fed your poor, it just simply ended my means to survive. Jailing me in a gulag or Shooting my counter revolutionary ass for pointing out the obvious 100% failure rate of socialist communism is a very large sin against me. I think killing man to " save" a man compounded by millions of men killed who refused your program is a colossal failure and imminently the epitome of demonic sin.

JOL

HGL Please forgive, DC, HG. He is suffering from a bad infection of Communnitis, a mental illness whose primary symptom is that everthing to the left of him is perceived by him as an expression of Marxist-Lenninism.

HGL

DC "to combat sin you start with yourself"

Well, I unintentionally came to possess money gotten from interest. I paid it back to the poor via an intermediary.

However, politics exist. In a Monarchy, those starting with themselves who deal with this kind of thing are basically Monarchs. But in a Republic, it's voters. Which makes it a bit more commonplace to think about it.

"Siezing my means of production has never fed your poor,"

If you didn't get the memo the first time, I'm a Fascist, not a Communist. In 1920 to 1922, bands of Communists went from farm to farm and small factory to small factory (Fiat was safer for some reason) trying to seize the means of Production.

Meanwhile, Blackshirts went from small business owner to small business owner and told him "we'll defend your property, if you give the workers decent wages and decent working hours" ... many small business owners took that.

And when Mussolini became Il Duce (more prosaically Prime Minister in the Kingdom of Italy), the idea of seizing other people's property suddenly was way less popular. But so was the idea of underpaying or overworking employees.

HGL

DC "100% failure rate of socialist communism is a very large sin against me"

I wish the economically Fascist Marxisms of Nordic countries and the economically Distributist Marxism of Tito had failed as well, nearly. Nope. No 1990 to end those Marxisms. In the case of Yugoslavia, it ended but through Nationalist War. In the case of Sweden, Denmark, Norway, still way too Marxist, because the economic model is Fascism and didn't fail.

As a consequence, it was way after 1990 that Norwegian Child Protective Services targetted the Bodnariu family for being too Christian. If I didn't walk in protests before the Norwegian Embassy in Paris, it's because I supported the protests from my blog instead.

But when it came to feeding the population, the failure of Holodomor was worst and as said has parallels outside Communism.

HGL

JOL Did you say "mental illness"?

Matthew 5:22 ...

HGL

JCE "men ready to kill a woman who made decisions they criticized"

He criticised her decision too, "Go and sin no more" ...

As for killing, Judah had already lost sovereignty, which in Genesis 49 couldn't happen before Jesus came. Herod had forfeited the right to execute justice within his confines by that child massacre. It was not a Mosaic execution, but an Anti-Roman lynching (with no new Maccabee rising to match it).

Plus, where was the man she had sinned with?

MC

“to combat sin you start with yourself” No, to combat sin you start with Christ who had destroyed death and the power of sin and death over us.

DC

MC LOL, I mistook my audience to have AREADY be Christian. And having turned to Christ. But, that doesn't mean all are well catichised and well formed Christians. And to circle back, my opening point was that Christ came to defeat the power of the devil by destroying sin and death. Which starts in you not governments be they, kingdoms , nations or empires. Christ was offered the opportunity to allow nations to build an earthly paradise that filled the bellies of men. The master of this world offered it to Him. A world of forced peace and redistribution and even let Jesus be it's human leader. There's more to life than full bellies and forced peace and all that without a Risen Christ. There will be a time when one world will unite under their political messiah who will deliver full bellies and peace. But it's utopianism won't have room for Christ. Socialism has no room for Christ. Marx was speaking plainly, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, uncle Ho Che Minh, Fidel, none have lied, Christ is not welcome in their atheist, man centered humanist paradise where sin and the devil doesn't exist.

Really makes you wonder how the whole "I AM YOUR GOD,WORSHIP ME " demands of the antichrist are going to fit in their political/ economic/ atheistic philosophy of socialism. Power loves power they will adapt easy enough. Sin? No place for that archaic mind set. Death? Isn't that the natural reality of all animals and it's the States obligation to get the most out of the production units labors before he expires. We can soon replace the word state with corporate overlords who will decide if we have enough value to bother feeding. Socialist christians??? After all these millions of deaths, slavery and human suffering from socialist communism. It simply does not compute. It's as silly as atheistic Jews for Communism. There were plenty of Russian jews for Communism, but we all know what their reward was in the great purgings.

And the Christian left who work for socialist entities will no doubt be blessed with the same rewards.

The DNC stated there's no room for Christianity in their platform. It would take a pretty serious "true believer in socialism first/ Christ as means to that end " to stay there , where Christ is obviously not their God. The architect and builder of a Christless

Utopia is the devil. And sin is a word that will not be spoken in his kingdom of LOVE. That hate speech/ judgmental word will not be tolerated. What a paradise the lefty Christians are working hard for. No understanding of sin and there will be no salvation from death. It starts with you, you learn your a sinner, you get saved from death. You in cooperation with the Holy Spirit provide salt and light to a dark decaying world, calling them out a world that is destined to destroy itself when it's master challenges the God / man Christ who puts an end to satan and heals this creations sin rebellion. Sin is problem.

Change men's hearts, not the place where men fill their bellies.

JOL

So please explain, DC, why our Lord bid us to pray daily for bread and further commanded us to break bread with one another in his name?

MC

DC I wasn't talking about people who aren't Christians, or even about Christians who aren't well catechized or whose formation in Christianity might be less than ideal. The comment about starting, always, with Christ in combating sin applies to any and every one, even the those who are committed, devout, well-formed, and well-catechized Christians many years into their life in Christ. It doesn't start with ourselves, and it doesn't ever get to be about ourselves. It is always and forever about what Christ has accomplished in destroying the power of sin and death over us. We always need to be reminded. That's the point of regular worship, regular reception of the Eucharist, regular proclamation, and regular catechesis.

But working on sin, broadly in humanity or in a specific person, also isn't something applicable to government. That's not government's purpose. Working on sin isn't what the quote of Pope Francis is deriving at, or the advocacy of others for a better social, political, and economic system and against the ways unfettered capitalism and market fundamentalism abuses and harms people. We might point to the sin of such abusive and harmful actions, but the role of government is not to remedy sin. Power does indeed have a way of corrupting and bending toward itself. Other systems of government and other variations of socioeconomic structures also abuse and harm people. All of those are worthy of prophetic attention, including the terrible and violent autocratic regimes you use as a foil. That does not mean we simply give it over to evil, or call it evil in itself.

Recognizing that the purpose of the government is not to work on or combat sin, doesn't mean that there is nothing for a Christian, or the Christian community, to say about such matters. It certainly does not mean we leave it alone as a supposed kingdom of the devil. Government and law are not bad things. They are not inherently evil or diabolical, however much there is a tendency of power to corrupt. The purpose of law and government, even while it can often fail in purpose, is for communities to organize and structure themselves so that life in community is possible, and even to allow that community and its members to thrive. Law and government is good and necessary. It is a gift. It supports life. It can also be abused and misused, turned to selfish ends. All too often it is. Yet, it is still good. And we still need to point out where it fails and call our communities and those with power to do better and stop causing harm. Life and human beings are not black/white and unalloyed. It's all complex and nuanced.

Sin is not the only thing Christianity is concerned about, nor is it the only thing that Christians are called to have a concern for. It may be a root of so much from the perspective, which is, of course, why we need Christ and his defeat of the power of sin and death once for all. God, Christ, Christianity, the Christian church, and individual Christians are and are called to be concerned with life and the well-being of neighbor in its own right. That is, this is a concern and call that is parallel to any concern about sin. That concern does directly apply to what governments might do or not do, and how economic and social systems function. Those are, after all, things that directly contribute to life, or hinder it. So it is good and right for Christians to be concerned with how government might better support life, address inequality and problems in a society. It is good and right for us to be concerned with how we treat various people, how we structure our political, social, and economic life together, and so on.

What you might note here, contrary to your assertion, is that there is plenty of concern about sin. It isn't excised from the conversation. How people are harmed is discussed. It's a common theme. It just isn't all theologized into an abstraction or turned into matters of personal peccadilloes. It doesn't call for government to remedy sin, but it points out where sin and harms occur in concrete, everyday ways. And we call us back to that task of supporting life and wellbeing, even when that occurs in what appears to be secular rather than religious language. (I would also suggest that such a split is a false dichotomy.)

From my perspective, it isn't Christians on the "left" that are calling for a utopia. We want a better and more just society, in keeping with our calling to support and protect our neighbors and their wellbeing. We recognize that no one political, social, or economic system will ever be perfect. And we don't reject such matters as unworthy of our attention as Christians. On the other hand, this idea that if we all worked on our sinfulness as fully-formed Christians, while rejecting all that government and law stuff as evil and diabolical, all could be well. That sounds like a utopia to me, not a realistic outlook of the world or our faith and the interaction between the two.

HGL

DC "Utopia is the devil."

The Corporatist Utopia was all over the Western Europe's Cities during the Middle Ages, ending diversely by either Deformation or Revolution (so, between 1534 and 1848).

The Distributist Utopia was villages of Serbia in the Kingdom of Serbia and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, Slovenes.

Was Latin Christendom of the Devil? Was Byzantine Serbia of the Devil?

And who here is defending Pol Pot or Stalin?

HGL

MC "But working on sin, broadly in humanity or in a specific person, also isn't something applicable to government. That's not government's purpose."

However, governments consist of people.

And people are not exempt from descending from Adam and being candidates for redemption by Christ, even when they are in government position.

MC

HGL Yes, governments consist of people. People are bound by sin and given the gift of life and forgiveness in Christ. Government is thus subject to the foibles and gifts of human beings. But the purpose of government is still not that of working on sin.

DC

HGL, Distributism showed up as a word in GK Chestertons works in the early 20th century. Serbia was Slavic and just like Russia bound it's serfs to the lands in de facto slavery till the 1860's. If there was villages practicing Distributism it was on a very small scale and came to an end by the Greatest utopian evil Communism. Chartered Corporations were common means of raising money for grand ventures. The Virginia company and Mayflower compact come to mind. But capitalism and profit are their driving forces. The puritans simply signed up to be the corporations laborers. Nothing utopian about the reasons the investors bought stake in corporations. Coming back to Serbia, utopian Communism produced many Serbian Saints.

DC

JOL, let's return to the temptation of Christ as it's not about bread. It's about who will be king in your life. Bread/ food is a necessity and an appetite created by God for our survival. But it rules our lives like it does the animals. You were called to be higher than the animals and not ruled by your appetites. A foreshadowing event happened in Genesis when a very starving Esau wandered in to Jacob's tent. Esau sold his birthright and future kingship over the tribe to fill his stomach. His words were final and the consequences eternal. His stomach/ appetite caused him to sin and separated him from his rightful place.

40 days of starvation a sinless Christ was tempted to sin against God by turning rocks in to bread. This sin would have destroyed Christ's mission to defeat sin by remaining sinless. His stomach didn't rule Him and cause Him to sell His birth right as the Son of God. Next temptation was to be perched a top of the Pinnacle and show yourself God by defying gravity. It was not in God's plans to show that power yet. So the devil was saying come show off, do your own thing and let us see your power. Surely God will honor your doing things your own way. The rebellion of the demons is they wanted to do things their own way and not in God's timing. Christ said you shall not test the lord by doing things foolishly, your own way assuming there is no consequences.

Thirdly the devil offers Christ a way to achieve satisfaction of all his earthly appetites and kingship of this world to feed all the world. To rule and control the world's peoples. Simply sell his birth right, avoid the cross, get what he wants in fixing all those world problems. Simply transfer His loyalty and worship and make Satan His God and king. Easy easy, full appetites of sinful completion, food, wine, women and song and no cross. No cross! We all will carry our cross, bread will always be scarce, Satan will always be a LIAR and someone will always be demanding earthly governments/kings to be their God's. It's not about bread , it's about lordship over your stomach.

HGL

MC Nevertheless, each person wielding government power is bound to try to be forgiven, bound to obey God.

This means, what God wants for society (for instance no abortion or just wages) is a thing that a person with government powers needs to obey in his life as it relates to governing.

HGL

DC "Distributism showed up as a word in GK Chestertons works in the early 20th century."

And Belloc's. A thing may precede a word.

"Serbia was Slavic and just like Russia bound it's serfs to the lands in de facto slavery till the 1860's."

I would like a source for that. You might be confusing Serbia with Romania.

But supposing it were true. Something replaced serfdom at some point when it was abolished. In Russia Kulaks showed up. Kulaks are distributism, even if the word is different.

"If there was villages practicing Distributism it was on a very small scale"

Very small scale is the EXACT point of Distributism. Can you point to Serbian villages with all farms tied to one single lord in the time between 1860 and 1948? Or to villages where some farmers bought up their neighbours' farms until they had expanded to plantations? If you can't, that means that they practised distributism.

"and came to an end by the Greatest utopian evil Communism."

Not really. Tito broke with Stalin over Stalin being against NEP.

"Chartered Corporations were common means of raising money for grand ventures."

Yes, but was farming in Serbia ever a "grand venture"?

"The Virginia company and Mayflower compact come to mind."

The Mayflower, after trying Communism, settled for Distributism.

Unlike the Virginia Company, they were not a chartered corporation.

"Coming back to Serbia, utopian Communism produced many Serbian Saints."

As I recall, not exactly over Economic policy, but over what was really Marxist in Tito's Yugoslavia: religious and national policy. And education policy. And feminism.

Sweden also has these Marxist things without a Leninist economy, Sweden has a Fascist economy, even if it doesn't like or commonly get referred to by that name (Lyndon LaRouche correctly assessed Olof Palme as a Fascist in economic policy).

HGL

DC Your words to JOL very well assess the duties of the poor as poor.

But it doesn't assess the duties of a king as king, or, in a democracy, of the voter as a voter.

Capitalism creates situations were people's lives are ruled by their stomach. Just as much as Communism. And I don't mean a free market as such, I mean extreme Capitalism.

MC

HGL I don't agree with your statement about a person with government powers (or anyone) needing to obey. First, we aren't bound by God. We are graciously called by God. That's a significant but important difference. We aren't puppets in God's hands. Second, I don't think God has a specific will with respect to what governments should do, or those in government should do with their position. The whole thing presents God as an authoritarian divine dictator. That's not who God is.

HGL

MC "We aren't puppets in God's hands."

Never said so.

Bound to obey means morally bound, not physically or quasi-physically bound.

Governments are free to obey, or to rebel, God to punish them or to reward them.

"I don't think God has a specific will with respect to what governments should do, or those in government should do with their position."

I get the opposite impression from "quare fremunt gentes" ... sorry, fremuerunt and it's Psalm 2.

There are government actions that God approves, there are government actions that He disapproves. The Psalmist is speaking up against the latter in the case of Gentile governments.

"The whole thing presents God as an authoritarian divine dictator. That's not who God is."

Mussolini tells a company they will be fined if they don't pay workers decently, I think God approved, you think He didn't?

Four Corners Doesn't Mean Flat Earth

CREATION

Pete F. Fiske

Admin, Star contributor

@everyone: we would appreciate feedback on this: THERE ARE NO FLAT EARTH BIBLE VERSES WHATSOEVER!

Hans-Georg Lundahl

The ALLEGED "flat earth" verses fall into three categories.

1) "Circle of the earth" the Greek translation has "guros" = "circumference" and a globe has that too.

2) four corners = are those of the continents (NW corner in Alaska, NE corner in Siberia, SE corner in SE Australia, like Sydney or Hobart, SW corner on Cape Horn)

3) tree in Nebuchadnezzar's dream and Jesus saw all the kingdoms, the one is a dream, not a physical vision at all, the other, I'd say Satan provided "tele-vision" before TV sets were a thing.

He made sure light beams from the capital of China, back then Luoyang, were transmitted by the abilities of angels, and therefore retranslated into light beams on that big mountain where he and Jesus were standing. It doesn't mean Jesus could have seen the streets of Luoyang with a really good binocular pointed that way. And same for Rome, obviously. Or the Maya site San Bartolo.

For category 3, I had to look up what it was on an old post of mine from 2019, in French : Est-ce que la Bible dit que la Terre est plate?

For category 2, I did an update on factchecking how much exactly falls "within the four corners" of inhabited land. Basically, the biggest part outside it is New Zealand. In order not to have East Coast of Australia or Murmansk outside it, I accept some bending of the outer lines between the four corners.

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: One Comment, a Bit Prematurely Under a Long Video · New blog on the kid: Where Are the Four Corners on a Globe? · But What About the West and East Lines?

Update

CREATION

Pete F. Fiske

Admin, Star contributor

@everyone: "Take no part in the ...works of darkness (Satan's #FlatEarthLie), but instead expose them."
~ Ephesians 5:11 ESV

Hans-Georg Lundahl

A few Church Fathers or Ecclesiastic writers were in fact flat earth, Lactantius, for instance, I think.

This being so, flat earth as such is arguably not a heresy per se.

However, the contemporary Flat Earth map has more like three than four corners of the continents, so, unlike Lactantius, actually contradicts Apocalypse 7:1.

Literal on Both Since Childhood

For those who know I became a Catholic only in 1988, at a few months short of twenty, I had believed in the Real Presence since I was a newly Baptised Lutheran and before that a not-yet-baptised basically Evangelical.

I've never been a Calvinist or Zwinglian./HGL

Israeli Police or Religious Liberty?

Middle East Eye, 19 April 2025
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1064263595630400

On Holy Saturday, Israeli police imposed heightened restrictions on Palestinian Christians, blocking their access to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. While large sections of the courtyard remained empty, worshippers were confined to narrow alleyways.

Police presence dominated the area and disrupted traditional rituals performed by the worshipers.

About Catholic Clergy

CD

I

GK

No house visits unless your family has money to possible donate to church on demise.

CD

GK ...not a true priest in a true Catholic Church

MÓF

GK we were brought Holy Communion by an SSPX priest two weeks ago. There was no altar boy but we all knelt and there was a small altar with candle in the house. Nothing at all was said about donations.

NP

GK this was before your time and in a place and culture you would never understand because you've never been exposed, and obviously had nothing to do with whatever "Christian"assembly you frequent.

HGL

GK, Even from a Novus Ordo, doing those house visits are part of what he's payed for.

That's one clear part of what he's doing if not every week (though possibly that) at least every month when not hearing confession in Church or celebrating Mass.

That's one reason why he is not obliged to say all the hours in Choir, he's still obliged to say them, but he can do so on the walk to shopping or (in some countries) bus or tram to a house visit.

II

NP

"This is what is now lost to modern Catholics"

And in Quebec, the Faith is so diluted and childish that the province is even more left woke than the rest of Canada. They now think that speaking French is what constitutes the distinct society clause of the BNA, when in fact it was their Catholicity as a French colony (which was/is ruled under the Napoleonic Code) that did so. And this recognition was necessary in order to not politically force the French to commit apostasy by being, as a Canadian, under the rule of the English monarchy, which is also the head of the Anglican communion.

III

MD

I spent 13 times in the Memorial Hospital in Jasper twice for double pneumonia given last rights they came around every Sunday asking if you wanted to receive Christ always did. One Sunday the priest and nun entered the room the man across from me just died he was on his stomach he defecated, and the smell was pretty bad I was a little kid I'll never forget that poor man

About My Situation

HGL's F.B. writings: About My Situation · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: My situation, bis

ZM

So I watched Darby O'Gill and the Little People with the kids. They were absolutely terrified, which was a terrific surprise given the folklore's light-hearted portrayal. I was delighted at their natural intuition that Leprechauns can be evil creatures.

I used the moment to teach them to extend basic decency and respect even to the wicked, and not to seek the granting of wishes, but rather to petition the salvation of the soul.

HGL

sometimes the granting of wishes is necessary for the salvation of a soul

ZM

HGL no doubt. But let's not confuse ends. The leprechaun grants wishes without regard to end, or often enough, with a preference for a bad end.

It flirts with presumptuousness to make wishes. Rather, pray "thy will be done," and perhaps the wish will be granted, if it was a good wish.

HGL

there is also the possibility of going on a pilgrimage for one ... the pilgrimage I did to St. James was not for an indulgence

JSC

HGL and sometimes the refusal of a wish is necessary for the salvation of a soul, or of many souls, as in Gethsemane.

HGL

Well, I don't think the guys who think that about me are right.

As an alternative, I prayed for death (note, not for culpable death, like in suicide), and some who seem to have wanted to preserve me from my request have died, starting with Antipope Wojtyla.

ZM

HGL I understand you have gone through tremendous struggles in the times I have known you. How is life at the moment?

HGL

I don't know what "tremendous struggles" means.

I am a writer and (very part time) composer.

With an income from my production, which is a regular one, I could have a happy life pretty quickly. Without it, what are you even doing asking about my "tremendous struggles"?

One of my blights are people who pester me to ask how I am, as if they were presuming I mist be ill or a very anxious and weak person if I don't like them. Regularly, they are the least willing to put my texts into print or my sheet music into sound.

ZM

HGL well, you are coming on my page, telling me how you prayed for death, and I don't know what to do with this information. The last thing I want to do is contribute to any blight on your life

HGL

I prayed for death in 2004.

This does not equate to me going through tremendous struggles since then.

So, I still do not see what you mean by tremendous struggles.

I am going through a certain hardship, like in order to have a flat in Paris (and probably most surroundings), I need either two years' rent in advance or an income that's three times the monthly rent.

Starting to play my music (if you think it's good) could do that.

Starting to print my texts could do that.

Speculating on what tremendous hardships I'm going through could very much NOT do that.

I may add that my conditions are favourable to you, economically. You earn, you decide the rate of royalties.

It's not like a pyramid or Ponzi scheme where I control everything.

For anyone interested, here are some stats on page views:

12:27 Today, St. Gabriel, 24.III.2025 12 + 7 + 24 + 2 + 1 + 3 + 12 + 14 + 11 + 33 + 1 + 2 + 16 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 4 + 11 + 132 + 1 + 6 + 3 + 5 + 11 + 5 + 38 = 359		Yesterday, Oculi LD, 23.III.2025 80 + 7 + 20 + 1 + 8 + 7 + 9 + 5 + 1182 + 14 + 7 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 15 + 5 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 5 + 58 + 66 + 37 + 2 + 6 + 84 + 13 + 381 + 1 = 2023
The different numbers adding up are from different blogs, I have many specialised ones.
March 2025 by the 24th 6639 + 1450 + 11572 + 248 + 393 + 89 + 432 + 1016 + 4427 + 5354 + 106 + 114 + 27 + 456 + 1226 + 73 + 27 + 11 + 40 + 37 + 36 + 37 + 29 + 35 + 163 + 110 + 42 + 299 + 612 + 27791 + 333 + 47 + 853 + 554 + 951 + 821 + 32 + 1316 + 20 + 17 + 34 + 6040 = 73,909, or each day 3080		February 2025 10094 + 146 + 103 + 139 + 2688 + 123 + 3358 + 2659 + 983 + 2308 + 153 + 1540 + 19326 + 1629 + 568 + 162 + 220 + 160 + 116 + 173 + 162 + 185 + 190 + 159 + 75 + 114 + 127 + 3797 + 2025 + 63 + 402 + 386 + 7730 + 16205 + 2001 + 657 + 199 + 830 + 587 + 38900 + 2987 + 6022 = 130,451, or 4659 each day

And here are conditions:
Writings: Conditions, comment les imprimer/how to print them, Sheet music: What's the deal? C'est quoi ce truc?

Answer to Lindsay Harold on the Bible canon

Lindsay Harold consented to the following:

Hans Georg Lundahl

Did you know that Lindsay's Logic and Rational Abolitionist are being blocked by malware control when you have the www. in front of what's in front of blogspot?

Either way, as a defender of the Catholic canon 72~73 books (in the former case Baruch or Lamentations is counted as part of Jeremias), I'd like to copy paste your post from March 8, 2023, inlcude it in a blog post of mine with answers about the OT canon, you'd be OK with that?

Lindsay Harold

You're welcome to copy/paste with attribution and a link.

When she gave her consent, she may have been thinking of a blog post from March 20, 2023, on Lindsay's Logic: The Biggest Mystery in the Bible. That's supposing she thought I meant a post on her blog, which I had mentioned. I actually meant a post on her FB wall, so attributing, Lindsay Harold, link within attribution is to her FB page. After the copy-paste, I will also give my reply.

Lindsay Harold

March 8, 2023

How can we know that the Protestant canon of scripture is the correct one? Why only those 66 books and no others?
-Because the New Testament books are the group of books used and accepted by the early church as scripture.
-Because the Jewish canon never included the apocryphal books. They were set aside as useful Jewish history, but not inerrant scripture. That's what the word apocrypha means - "hidden" or "set aside."
-Because the Jewish people knew and admitted in their writings that there had been no new revelation since the Book of Malachi around 400 BC, so the books written during the period from 400 BC until the NT books (~40 AD and later) were not scripture and not considered scripture.
-Because Jesus Himself referred to all the blood shed from Abel to Zacharias the son of Berechias to refer to all the innocent deaths from Genesis to Malachi, thus affirming that these and only these books were scripture in His time.
-Because Jesus and the apostles quoted the canonical books as scripture and no others.
-Because the apocryphal books and other books (e.g. gnostic gospels) contain errors and often contradict scripture.
-Because no book which falsely attributes its authorship to someone we know did not write it (e.g. Book of Enoch, Gospel of Peter) can be scripture as it's lying about itself.
-Because the apocryphal books were canonized by the Catholic Church in the 1500's as a power play in response to the Protestant Reformation, not because they had ever been considered scripture by the church as a whole throughout history.
-Because the apostles were given direct authority by God to set doctrine for the church, but this authority did not pass down to others not commissioned directly by God. Thus, only those books written or supervised by the apostles during their lifetimes are authoritative scripture in the NT era. The NT books we have are the only 1st century works with this pedigree. Later books were not apostolic.

My Answer

I'll quote and answer bit by bit:

-Because the New Testament books are the group of books used and accepted by the early church as scripture.

Not all of them, by all of the Church and not exclusively by all of the Church. As late as the council of Laodicaea, the Apocalypse was excluded. As late as the Muratorian fragment the Apocalypse of Peter is included.

-Because the Jewish canon never included the apocryphal books. They were set aside as useful Jewish history, but not inerrant scripture. That's what the word apocrypha means - "hidden" or "set aside."

We would promote, you and Jews would deny that certain parts of Daniel were in the original Jewish canon for Daniel and all of Baruch in the original Jewish canon for Jeremias. By the way, a single Jewish book being broken up into two in the Christian canon, that's not unique. First to Fourth Kings are in the Jewish Bible the two books "Samuel" and "Kings" (the Protestant mention is a compromise).

As to the other ones, they are not prophecy, the canon of the "writings" (ketuvim) was not yet decided among Jews when Christians took over both First to Fourth Kings and ... Tobit.

-Because the Jewish people knew and admitted in their writings that there had been no new revelation since the Book of Malachi around 400 BC, so the books written during the period from 400 BC until the NT books (~40 AD and later) were not scripture and not considered scripture.

The presence of a prophet is not necessary for a writing where the divine revelation is considered as residing in the historic events, like most of Genesis (not chapter 1 obviously), the four books of Kings, Luke's two books. I and II Maccabees do not state the absence of divine inspiration for themselves, but they do state the absence of a prophetic figure.

-Because Jesus Himself referred to all the blood shed from Abel to Zacharias the son of Berechias to refer to all the innocent deaths from Genesis to Malachi, thus affirming that these and only these books were scripture in His time.

He could have known that certain bloodsheds in the Maccabees era were not on the hands of the Pharisees He was talking to. He could also have known that (as I vaguely recall some have said) the Zacharias in question is the father of John the Baptist. Or He could have avoided the Ketuvim, as the canon wasn't fixed for them yet.

-Because Jesus and the apostles quoted the canonical books as scripture and no others.

In debates with Sadducees, they were quoting the Torah only, and in debates with Pharisees the books accepted by them.

Also, not all are quoted.

-Because the apocryphal books and other books (e.g. gnostic gospels) contain errors and often contradict scripture.

You cannot compare Wisdom of Solomon (accepted in the Muratorian fragment) to Gnostic Gospels. The ones accepted in the Catholic canon do not contain errors nor contradict Scripture.

-Because no book which falsely attributes its authorship to someone we know did not write it (e.g. Book of Enoch, Gospel of Peter) can be scripture as it's lying about itself.

Of Enoch, we can be reasonably sure Enoch didn't write it in its present shape, but it could have been written by Enoch and badly observed. My best argument against it is, it describes the natural year as 364 days. Perhaps a passage is missing which would make the total 365 and some more, and given the complexities, that could be the reason for the omission. St. Augustine considered it as "not canon" because it was so old the risk for errors in transmission was too big.

-Because the apocryphal books were canonized by the Catholic Church in the 1500's as a power play in response to the Protestant Reformation, not because they had ever been considered scripture by the church as a whole throughout history.

Book of Enoch and Gospel of Peter certainly weren't on the Trentine list of canonic books. The 72~73 book canon (depending on whether Baruch is counted separately from Jeremias or as a part of it) had been if not undisputed at least pretty standard since the councils of Rome, Hippo and Carthage in the late 4th C. AD.

Also, canonicity of II Maccabees is not necessary to prove that Jesus approved of prayers for the dead (chapter 12) and apparitions by deceased saints (chapter 15). It is sufficient this idea was widely accepted by Jews, and if Jesus didn't contradict it (which we don't find Him explicitly doing in the canonic Gospels, that means He approved of it.

-Because the apostles were given direct authority by God to set doctrine for the church, but this authority did not pass down to others not commissioned directly by God. Thus, only those books written or supervised by the apostles during their lifetimes are authoritative scripture in the NT era. The NT books we have are the only 1st century works with this pedigree. Later books were not apostolic.

This is true only to a limited degree. We agree that later books are not Apostolic. C. S. Lewis' Mere Christianity cannot be added to the canon. However, the books and book parts disputed by Protestants and affirmed by Catholics are in the OT, all of them written before Jesus arrived. They were only disputed later and at that time confirmed by successors of the Apostles, but they were written by prophets and writers of the Old Covenant.

In another sense, it is not true that the authority by God to set doctrine did not pass down. They commissioned successors. Apostolic Succession in the sense usually meant by Catholics (and not the Series Pastorum given by some early Church Fathers with the name Apostolic Succession) is found in the Bible. Acts 1:26 gives a general principle, but not the detail of imposition of hands. However, we know Apostles did impose hands on new bishops (Acts 8), the power Simon Magus asked for was the power of a consecrated bishop. We also know that a group in Antioch, not exclusively the twelve, none of the twelve except Peter, and just possibly Peter if he went under the pseudonym Simon Niger, imposed hands on Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13), we can interpose that those imposing hands on these two and not part of the original twelve had their imposition by the twelve, directly or indirectly. St. Paul imposed hands on Timothy (II Tim 1:6), and Timothy was supposed to impose hands on even more other people but very selectively (I Tim 5:22). We have no indication that this was supposed to cease, and we have a contrary indication, in the promise of Jesus in Matthew 28:20, given that we learn in verse 16 that the people receiving this promise were the eleven, this means the office of the eleven / twelve, at least on some plane, was to continue to the end of time. So, this finishes the rebuttal.

Philosophy (Between Two Swedes)

Johan Eddebo

There's something off about people being genuinely enthusiastic about and interested in philosophy for its own sake rather than exclusively with regard to the answers and truths it provides.

It's sort of like being unduly fascinated about the mechanics of autopsy procedures or morbidly preoccupied with the minutiae of different kinds of stool samples. Like a general who actually likes the methods of killing.

Philosophy is a necessary evil in the treatment of disease, and anyone who is actually compelled to perform it for any length of time may certainly learn to love it for the sake of its utility, but there's something uncanny about loving this sort of autopsy as such.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I don't know what philosophy you have been doing, see nothing that could relate to scholasticism here

Johan Eddebo

I'm a Thomist. You know that attributed quote about straw?

And you're aware of Garrigou-Lagrange's reflections on the dangers of philosophy?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
This is a relevant quote (Lagrange):

In this discussion of retarded souls, a most important consideration should be noted: namely, that we must be on the alert to preserve in our souls the subordination of the natural activity of the mind to the essentially supernatural virtues, especially to the three theological virtues.

These three infused virtues and their acts are certainly very superior to the natural activity of the mind necessary for the study of the sciences, of philosophy, and of theology. To deny this truth would be a heresy; but it is not sufficient to admit it in theory. Otherwise we would end by really preferring the study of philosophy and theology to the superior life of faith, to prayer, to the love of God and of souls, to the celebration of the holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which would be hurriedly celebrated without any spirit of faith, in order to give more time to a piece of work, to an intellectual overloading that would remain quite empty and fruitless, because it would be destitute of the spirit that ought to animate it.

Thus we would fall into an evil intellectualism, in which there would be something like the hypertrophy of the reasoning powers to the detriment of the life of faith, of true piety, and of the indispensable training of the will. Then charity, the highest of the theological virtues, would no longer truly hold the first place in the soul, which might remain forever retarded and in part fruitless.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

You are aware that St. Paul endorses the strictly Geocentric version of Prima Via in Romans 1?

I think he primes Garrigou-Lagrange, and as for St. Thomas, he may have regretted not having been an even sharper philosopher.

Johan Eddebo

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Rom. 1:18-20? I don't see how this implies geocentrism nor why Aquinas' First Way would have to relate to heavenly bodies -- that said, I'm not disregarding geocentrism, and there are interesting novel arguments for the position that build on contemporary scientific cosmology.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

What proofs of God were:

a) visible
b) and so since the creation of the world
c) and show specifically how God's power is inexhaustable?

Beauty could be several different limited spirits. Flagellum of the bacterium and modern cosmology were not available.

So, this leaves lots of things available and visible in the First Century AD, but the one most obviously implying that God has inexhaustable power is that He keeps turning the sky around us, with Sun, Moon and stars every day.

Johan Eddebo I think I also recall

"manifestum est et patet sensibus aliquid moveri, utputa sol" (maybe Leonine edition, maybe Contra Gentiles).

And Riccioli actually referred to God moving Heaven around us (which he didn't agree with, he preferred angels moving all celestial bodies East to West), as the proof given by St. Thomas, no doubt in Prima Via.

Someone Attacked the Crusades

Status:

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Religions are not locked demographics.

One is perfectly capable of converting.

Demographics are capable of converting.

Loren Hickerson

Star contributor

Hans-Georg Lundahl All it takes is a little bit of genocide. Which Christians are really good at, seeing as how their scripture not only explains how to commit it, but also justifies it as okay.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Loren Hickerson Or a little bad mouthing, which Atheists and Freemasons are excellent at against Christians, with a little genocide (Vendée, Russian Revolution, Holodomor) to back it up.

The same is also partly true of Protestants against Catholics, who are the real Christians.

No, the Bible does not promote Genocide. Whatever you could say about ethnic cleansings under Joshua, they were under Joshua Ben Nun. Under Jesus, the orders are to make disciples of all nations, which implies killing off none of them. And unlike both Protestants and Atheists, we have generally obeyed that (some places of Canaries and Hispaniola did suffer from bad habits that Spaniards took over from Muslims).

Loren Hickerson

Hans-Georg Lundahl Cool except every part of philosophy and history proves you wrong.

Just the fact that you completely ignored the Crusades is enough to make me laugh and recognize you as an idiot and a liar.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Loren Hickerson Crusades were not genocidal, and the ones in the Orient were not missionary.

You could get one point for 5000 people massacred in Béziers for being (among) Albigensians.

Loren Hickerson

Hans-Georg Lundahl Look at you pivot and then suggest bold faced lies.

Cambridge has multiple studies showing the Crusades were a genocide.

Infact, the depiction of blood often mentioned in the Crusades is so egregious, as to suggest that blood ran through the streets up to the ankles of the Judaic and Muslim places the Crusaders attacked. Being a bold faced liar doesn't make you right. It makes you and your religion you're defending look like it has bold faced liars in it. Thanks, but I want no part of that doctrine.

And I don't see how mentioning the Inquisition helps your case.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"blood ran through the streets up to the ankles"

Literary exaggeration. Note that Jerusalem's taking in 1099 could be added to Béziers, 3 days, until Geoffrey of Bouillon stopped it.

Again, the taking of Jerusalem wasn't a missionary enterprise, and the liar here is either you, or the people you wrongly trust.

"Cambridge has multiple studies showing the Crusades were a genocide."

Like very new ones by Muslim students?

Loren Hickerson "And I don't see how mentioning the Inquisition helps your case."

To showcase your ignorance, I didn't. The Albigensian Crusade and the Inquisition are two distinct things.

Loren Hickerson

[lol to both]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Loren Hickerson Just checking ... did you have actual answers to what I stated, or do you prefer making a show of laughing?

Harcèlement

Recipes from Home and Abroad: Quelques astuces en culture générale · HGL's F.B. writings: Le PM de Versailles - avec des corrections · Harcèlement

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Je suis dans un cyber.

À côté de moi, un homme dont les premiers mots sont "vous allez bien ?" ou "tu vas bien ?" et qui ensuite dit "je te connais" ... je le reconnais sur les ongles en vernis noir. Depuis hier. Soit je ne l'avais pas vu avant le bref rencontre hier, soit c'était il y a très longtemps.

Ce genre de personne m'isole des gens que j'aimerais côtoyer en épuisant mon énergie sociale sur eux.

Un peu avant, je m'assois pour manger une glace. Un grand paquet. C'est à la place Theodor Herzl. Quand je m'assois, deux personnes, que je ne connais pas, sont à l'autre côté de la statue.

L'un d'entre eux dit à l'autre "c'est Jésus" mais en pas beaucoup de bruit. Je ne m'appelle pas Jésus. Par contre, je sais que des gens des accueils de jour, par exemple SOS Accueil à Versailles, qu'ils ont parfois voulu m'appeler "Jésus" comme si je me prenais pour Lui. Ce qui n'est pas le cas.

Cette fois à Versailles, je n'ai pas eu gain de cause, un policier musulman (au moins de la population) protège les harceleurs musulmans, pour les dénoncer j'ai eu à me déplacer vers le commissariat de Versailles, et attendre, tandis que, dès l'intervention, ... l'homme à côté me quitte, heureusement ... les harceleurs ont eu pleine liberté de se prononcer sur moi devant les forces d'ordre. Ils pouvaient me dénoncer comme fou complet dans leur exaltation de pouvoir abusif, moi, la victime, devait attendre pour me calmer.

Revenons à la glace. Des pompiers viennent. Ils me demandent si je les ai appelés. Je hoche les épaules en continuant à manger ma glace. Ils se font des conversations assez longtemps, demandent à droite et à gauche, les deux qui étaient là sont partis, et parlent d'un homme de 36 ou quelque chose.

Diverses hypothèses se posent. Une est une hargne très grande chez des sdf pour ma situation avec davantage indépendance qu'eux. Les pompiers seraient les victimes de leur surchérie. Mais alors ils auraient pu me demander si j'avais fait appel, sans plus, sans de s'attendre à côté de moi jusqu'à ce que j'avais fini la glace. Un paquet d'un demi-litre ou demi-kilo. Je n'étais qu'à la moitié quand ils venaient, peut-être même pas ça.

Une autre est, quelqu'un dans les services ou peut-être sévices médicaux voudraient me coller dans la psychiatrie. Ceci était alors un harcèlement de plus, je viens d'en subir un autre le 16 par le fouillage et éparpillement de mes choses que je découvre en revenant sur mes affaires.

Quand je suis enfin suffisamment récupéré d'une bronchite pour aller à la police, le policier fait des délais et re-délais pour vérifier et revérifier que mon histoire soit cohérente. Quand je part de la police et reviens à mes affaires, encore une fois mes choses sont fouillées.

Un des jours entre le 16 et mon pv ma ceinture un cuir avait été volée.

Quelqu'un semble décidé de me tamponner comme fou. Et de me traiter en fonction. Me priver de ceinture au cas au je serais suicidaire. Me noyer en compagnie pour prévenir des pensées noires. Et bien entendu me faire subir des tests de cohérence mentale. Un peu comme Hitler ou ses hommes ordonnaient à faire subir Schuschnigg une surveillance accrue pour le tourmenter, sous prétexte qu'il serait suicidaire. Et puisque Hitler soutenais une dictature médicale, quoi de plus naturel, comme harcèlement d'un ennemi ? Le régime de Hitler n'est pas mort partout en 1945. La dictature médicale, ça reste. Et au cas qu'on dirait "non, c'est socialiste, c'est communiste" - il paraît que Hitler avait été en deux régimes temporaires, plus ou moins léninistes, celui d'Eisner et celui de Levien ou de Leviné ou s'ils étaient dans le même gouvernement.

Facebook Connection Phishing For an Email?

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: Facebook Connection Phishing For an Email? · New blog on the kid: Phishing for an Email

It so happens, the password I entered for that FB account was correct.

Update, 27.I.2025, 22:20:

Again, the password was correct./HGL

Update, 1.II.2025:

Update 6.II.2025:

Zuckerberg Changed His Policy?

By 20 minutes 18 seconds in this video, I had heard it:

Singing From the Ruins | FORWARD BOLDLY
Christine Niles | 12.I.2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkjWGRkFezI

I decided to test. Well, not to me:

What I tried to share, the first of these three (which link to each other), here:

Newer Tables: Preliminaries · Flood to Joseph in Egypt · Joseph in Egypt to Fall of Troy.

Where a tried to share:

Radiometric Dating
https://www.facebook.com/groups/201189381177748

The group is dedicated to a discussion between Deep Timers and Young Earth Creationists about diverse methods of Radiometric dating, one of which is carbon dating. My intended post was entirely appropriate for the group. No one has stamped my blogs as criminal in any court of law in France, at least none where I was able to answer or that I heard of. Facebook is treating my blogs as criminal, because they do not support the agenda of promoting Big Bang Cosmology, Deep Time Evolution, possibly also parts of what Roger Buck calls "Eastern, Esoteric, Ecumenic, English" which does take issue with Modern Science on lots of issues, but not on these ones./HGL

Pre-Tribulation Rapture is NOT Biblical

GB

status

29.XII.2024

HGL

The problem with this is, it presents a pre-tribulation rapture.

Those left behind will have a few hours or minutes before they die and resurrect before a judge. Those raptured will have a few hours or minutes before they hear a trump and see their brethren and enemies walk up from graves, lining up on two sides of Our Lord.

The Bible no-where says that the rapture is pre-tribulation, or, even if* there is a partial one, that all the Church will be raptured before the Tribulation.

This teaching is pretty toxic, since it leads to conclusions like this one:

It can't be the anti-christ or the mark in Revelation. It's okay to take the chip and follow this man because if it were the mark of the beast we'd all have been raptured by now.

Or someone else pretended the strong delusion foreseen in II Thessalonians is post-rapture. Nope.

GB

[omitting a pc**]

HGL and then i read ur comment, u got it all wrong hun

HGL He is going to take us somewhere: John 14:3

how ne1 can deny the rapture is beyond me

[facepalm]

PM

HGL The pre-trib Rapture IS shown in Scripture

The Rapture Generation
https://www.alongemausroad.com/rapture

JD

HGL "no where"? Prove that.

HGL

GB

And if I shall go, and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and will take you to myself; that where I am, you also may be
[John 14:3]

Yes, but it doesn't say this happens before the tribulation.

PM

The absence of the word "Church" from chapter 4 in Apocalypse doesn't prove the Church is actually missing.

The idea that the restrainer is the Church is false. Church is feminine, so, it would be feminine "he katekhousa" but we have masculine "ho katekhon" and indeed a prequel of the final Antichrist started when in Austria and in Russia a heir of the then ho katekhon, of Emperor Claudius, was taken out of the way. The restrainer is the Roman Emperor.

JD, give me all places that talk of the rapture, and I will shown none speak of that being pre-Tribulation.

CM

HGL; It is the Bowls of Wrath that we do not experience. Jesus makes His Harvest from ABOVE the clouds, just before it starts. Rev.14:14-16. Then the Bowls of Wrath are poured upon the earth. The 5th and 6th trumpet events put the false one into power after the 1,260 days Daniel was told about in DAN.12. 30 days later the false one is standing in the holy place claiming to be god. 45 days later BLESSED are they that WAIT and come to the 1,335th day. I figure that is when Jesus makes His Harvest of His crops to the Master's Barn! We will be ONE with Him then and may be assigned to help in our Eternal Bodies during the Bowls of Wrath. This honor have all the saints! Psalm 149:1-9; JOEL 2:1-11

HGL

If you check the previous verse in Apocalype 14, namely verse 13, it says:

And I heard a voice from heaven, saying to me: Write: Blessed are the dead, who die in the Lord. From henceforth now, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; for their works follow them
[Apocalypse (Revelation) 14:13]

The Church may not experience the bowls of wrath, but neither did Goshen experience the Ten Plagues of Egypt.

Saints who are already in Heaven, having already died, no doubt participate in punishing the persecutors of those of the Church who are still standing on ground level. This will not be much different for when the Antichrist is on scene than it is already.

CM

HGL; What we are seeing now, and all that has happened in the past is NOTHING compared to what the 7 trumpet events will do. The first 4 are not woes, but the 5th, 6th, and 7th are classified as WOES! Like never before. The 5th and 6th I believe may have something to do with fallen angels/UFO's, demons, etc. They put the false one into power claiming he is god returned to save humanity. Blessed are they that wait and do not take the mark [probably 45 days; Dan.12]. Then the 7th and LAST trumpet sounds, which is classified as the greatest of all WOES, God's Bowls of Wrath! These events will be nothing like any of our recorded history. We may at any time now start seeing the trumpets manifest.

HGL

You have not contradicted any of my observations.

* Note

"Third Eagle of the Apocalypse" / William Tapley considers some Protestants of goodwill will be raptured. But they won't be the Church, on his view they would be kind of annexed souls as an outlier to Her, and the Church will continue on Earth to Armageddon. I'm not saying he's right. I'm saying he's not refusing the normal Catholic view on I Cor. 4, he's speaking of Matthew 24:17, housetops or rooftops (he reasons: "if they can't go down, there is only up left", I think "go down" could refer to go down into the house, they are told to wait until the enemy is out of sight, or perhaps take the stairs to the outside and run, at least, definitely, not to go down into the house — it is possible this was already fulfilled with Titus' arrival).

** Note

Not a personal computer, but a personal comment.