Відео

OK. Ill just whip out my time machine.

@@edwardburroughs1489 Say Hi to him for me.

Quite right. Theology is not the established church / various church hierarchies.

Or we could elect our judges so we can have kangaroo courts like the one trying Trump in New York?

kudos for ‘arrant & risible tosh’

Americans are Europeans

Starkey, like most, doesn't seem to have read much about Germanic paganism, that is to say, the traditional ways of English people. He often seems to only see things for their appearance sake, a certain word, name, outfit, item, and he'll point out that it's often Roman or Greek in origin, essentially he can't see past a classicist education, he knows the classicism that is taught and commonly spoken about, he doesn't really seem to know classicism as a whole as a historical era, just the Greco-Roman stuff. When I first became aware of Starkey's political side, I was very sympathetic to Christianity, I had absorbed the bible, heard the professions, came to a deep feeling about the character of Jesus and the nature of the Yahweh god, etc and I first I didn't know what to make of Starkey's atheism. Years past and I had quite a u-turn on Christianity, I came to view it on my own quite similarly to how Starkey seems too and probably with a more in depth dislike. However I still find atheism quite nonsensical, I realised that I had essentially come around to what I imagine (and from my reading of plenty of ancient writings) is the pagan position. And as time went on I've become fond of what I've seen of the broadly Germanic paganism, based on what Romans claimed of them and what their own sagas and poems contain, not worshipping trees or any such things, but with all that we know in modern day, just seeing the psychology, sociology, and spiritual side of things, and I think I land on the position of definite democracy but with focus on goodness (something Starkey doesn't say, most our moral, emotive and action words are Germanic, such as "good"), essentially the phrase Starkey uses which I think is a good analogy, "English Shinto", not quite, "Worshipping themselves", but consciously attuning themselves in the world to their own soul. I could go on about my own feelings, but I do think a form of modern paganism, that is actual paganism, the pagan mindset of old, not modern wu wu tree worship, but the historical paradigm of the term "paganism", meaning "the common people's ways", would be good for anyone. And we're blessed to have some invaluable ancient texts from our particular stripe of paganism, the Germanic languages, still surviving to show some guidance in archetypes, ideas, and principles so we need not start from complete scratch with the soul searching.

I don't know If you've seen much of David Starkey before, but once he gets going, good luck getting a word in edgeways. But it's always worth it - fascinating intelligence.

@@ianfoster6601 I have been a lifelong fan , but it's still good to hear more than one viewpoint.

🎵Glory! Hallelujah!!🎶

But England doesn't have a Christian foundation, that's just propaganda. England, the English, the Angles, likely long predate Christianity as a whole, let alone the Germanic tradition they come. It's no coincidence that Beowulf was the most common story in all of ancient England, and one of the oldest examples of Germanic language text altogether. Protestantism in history, to a naïve eye, might look like an attempt to reassert a more fundamental Christianity as apposed to a paganised Catholicism, but it simply isn't. Firstly, Protestant nations hardly agree on anything theologically. The reality is that it was a democratic feeling. Catholicism was a form of globalism, it's no coincidence either that it was Germanic nations who most firmly turned Protestant, almost as if there's something cultural about it (interesting note, the Duchy of Prussian, the remnant of the Teutonic Order was the first state to profess Protestantism). Nations simply didn't like the political power that a central supreme Catholicism was having in their daily lives. As some have said, Henry VIII and the Reformation was the original Brexit. So, the politics of it all is obvious and well recorded. But spiritually we can see what happen after these countries turned to Protestantism, they became generally much more patriotic, more democratic (in a productive way), more scientifically minded and culturally more creative, whether it be the literature of Shakespeare or the mass of classical German composers, or in the case of the tiny Duchy of Prussian, rose to overtake all it's deeply catholic neighbours and hold a central European empire that absorbed the Holy Roman Empire and reforged it into modern Germany. Now you can move the goal posts and say "Ah well yes, those of the fruits of a more true Christianity", that's obvious nonsense. I'm not saying they're the fruits of rejecting Christianity either because that's not what they did, but they did reject a centralised de facto globalist rule. They moved out from under a hegemony into a democratic space, essentially a more pagan space, if you know that that word simply means "common people's ways". Of course the religiosity didn't necessarily lose any intensity, though it's being noticed today the Protestant nations are essentially atheist nations, but that's because of a double sided effect of people thinking paganism is about worshipping trees, rather than it's true meaning, which is simple a cohort of people thinking and living for themselves with their own best beliefs and traditions.

Its quite simple. Starkey is gay and doesn't like God's position on this.

@@grannyannie2948 The Bible only very vaguely and slightly mentions what we assume is homosexuality, really only certain physical acts, which is held up to criticism aren't even physically possible. It's been human beings investing themselves with the right to speak for god that have had a thing for that particular issue. While leaving out all the other things more overtly mention and forbade in the bible, or even just the glaring mistakes.

Well surely anything that commands us to "Love thy enemy as thy neighbour", should be rigorously researched? Also, you might be interested to know, that one of the earliest, papal bulls so to speak, of early Christianity, was a plea for believers to stop castrating themselves, it was expressly banned at the Council of Nicaea. Upon reading the bible, specifically Matthew 19:12, you can understand why a lot of ancient highly superstitious people might come to that conclusion.

Yes but Christian " leaders " are at the forefront of promoting both Marxism and Islam . How is that good or even Christian ?

@@Alfred5555 And yet people get arrested and even jailed in my country for reading the Bible as it's considered hate speech by the LGBT community. So our politicians and judiciary have come to a definite position on what the Bible says on the matter.

One of the best litmus tests and reveals of delusion I think is. Does a person think Europe succeeded because of Christianity, or, was Christianity spread by the success of Europe.

​@Alfred5555 Good point Alfred .

@@Alfred5555 the latter I would say, Christianity didn't value history or science. It was once European nations moved beyond matters of doctrinal faith and sought knowledge of how things worked and recovered and taught old pre-Christian texts. That technological and organisational progress permitted expansion trade and conquest. Christianity got carried along by that success.

Alloys are often better than their base metal components. It seems a foolish Either/Or questions & the real one is what is the best combination mix for the outcomes needed.

She knew that workers were potentially not guilty of theft in that the Fujitsu computer system was know to be faulty, workers lives were destroyed and there were suicides during a prolonged criminal of investigation against the innocent.

​@@andygriffiths9916Thankyou for that context

I disagree. The modern interpretation of Christianity is left wing, and most people reject that form. Historically it's been quite possible to be both politically conservative and Christian. To give one example, I have heard a sermon that completely disregards multiculturalism. Whilst it is correct to show kindness to strangers, if a foreigner lives amongst you they have no rights until they have completely adopted your culture for three generations. PS I never did like Paul much, Peter and James are more interesting.

@@grannyannie2948 A. If you're relying on varied interpretation of a supposedly perfect sacred text, then philosophically things have fallen at the first hurdle. B. None of what you just said was preached by Jesus or the new testament, in many ways the very oppilate.

What you say is fundamentally true. It leads me the conclusion that in truth, no nation as a state has every really been Christian, mainly because it's just absurd beyond the barest simple teachings on kindness (which as Plato pointed out, such things come naturally to good people, "good people don't need laws to tell them how to live responsibly"). I've actually heard Christians say, while arguing with a Ukrainian atheist, that if he, as a modern English Christian, was teleported back in time to 13th century Ukraine, he would find more peace and commonality with those people due to the magical bond of Christianity, than the modern Ukrainian atheist who speaks and knows the people and culture intuitively. And of course, 99% of the time, when asking a Christian what they actually believe in or know about their own faith, you realise they're just basically pagans. They've never read the bible, never looked into Christian history, don't actually know any quoted teachings from Jesus, etc. They just live by their personal moral compass, but have been tricked into thinking that's the same as church dogma or the bible. It's a lot of non-thinking going on really. If the same amount of casual faith was put into something like Beowulf or some sagas, things would be very different, and I'm not necessarily saying better or worse, just the fact that there is in fact a great difference between Christian subconscious 9even if it's quite faux and ignorant) and any variety of pagan subconscious.

@@Alfred5555 I don't know anyone who thinks it is a perfect text. There are various translations for one thing, Genesis was not even written down until the Babylonian enslavement for another. So ofcourse different interpretations are possible. Most serious people I know use the King James Version, or earlier translations. Many leftist churches are banning it so as not to hurt the feelings of fornicators etc. As for the New Testament, the four gospels were chosen by Constantine from hundreds in existence. So even they are politically rather than divinely selected. As for the sermon I mentioned it was several years ago and from the Old Testament, I don't recall Jesus actually speaking out on the subject in the gospels we use. As for your larger argument crusaders fought for the cross. Throughout most of history Christians have only had to treat fellow Christians well, and even then, sins can be atoned. The church has become soft and politically left and people have left in droves. Another reformation is occurring with people meeting in private homes.

@@Alfred5555 Hmm. My reply disappeared. I spent some time on it too. I'm in a very different time zone. Will try again later.