/r/ - Religion

08c0aa04cae136c116327d11555c60cbd857faf238831793b3c16b0ce55f73e1.jpg
[Hide] (253.3KB, 734x632) Reverse

>>1000 (OP) 
Rabbi's got a quick hand
He'll look around the globe, he won't tell you his plan
He's got a toddler's phallus, hanging out his mouth he's a synagogue kid
Yeah found a six day old son
In his Father's tunnel hidden oh on a mattress of soiled things, I don't even know what
But he's coming for you, yeah he's coming for you

All the other yids with the fucked up tricks
You'd better run, better run, out run my ethno-weapon
All the other yids with the fucked up tricks
You'd better run, better run, faster than my two million dollar lab
All the other yids with the fucked up tricks
You'd better run, better run, out run my ethno-weapon
All the other yids with the fucked up tricks
You'd better run, better run, faster than my two million dollar lab

Goyim works a long day
He be coming home late, he's coming home late
And he's bringing jews a surprise
'Cause the final solution's in the lab and it's rotated in a centrifuge
I've waited for a long time
Yeah the slight of my hand is now a quick pull trigger
I reason with my micro-pipette
And say your schizophrenic genes are on fire, you must have lost your wits, yeah

All the other yids with the fucked up tricks
You'd better run, better run, out run my ethno-weapon
All the other yids with the fucked up tricks
You'd better run, better run, faster than my two million dollar lab
All the other yids with the fucked up tricks
You'd better run, better run, out run my ethno-weapon
All the other yids with the fucked up tricks
You'd better run, better run, faster than my two million dollar lab

Not a card carrying CI dentist. 
 But I do believe in certain aspects of dual seedline CI. 
 Nearest I've been able to tell, it has it's roots in British Israelism.  Which is the belief that Britain is the spiritual heir to the throne of Judiasm.  Some also believed Anglos, Saxons, and some Nordics, were literally Israelites who migrated from the Middle East to Britain before Christ's time. The 10 lost tribes essentially.  

CI basically believes the same thing but without the British Empire nonsense.  Dual Seedline CI ays there is a war between children of Satan, and the children of God through Adam and Eve.  The children of Satan are literal genetic descendants of Satan.  The first one being Cain, who was the offspring of Lucifer and Eve.  Others were created before the flood when human women married Fallen Angels.  Others somehow appeared on earth after the flood.  Some of whom were still around at the time of King David.  

A third type of humanoid is what they call, "beasts of the field,"   Negroids and Mongoloids, that are neither descendants of Adam and Eve, nor Satan.  They are monkey 2.0 essentially.  That' the basic explanation, Though you can put 2 CI dentists in a room and they'll argue all night about fine points, and even basics to some degree.  Like any Baptist would not agree with a Pentecostal on a lot of things.

>>1009
One thing I forgot to mention, virtually every CI dentist believes these modern day khazkars larping as jews, are children of satan.   That part I believe absolutely.

>>1001
What's up anon are you the Christian  Identity spammer?

>>1012
You are the spammer.

>>1000 (OP) 
i would align with CI before episcopalian or jehovahs witnesses.

t. cosmotheist

>>1000 (OP) 
They are the white version of black Israelities same delusion different race. We wuz ancient Jews n sheit.

>>1220
I think there is something to it.  We know the 10 lost tribes went somewhere.  They didn't go extinct.  Revelations says 12,000 from each tribe get sealed and become part of the 144,000 during the end times.  So the lost 10 still exist, somewhere.  

Look into the similarities between the Welsh language and Hebrew sometime.  Richard Burton the actor was Welsh.  He once said anybody who can speak Welsh, can understand Hebrew, because they're so similar.   Entire sentences are nearly indistinguishable one from another.  Why would that be?  Because Welshmen are one of the 10 lost tribes.  

Welsh is a Celtic language that has undergone nearly no changes over the centuries.  Except for a few minor spelling and pronunciation alterations. 
 All the rest of them changed dramatically.  Just read something written in English from 1000 years ago.  You'll barely understand it.  1000 years before that, it was Hebrew,  because that's where Englishmen came from.

>>1233
I thought Welsh was an Indo European language which have no connection to Semitic langugues like Hebrew and Arabic .  I think the only language that is not Indo Europen in Europe is Basque its roots are unknown.

>>1234
It's iffy. The lines are not clearly defined and there are all sorts of cross pollination, even Basque is 50% Indo-Euro. Lang can also shift very rapidly, especially without writing. The hebrew-welsh thing is true, though, which is interesting. Maybe an artifact of trade and migration to the area.

>>1234
>I thought Welsh was an Indo European language which have no connection to Semitic langugues like Hebrew and Arabic .
Correct

>>1235
>It's iffy. The lines are not clearly defined
It's extremely clear. Welsh is Indo-European. All Celtic languages are Indo-European.

>The hebrew-welsh thing is true,
It's not. The only people who take these comparisons seriously have very little knowledge about linguistics. Everything which is comparable between Celtic languages and Semitic languages is 100% trivial and the result of coincidence. Another issue which amateurs are unaware of are Eurasiatic language connections between Indo-European and Afro-Asiatic in general which have nothing to do with Celtic or Semitic specifically.

The most commonly cited example of a feature which Celtic and Semitic have in common is Verb-Subject-Object (VSO) word order. This in itself is trivial because languages develop these words orders independently and only so many word orders are common. Most importantly, Proto-Indo-European (PIE) did not have a fixed word order. The majority of the amateurs who think VSO is significant don't even know that PIE and the descendant Celtic languages had nominative, accusative, dative (etc) case markings which allowed a person to reorder a sentence arbitrarily without confusion unlike English.

Because PIE did not have a strict word order, Celtic speakers would go on to settle with an uncommon word order among modern Indo-European languages for whatever reason. It could be due to the influence of another language family, but this doesn't change the fact that Celtic languages are fundamentally Indo-European because of their vocabulary, morphology, syntax, and grammar. If Celtic speakers took on a few features of non-Indo-European languages, they wouldn't be Semitic, because there is no evidence of Semitic existing in or around the Proto-Celtic homeland. The only known candidates would be something like Basque or Etruscan, and these are not Semitic or Afro-Asiatic.

>>1243
> Everything which is comparable between Celtic languages and Semitic languages is 100% trivial and the result of coincidence.


Not correct.  Go to the link fort an extensive list of entire Welsh phrases that are basically Hebrew with only minor variations in spelling an pronunciation.  
https://www.hebroots.org/hebrootsarchive/0105/0105nn.html

There is probably some arabic word that sounds like chicken in English.  I doubt it means chicken though.   That's an example of a meaningless coincidence.  Welsh and Hebrew similarities are not meaningless coincidence.

>>1248
This is really low quality "research". It calls for citations pointing to specific dictionary entries at the very least. I'm not going to go through the list one-by-one, especially since I've seen lists like this before. Many of the comparisons will no doubt be seen as dubious upon careful examination.

Instead I will offer you a simple challenge: Find one word in Welsh comparable to one word in Hebrew while citing any dictionary that we can both see and validate. Even Wiktionary will suffice. Finally, the Welsh word must not have an Indo-European etymology. If the Welsh word is genuinely comparable to any Semitic word but still has an Indo-European etymology, this means the comparison is not with Welsh specifically but the Indo-European family of languages in general.

In any case, the main issue being discussed is the categorization of Welsh. Is Welsh Indo-European? Is it Semitic/Afro-Asiatic? Is it ambiguous or unclear? No, it's clear. Welsh is obviously Indo-European even if you find a stray word or phrase which is comparable to Semitic, because Welsh does not primarily consist of Semitic features. If any specifically Semitic features exist in Welsh uniquely (as opposed to Indo-European languages in general) this can only be a minority feature.

Languages are categorized according to the most commonly used words, kinship terms, morphology, syntax, and grammar, and they are also place within a language family if they can be shown to relate to other languages within that family through regular sound changes. Welsh and other Celtic languages are relatable to Proto-Indo-European through regular sound changes. The same cannot be readily said for Welsh and Afro-Asiatic or Semitic.

If you manage to find a secure and unique Semiticism within Welsh, what would it mean? Borrowing. Language contact is certainly not impossible but some would like to take evidence of this sort in order to demonstrate Insular Celts are somehow part Semitic themselves which is ridiculous and contradicted by genetic evidence.

>>1248
>>1249
I will give an example just so you understand I am not being skeptical merely for the sake of skepticism.
One of the comparisons given on that webpage is
>Welsh aml
>Hebrew hamale

First of all, there's no reason to believe aml is not an Indo-European word. See here where it is suggested that it ultimately comes from Latin am plus:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/aml

This being the case, if there is a genuine connection with Hebrew hamale—however distant—there is no reason to single out Welsh here.
Another issue is the citation form of the Hebrew word. I do not know Hebrew, so I do not feel obliged to figure out how to spell it correctly on your behalf in order that it can be found in a search engine or modern dictionary. So if a Hebrew word is given, it should ideally be cited in the Hebrew alphabet so anyone can copy and paste it into a search engine or it should be given in a standardized Romanization scheme so that the exact Hebrew spelling can be reconstructed. (Is it a plene or defective spelling?)

The list which contains aml and hamale is from 1832. In that era, historical linguistics was still in its infancy, and erroneous connections were made on a regular basis which do not hold up against modern formalized linguistics. If the findings of the email on the webpage you gave cannot be replicated using modern dictionaries and linguistic resources, they are unlikely to have any value simply because of how much more advanced and systematic linguistics has become.

>>1253
Furthermore, I would like you to know that I am by no means allergic to long range comparisons in principle. Allow me to bring your attention to the Proto-Afro-Asiatic root *ʔit- "to eat":
https://starlingdb.org/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=%2fdata%2fsemham%2fafaset&text_number=1901&root=config
This root is reconstructed through
>Western Chadic: *ʔyat-
>High East Cushitic: *ʔit-

The Afro-Asiatic root is comparable to the Proto-Indo-European root *h1ed- */ʔed-/ "to eat":
https://starlingdb.org/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=%2fdata%2fie%2fpiet&text_number=1323&root=config
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h%E2%82%81ed-

While the comparison is valid in my personal opinion, many linguists don't want anything to do with this sort of data because it's fringe linguistics. The nature of the implied connection between Afro-Asiatic and Indo-European is also very mysterious. Is it just a borrowing? Whatever the case, there's actually no reason to believe this alone demonstrates a special connection between Afro-Asiatic and Indo-European in particular, because this root is held in common with other language families as well:
https://starlingdb.org/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=%2fdata%2feura%2fglobet&text_number=112&root=config

>>1233
>We know the 10 lost tribes went somewhere.
This guy, Archaix, seems to have it all mapped out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmEoM2ALD7A