Christian diet

True Christians don't believe in contagion theory, but they also don't consider parasite-ridden bottom-feeders as "food". To revive this consciousness, an Adamic man must refresh his cultural and historic memory; that from the beginning of our People's history, priests' wages were paid in meat sales, "slaughter" was performed as sacrifice, and prophets were vegans often bringing the very unpopular message to the public that flesh consumption offends Yahweh.

OT priests

The industrial slaughterhouses and barbeque festivals of today are an exaggeration of the priestly sacrifices and blood holocausts of yesteryear. Though the priestly bible books offend with their tales of gore at the temple, sacrifices were on the one hand a noble attempt to limit and regulate meat eating, and on the other hand a corrupting profit incentive for the priests. Keep in mind always that the end game of "sacrifices" was consumption of animal flesh, in a time when the levitical priesthood doubled as a monopoly delicatessen. The good side of this was that Israelites were limited to eating meat just a few times a year, or however often they could physically travel to the central temple during festivals. The nasty side of this is obvious: there were animals killed in the worst way possible (throats cut) in a place claiming to contain the holy of holies.

BBQ = holocaust

Barbequeing this flesh was as much part of your typical party then as it is today. Maybe we don't realize is though, that there is nothing holy about these "innocent" parties. [

1

The parties that Job's sons were having greatly disturbed him. They were perhaps celebrating his birthday (Job 3), which was probably day 365 and striken from the calendar. Also, Aaron and the other Israelites were having a party when worshiping the golden, young bull

]

Much is masked in secular terms, but if we think about it, wherever Yahweh is not praised, Satan creeps in. For example, the music at these parties is never sacred. Even a kid's birthday party will always contain some of these elements. Furthermore, many of them are held in forests, at the beach or other natural settings and at night, and all of them have alcohol and often times other drugs.

Prophet vs. priest

It's astounding how explicit the prophets were about vegetarianism, and when they heard Yahweh, He always confirmed that He didn't want blood sacrifices/bbq/meat eating [1]. One gets the feeling that the Yahweh of the priests is not that same Yahweh, that these two classes had a very different idea of the Law. In the middle of all that was Moses, who, for the sake of taking us out of Egypt, attained a unity with a compromise in dietary law: if you have to eat meat, you cannot eat the garbage-men, scavengers, feces-eating or bottom-feeding animals (generally speaking). This compromise position wasn't especially appreciated by Yahweh, neither was it readily accepted by the Israelites, but then again, neither is any politician with unifying, compromise positions. Very often, the man in the middle, straddling both sides, is hated by practically everyone. Moses had constant meetings/renegotiations with Yahweh, and was often on the verge of being assassinated by an angry Israelite mob. However, an awkward medium like Moses was essential to accomplish Yahweh's amazing plan; and to keep Israelites from becoming sickly slaves to non-White populations in the future, his basic dietary laws, echoed by the priests in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, were absolutely necessary.

Throughout the whole Bible, therefore, the debate/conflict concerning diet was always about 1) vegetarianism vs. eating mosaicly-clean meats, or 2) about eating meat "sacrificed to idols" (i.e., butchered by pagan priests, when this was practically the only meat for sale). Nowhere in the Bible are unclean animals ever considered under the category of food. (Fancy that!) A rookie Bible student will always err on this: from his culture, he thinks "all food is okay" means he can eat pork and snake meat, when in fact Biblical writers would have never in their wildest dreams considered such animals as "food". This is the objective and honest truth any biblical scholar must admit.

Basic biblical diet law

It's the naked Bible

Just rack this up with a stark trait of "the naked Bible". The Bible as it is contains its historic, linguistic and cultural context which undeniably affirms several very foreign positions to the modern Christian, e.g., the earth is flat, "the world" = the White/Israelite world (not all bipeds nor all land), "human" = an Israelite, "your neighbor" = fellow Israelite, "his nakedness" (as in the story of Noah and Ham, Jacob and Reuben, David and a son) = his wife, "the day and hour no man knows" = the first day of the seventh month ("Tishirei", the festival of trumpets "Rosh Hoshanah", the first day of the regnal year)....the genealogies = a list of names that tell their own story, when read listed as written. Trees = genealogies and nations, and fig trees especially mean Israel....All of this is inconvenient for universalists, globalists, zionists and anti-racists. Israelites are explicitly the chosen and elite People of the entire Bible, in fact. The Watchers/Nephilim/Divine Council have a whole, often extra-Biblical context that many define as the key to understanding the whole Bible. Angels became wicked, mated with Israelite women to make Nephilim, and they also mated with animals which probably created several types of non-Israelite bipeds. All these themes are politically-incorrect, outside any part of today's culture, yet undeniably integral parts of our heritage and history.

Main biblical objections

In debate, there are two main points raised as an objection: verses stating "all food can be eaten", and two, "against judaizers". Number one seems to say we can eat anything, referring to Peter's vision in Acts 10:11, but in context, it is Yahweh explaining to the Judahites that their previous law to never touch nor talk to a non-Judahite is now abolished, and they can freely socialize with any Israelite, especially for evangelizing. In this passage Peter affirms (like Ezekiel before him) that he has never eaten non-food/unclean things.

That Christ and Peter were vegans, as were Essenes and Nazarenes in general, shows that biblical diet discussions were about distinctions within mosaic law, and not considerations of a radical abolition of the law and negation of the prophets. There were debates about veganism and eating (formerly clean) meats sacrificed to idols.

"What comes out of one's mouth"

Yahshuah simply tells the pharisees that their lying and lust are a much bigger problem than the brazilians of petty rules in their fake lawbooks. One contaminates himself with his thoughts, not with material, external things. One could eat with dirty hands and not get sick, but one with perverse thoughts could wash his hands all he wants, but he will never be clean nor healthy. All mosaically-clean food is permissible food no matter what direction one washes his hands. This is an affirmation of the real, original law. To this day, canaanites in israhell are obessed with exactly what way you wash your hands, and show no differences from their spiritual ancestors. Kevin MacDonald in "A Culture of Critique" marvels at how literal satanists and every stripe of pagan canaanite have no problems respecting their bastard brethren, as long as they wash their hands clockwise along with hundreds of other regulations. This is what Christ was addressing.

Common Bible guidebooks will erroneously connect Mark 7 and Acts 10 et. al. as "parallel texts". This sloppy scholarship ignores, for example, that Peter's story in Acts comes after he'd already heard Yahshuah's discussion in Mark 7. Apparently, Peter nor anyone else in the gospels had taken the events of Mark 7 to be the grand reversal that your typical bbq Burger christian takes them to be.

“What God has cleansed, that call not thou common”. This is repeated in Acts 11:9 and refers to a clean heart that was given to the [non-Judahite], Cornelius (Egan 2005:55-56). Peter acclaims that he never ate anything that is common or unclean (10:14), which means that he did not understand Jesus’ discussion with the Pharisees in Mark 7 as permission to eat unclean animals. “If Jesus had taught the acceptability of eating unclean food, Peter would not have been shocked. ‘The story presupposes that Peter is not aware of a previous ruling by the historical Jesus to the same effect’” (Rudolph 2002:299-300 – see also Räisänen 1992:144; Lindars 1988:67; Svartvik 2000:118). [1]

Eat bacon = "Jesus ain't Lord"

Another glaring fact skipped over for convenience of tapeworms: Yahshuah had to fulfill the law, obey it Himself, and "not change one jot or tiddle" as principle credentials of being the messiah. In other words, had Yahshuah anulled the mosaic dietary laws, He could not have been the Savior.

As for the New Covenant and how it does not contradict the Old, and that Yahshuah therefore is fullfilling the law:

...In Hebrews chapter 7 Paul of Tarsus had explained that the Levitical priesthood had passed, and that Christ was the high priest of an older order which was therefore of greater authority, which is the order of Melchizedek. To prove that this older priesthood was of greater authority, Paul illustrated the fact that Abraham, the ancestor of Levi, had made tithes to this Melchizedek, who was therefore greater than Abraham and who in turn had blessed Abraham. Doing this, Paul hoped to impress upon the Hebrews that their Levitical priesthood was never meant to perpetuate, as that was the original plan of God for the Melchizedek priesthood. The Melchizedek priesthood is eternal and transcends the Levitical priesthood which was only implemented for a more particular purpose: for the maintenance of the Old Testament kingdom which had also come to pass. So Paul had also explained that the Levitical priesthood and its continuous sacrifices were peculiar to the Old Covenant, and now they were eclipsed in Christ.... - William Finck [1]

Judaizing

Now the second most-common argument, "against judaizers", assumes that skypes and moose-limbs actually obey their alleged law, which in common observation they most often don't [1]. They are asiatic, yellowish, bastardized bloodlines that lack logic. They can write as many "laws" as they want, but the White concept of law and obedience to it, seeing as they are heathens, has no literally translation to them. I have personally seen many of them eating pork and drinking, for example, but if you haven't, consider how private most eating and drinking habits are. How many parties, weddings, or restaurant meals have you had this week? Now consider how easy it would be for canaanites to lie about diet, and in the midst of all their filthy language and perversions spewing out in all directions, how easily they could pay lip service to any morality or cleanliness in their food choices. Precisely for this reason, "veganism" has become a major tenet of the new satanic/canaanite facade, their Greta/eco-religion of Gaia/Maya.

In the end, the only law actually obeyed by most sypkes is that of genital mutilation, because it is in fact, the defining act in creating the monsters that they are. So we would point that out first, that when we talk of Christian law, sometimes it may seem similar to one suggested by canaanite texts, but it is never the same. (This exact principle applies to all other non-Israelites, in fact).

Second, the motivations are quite different, seeing as they rightly and often see pigs as their brothers, and to Christian men, this idea would be quite foreign. Third, it is always assumed in (((mass media))) that Whites are expropriating the culture of others, when the opposite is true: *only* Whites produce culture and civilization. So the idea for this law was copied from us, not the other way around. (Law, etymologically, literally means morality, which logically and philosophically can be proven to have its only root in Yahweh consciousness).

Now it's true there are "christian zionists" and "hebrew roots" people out there who are genuinely judaizing, who copy the corrupt versions of our own cultures, especially of Egypt and Babylon, from kippahs to themselves, like saying night is day, autumn is new year, yids are chosen, israhell is Israel and so forth. These were the people being addressed by scripture as judaizers, not we Christians who don't eat pork. Now let us consider non-biblical problems:

Asian tradition

In China, after taking up the nofap challenge and the Nazarene vow in 2006, I found my practices absolutely unsustainable without strict adherence to at least vegetarianism. To confirm my suspicions, Chinese practitioners and medical authorities often repeated to me, "Meat increases the passions", "Meat creates an inner fire". "Meat" in China (as in Italy), automatically means pork, and all other variants require additional adjectives.

Mexican tradition

The Aztecs were eating "pozole", a stew of sacrificed bipeds and nixtamalized corn, hominy. The conquistadors tried breaking their cannibal habits and brought them pigs. The Aztecs were amazed at how similar the taste was to biped flesh and accepted it.

Pork is practically human

And the men who were with them there for the first time were eager to do the like. Thus, although we are born neither good nor bad, we become one or the other; and having formed habits, we are with difficulty drawn from them. But when irrational animals fell short, these bastard men tasted also human flesh. For it was not a long step to the consumption of flesh like their own, having first tasted it in other forms. - Clemintine Homilies, Chapter XVI

It's often overlooked, but pig skin, body parts and even hearts easily substitute human ones in modern medicine, i.e., physically speaking, a pig's body is practically indistinguishable from a human one. Pork is universally described as the flavor of human meat by all bipedal cannibals in history [1]. Pork is universally the label put on human meat by murderers getting rid of bodies, again in 100% of cases [1]. Chinese censorship software, when first implemented when I was still living there, censored pig pitures assuming they were human porno. The flesh, teets, hair and many other qualities are digitally identical to people. Also, chinese, who have a pork-based diet, readily eat the placenta of their own children. Under the table they have meat of aborted russian and chinese children used as supplements. Pigs, like chinese, will readily eat each other, their own feces, and garbage. Especially when eating ground pork, there is no guarantee that there is no human flesh being used, and this contributes to the often-repeated rumor that McDonald's et. al. are using people as a part of their famous "jungle meat" portion of their burgers. In general, the american practice of eating ground meat and burgers virtually guarantees that all americans have at least sometimes eaten their own children, a principle part of satanic ritual against our Adamic brethren. Concerning the modern coof regime, people are publically and openly being fed their own children with an ingredient called MRC-15, used in vacca-cines. It was originally stated that it was "only" copied off of "stem cells", which would still be human flesh anyway, but recently it has been confirmed by an internal Pfizer memo that the use of human flesh in the serum should be downplayed as much as possible, i.e., it looks strongly suggested that the cells are also fresh human cells, "of a caucasion boy aged 14 weeks". Finally, the public being fed its own flesh is a popular theme in hollyweird, like with soylent green (notice the color there) among many others. Have the cattle ("vacche")/goyim been conditioned to accept human meat by first being accustomed to pork?

Pork is particularly dirty

Pigs eat their own feces, will eat their own dead, also people who fall into their cages, and they will eat ground plastic, newspaper and other garbage. Pigs cannot graze where horses or cleaner animals graze, lest they kill the other animals with trichinosi and other parasites they leave everywhere in their wake. Other forbidden meats in mosaic law are also bottom feeders, feces-eaters, or have other similar traits that make them especially dense in worms.

Odd and satanic traits

They are hyper-sexual, able to orgasm apparently for a full day at a time; sows have around 16 teets each, and birth litters of 10 to 20 piglets at a time. Their society is matriarchal, and in nature, only the queen is allowed to reproduce. They can become aggressive and are by nature extremely destructive. If you are building a fence, forget about protecting against them as all in is vain. Their preferred foods are bulbs, onions and garlic. Around where I live, if a man dies in the woods, they will eat not just him, but also his clothes and any trace of him. Pigs are a symbol of filth, evil and lust for very good reason. Due to the hunter's natural desire to shoot the biggest and strongest of them, he will probably shoot the queen, in which case all the females become reproducive, so there is an ironic situation: the more you shoot them, the more exponentially they reproduce.

Temples

Our bodies are literally temples of Yahweh [..], and the sacrifice committed by Antiochus IV Epiphanes is called "the abomination of desolation", abomination traditionally meaning "punishable by death" - sacrificing a pig in the temple. So it's not hard to put two and two together: if we're a temple, and we eat pork, are we sacrificing (slaughtering for meat consumption, remember) a pig in the temple and committing the abomination of desolation? Remember also that .. were martyred in scripture soley for refusing to eat pork - our heroes, when faced with simply eating a pork dish or be tortured to death gladly accepted the latter, and they were not "jews".

Pondering 1 John 1 and the similarity, in English, Italian, Latin and other languages between "word" and "worm", one reconsiders the "snake" in the garden of Eden, and the distinct possibility that parasites, especially from prohibited meats, are influencing and even controlling the thoughts of potential sinners. In 2006 when taking up my Nazarene vow, I noticed that without quitting meat very strictly, celibacy was very hard to keep up. The chinese monks and traditional doctors answered my question with this: "meat increases the passions [to impure relations and violence]". Remember that "meat" in China literally means "pork". But how? Could they be parasites?

(((Western medicine))) simply does not talk about parasites, and it is clearly not in their interest to do so: most of our diseases are caused by them. Their new vacca-cine contains an octopus-like parasite that feeds on human female eggs and male sperm, the polypodium - one sees quickly that as such, they are deliberately spreading parasites in the normie population to increase their profits and eliminate more Adamic goyim spawn, their enemy number one. But did you know that WHO did a 20-year study concluding that *all* post-natal epilepsy is caused by tape worms in the brain? Further, there are hundreds of videos of an apparently common operation, often done to weight lifters and other faithful meat eaters, to pull out many pounds of tape worms from the guts - the one I was watching showed over 10 pounds being pulled out like a huge bowl of spaghetti. And last but not least, today the medical establishment is getting hysterical about people taking ivermectin, a drug that specifically kills tapeworms. Why would the medical establishment be worried about Burgers having less tapeworms?

Parasites as mind control

There is much information to be found on literal examples: slugs infected with bird crap have their minds taken over by a parasite which makes them act crazy and go to get eaten by birds; a mouse parasite controls the mind of mice to make it easily caught by cats, who allow further breeding and spreading of the parasite; cat ladies are shown to have seriously deprecated mental acuity and lack of driving skill from a cat-derived brain parasite that (surely along with other things) slows motor response...there are endless examples in biology, and it obviously applies to humans as well, and perhaps on a much deeper level than we'd ever thought.

Consider "gut feelings". Your intestinal flora determine your thoughts and feelings on things just as much as your heart and brain do, just on a different level and a different way. Further, remembering the epilepsy example above, they are literally getting into the heart and brains a lot more than people are aware of. It's much easier for us to imagine that once a parasite gets into the brain that it is effecting, often profoundly, the thoughts of that person.

So in our mind, the pork debate among CI Christians and others is not necessarily just a debate between humans. Often when you find someone vigorously arguing that Adamites can and should eat pork, you're actually arguing with the original Worm, satan himself. We say this in all seriousness and we do not take it lightly. Sin in general is a vicious cycle, and it will always have that nature. To stop sinning one has to find the courage to try cleaning up first before drawing any other conclusions. We also challenge any brother reading this who still thinks pork is probably okay, to still try not eating it for at least two weeks if not a month, (and better yet - do a Hulda Clark bitter herb parasite cleanse or ivermectin regimin while you're at it) and see what happens to that opinion. Don't knock it till you've tried it. The path is literally the truth, and the truth is literally the path (the same word, Dao .. in chinese). You don't see what is being talked about until you walk over there and take a look, so grow a pair and try it.