👃who could have coined the phrase? I’ll give you a 109 guesses
That's false.
1830s is around the time it popped up:
Look...you don't have to believe this one-liner tweet-like bullshit people post. Start fact checking stuff more often.
Edit - Don't believe people who ignore facts and spin absolutely retarded narratives. It's an attempt to make you look stupid and uneducated.
"But...but...the 1800s use of Judeo-Christian referred to Jewish converts to Christianity!"
Sure. But Nietzsche created the modern use of the term in 1895. Still the 1800s. Still a long ass time before the 1950s.
Your graph doesn't really show anything but a blip before 1930's. I'd want to know what that is all about before insisting others are wrong.
Judeo-christian is a bullshit term used to get Christians to support a jew state. They are the synagogue of Satan and arranged to have the son of God killed.
No, Judeo-Christian is a term, in the modern use, coined by Nietzsche in the 1800s to derogatorily refer to that set of theists.
Sauce on that. Why would that fuck headed dimwit leave out the muzzie scurge and insult Christianity to raise up those filthy fucking jews?
"Jew" didn't even exist until 800ad-1000ad. It didn't enter the KJV until after the 1611 update.
No reason has even been provided why Judeans needed to be renamed to "jew" which didn't exist until no later than1000ad, and then added to the bible after 1611ad, and then apparently "judeo-christian" in the 1800s.
It's almost as if the synagogue of satan has steadily been rewriting history for 2000 years, to write themselves into it - and out of it.
As you can see above, Jews become very angry when this is pointed out. Especially when real Hebrew history and associated race is discussed.
Dig a little deeper and you’ll find that “judaeo-Christian” originally referred to jewish-Christian converts.
The phrase he’s talking about didn’t take on its meaning of Judeo-Christian ethics/values - rather than the theological/liturgical meaning - until 1939 (George Orwell) and became popular in use during the Cold War.
All that info is from the kikes at Wikipedia… Here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judeo-Christian
Cunt.
You need to learn to read, retard:
1895:
Use of the German term "Judenchristlich" ("Jewish-Christian"), in a decidedly negative sense, can be found in the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche, who emphasized what he believed were neglected aspects of continuity between the Jewish and Christian world views. The expression appears in The Antichrist, published in 1895 and written several years earlier; a fuller development of Nietzsche's argument can be found in a prior work, On the Genealogy of Morality.
Now go suck more dicks like the giant homosexual you are.
You are a fantastically retarded mother fucker. The term as it is used today - was not coined until much later. “Judeo-Christian values” wasn’t being used by Nietzsche either (e.g., “Jewish-Christian”). It’s used in a mostly positive context today - not a negative one. So, no, they’re not the same.
Not to mention that this entire pedantic exercise in Fuck-wittery is as about as jewish as it gets.
Ass-spelunker.
Christianity is the antithesis of Judaism. It is the response to their corruption.
Judeo-Christianity is as saying disease-cure or Satanic-Christianity. There is no such thing as Judeo-Christianity. Technically Judaism came after Christianity. Which is why Judaism references Jesus in their Talmud.
https://poal.co/c/df149354-cbd3-4319-81d5-7efd9479f751#cmnts
Christianity is ...
Ah just saw who I'm responding to. Feel free to ignore! But for everyone else, I'll just mention that NoisySilence has no clue what "Christianity" is about, in the sense that I have never heard read anything remotely resembling the words of Jesus, the apostles, or early fathers in all these posts in which we've argued.
The gospel is that we are dead in sin and need a savior. Jesus came as God in the flesh, lived a perfect life, and died an unjust death in our place. He then rose from the dead and ascended to the right hand of the father.
nosy silence
It's funny because I already have you blocked for being a jew. Lol. Once again you confirm it. Lol.
Strange comment considering I'm providing a historical context to what is commonly misframed by the synagogue of satan and gang.
The fact you even comment to discredit documented history inherently raises questions about your agenda and race. No other group has cause to malign nor dismiss documented Hebrew history - and associated genetics. Only Jews - Arabs in Hebrew (mixed) - rush to dismiss the facts.
But hey, you keep promoting and worshipping the synagogue of satan. I'll continue to promote Christianity and our history.
This sounds like very painful cope, my friend. It's a jewish-originated religion which uses a jewish book (The apostles were all semitic Jews) to preach about Jesus, King of the Jews (Rabbi Yeshua), about the semitic god Yahweh.
I've heard so much fucking cope about 'Jesus was white' (Even if true, he still teaches Semitic philosophy which is inherently anti-European) or 'Jews hate Christians' (They do, just like they do Goyim, it doesn't mean they fear it)
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Stop coping and just adopt an ancient religion that white European man used to practice, you will feel 1000% better when freed from the nootropic chains of semitic thought patterns.
Except the link proves you're lying and likely a jew. Your comment is powerful jew propaganda. Now why would a jew be pushing pro-jew propaganda...
But hey, you keep promoting and worshipping the synagogue of satan. I'll continue to promote Christianity and our history.
We see you.
.
There was a time, not long ago, jews changed their names to hide their jewy shit.
200 years later (((they))) had a plan
king james bible written by sir francis bacon, changed a lot of the meaning of the bible, used it for propaganda to get people to pay taxes to king james (made up the render unto caesar part).
nosy silence
It's funny because I already have you blocked for being a jew. Lol. Once again you confirm it. Lol.
from NoisySilence • 0 point
a min ago mark as read
While the sentiment might be true, it's not a great argument. Was the term "heliocentric" coined before or after we burned people at the stake for believing in it?
(post is archived)