If one looks into the etymological origin of the word “religion” one finds great disputation, which is kind of odd given all the heat that the word creates today.

Some will insist that the etymological origins of the word “religion” comes from the noun “religio.” The ancient philosopher Cicero linked religio to the Latin verb “relegere” which means “to go through or over again in reading, speech, or thought.” This introduces the idea of repetition into religion which, for those from Liturgical Churches, makes a certain sense since Liturgical Churches do demonstrate in their worship going through or over again in reading, speech, or thought. Consider the Book of Common Prayer.

Others, following later ancients such as Servius, Lactantius, Augustine will insist that the word “religion” comes from the Latin word, “religare”  which means, “to bind fast.” This would find the purpose of religion being one of societal epoxy – the means by which people are bound together. If this is an accurate etymology then it becomes clear that religion is an inescapable concept since a culture comprised, as it is, of institutional infrastructure can’t exist without the societal epoxy that is religion. If this is accurate then there is the closest possible relationship between religion and culture. If culture is defined as the outward expression of a particular people groups religious/theological beliefs then culture and religion, by necessity imply one another. Where you see culture, there you see religion and when you see religion you see the manifestation of that religion in the culture.

If we go back to religion being defined from the Latin verb “relegere” which means “to go through or over again in reading, speech, or thought,” we may not be that far away from religion defined as “religare,” (to bind), due to the fact that “to go through or over again in reading, speech, or thought,” results in whatever is being gone over again being bound upon the person who is repeating the reading, speech, or thought.

If religion is indeed defined as “to bind,” and if it is proper to see religion as being the societal glue that binds a culture together then what must be observed next is the question of the legitimacy of non-Christian religions. Certainly, we would agree that the religions of different infidel peoples would serve to bind their infidel cultures. However, the binding that false religion brings to pagan cultures, will always be a religion that is to that society what foot-binding was to Oriental women.  As the footbinding of Oriental women indeed worked but at the cost of the health of the women, so false religions work to bind cultures together but at the cost of the flourishing of the  peoples where they obtain.

Scripture refers to these infidel cultures bound together by pagan religions;

For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life you inherited from your forefathers… (I Peter 1:18)

The “empty way of life” is easily enough understood as the pagan culture created by infidel religion and participated in by individuals. All infidel religions create pagan cultures but those pagan cultures are characterized as a “empty way of life.” When the power of the one true religion brought by Christ envelopes a people group the result is the culture changes because that which binds the culture (religion) has changed.

One consequence of the changing out of false religion for the one true religion is that the binding is no longer coercive. False religions, being false, can only bind by way of coercion. Individuals are forced, by the binding power of false religion, to move in terms of the false religion. Women are forced to wear the Hijab. Westerners are forced to use insane pretend pronouns. Oriental women were forced to have their feet bound. NWO types are forced to embrace pedophilia, etc. etc. etc.

Christianity sets individuals free to gladly and willingly obey. The power of the Gospel is the power to set us free from slavery to sin to be slaves of Christ. When Christianity sweeps through a people group coercion is only visited upon those who would throw off the Christian religion in favor of some other previous empty way of life. Biblical Christianity though, has historically always brought greater liberty for individuals since Christianity as a religion alone introduces “self-control” as the primary control mechanism in a Christian culture. Other cultures driven by infidel religions must find controls in a more top down fashion since false religions are never characterized by “self-control.” False religions always leave the problem of the self in place and so must implement top town control mechanisms to reinforce their religion.

After watching the full interview between Pope Doug the Wide and Tucker Carlson I have some impressions;

1.) Doug absolutely had his head handed to him. If I were Doug I would not have posted that interview because it was so decimating to his cause.

2.) I’ve noticed that Doug seems to melt down before those who he believes has “gravitas.” I remember Doug debating Christopher Hitchens on Atheism on a TV tour and I kept yelling at the screen at Doug because he was letting Hitchens get away with all kinds of stuff he had no business getting away with. Doug was almost tepid … even shy in responding to Hitchens. I noticed the same personality evacuation in Doug’s interview with Tucker. The swaggering Doug Wilson, who has no problem eviscerating those he thinks are beneath him (I know … I’ve been on the receiving end of that attempted evisceration) suddenly melts as if he is intimidated by those he knows can harm him. Maybe it is not that Doug is intimidated. Maybe he is trying to just be careful with someone he knows is dangerous? Maybe he is just being polite? Whatever it is, the Doug Wilson who is in conversation with a Christopher Hitchens or a Tucker Carlson is a different Doug Wilson who is attacking a Bret McAtee or a Michael Spangler.

3.) Tucker apologized profusely for saying at the Charlie Kirk lollapalooza memorial that he hated Zionists. He then went on to say that we should not hate anyone. Doug clearly agreed. I wonder if Tucker would apologize for saying, “I hate Satanists.” There remains a ridiculous strain of thinking in our Christianity that insists that hate is always wrong all the time. It is not. Inasmuch as Zionists are evil (and remember Zionism is naught by Notseeism for Bagels) in that much they should be hated. Now, of course Zionists might be do comparatively good things (Like Notsees). They doubtless love their mothers and treat their children well. However, when we say “I hate Zionists” we are not saying that Zionists never do anything praiseworthy. We are saying that the ideological/theological foundations of the Zionist worldview requires, out of love to God, a determined hatred. To not hate Zionists, or any belief system that dishonors Jesus Christ, is a hatred of the ascended and ruling Jesus Christ.

4.) Doug found himself in the position of defending the Bagel state in its bombing of schools, hospitals, and Christian Churches. Doug found himself in the position of defending Bagels murdering children in the was in the West Bank. Doug tried to blame all that on Hamas and as unfortunate collateral damage. Doug even tried to invoke Augustine on his side. Tucker was having none of it. Tucker insisted that there is all the difference in the world between besieging a city in the OT resulting in the population inside the city being starved out (a point Doug brought up) and pinpointing a dropped bomb to land on top of a Christian church full of refugees. Tucker kept insisting that Israel was making war on the civilian population which is a different proposition then civilians being killed in the context of battle.

Doug also suggested that it was legitimate to drop bombs on Christian churches in Gaza if Hamas has tunnels underneath those churches. Again, Tucker was having none of it insisting that if a Christian nation is the nation that is giving you the bombs which to drop you do not get permission to drop bombs on Christian churches.

5.) Doug insisted that Israel had a grizzly bear by the ears. Tucker agreed. Neither one of them asked the question … “Why did they grab the grizzly bear to begin with?” Remember, the Bagels showed up in Palestine and forcefully took Palestine from the Grizzly Bear. We shouldn’t be surprised if three generations later the Grizzly Bear takes exception to someone holding it by its ears. None of this is to say that Hamas is righteous, or even that Hamas should be given back the land illegally seized from the Palestinians. It is merely to say that if Israel as a Grizzly by the ears it is because they grabbed the Grizzly bear to begin with way back with the return to Palestine… a return of those who, genetically speaking, are likely not even Bagels, at least in their majority.

6.) Tucker clearly is no fan of Evangelical preachers.

“The people who lie the most are Evangelical preachers.”

Tucker Carlson to Doug Wilson.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the above doesn’t recognize that Reformed preachers are not technically Evangelical and as such the true statement would be “The people who lie the most are Reformed preachers.” Tucker then launched into a diatribe against clergy that have an all paid trip to Israel and then who come back and are all aglow with reporting on the glories of Israel. I couldn’t help but wonder if Doug was sitting there perhaps feeling cut by that remark since his chief Lieutenant, Rev. Toby Sumpter, had, not long ago, arrived back in the States after an all expense paid trip to Israel and arrived back singing the praises of Israel.

7.) Doug Wilson spent more than a few minutes defending the US dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan. Tucker ate him for lunch reminding Doug that the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki was dropped using the largest Christian Church and its steeple as the target focus. The putative Christian US Military did in 9 seconds with the destruction of Japanese Christianity, what the Japanese had not been able to accomplish in the previous 250 years. And that happened despite the fact that the terms of surrender that the Japanese finally signed were the same terms of surrender they had agreed to sign 6 months prior to the bombs being dropped. (See Hebert Hoover’s “Freedom Betrayed.”) What was interesting here is that Doug admitted that his views on this subject have changed, as in years past Doug would have agreed with Tucker. This signals to me, as combined with Doug’s strong support for Israel, that Doug’s worldview has tacked in a neo-con direction over the years. Doug is no longer a reliable voice for Biblical Christianity but has instead reinterpreted his Christianity in a neo-con direction.

8.) Both agreed that antisemitism is evil but neither bothered defining what antisemitism is or gave examples of antisemitism. This is important when we live in a climate where merely saying that “We have no interest in Israel’s wars” is greeted with shouts of “antisemitism.” Clearly, the word “antisemitism” has, in the majority of its usages, merely the purpose of poisoning the well of the conversation. Once that word (or other words like that … “racist,” “bigot,” “misogynist,” “Kinist,” “homophobe,” etc.) is used the person hurling the toxic pejorative automatically wins the conversation unless the person on the receiving end says something like… “you say that like it’s a bad thing,” or, “why thank you but flattery will get not help you in this discussion.”

9.) Tucker mentioned that Israeli cabinet members have said they would like to kill all the Palestinians. What people don’t realize is that this is not an atypical view for those shaped and influenced by the Talmud which teaches that kind of attitude towards not just Palestinians but is a Bagel attitude towards all Goyim. Michael Hoffman in a blurb teasing a podcast on this subject has said;

“To safeguard civilians in occupied Palestine and the Middle East, and for the advancement of human rights and knowledge in defiance of cancel culture, the influence and impact of Talmudic theology on the Israeli government, military and the settlers must become known and challenged by all people of good will. In studying Israeli violence, confining the analysis mainly to “settler-colonialism” seriously limits authentic understanding of the roots of the racist, ethno-supremacist forces at work.”

10.) Doug tried to glibly defend the fact that 90% of US Congressman take money from AIPAC by saying, “they take money from everybody.” Tucker, responded by saying; “Perhaps but if you notice AIPAC doing that you’re instantly called an anti semite.” (Doug also forgets that AIPAC isn’t required to register as being a foreign agent unlike all other foreign agents — another strange perk that Israel gets here.)

Over and over again in this interview Doug tries to defend Israel against Tucker Carlson’s common sense observations touching on how Israel is dominating the US in its policy and in its culture. Doug is a Evangelical neo-con.

11.) Tucker interestingly said;

“Almost all of our foreign policy winds up disproportionally killing Christians.”

This is because the US Government in DC is a main arm of the New World Order and there is no one that the New World Order hates more than Christians.

12.) Doug tries to argue that Israel, unlike the Palestinians, is virtuous enough to be hypocritical about their sins and so deny their brutalities vis-a-vis the Palestinians who just own their slaughters. Tucker disagreed by insisting that what Israel does is to manipulate the US media since they are so dependent upon US aid. In essence Tucker is saying here that Israel is not hypocritical so much as practitioners of the art of distraction via the US media (which the Bagels largely own).

We could go on from here but it is pretty clear throughout the interview Doug was seeking to be an apologist for Israel even going so far as to ridiculously say;

“Hey, don’t call me a cynic but I’m starting to think these blood drinking, moloch worshipping pedophiles who run our government might not have our best interests in mind.”

1.) Tragedy & Hope – Carroll Quigley 
2.) The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome – Michael Hoffman 
3.) The Invisible College: The Great European Secret – William Stuart 
4.) Conspirators’ Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300 – John Coleman
5.) America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones – Antony Sutton 
6.) Illuminati: The Cult That Hijacked the World – Henry Makow 
7.) Tavistock Institute; Social Engineering the Masses – Daniel Estulin
8.) The True Story of the Bilderberg Group – Daniel Estulin 
9.) Pawns in the Game – William Guy Carr 
10.) None Dare Call It Conspiracy – Gary Allen

I offer the above books as just a few that I have read that accounts for the conviction that is to follow. My convictions on the whole Jeffrey Epstein affair is not a matter of merely wildly throwing darts hoping to hit the target. Instead, my convictions grow out of the reading I have done over the decades.

It is my conviction that Epstein was doing the bidding of his occult elite masters as a kind of international troubleshooter. Got a problem? Call Epstein. Want a relaxing sexual occultic getaway? Call Epstein. Desire little girls? Call Epstein.

The occult aspect that was integrally tied to the Epstein sexual kingdom is seen frequently now. A few years ago there was a international ceremony opening a new railroad tunnel (interestingly near the CERN Collider). This opening ceremony was attended by the heads of state of Germany, Italy, and France. It was occultic to its core as the below link demonstrates.

The elites are telling us who they are.

Then there was the recent Super Bowl where the sexual (which for the elites is cheek by jowl with the occultic) overtones were startling as seen in some of the lyrics that the nation was serenaded with by Bad Bunny;

The fact that the elite are putting their occultic/perverted sexual disposition in our face is just one link that suggests that this is the world that Jeffrey Epstein was serving.

The occult/perverted sexual disposition tipped its hand again in the 2016 election with the whole pizzagate revelations, the spirit cooking of Marina Abramović that came to the fore, the whole Podesta (John was Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman) brothers coded messages and pedophile “art” owned by Podesta the perv. The connection between the occult and the perverted sexual habits has a long history behind that. All one has to do is to look into the background of Bohemian Grove or the Skull and Bones rituals to find more of the connection between the occult and sexual perversion. Behind that were the accusations that were made in the Presidio and McMartin child day-care cases. Another piece of evidence combining sexual perversion and the occult that was dropped down the memory hole was the whole Franklin scandal during the Reagan years. This occult/child sexual perversion has been the humming noise in the background of our cultural rot for decades. The recent Epstein files has only brought it to the fore again with its countless coded references to “pizza” and “beef-jerky” and “grape-soda,” which are likely stand ins for child references.

Of course, Epstein has long been at his tradecraft. If you will recall he was arrested and convicted in 2008 for procuring a child for prostitution and soliciting a prostitute. Epstein served 13 months in Florida prison where he was absent from the prison as much as he was present at the prison due to a sweetheart work release deal that Epstein was given. It was Alexander Acosta, who later served as Trump’s Labor Secretary, who gave Epstein the sweetheart prison deal when Acosta was serving as a prosecuting attorney in Florida. Epstein definitely had connections. As an aside, these connections prove that there really is no longer an equitable law system in this nation. We have one law for the well connected and another law for the goyim (cattle).

Keep in mind that Epstein had as his “right-hand man” one Ghislaine Maxwell, whose Father, Robert Maxwell, was a reputed Mossad operator of legendary stature. Some have opined that it was Maxwell that introduced Epstein to the Mossad world of spy vs. spy and that as Maxwell had served Mossad interests so Epstein came to serve Mossad interests.

Part of those interests was found in leveraging assets to provide information and one way to leverage assets is to sexually blackmail them. There can be little doubt that was part of Epstein’s portfolio with his Lolita express and with his little kingdom on St. James island. Rumor is that cameras were everywhere on Epstein’s island bordello. Also present on this small island of Epstein was a Molech temple where testimony tells us all kinds of orgies were held with underage girls. This reality is what brought down Prince Andrew.