Christopher Jon Bjerknes

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
No open-minded person who watched the Adam Green vs. Myles Poland debate could walk away from that debate thinking that Adam Green's Bjerknes-inspired arguments carried the day. Mr. Green lacked any evidence for his conspiracy theory.

Adam Green gets tens of thousands of views on his video (I suspect that most of those viewers are impressionable edgy teenagers), so the Odysee comment section is a bit skewed.
 

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
Adam Green even went so far as to say at one point (I'm relying on memory and paraphrasing) "it was a Jewish plot because it worked." He spent the entire debate trying to make an argument by beginning with the assumption that he was trying to prove. He just repeated his claim over and over again without ever producing any evidence in favor of his theory. Why does this man get so many views? Why do people take him seriously? Small wonder why we are mired in the covid-19 scamdemic if so many people cannot think critically.

By the way, both Bjerknes and Adam Green contributed to the Covid-19 fearmongering.


Here we have the angry Boomer Bjerknes issuing dire warnings of the scary, scary virus:


These two men are either utterly inept or compromised in some way.
 

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
Another flaw with Bjerknes' argument that the Jews created Christianity to subvert the Gentiles suffers from another glaring problem: there was no such thing as "the Jews" during Christ's lifetime. There were instead of number of sects competing with each other over what it meant to be Jewish. You had the Zealots, the Pharisees, and the Sadducees (among others). The Pharisees and Zealots were anti-Rome while the Sadducees were pro-Roman. Which of these movements, according to Bjerknes, created Christianity?

Why would the Sadducees, who supported Rome and enjoyed good relations with the Romans, create a movement to subvert the Gentile world? The Sadducees were the faction of high priests, aristocratic families, and merchants (i.e. they were wealthy) and heavily Hellenized. If, on the other hand, the Pharisees created Christianity, why wouldn't the Sadducees have immediately jumped on the chance to expose the Pharisees' plot to the Romans and destroy one of their rivals?
 

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
Adam Green and Bjerknes constantly belittle White people as "cucked" for "following a Jewish Messiah" and scripture written by Jews. They, and their audience, seem to think that an idea or concept is somehow tainted if it originated in a Jewish mind. I don't subscribe to this view at all, I'm not in the racial determinism crowd.

Why are Adam Green and his followers, given their aversion to any ideas that don't originate from a European person's brain, so enamored with Bjerknes' ideas? Bjerknes is, after all, Jewish. He admitted it here:

Listen at the 1:30 minute mark to the 2:00 minute mark.

I'm only sharing this in the hopes that Bjerknes and Adam Green might re-consider their stance that White people should disdain any ideas originating from non-White people.
 

Anomaly

Sparrow
Non-Christian
Bjerknes has a certain type of persistent, brewing anger I call “weirdo anger”. I can’t explain it but I know it when I see it. It’s the sort of anger I see in gay men and fatherless men. Richard Spencer seems to have it too.
 

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
Bjerknes has a certain type of persistent, brewing anger I call “weirdo anger”. I can’t explain it but I know it when I see it. It’s the sort of anger I see in gay men and fatherless men. Richard Spencer seems to have it too.
He's had chemotherapy in his old age and that can change people's personality. I saw a video of him debating someone on a contentious issue (when Bjerknes was much younger and before he had chemotherapy) and he was much less volatile in his replies (unlike his performance in the EMJ debate).
 

doctorweedmd

Sparrow
Orthodox Catechumen
Yes I stopped paying attention to KMN last year early in the pandemic when he had Bjerknes on, who proceeded to fear monger Covid being an ultra deadly bioweapon that we should all be very afraid about. I haven't seen him formally retract this false argument, so I don't trust his opinion on anything else, especially Christianity.

Would be good to see him debate a Christian other than EM Jones, who has too much of an "old man yelling at the sky" vibe to win well.
 

Anomaly

Sparrow
Non-Christian
He's had chemotherapy in his old age and that can change people's personality. I saw a video of him debating someone on a contentious issue (when Bjerknes was much younger and before he had chemotherapy) and he was much less volatile in his replies (unlike his performance in the EMJ debate).
Got it.

He was in full weirdo-angry mode in the EMJ debate. Curt Doolittle showed it too in a discussion with Michael Witcoff.
 

Orthodox_Prepper

Chicken
Orthodox
Another flaw with Bjerknes' argument that the Jews created Christianity to subvert the Gentiles suffers from another glaring problem: there was no such thing as "the Jews" during Christ's lifetime. There were instead of number of sects competing with each other over what it meant to be Jewish. You had the Zealots, the Pharisees, and the Sadducees (among others). The Pharisees and Zealots were anti-Rome while the Sadducees were pro-Roman. Which of these movements, according to Bjerknes, created Christianity?

Why would the Sadducees, who supported Rome and enjoyed good relations with the Romans, create a movement to subvert the Gentile world? The Sadducees were the faction of high priests, aristocratic families, and merchants (i.e. they were wealthy) and heavily Hellenized. If, on the other hand, the Pharisees created Christianity, why wouldn't the Sadducees have immediately jumped on the chance to expose the Pharisees' plot to the Romans and destroy one of their rivals?
Correct me if I'm wrong but a "Jew" is a descendant of the tribe of Judah, or am I mistaken? The Pharisees and the Christ descended from that very tribe, but Christ was in no shape or form in league with the Pharisees ie. the Jews, but was clearly against them.
 

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
Correct me if I'm wrong but a "Jew" is a descendant of the tribe of Judah, or am I mistaken? The Pharisees and the Christ descended from that very tribe, but Christ was in no shape or form in league with the Pharisees ie. the Jews, but was clearly against them.
In Christ's time, they were called "Israelites" and not "Jews." The Israelites consisted of a number of tribes, Judah was one of them. The Pharisees were one of the Israelite factions. They differed from most of the other Israelites because they incorporated Babylonian teachings into the Israelite religion, whereas other Israelite factions taught that only the Torah should be followed instead of the Babylonian "tradition of the elders."

I'm not convinced that all of the Pharisees were members of the tribe of Judah. Regarding whether or not someone was an Israelite by "blood" or by creed, I'm also not entirely certain. Again, there were a number of different and competing factions (Zealot, Pharisee, Sadducee, etc.) and it's possible that they differed on this question. I'm not 100% certain, but it's a question worth examining.

The Pharisees became the dominant faction once the Temple was destroyed by the Romans precisely because many of the other Israelite factions were killed by the Romans.
 

easterbunny2020

Pigeon
Catholic
EM Jones did an interview with him and Bjerknes was babbling at the end. I read one or two of his books and they either needed a proper editor or his mind is actually that confused. Like many, I think he is simply another Jewish op to rip Christianity.
 

Orthodox_Prepper

Chicken
Orthodox
In Christ's time, they were called "Israelites" and not "Jews." The Israelites consisted of a number of tribes, Judah was one of them. The Pharisees were one of the Israelite factions. They differed from most of the other Israelites because they incorporated Babylonian teachings into the Israelite religion, whereas other Israelite factions taught that only the Torah should be followed instead of the Babylonian "tradition of the elders."

I'm not convinced that all of the Pharisees were members of the tribe of Judah. Regarding whether or not someone was an Israelite by "blood" or by creed, I'm also not entirely certain. Again, there were a number of different and competing factions (Zealot, Pharisee, Sadducee, etc.) and it's possible that they differed on this question. I'm not 100% certain, but it's a question worth examining.

The Pharisees became the dominant faction once the Temple was destroyed by the Romans precisely because many of the other Israelite factions were killed by the Romans.
But some people do refer to the Israelite's as Jews, even Priests and Bishops sometimes do. Perhaps it is by mistake? Several I've seen often conflate the characters of the OT as being "Jews" when they weren't. Noah was not a Jew for instance, neither was Moses to my knowledge as another example.
 

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
"But some people do refer to the Israelite's as Jews, even Priests and Bishops sometimes do. Perhaps it is by mistake?" Of course, check the historical record and look at primary sources (contemporary records) and you will see that ancient Israelites were not called "Jews" that's a much newer designation.
 

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
This is my understanding of the matter. If it's faulty, please correct me. Flavius Josephus wrote that the word "Jew" was never used until the remnant of the tribe of Judah came back from Babylon (not ALL members of the Tribe of Judah were returning from Babylon as some remained in Palestine). When this remnant came back from Babylon they interbred with the Idumeans who were half-Canaanite. These people became known as the "Jews" which meant citizen of Judea. Whereas before then, you had the word "Judah" and "Judahite" which meant "a descendant of Judah." A Judahite could be a "Jew" or a "citizen of Judea", but a "Jew" did not necessarily have to be a Judahite.
 

JoeChill

Robin
Protestant
Gold Member
Given that Adam Green/Know More News is starting to examine "Caesar's Messiah" by Joe Atwill, this brief video outlining some of the problems with Atwill's theory is relevant:
 
Top