(Bitchute) A video titled “Logos And Africa” has been posted on Bitchute featuring author and Catholic apologist, E. Michael Jones, in which he is interviewed by a black African — Robert Odero, professor of religion and philosophy at Strathmore Academy in Nairobi — about Jones’ book Logos Rising.
We will address this discussion in three parts — this first part will focus on Jones’ argument that the Catholic concept of Logos was essential to the advancement of civilization — or the lack thereof.
Logos is the Aristotelian Greek term meaning “reasoned discourse” which the apostle John incorporated into Christian theology to describe God’s eternal power and spirit that created the world “in the beginning” — and that Jesus Christ is the physical embodiment of this Logos.
But Logos existed a priori before the Greeks gave a name to it — advanced civilizations prior to Greece — along with the Hebrew understanding of God — are proof of the a priori existence of Logos.
The apostles and prospective converts were Hellenized — as was all of Judea — and John appropriated this Greek concept as a familiar philosophical metaphor to help make the nature of Jesus Christ and God the Father understandable to his Hellenized audience.
And it’s worth noting that none of the other Gospel writers used this term — and yet they had no problem understanding Christ and his relationship to the Father without this philosophical metaphor — which should suggest that it’s not essential but merely a rather useful, additional tool to appeal to a certain audience.
As a Catholic, Jones takes Logos one step further and claims that because the Catholic Church was allegedly ordained by Christ with Peter as the “first Pope,” the Church, therefore, is the only legitimate representative of Logos on earth.
The overall question that Jones addresses in the video is why Logos has never taken root in sub-saharan Africa — and why these Africans have never developed any semblance of civilization independent of efforts of Christian Europeans to help them advance.
We have to distinguish North Africa from sub-saharan Africa because North Africa had developed high levels of civilization prior to Christianity — as both Egypt and Carthage attest — and the common denominator in ancient North Africa is the white Adamic race — not Christianity or the Catholic Church.
Jones sees himself as “the Logos guy” — and it is his personal mission to spread the Logos — via Catholic conversion — to the world — and he encourages Professor Odero to have his book Logos Rising printed in Africa so that Africans can study it in schools and apply Logos to their lives — convert to Catholicism — and finally develop Africa into a civilization that will rival Europe.
We have read Logos Rising — and rest assured, it requires high intelligence with the ability to grasp complex abstract philosophical concepts — this is not a book you can give to average students — let alone students in Africa where the average IQ is 65.
That’s not to say one needs a high IQ to understand the Gospels — there is a “simplicity in Christ” that makes them accessible to the average Adamic person, but this book — written by the Harvard-educated Jones — is far more intellectually demanding than the Gospels and therefore beyond the average person’s ability to fully grasp.
Of course, Jones is a race denier — as we have previously discussed — therefore, he must also believe that IQ is not an inheritable trait that is demonstrably different among racial groups. If that were the case, then one’s ability to apprehend the meaning of Logos would be dependent on one’s IQ rather than on one’s having been baptized Catholic and attending church.
As a race denier, Jones has painted himself into a corner and is forced to come up with alternative explanations as to why Logos has not taken root in sub-saharan Africa — and like all Liberals, as we will see, he attributes this phenomenon to environmental and historical factors rather than the elephant in the room — very simple racial explanations.
That said, we will now take a look at Jones’ major talking points and respond to them point by point — and it should be noted that even Professor Odero appears skeptical of Jones’ explanations — Odero seems to grasp that there is something inherently different about Africa that is at the heart of its problems — and it’s not merely because they aren’t all Catholics.
We recommend that you watch the video in its entirety if you find the subject of interest — and we have provided a link above and at the end of this article.
Odero asks, “You said that Logos did not take root in Africa because of polygamy…“
“Logos is primarily speech, so any place that there is a human being, there are going to be people speaking a language — and that is the fundamental manifestation of Logos….so obviously there is Logos in Africa. So the question is “Why didn’t Logos develop in Africa?”….Why did it develop someplace else?
When I was in east Africa, it struck me that it was a savannah — it’s not like the Congo — which is a rain forest — you could never develop the wheel in the rain forest. You could never develop the wheel in Switzerland….if you have a mountainous forest, you can’t use the wheel. So why did the wheel develop there and not here? The answer is I don’t know.”
[CFT: Like all Catholics, if they can’t answer a question, they just say it’s a “mystery”. And we would disagree that just simply because Africans have a form of speech that they therefore have Logos — as Logos was an essential trait of His Adamic creation, the “generations of Adam” — and Africans are not part of those “generations” — according to the genealogy of the Genesis 10 Nations.
Logos is not “primarily speech” — rather, speech is a pre-condition to articulating Logos.
Primordial Europe had physical conditions that were just as — if not more — physically challenging to develop than Africa — and the harsh winters and dense forests — such as in Switzerland, Sweden or Iceland — would be far more difficult to penetrate and tame than anywhere in Africa. Greeks wrote about the inhospitable lands up north along the Danube.
In fact, Europe could never have been developed without the wheel and agriculture — and Europeans brought these practices with them when they migrated up into Europe from the Near East — they didn’t start from the rudimentary status of hunter-gatherers of Africans as Jones seems to be suggesting.]
“Why did the concept of Logos develop in Greece and nowhere else? Even among the Hebrews who were instructed by God himself, but they didn’t have an abstract language.
The Greeks were pagans, but they developed a language that was very abstract and conducive to philosophy. There are people like Dawson who say that it was “the Greek miracle”.
Maybe it was this contact between these Greeks and Persians….the difference between Greeks and Persians is that Greeks talked a lot more than Persians did.”
[CFT: Here Jones appears to conflate the Greek concept of Logos with having the spirit of Logos in the people themselves. Logos pre-existed the creation — and God breathed that spirit into his Adamic creation — into Adam and all his legitimate descendants.
All the ancient advanced Adamic civilizations had it — Sumeria, Egypt, Persia, Assyria, Greece and Rome — and they had sophisticated languages that conveyed abstract ideas, including Hebrew — the Old Testament conveys many abstract ideas — and to suggest that the ancient Hebrews didn’t have Logos — despite not having coined the term — is disingenuous.
The ancient Hebrews presumed the eternal existence of one true God — whereas the Greeks did not — but even Greek writer Diodorus Siculus acknowledged admiration of the writings of Moses — and the Greek language is related to Phoenician — and many believe that the Phoenicians spoke a form of Hebrew.
There’s nothing “miraculous” about the Greek development of philosophical concepts — they merely built upon what their ancestors from these previous advanced civilizations — such as Persia — had already developed.
And Jones’ contention that the ancient Persians didn’t “talk a lot” is simply conjecture — a presupposition — or “begging the question” — to account for this “Greek miracle.”
In reality, ancient Persian civilization rivaled Greece in its magnificence — King Darius’ ceremonial complex — the Persepopolis — is one of the great architectural accomplishments of the ancient world.
Jones says of the ancient Persians,
“The Persians had the asiatic worship of the emperor as a god — and you didn’t talk a whole lot. I was in Golestan [Iran[, and met the head of Radio Golestan who said Persians never wrote anything down….you have a situation that Logos will not develop.”
[CFT: Again, being a race denier, Jones completely ignores the fact that the modern Iranians are not of the same racial stock as the ancient Persians — Persia was overrun by Arab illiterates during the Islamic conquests of the Near East in the 7th Century AD, and the original white Persians who didn’t flee the kingdom — such as the Sarmatian/Scythians — were absorbed into the conquering Arab population. Only this fact accounts for the slow decline of Persia into a Third World status.
And the idea that the ancient Persians “didn’t write anything down” is preposterous — thousands of Persian cuneiform inscriptions have been discovered — and one look at this script shows similarities to Sumerian and Egyptian cuneiform — along with the Greek alphabet itself, which has been shown to be related to ancient Hebrew. This “coincidence” makes sense considering all of these peoples can be traced back to their common ancestor — Noah.]
“[Logos] only developed in one place, and that was Greece — and between that and the Hebrew Scriptures, you had the beginning of a dynamic marriage of the two known as Christianity.
If you compare the Islamic world to Europe at this time — let’s say the 7th century — they had the texts of Aristotle long before the Europeans did.
The Europeans were constantly being subjected to barbarian invasion — the Vikings from the north and the Saracens from the south — and it’s a miracle that any civilization survived there.”
[CFT: The Persians had the Greek texts long before the Europeans did because they were closely related to the Greeks — and they lived in close proximity to them — along with commercial trade connections.
In fact, there’s plenty of evidence that the ancient Sarmatians — from eastern Persia — became part of the Scythian peoples — who merged with the 10 northern tribes of Israel and migrated up into Europe — the Poles acknowledge this ancient connection to the Sarmatians — and the Polish language still has some remnants of the ancient Persian language.
And Jones makes an arbitrary distinction between the Greeks — the first Europeans — and the later Near Easterners from the Assyrian captivity — and those from much earlier tribes — who were migrating up into northern Europe at the same time the Greek Empire was rising.
These different ethnic groups were all closely related and had the same potential to develop advanced civilizations — because they were Adamic — not because they were Catholic.
And ancient rune stone inscriptions and monuments have been found in Europe that are at least 2,000 years old — the Vinča or “Danube” inscriptions have been dated as early as the 5th and 6th Century BC — while the Tărtăria tablets discovered in Romania — which is not far from Greece — have been dated to 4,000 BC.
We also know, for example, that the Welsh — or Cymry/Cymru — language is based on the ancient language of the Khumry — the Israelite tribe of the Assyrian captivity — and that when spoken out loud, the Khumy language is still intelligible to a modern day Welshman.
The same is true of ancient Gaelic — books have been written on the uncanny similarities between this ancient Celtic language and ancient Hebrew, but Jones will never consider this evidence because it doesn’t fit in with his race-denying world view.]
“The crucial factor in the development of Logos in Europe was the Trinity….which is what happened in the first 300 years of Christianity.
In 325 AD, the Council of Nicea, and you have to speak Greek to take part in the council. The Latin fathers did not get involved in heresy because they didn’t speak Greek.
So you had to have a term like “homoousion“….consubstantial — one in being…and it all revolved around Greek categories of thought — if you didn’t have these categories, you could not proceed.”
[CFT: If Logos is embodied in the Trinity — which wasn’t codified as a Christian concept until over 300 years after the death of Christ — then how did Christianity spread prior to the Council of Nicea?
According to The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
“No theologian in the first three Christian centuries was a trinitarian in the sense of believing that the one God is tri-personal, containing equally divine ‘persons’, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”
This is a classic example of circular reasoning or “begging the question” to justify the Catholic Church’s monopoly on Logos and Christ Himself. If anything, the complicated and controversial concept of the Trinity made Christian Logos even more difficult for the average Christian to understand.
There is ample evidence that Christianity took hold in Britain long before the British people had access to the writings of Aristotle or Plato — to suggest that one needs to understand the Greek philosophy in order to comprehend Christianity is simply not true.]
“So what you had with the Persians — who were an advanced culture….what I say to my Iranians friends, ‘Your people were astronomers and philosophers when my people were chasing pigs through the forest of Germany.'”
[CFT: Here we have Jones reducing the pre-Christian — or better yet pre-Catholic — German people to the status of grunting savages — no different from Africans who couldn’t invent a wheel or weave cloth. As we have shown, pre-Christian Germanic peoples were far more advanced than Africans at that time — and even Africans today. Their mastery of metallurgy alone is proof of this — let alone their use of animal husbandry and advanced agriculture.]
“[The Persians] had a big head start, yet the Logos did not develop there — because first of all, they got their idea of Christianity from Nestorian heretics — so they didn’t know that Jesus Christ was God — and secondly, they were conquered by arabs who were not a philosophical people….to this day, they have no recovered.
So it’s not surprising that Logos didn’t develop in Africa because it didn’t develop anywhere other than Greece…
…So I got in trouble with the white boys because I said that the only difference between Africa [and Germany] is 800 years of Christianity.
They were outraged at that because they have some sort of racial mysticism…”
[CFT: Again, we see Jones conflating the ancient Adamic Persians with the modern day Iranians — a disingenuous intellectual sleight of hand — or to give Jones the benefit of the doubt — a refusal to believe that the racial admixture with the Arabs led to their intellectual and civilizational decline.
And, no, the “white boys” don’t promote “some sort of racial mysticism” — they simply believe that the white race — the “generations of Adam” — long before Christianity appeared — had proven its unique ability to create advanced civilizations — along with sophisticated written languages — without even understanding the Greek concept of “Logos.”
Ethiopia in Africa was “Christian” 500 years before Germans were converted, yet Ethiopia is still a Third World, backward nation, so whatever form of “Christianity” the Ethiopians believe, it hasn’t done them any good in advancing their civilization.
And to suggest that the Nestorians did not apprehend the concept of Logos in Christ is contradicted by the facts — the reason Catholics like Jones call the Nestorian Christians “heretics” is that first and foremost they rejected the Catholic dogma that Mary had some sort of unique special divinity — and was some sort of special “intercessor” between Christians and Jesus Christ.
The Nestorians did acknowledge the unique indwelling spirit of God in the Son, but they merely disagreed about the hypostatic nature of this relationship — that they were literally one and the same divinity — which the dogmatic trinitarians insisted upon. The Nestorians described the Logos in this manner:
“Jesus was viewed as a human being who shared the divine sonship of the Logos; the Logos united itself to Jesus from the moment of Jesus’ conception. After the resurrection, the human Jesus and the Logos reveal that they have always been one prosopon.”
If you were to present these Nestorian ideas of the Logos to your average Christian today, it’s doubtful that they would immediately cry, “Heretic!” — but the Catholic Church saw this as a threat to their hegemonic monopoly over “The Word” — so they smeared anyone who did not toe the party line as “heretics.”
And contrary to what many Catholics assert, none of the early ante-Nicean Church fathers believed in the Trinity per se as propounded at the Council of Nicea — and nor did the Nicea Council put an end to the controversy.
But regardless of the validity of the concept of the Trinity, to suggest that any Christian who does not agree with it is somehow a rejecter of Logos — and essentially an anti-Christ — is not only untrue, but ignores the fact that none of the Gospel writers enunciated the Trinity in any way that approaches what the Council of Nicea propounded.
There were many disagreements among the apostles, but none of them involved this complicated, later concept of the Trinity — and it would take another 300 years to settle the matter — settle it, using the power of the pagan Emperor Constantine to enforce its acceptance as a vehicle for consolidating — or unifying — his political power.
Link to video “Logos And Africa”:
[End of Part 1]