Thread 519130764

https://www.reddit.com/r/AmmonHillman/comments/1d7y5p9/ammons_translation_of_neaniskos/
I can't find any other instances in ancient Greek texts where his translation of "νεάνισκος" indicates "boy," but plenty where it indicates "young man."

While νεάνισκος does contain the diminutive suffix -ισκος, it is not used to denote a young boy, but rather a young man or youth.

I'm no expert at this but a simple search reveals the Greeks had words for different stages of growth:

παῖς (pais) - boy, child

μειράκιον (meirakion) - adolescent, teenage boy

νεάνισκος (neāniskos) - young man, youth

ἀνήρ (anēr) - adult man

Furthermore, when reading references to Ganymede and boys you find (pais) and not (neāniskos).

Παιδοφιλεῖν δέ τι τερπνόν, ἐπεί ποτε καὶ Γανυμήδους ἠράσατο Κρονίδης ἀθανάτων βασιλεύς, ἁρπάξας δ᾽ ἐς Ὄλυμπον ἀνήγαγε, καί μιν ἔθηκε δαίμονα παιδείης ἄνθος ἔχοντ᾽ ἐρατόν. οὕτω μὴ θαύμαζε, Σιμωνίδη, οὕνεκα κἀγὼ ἐξεφάνην καλοῦ παιδὸς ἔρωτι δαμείς.

https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A2008.01.0477%3Avolume%3D1%3Atext%3D11%3Asection%3D2

Translation:

"To love boys is something delightful, since once the son of Cronus, the king of the immortals, also loved Ganymede. He seized him and brought him to Olympus, and made him a divine being, possessing the lovely bloom of youth. So do not be surprised, Simonides, that I too have been overcome by love for a beautiful boy."

YHWH's law uses the word paidia.
It means child.

Raping little girls gets you that girl for some money.
This is what they took from you: child brides.

YHWH's law uses the word paidia.
It means child.

Raping little girls gets you that girl for some money.
This is what they took from you: child brides.

>>519130764 (OP)
Mentally ill people can’t fathom what is a lovely relationship between a (((master))) and his apprentice.

>>519131242
stop applying modern morals to ancient civilizations.
they were Greek. it could have been debauched as hell and still considered a healthy relationship.

>>519131242
Christians like you believe it is impossible to say "girl" in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin.

To you paidia "does not mean child"
puella "does not mean young girl (child)"
na'r "does not mean child"

>>519131511
If I ever get blessed with a girl, I will give her in marriage while she is still very young teenager.
I don’t care about the opinions of the governfags. Their gynobots bleed and their systems are fragile.

>>519131713
daughter*

>>519131484
>modern morals
the idea that morality is subjective is peak kike horseshit.

>>519131713
Christians will slaughter you with a millstone fired by their police.
They are under the NEW COVENANT.

>>519131928
You hate the Old Testament God because he didn't follow your Christian morals. He game men cute young girls.

>>519131987
I will fight to death. You know what they say in France.

>>519131928 >>519132068 >>519131713
They wrote the "sequel" (new testament) because they didn't like the laws of the old testament.

Testament basically means "deal" here.
The old deal was money existed to purchase female children as brides.
(this is the same deal as in the Sumerian empire, the price was 40 of the currency back then, 50 by the time the old testament was written (though in the greek it's still 40 (20-double of the currency))

The new "deal" is
1) women are not to be stoned for being whores or adultery
2) men are to have their eyes gouged out for looking at women (gyne).
3) pedos are to be drowned with a millstone
4) men are to have their genitals cut off from their body (matthew 19, greek) ("for heaven")
5) there is no male nor female.
6) men are to give all there money and posessions away: there is no inheritance for their sons (since it's all given away).

That's the new covenant.
How old is it really?

The old deal is for : Man.
The new deal is for : Human.
That's why when any "male" does anything violent they say "he's not Human"; human is a different species: domesticated form of man.

Human's are ruled by Jesus Christ: the userper new god. A god of women and castrated slaves with no dick or balls.
Man was ruled by YHWH etc. Rapist of cute young girls; Lord and ruler. All men were Lords then (ba'al: which humans call "demon": but it means master) But he's gone now, as far as we're told.

We are told it's a sin to follow the old God's laws. Christians tell us that.
Because they hate him.
They hate Man.

>>519131928
is it, you ridiculously stupid faggot. It used to be taboo for women to expose their ankles for example.

>>519130764 (OP)
Of course hillman is right. That's why they seethe.
Early christians were a horrible jewish offshoot. Atheistic (yes, they were seen as godless) nonsense. Mystical gay sex. Kids (vomiting Nazi smiley). Gullible White people.

Their later success at shmoozing with White kings made this all inconvenient. So it was buried.
We can all argue words but what matters ultimately is context.

>>519132068
>>519131713
One reason they have the men do alot of the child care now, instead of the women is so that the girls are too dear to you to marry off. So they become whores: which is the New Testament way (do not stone women, DO gouge out mens eyes and chop off mens dick and balls (matthew 19 greek)).

When women did all the work 24/7 with the kids and the men did as they pleased: it wasn't such a problem to marry off one of you 6 girl children to someone. You also had 6 boys too often to hang out with eventually and to be your platoon.

Now you get 1 or 2 kids; and the "male" must helicopter parent 24/7: which changes you. It's like a metamophisis.
So you would NEVER give her up.
But you MUST send her to school, but tell yourself "this isn't giving them up" (it is).
While Jesus' New Testament says : ROMANS 13: OBEY ALL EARTHLY RULERS.
(opposite of the Old Testament early parts: "if anyone entices you to follow another Power, even if it is your brother ... Kill them" --5th book of old testament, which christians reject)*
>>518426582 *
>The law of Moses has been abrogated. To attempt it is now sin.

The reproductive cycle has been broken.

>>519132625
Preach brother

>>519132422
>Their later success at shmoozing with White kings made this all inconvenient. So it was buried.
For the Germans they used a completely different New Testament that was much similar to the myths we know as King Authur.
Jesus was a miltary man and his apostles were his knights. The word they used for God in it was the same word used for the high God of the Germans back then.

You can look up that "version" of the New Testament. It is in German and exists in some european museums. It is called a "early christian forgery, to convince the germans" now. But Medeval chrisendom seems much more congruent with that version than what we have now (feminism (no jew nor greek, no male nor female), whorism (do not stone women), transgenderism (castrate males for heaven (matthew 19, greek)), anti-child bride (millstone pedos), anti-god ("your father was a murder and liar from the begining, he is the adversary") etc.

>>519130764 (OP)
If you are really interested to learn the truth aka that homosexuality want accepted in ancient Greece then check pic related

You are really falling for Jewish lies

>>519132865
I've heard about it and the 'Heliland' is in my workpile. As I'm a chrono revisionist, old, weird sources are important bits that can help reconstruct a real timeline.
I am of the opinion that both history and specifically judeo-christianity are much younger (around a 1000 years) than we've been told. It's really an enormous blunder serving only to uphold the moronic jewish anti mythology.

Thanks for the tip.

>>519134093
> https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/44611072-homosexuality-in-ancient-greece
It's a divisive book. Some call it right wing propaganda and alt-right historical revisionism. Others embrace it.
Although mostly irrelevant to this debate, it's important to note that the foundational insight of queer theory is that homosexuality began in 1885 with the term homosexuality was coined. Of course, in the end it was really a matter of political convenience, which enabled androphiles to cut ties with pederasts in the late 1980s. But it's important to realize for anyone who naively believes that queer theory sees homosexuality everywhere in the past. Those behind gender theory reject that idea, so even if the book in question was true, it wouldn't really touch the arguments of the ideology most people who support the book are concerned with.