/fascist/ - Surf the Kali Yuga

Fascist and Third Position Discussion

[Post a Reply]
[Hide]
Posting Mode: Reply
Säge:
Name
Subject
Message

Max message length: 5000

Files
E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

  • Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more
  • Max files: 5
  • Max file size: 50.00 MB
  • Read the global rules before you post, as well as the board rules found in the sticky.

01/04/22 New board for Australian Politics has been created.
08/28/21 Come and join our Matrix/IRC servers, the info can be found here.
[Index] [Catalog] [Archive] [Bottom] [Refresh]

(5.26 KB 226x223 varg stop watching porn.jpg)
/aag/ Anti-Abrahamism General 2 Blackshirt 09/12/2021 (Sun) 19:56:12 No. 13995
This thread is for combating and deprogramming individuals from jewish ideologies, particularly Christianity. Christianity is irreconcilable with White racial politics and National Socialism. It is necessarily universal in all respects, downplays the value of life, makes one worship a jew as their lord and savior, and worst of all preaches ethics fit for weaklings. The strong, beautiful, superior, etc are all denigrated before the jewish imposter god. It must be said that Christianity is among one the greatest enemies of racial regeneration, and cannot be viewed seperately from the problem of the JQ. I urge Christians to realize that they been deceived. Previous thread: >>1395 https://archive.fo/FyjjL
Christianity sucks its like paralysis
>>14006 I agree, people generally raised as Christians have a hard time shaking it off. I should know. I was always raised to be fearful of everything, or that "the next man you come across could be Jesus, treat everyone like a king", or other crazy bullshit drilled in my head for years. Sage for blogposting.
>>14007 >I was always raised to be fearful of everything, or that "the next man you come across could be Jesus, treat everyone like a king" Definitely don't read up on xenia among ancient pagans. They were always concerned that a god could be visiting them, and so highly valued hospitality. Odin often disguised himself and paid a visit to people in their homes as well. When Odysseus visits the Phaeacians in the Odyssey, him whether he might be a god who is visiting them, since typically for their land (unusual compared to all other lands, it is said) the gods do not come in disguises among them.
>>14007 >be peaceful >dont engage in any direct action >thats unholy and satanic >just pray every day and hope that things magically change Christfucks were the first glowniggers
>>14017 I mean yeah, hospitality is fine and all -- but the way my family (and hell, even a part of my many communities growing up) basically phrased it was always in a "turn the other cheek" sort of way. For example, in one rural community I was in growing up, there was a literal demon spawn kid who used to torture farm cats (granted I have no clue what he does now, hopefully he's dead and rotting). Throwing them around, throwing them into the lake, making them climb all the way up on tree branches. For the longest reason, I wondered why no adult did anything, aside from actually fucking back up the kid saying that "they were his" (when they were literally just stray street cats). Hell, when my mom was driving me out of the drive way, one time the little fuck was actively jumping right in front of the van like a spazz, and it took forever to get him out of the way. Either way, the whole point of that story is that my entire family and that community all went to church regularly, with a pastor who basically peddled the shit >>14034 described. Those adults (and even whatever kids were there) always turned the other cheek, a blind eye to what that kid was doing, 'cuz hey! He just might be fucking Jesus in disguise! I later on stole his "favorite", the tiniest cat of all, right as we were moving out. She's the most loving cat you could ever ask for.
Do you think smashing statues of Jesus and his whore mother would be a good way to demoralize christcucks and Mary-worshiping shitskins? In Mind craft of course.
(634.69 KB 750x499 statuevandalism.png.png)
(34.06 KB 590x350 beheadedidol.jpg)
(158.30 KB 1200x630 before vs after.jpg)
>>14038 fuck outta here, glownigger and/or phoneposter, no destroying property
>>14038 >Mary-worshiping shitskins To be fair (except niggers and spics), the other peoples have been more civilized because of such religion.
just finished the book of esther. what other parts of the OT are essential reading for understanding jewish subversion? only read genesis before and a related question, are the general epistles worth reading if I'm already familiar with paul and the gospels? or should I just jump into gnosticism at this point
>>14053 Ben Klassen elaborates on many subversive texts in "The Nature's eternal religion"
>>14044 >To be fair (except niggers and spics), the other peoples have been more civilized because of such religion. No they haven't. Niggers in America are at-least 90% Christian and yet they still loot and destroy everyone's property. This is true when it comes to African countries and communities that are mostly protestant, catholic, sunni as well.
>>14038 Plenty of shitskin muslims do this on regular basis in places like France, Greece and Italy. Christcucks shut up and swallow down without a whimper. Their pope sold them to the kikes and his clergy minions fully embrace globohomo. Christianity is a dead end and a dying horse. if you just wanted to accelerate and fan the flames of conflict, you would return the favor by doing this stuff to mosques and synagogues in Minecraft instead.
>>14053 Daily reminder that Esther BTFOs the idea that ancient Judaism was an ethnic religion
What are your guys' religious backgrounds? My parents met in a Pentecostal cult but I was raised fairly liberal protestant. /pol/ made me an edgy new atheist for years, then /lit/ made me muslim until recently. These days I don't know what I believe other than polytheism is better than monotheism and the Abrahamic god in particular is evil. I still spend too much time reading the Bible and stuff about the JQ
>>14076 <It's okay to be jewish, because we goys can be jews as well You're retarded. >>14116 >What are your guys' religious backgrounds? I grew up from a zealous Scottish-descent catholic family, went agnostic for a while, realized that it was dumb and life-denying and got further redpilled into the Abrahamics and became an OG buddhist on pre-nu/pol/, /lit/ and /fascist/. I tried getting my parents to become buddhist as well, but they kindly turned it down, while stilling willing to listen to what I say. >/pol/ made me an edgy new atheist for years, /pol/ were filled with a bunch of feds and cringey atheists who were shilling nilihism on purpose. I almost got caught up in it as well, until I actually researched a-lot about it and what it truly was about. >then /lit/ made me muslim until recently. Did you fall for the meme?
>>14116 My parents were atheists who came from different Christian denominations. I read a lot of Catholic literature growing up, the whole imagery of smashing idols really stuck with me. I was intrigued by the idea that I could "kill" someone's god by destroying a statue, and that all such gods would be completely dependent upon humans to defend them. In fact I almost became a Muslim at one point because I was attracted to Islam's rejection of religious imagery. >>14062 That would be pointless because Jews and Muslims don't worship statues. I was thinking of Catholic mestizos who worship Mary, not so much White Catholics who are by and large just as cucked as everyone else. Their religion seems to have inherited a lot from Mexican paganism, including idol worship. In fact, the virgin Mary seems to have been conflated with a certain goddess worshiped in prehispanic times. Thus, by any damage to the virgin Mary is in fact damage to this goddess. Who is dependent on spics to defend her.
>>14140 I fell for the traditionalism meme in particular, yes. I had to actually make friends with some Muslim traditionalists irl to realise they didn't understand Hinduism and were basically still shilling Abrahamic monotheism. I lasted 3 years which is longer than most White converts. I've always liked the five percenters, though >>14144 What's wrong with idol worship?
>>14116 My Dad was Methodist and mom was a JW. They're getting back into it and it has become quite grating.
>>14116 my parents are protestant. Don't want to dox myself on the domination as it is a mega church I am not sure if there other churches but it mix of Pentecostal and Presbyterian beliefs. I would have been a Christian but the pro-Israel/pro-jew talk just disgusted me even before I went /pol/ /polk/ or whatever I don't know how political boards I lurked on 8chan on endchan. It's was I like hopping from one board to another. I still believe in higher beings but I can't be Christian anymore. I want to help and be in touch with my own community not cuck out to Isrealis half way around the world whom I never even met personally.
>>14144 Literally no one cares about vandalized churches, in France several whorshippers and priests were beheaded and no one did anything at all. Memoryholed just like that. Christcuckery is finished, their own pope is advocating the genocide of Whites via mandate vax and forced immigration. He's in Hungary, he literally said the place need more diversity. If you wanted to do something useful against christcucks, you should just kill pedo and globohomo clergy in minecraft.
varg is a kike
>>14370 whos varg
>>14400 >Who's Varg? Literally lurk more
>>14401 why are the users so mean to me?
>>14402 Because you're a newfag But to answer your question, assuming you're being genuine, varg is a top-tier black metal musician who went to jail in norway for awhile after burning some churches and stabbing his aids-infested bandmate to death
>>14400 >OP pic related https://www.bitchute.com/channel/thuleanperspective/ Varg Vikernes thuleanperspective.com >jewpedia.org/wiki/Varg_Vikernes >>14401 Because you could have just typed "varg" in to any search engine, and the first page would have gave you an answer
>>14403 thank you brother for helping me understand what vrag is
>>14442 fuck, i meant varg
(49.10 KB 604x364 after pol luther.jpg)
To get the thread back on track, why do y'all think some White nationalists cling to the idea that "jesus was a White aryan israelite not a jew" and similar such nonsense? It can't be that they haven't read the bible, since these people are usually well-versed in it. Is it the result of some sort of personal weakness that prevents them from from acknowledging how deep the jewing of western spirituality really goes? Or is White nationalism for them just an excuse to advance the reactionary (yet still degenerate) worldview present in the old testament? Even if jesus was an aryan the mosaic law is so obviously barbaric, the jewish god so obviously psychopathic, I would have trouble trusting that a "White nationalist" christian had the best interests of White people as a whole at heart, rather than simply seeking a new form of tyranny
>>14476 That's usually the final cope when exposed to all the contradictions and degeneracy of Christianity. The reason why it's so potent is because real Kristos was a White Aryan, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the story of Jesus, that region, or the time period. On a side note, once people get conditioned since early childhood to believe in some things, it becomes very difficult for them to ever fully give up those ideas.
>>14476 they're fully convinced that paganism/buddhism is a larp (without thinking that there's the same idiots in their religion going DEUS VULT), and they sure as hell don't want to go with the other two abraham relgions that, and, the fear of being cast into hell when you die's a deep root. that kind of shit is drilled in your head, early and often.
>>14582 Why would anyone pro White care about Buddhism? Isn't it all just leftist hippy cucks and pajeets?
>>14587 >Why would anyone pro White care about Buddhism? Isn't it all just leftist hippy cucks and pajeets? Ignorant posts like this convinces me that there are too many non-Whites on here.
>>14587 <hurr everyone pro-White should just be a vulgar materialist otherwise you are a cuck
>>14587 plenty of religions have their leftist hippy cucks and/or pajeets who never actually read the texts, delve into it past that and you'll find that buddhism is definitely a good alternative, especially when compared to cuckstianity and the totally-not-forced rising of people wanting to be mudslimes
>>14594 Buddhism is far dumber than Christianity, let's be real.
>>14596 With what we know we're never ever going to worship your jewish proto-marxist petty vengeful and sadistic desert fiend Yaweh you fucking fag.
>>14596 No it isn't, Buddha's teachings are superior in every singleway to christcuckery. The Greeks and Japanese got into for good reasons. You will never be a Jew.
>>14592 >not liking a degenerate universalist spinoff of Hinduism makes you nonWhite >>14594 "Better than christianity and islam" is not a high bar to clear tbf
>>14603 >not liking a degenerate universalist spinoff of Hinduism makes you nonWhite Except it isn't that at all as per debunked for the hundreth time. If you want to be a retard who doesn't understand things, then do it on /pol/.
>>14601 >>14602 Buddhism denies the existence of the self and claims that living beings are just like other objects in the world in that they are no more than the some of their constituent parts. Just as a chariot is made up of various types of matter arranged in a certain way and so therefore doesn't really exist (there is no svabhava / essence of the chariot), it is the exact same with human beings, they are bundles of aggregates fluxing around, with no svabhava or essence. Even the aggregate of vijñāna is said to be not-self in the Milinda Panha. It shouldn't take much thought to see why the existence of the self being illusory is stupid, and its for the same reason it's stupid in atheistic materialist views of the world. It's even more stupid that still Buddhism posits dogmas like reincarnation while simultaneously holding this view. It's really no wonder why Buddhism is so readily reconcilable with soulless materialistic modern worldviews in the West. Because Buddhists believe they are quite literally soulless bundles of aggregates. On top of that, Buddhism denies moral realism and posits a fully instrumental / consequentialist view of morality. They are departing from ancient Aryan conceptions of cosmic order which affirm moral realism. >Buddha's teachings are superior in every singleway to christcuckery Literally not even the point. Buddhism is an incoherent system of thought. Christianity is at least coherent even if you don't like it (and I never claimed to be a Christian, so chill the fuck out)
>>14605 >Even the aggregate of vijñāna is said to be not-self Forgot to say that this term means consciousness
>>14605 >Buddhism denies the existence of the self and claims that living beings Stopped right here, confirmed to never had read Evola. Also links may be scuffed but debunks your stupidity. /fascist/ really knows nothing about the religion they cry about as being "life-denying" or reject the self. https://dhamma.neocities.org
>>14607 >The core message of presecular Buddhism found within the Nikayas, the oldest texts of original Buddhism Nikayas, huh? Let's go to the Majjhima Nikaya then: <Bhikkhus, there being a self, would there be for me what belongs to a self?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Or, there being what belongs to a self, would there be for me a self?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, since a self and what belongs to a self are not apprehended as true and established, then this standpoint for views, namely, ‘That which is the self is the world; after death I shall be permanent, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change; I shall endure as long as eternity’—would it not be an utterly and completely foolish teaching?” <“What else could it be, venerable sir, but an utterly and completely foolish teaching?” https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/bodhi This is the exact same doctrine used in the Milinda Panha, in which the existence of every composite object including human-beings is denied for some sort of mereological nihilism. It's too long to quote here: https://sacred-texts.com/bud/sbe35/sbe3504.htm According to Buddhism you are literally just a bunch of insentient things fluxing around. >/fascist/ really knows nothing about the religion they cry about as being "life-denying" I don't use that term. It's a gay holdover from Nietzsche, who himself is cringe.
I'm surprised there isn't more interest in Zoroastrianism and the Avestas among our circles. The doctrines of the religion are very intriguing, and they represent a direct continuation of ancient Aryan religious traditions. The influences on Christianity and Islam are apparent even under casual scrutiny, and I'd think their sense of symbolism would appeal to White westerners already familiar with these religions. Instead all I see are attempts to "correct" existing traditions(Christian Identity), or charismatic cult leaders making shit up as they go along and calling it "traditional"(Creativity). If you're going to "reconstruct" dead religions, why not go off something still practiced today, albeit in altered form? >>14594 In my experience it's the opposite. All the most right wing Whites I know IRL practice some form of Christianity, while all the White Buddhists I know are "spiritual' types looking for novelty or using the religion as an excuse for their anti patriarchal views, vegetarianism or pacifism. All my older relatives practice Catholicism, and the most redpilled also tend to be the most religious, which I doubt is a coincidence. The only thing that keeps my from being a Catholic myself is seeing just how pozzed and corrupt the church actually is, especially the current pope. I just can't take neopaganism seriously, it seems like the whole thing was made up in the last hundred years or so. Even Islam is more attractive to me, they at least have a well established spiritual heritage, not to mention that Muhammed himself was lily White. >>14596 I agree.
>>14609 I'm glad that you're stupid enough to pick-up rando sites that teach new age nonsense and grab lies from heretical sects that corrupt Buddha's original teachings so you can lie, bitch and moan about Nietschze and a religion you continue to not understand at the same time, because you can only be as irrational as a woman. I'm convinced that you are spiritually Christian or a subversive Jew. <"The Soul (Attan) is Charioteer"[Jataka-2-1341]-Gotama Buddha "The Tathagata is without the mark of all things, he dwells upwards within the signless self-directed mind/will (citta). There within, Ananda, dwell with the Soul (attan) as your Light, with the Soul as your refuge, with none other as refuge." - [SN 5.154, DN 2.100, SN 3.42, DN 3.58, SN 5.163]-Gotama Buddha <The Soul (Attan) is ones True-Nature (Svabhava)” [Mahavagga-Att. 3.270] < "The Soul is the refuge that I have gone unto; it is the Light, that very same sanctuary, that final end goal and destiny. It is immeasurable, matchless, that which I really am, that very treasure; it is like unto the breath-of-life, this Animator.”[KN J-1441 Akkhakandam] "Nihilists (natthiko) [those who deny the Soul] go to terrible hell"[SN 1.96]-Gotama Buddha GTFO
>>14610 The only good form of Christianity is the Orthodox Church. I can't take Protestants or Catholics seriously. Catholicism sold out a long time ago, started taking Rothschild loans, declared that that pope was infallible, and decided to enter into dialogue with the modern world with Vatican II. The infestation of the Church with pedophiles and homosexuals is the cherry on top.
>>14611 >I'm glad that you're stupid enough to pick-up rando sites that teach new age nonsense How the fuck is Sutta Central new-age retard? It's literally a site dedicated to early Buddhist texts and translations. You're committing a genetic fallacy here too, unless you can prove that this translation is fake, or that this is not a real Buddhist text, you are going to have to deal with the fact that the Buddha here is declaring the doctrine of a self as 'foolish'. In other texts, the Buddha won't even answer the question whether there is a self or not. When asked if there is a self, he doesn't answer. When he's asked whether there's not a self, he doesn't answer. It's the same shit he does constantly when asked about any substantial questions on his doctrine. The Buddha has no consistent philosophy. He does not provide us with an adequate framework for understanding the nature of the world. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.010.than.html Atta can be a permanent essence or in a different context it can be used as a unmetaphysical pronoun "oneself". Buddhism denies the former.
>>14610 >Zoroastrianism It was already too late >>14612 >Orthodox Church Which is run by communists and only exists to fleece the gullible goyim so that it's bishops can live in golden mansions. It's also deranged since according to some of it's doctrines, the more you suffer, the more D-G loves you. All monotheistic religions belong in the trash. Monotheism of any kind is the root of modernism and egalitarianism, the only difference is how far on that path did they go. To look at Zoroastrianism, Orthodox Church, and Protestant churches with transexual priests is like looking at the same person as a child, adult, and an old man. >>14614 Buddhism in general has a lot of whoa, so profound, 2deep4u moments. It never developed a complete worldview or religious philosophy.
>>14617 >All monotheistic religions belong in the trash. Monotheism of any kind is the root of modernism and egalitarianism, the only difference is how far on that path did they go The real question should be if it is true or false.
>>14609 >Majjhima Nikaya You picked up a text that was for Theravada, you're attacking the heretical sects, not the OG. Theravada and their the Nikayas didn't exist until after the 2nd CE and many of their written text are their thoughts of what Gautama may have said and not his direct words. Again with this stupid myth and even this board believes in it. https://zenstudiespodcast.com/emptiness-of-self/ But I'm going to use the neocities link as well to summarize Buddhasasana, also to say that Christianity is more coherent, goes to show that you do not understand either religions and what Christianity actually teaches. <is the refuge that I have gone unto" [KN Jatakapali 1441] <"To be fixed in the Soul is to be flood crossed" [Mahavagga-Att. 2.692] <"The Soul is Svabhava(Self-Nature)." [Maha’vagga-Att. 3.270] <"The Soul is the refuge to be sought" [Suttanipata-Att. 1.129] <"Nirvana means the subjugation of becoming" [AN 5.9] <"Having become the very Soul, this is deemed non-emptiness (asuñña)" [Uparipanna’sa-Att. 4.151] <"Steadfast-in-the-Soul (thitattoti) means steadfast in ones True-nature (thitasabha'vo)" [Tikanipa’ta-Att. 3.4] <What is emptiness-liberation? Gnosis and contemplation into what is not the Soul liberates one from misconceptions about the Soul, this is emptiness-liberation. [Pati 2.67] <What do you think, is form lasting or impermanent? Impermanent Gotama. Is that which is impermanent suffering or blissful? Indeed its suffering Gotama. Is that which is impermanent and suffering and subject to perpetual change; is it fit to declare of such things ‘this is mine, this is what I am, this is my Soul? Indeed not Gotama! [MN 1.232] <"Having insight he knows, having vision he does so see, the Lord is the holy-eye become, he is gnosis become, the Dhamma become, verily Brahman become, is turned to the Soul, elucidator of the goal, giver of Immortality, he is the Tathagata, the Lord of Dhamma." [MN 1.111] <When this exists, that comes to be, with the arising of this, that also arises; when that is not present, that does not come to be; with the subjugation of this, that too is subjugated. This is meant that which nescience (ignorance) as (original) cause there are then experiences; and with experiences as cause, there then is found consciousness.” [SN 2.65] <"What do you suppose, followers, if people were carrying off into the Jeta grove bunches of sticks, grasses, branches, and leaves and did with them as they wished or burned them up, would it occur to you: These people are carrying us off, are doing as they please with us, and are burning us? No, indeed not Lord. And how so? Because Lord, none of that is our Soul, nor what our Soul subsists upon! Just so followers, what is not who you are, do away with it, when you have made done with that, it will lead to your bliss and welfare for as long as time lasts. What is that you are not? Form, followers, is not who you are, neither are sensations, perceptions, experiences, consciousness." [MN 1.141] <"Wide open is the portal to Immortality. Let them hear the Dhamma of the stainless one, the Buddha." [MN 1.168] < "What of this short-lived body which is clung to by means of craving? There is nothing in it to say ‘I’ or ‘mine’ or ‘me’." [MN 1.185] <"Whether he walks, stands, sits, or lays on his side; so long as his mind (citta) is sovereign upon his very Soul, he is thoroughly quelled." [Itivuttaka 82] <"Parinirvana is to be steadfast-in-the-Soul (thitattoti)" [Theragatha-Att. 1.51] “Suffering comes to (one) with mind/will (citta) which is inchoate (incoherrent).”[SN 4.78]
>>14610 I was always interested in the Mazdayasna.
>>14609 >I don't use that term. It's a gay holdover from Nietzsche, who himself is cringe. Let me guess you're that platonic LARPer who thinks that Socrates was justified and wasn't a subversive at all? The same guy who never read any of the books he spouse so much about.
>>14620 Why yes fellow anons, I too always wanted to follow the Noahide Laws and be a righteous gentile, however I was disillusioned with Christianity because of how corrupt it has become. But one day a ray of light emerged from a nearby synagogue, and I was blessed to learn of the Mazdayasna. Maybe one day I will become such a good goy like Cyrus the Great so Israel makes a commemorative shekel with my name, that would indeed be the highest honor of a true Aryan like me, making my ancestors proud. Once there are no more idolaters, God's chosen people can finally lead humanity towards the Universal Good (TM), just as the Avesta had predicted! Then we can join hands together with our brown and black brothers and experience compassion for all eternity.
>>14621 Daily reminder that you never offered any proof that Socrates was a non-Greek. >>14619 Weird how when you google the verse that it gives, it comes to the exact site you're linking and nothing else, have you tried to actually look up and dig up any of these verses? No matter how many verses you throw at me, that does not change the fact that there are authentic texts that say the exact opposite. Buddhism is just incoherent, and I could easily claim that this shit is all just upaya and doesn't even matter, because that is what Buddhism ultimately comes down to. It's a glorified form of self-help.
>>14605 >Christianity is at least coherent >gentiles worshipping a jew that btfo other jews for not following the mosaic law hard enough is coherent No The mosaic law never applied to gentiles and never will. A perfect god would never change his mind because he would already know the outcome of trusting the yids in advance. The whole idea of the new covenant is just cope. We don't need the jews to tell us how to think, Aryan morality is already superior >>14617 >To look at Zoroastrianism, Orthodox Church, and Protestant churches with transexual priests is like looking at the same person as a child, adult, and an old man. Exactly. Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic corruption of polytheistic traditions just like Judaism and Christianity. It doesn't really bother me that they're almost extinct >>14623 Kek
>>14632 >The whole idea of the new covenant is just cope. How is it a cope when it is from the Old Testament (Jeremiah 31:31-34)?
>>14370 Lol, no
I'm not going to be a JOS shill, but this vid explains the word etymology of Wotan = Satan, Satan is older than Abrahamic trash and equals all "Paganism". The vid doesn't explain it but Varg has years ago saying all pagans are the same at the end of the day, there's cultural nuances but it equals to the same outcome, the outcome being Blood and Soil. https://odysee.com/@Commander.Cobra.666:5/Heinrich-Himmler---'The-Aryan-Knight'--His-Life-and-Struggle---WW2---DOCUMENTARY-:2
>>14636 Still only applies to "Israelites and judeans." You aren't a fucking Jew, you're an Aryan. Start acting and worshipping like one
>>14636 The old testament and the new testament are both jewish toilet paper.
>>14643 Christians are the true spiritual Israel, retard. Galatians 3:7-9 >Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith. Galatians 6:16 >And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God. Isaiah 56:8 >Thus declares the Lord GOD, who gathers the dispersed of Israel: “I will gather to them still others besides those already gathered.” Isaiah 56:3 >Let no foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say, “The LORD will utterly exclude me from His people.”
>>14669 More cope. You're intepreting the OT outside of the context in which it was originally written. For a goi to worship the god of Abraham they were still supposed to convert which used to be more of a thing before christianity. The Jewish messiah is supposed to make willing slaves of the goim at best, the jews were always the center of attention
>>14669 The christians redefined Israel post-hoc to justify their heresy. I'm not siding with the jews here, I don't like any abrahamists, but Yahweh is their god for all time and you're just being a useful idiot
>>14677 >>14678 You're just showing that you've never read the Bible again. Through Abraham all the families of the world would be blessed in time, Genesis 22 is very clear about this. It is clear what this means is that Jesus will be a descendant of Abraham. God did choose, for a time, the physical nation of Israel as His people for the fulfillment of his promise to Abraham and again for the coming of Jesus. But he was always the one God of the entire Earth, as it is said over and over again in the Bible. After Babel, the nations were divided, God took His people as his own share, and appointed the 'gods' over the other nations of the Earth (Deuteronomy 32:8-9). These are the pagan gods, who rebelled against God and became degenerate, wicked and unjust, abducting women, introducing shit like human sacrifice, pedophilia, etc. It is prophesied that all the nations of the Earth are God's inheritance in Psalm 82, which deals with the gods of the nations. And just like was written, the pagan gods were scattered and overthrown over most of the world. More proofs that the whole world will / would turn to the living God - Psalm 22:27-28 <All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations will bow down before him, for dominion belongs to the Lord and he rules over the nations. Psalm 86:8-10 <Among the gods there is none like you, Lord; no deeds can compare with yours. All the nations you have made will come and worship before you, Lord; they will bring glory to your name. For you are great and do marvelous deeds; you alone are God. Isaiah 56:6-8 <And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord to minister to him, to love the name of the Lord, and to be his servants, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant—these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations.” The Sovereign Lord declares—he who gathers the exiles of Israel: “I will gather still others to them besides those already gathered.” Esther 8:17 <And many people of other nationalities became Jews because fear of the Jews had seized them. All of your nonsense about 'muh goy slaves' is Talmudic, and thus postdates Christianity by centuries.
>>14681 Abraham was a baby raping kike and not my ancestor. The mosaic law and it's christian abrogations are plenty degenerate. Go shill your spiritual cuckholdry somewhere else christfag
>>14683 >Abraham was a baby raping kike <it was real in my mind
>>14644 the Bible has good qualities, but much of this is distilled from older mythology from the Ancient Near East. as I've mentioned earlier, there's a serious declination of the Jews between the Old and New Testaments. there are admirable qualities in the OT, but by the NT, the shekel-hoarding and hand-rubbing is all too familiar.
When it comes to Biblical characters, Nimrod was much more based than Jesus. He was such a gigachad that he gathered his elite troops and opened a portal to the immaterium to battle Yah and his daemons. He also dissed Abraham.
>>14795 >He was such a gigachad that he gathered his elite troops and opened a portal to the immaterium to battle Yah and his daemons. He also dissed Abraham. Is this some sort of Talmudic fanfiction? I read through Genesis a few days ago and didn't see that.
>>14681 Why would anyone take a book that is both inconsisent and fails everytime to do what it pleads its retarded followers to do, because it cannot understand human nature nor the universe itself? All you do is bitch about your stupid kike God and it is clear that you are Jewish, because you hate pagans (goys).
>>14628 You still haven't disproven that Socrates was not a subversive faggot. >Weird how when you google the verse that it gives, it comes to the exact site you're linking and nothing else, It's retarded for you to take Thervadan lies as a case that Buddhism is against indiviuality. You are a true retard and those bad posts you've made on the Dharmic thread is definitive proof that you would turn an entire generation of children to be as dumb as niggers if you ever become a priest.
>>14807 The whole point of the Epic of Gilgamesh is that immortality for a man cannot exist, but his people and his works can endure forever. No wonder the jews hated Gilgamesh. Actually, Christianity is the antithesis of the moral of the Epic of Gilgamesh, because it calls on people to pursue personal immortality.
>>13995 Good anti-Christian books I should read? Most atheist/antichristian literature these days (and probably since the 1900s tbfh) is made by leftists or just general faggots. I was going to start on Nietzche. What are some good things by him
>>14795 indeed
>>14811 This one sums it up pretty well in a WN context.
>>14811 This one is quite good too.
>>14632 >Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic No? Zoroastrianism was never monotheistic.
>>14808 >The whole point of the Epic of Gilgamesh is that immortality for a man cannot exist This is not necessarily the proper reading. At its fundamental level, it shows that a lack of wisdom and awareness at any time will bar you from actually obtaining The Prize.
>>14711 The Aryan inspiration of entire swathes of the OT is most obvious but one cannot deny that it's been severely tainted. Many anti-Christians are revolted at the so called paragons of virtue that some of the central and most important figures are, but essentially they use extreme left-hand-path cunning to preserve their blood and wealth. Their ways look despicable and unhonorable. Perhaps the lesson would be that if you do not want to have to resort to this kind of low scooping tactics, then fight ahead of your own people's enslavement and destruction.
>>14681 >shilling Yahweh >all nations under one desert god At least if all nations were actually subdivisions of one big White nation, and the God be also an avatar come unto us as a big genocidal mutafucka with a flaming sword, perhaps then I wouldn't mind, but that's just not the case and leaving aside any feeble Christian Identity argument (Dan leagcy, ruby skin), it is most certain that this Bible is severely lacking in even trying to look like it's favorable to Whites. It's pointless and pure shite.
>>14845 Zoroastrianism has always been monotheistic. Ahura Mazda isn't diametrically opposed by an equal Angra Mainyu. Ahura Mazda begot both Spenta Mainyu and Angra Mainyu (the two 'twins' of Yasna 30 and 45) and these two are the diametrically opposed opposites. The Gathas make this very clear. Druj is ultimately subordinate to the sovereignty of Ahura Mazda. Ahura Mazda literally can't lose, after all he is described as omnipotent in Zoroastrianism scriptures, and two omnipotent beings is impossible philosophically-speaking since either one could override the will of the other, or they would cancel each other out, rendering either both impotent or one superior to the other. You should read this paper and the book on Iranian religion in the pagan thread. >>14799 >You still haven't disproven that Socrates was not a subversive faggot. Prove that he is a Phoenician. I'm waiting. You can't just spout lies and not substantiate the claims. Declaring someone 'subversive' across the board is also brainlet-tier, since I don't even know where I would start to defend him. It just seems to me that you would be like one of the people described in Plato's Apology who would get assblasted after Socrates asks you a few philosophical questions about your worldview and would completely demolish it, just like I am doing with Buddhism and exposing how dumb it is.
>>14862 This entire statement is so fucking stupid, please kill yourself and stop shitting up this thread with your philosophical faggotry. You're a massive faggot and I know you come from cuckchan's autistic board known as /lit/ where no one reads anything at all and have stupid slap-fights between Nietschzians and Socratians. >declaring someone 'subversive' across the board is also brainlet-tier, since I don't even know where I would start to defend him. Socrates was a subversive greekoid. He got BTFO'd by Callicles for a reason and him getting killed was purely justified, despite my hatred democracy as well, but even a broken clock can be correct about some things. You are shilling the guy who literally sperged out against the entirely of Athens, because someone went to an oracle and asked if there was anyone wiser than him. The prophet answered no and this what lead to him becoming an intellectual nigger who began to act like a leftoid Hegelian. All he was good at was making people look stupid, because he argued in bad faith, just like modern leftists. Apolloian Germ explains why you and he is retarded. https://yewtu.be/watch?v=SWPGr0_cPZM
>>14897 cont. Read the Apology Of Socrates, or shut-up along with the nigger you keep responding to (You).
>>14897 >He got BTFO'd by Callicles for a reason No he didn't. You should go and read Gorgias again (implying you've even read it). Callicles is defending some sort of coomer-tier hedonism where any form of self-restraint is viewed as shameful and something for the weak. The powerful should be able to enjoy as much pleasure and luxury as they want with zero limitations. Socrates refutes this with ease, and it should be obvious enough why this is a dumb position to hold, so I won't even rehash the debate here. And then his second position of course is that the just according to nature are those who can plunder and rule over others. Socrates BTFOs this position by pointing out that if the masses can band together and can together become stronger, making laws over the 'le superior individuals', and are thus according to nature 'just' and 'superior'. >You are shilling the guy who literally sperged out against the entirely of Athens, because someone went to an oracle and asked if there was anyone wiser than him Yeah, and since he didn't believe the oracle, he sought after wisdom and asked some basic questions to people like (you) about their worldviews, and they were exposed for not being as wise as they played themselves off to be, since they held inconsistent, baseless and retarded views. They got so mad at this they arranged his judicial murder. For a Buddhist you should really be exhibiting some more equanimity and lovingkindness though, you seem kinda mad :^)
>>14808 It seems to me that it describes different natures of Man, Enkindu is basically a wild animal-man who gets enticed by a woman to become civilized (Archetypal mortal man), while Gilgamesh represents the divine, higher Self. He needs Enkindu to descend into hell of matter (conquest), and his pre-civilized consciousness (before it was obscured with culture) to track the lord of material beings in order to battle him. After the battle the mortal consciousness dies, while the higher Self survives. Mortal consciousness cannot provide an answer to what comes after death, because there is no after death for it. Higher Self on the other hand, achieves apotheosis. >>14852 What is The Prize? >>14853 >but essentially they use extreme left-hand-path cunning to preserve their blood and wealth To obtain it by deceiving goyim. Even the most extreme left hand path behavior among Aryans is still required to abide by the principle of honor, and not even the most extreme right hand path has to abide by the principle of slave morality. OT is basically a bunch of kikes getting hold of some ancient material and interpreting it from a purely Jewish perspective.
>>14862 Just because Ahura Mazda is the most supreme deity, doesn't mean other divine beings/Gods don't exist in it. Vohu Manu and Airyaman are explicitly said by name as seperrate beings.
>>14944 >No he didn't. You should go and read Gorgias again (implying you've even read it). Callicles is defending some sort of coomer-tier hedonism where any form of self-restraint is viewed as shameful and something for the weak. I don't care what Callicles said that doesn't negate the fact he was right about Socrates sperging out like you are doing. This is proof that everyone who unironically like him are retarded. He criticized Socrates for denying life itself and constantly rambling on shit that are too unrealistic to be accomplished within a society. Gorgias does nothing to counter my point, but funny enough you have never read a book in your life, so of course you're not going to directly quote it as a counter-argument. Everything else you say is nothing more, but a cope and excuses for a guy who tried to corrupt the Athenian by grooming them and became to deep into fiction over reality. >Socrates BTFOs this position by pointing out that if the masses can band together and can together become stronger, making laws over the 'le superior individuals', and are thus according to nature 'just' and 'superior'. Socrates didn't BTFO shit, he merely made shitty arguments of things that he couldn't prove to work in theory himself. We're talking about a guy who has no real experiences other than being a teacher of religion and philosophy. >Yeah, and since he didn't believe the oracle, he sought after wisdom and asked some basic questions to people like (you) about their worldviews, See, pure autism, no he didin't you cuckchan loser, he went around asking pointless questions to the Athenians look ignorant compared to him. He done nothing different than any Hegelian would do as a way to create an illusion of how smart they actually are. They weren't exposed as inconsistent, it was what Socrates considered to be inconsistent, because he disagreed with their views. >For a Buddhist you should really be exhibiting some more equanimity and lovingkindness though, you seem kinda mad :^) <thinking i'm the same guy Witness how stupid Socrates niggers are everyone. I'm not a le buddhist, but this is hypocrisy, because you're favorite philosophers warn you of doing similar actions to my posts. I'm tired of you coming on here spouting dumbass bullshit and being a total cucksucker. Read a book and shut the fuck up.
>>14964 You need to realize that polytheism and monotheism are a false dichotomy. God (capital G) is in a totally different category than a 'god'. Both can exist at once, and the acknowledgement of one does not entail the demonization of the other. To confuse the two is to commit a category error. Just because Ahura Mazda is clearly the supreme being and source of all existence in Zoroastrianism, does not mean that Vohu Manah, Spenta Mainyu, etc. don't exist. They are derivative from Ahura Mazda. >>14981 I don't see any arguments being made here. It doesn't even matter if one agrees with Socrates philosophically or not, but it sure is funny how he exposed the false wisdom of those who thought themselves wise. If one's beliefs cannot even stand up to the smallest amount of probing, they are worthless beliefs. Your shitty Nietzschean philosophy (which is relativistic, perspectivistic, immoralistic, etc). His entire philosophical project is based on things that he likes, but he goes on to deny objective morality, (and any morality at all as anything more than an '(mis)interpretation of phenomena') truth, the gods, etc. Nietzsche is basically a leftist at heart, and this is why postmodernists / deconstructionists like Michel Foucault (pedo), Gilles Deleuze, Jean-Paul Sartre, Jacques Derrida all suck his cock. Nietzsche is part of the problem, just like (you)
>>14988 >I don't see any arguments being made here. Of course, not because you can't read at all or maybe you're so ignorant that you do not even know the meaning of the word argument at all. > It doesn't even matter if one agrees with Socrates philosophically or not But that's not the point. The topic was whether if this guy is worthy enough to be considered a philosopher or justified in what he done. You haven't brought any evidence contrary to my arguments other than that he was totally a good guy because he wanted to fight democracy which isn't enough of a reason for me to consider him to not be a faggot. >Your shitty Nietzschean philosophy (which is relativistic, perspectivistic, immoralistic, etc). Look! More asshurt and non-arguments about the topic! What a surprise! Nietschze is a better a philosopher than a greek faggot who was probably into molesting male children. At-least Nietschze didn't lead to the worst intellectuals of all times, Hegelians that Socrates created. >Nietzsche is basically a leftist at heart No he isn't, Nietschze acknowledge race, he supported hierachy, he never downplayed religion as worthless or shit he just hated religions like christcuckery or anything modern. >muh post-modernist This is because they take the things they like about Nietschze, but fail to recognize what he truly supported. It's like when leftoids claim that he loved Jews, despite him his critiques and clear disdain for Zionists or that he was an anarchist when he clearly established that he wanted a nation with a hierarchy and showed his distaste for them as well. Post-modernist love him for his ideas of will to power, but fail to understand what he meant on them like you do apparently.
>>14988 >You need to realize that polytheism and monotheism are a false dichotomy They are not, they are radically different worldviews and theologies, any intermediary stages are a result of progressivist/modernist corruption and gradual shift to monotheism. Your constant attempts to conflate both into your universalist kosher pilpul do not change that. >God (capital G) is in a totally different category than a 'god' Yes, it belongs to a category of false and subversive ideas >They are derivative from Ahura Mazda So different aspects of a single god, ergo, pantheistic or pluralistic monotheism. >Nietzsche is part of the problem Written by someone promoting the ideas of (((Spinoza)))
>>14996 >Nietschze acknowledge race, he supported hierachy, he never downplayed religion as worthless or shit he just hated religions like christcuckery or anything modern. Who gives a shit? According to his own dog-shit philosophy there is no such thing as morals, truth, etc. and everything is just a perspective-bound interpretation of phenomena. All of these things written by Nietzsche on hierarchy and stuff are no more than an expression of aesthetic taste by him, and every leftist who has taken his actual core teachings has realized this. His philosophy is worthless. >>14998 >Written by someone promoting the ideas of (((Spinoza))) Spinoza has nothing to do with the view of Ahura Mazda supported by the Gathas. Spinoza believed that nature WAS God in the sense that God / Nature was the only existing substance and everything that existed was a mode of this substance. Ahura Mazda is a sovereign creator who has designed the world according to his will. I don't know about his relationship to the world, but it is clear that Ahura Mazda is nothing like the 'God' (to the sense that it can be called that) of Spinoza. Also, you are demonstrating that you don't have a philosophical mind when you reject the existence of something on the grounds of 'muh subversion' alone, without demonstrating how the existence of God leads to subversion, and believing that you (or anyone) is free to reject things because they don't like them.
(208.34 KB 2445x722 The post that started it all.PNG)
>>14999 >Spinoza has nothing to do with the view of Ahura Mazda supported by the Gathas You were conflating polytheism and monotheism in general, which then you proceeded to use as an "argument" in favor of Zoroastrianism in particular. My reply regarding Spinoza applied to the former. <You need to realize that polytheism and monotheism are a false dichotomy. God (capital G) is in a totally different category than a 'god'. Both can exist at once, and the acknowledgement of one does not entail the demonization of the other This is matching Spinoza's philosophy to a very high degree >Ahura Mazda is a sovereign creator It was a spiritual predecessor of Abrahamism >Also, you are demonstrating that you don't have a philosophical mind when you reject the existence of something on the grounds of 'muh subversion' alone You are free to debate me in https://16chan.xyz/fascist/res/447.html and other threads where I have debunked monotheist and monist/pantheist ideas as both ultimately false and subversive.
(90.63 KB 488x760 spinoza jew and atheist.jpg)
>>15001 >You were conflating polytheism and monotheism in general I argued that the terms were a false dichotomy born out of Abrahamic analyses of religion, which distinguished between religions that worshiped a single being, and those which admitted multiple beings to be worshiped. The former is of course monotheism, the latter polytheism. And as I said, the type of being denoted by 'God' is in a wholly different category than a 'god'. They can co-exist side by side, as we see in orthodox Vaishnavism today, and in the writings of Emperor Julian and similar pagan figures. >This is matching Spinoza's philosophy to a very high degree Clearly based on my description of Spinoza's philosophy in my previous post, this is not true. Anyone is free to look up a summary of Spinoza's view of God and to confirm this view. It appears that Spinoza denied any sort of transcendence, creation or personality in God. It's basically materialism as far as I understand it, but with the name 'God' stamped on it. This was the understanding of many of his contemporaries as well. Just see this pic, which puts the words 'Iudeus et atheista' under him, i.e. 'Jew and atheist'. >It was a spiritual predecessor of Abrahamism Again, asserting this (regardless of truth value), does not prove it false.
>>15006 >born out of Abrahamic analyses of religion The inherent flaws of Abrahamic worldview eventually lead to philosophies of those such as Spinoza and Maimonides. Even if seemingly contradictory, they are just stages of natural development of the same foundation. Only those contradictions which remain once every idea is taken to it's logical conclusion count. Otherwise you are doomed to bounce from one facet of the same false god to another in total confusion (and be a mental slave of the Jews), forever. But I digress. >And as I said, the type of being denoted by 'God' is in a wholly different category than a 'god' So we can have multiple 'Gods' (with the capital G) then? That would match the definition of polytheism as well. Introducing additional categories does not change the core concept. If it does, it's no longer polytheism but something else (either creationist monotheism or some kind of pantheism or panentheism). The only true polytheism (paganism) is absolute polytheism where there are no higher categories to gods (pantheon). They can have different natures, levels of power and a hierarchy, but this hierarchy is not absolute and permanent nor is there any higher category above it. From this perspective, Abrahamism (including it's prototypes like Zoroastrianism) and philosophy of Spinoza and the likes are a false dichotomy. If you put a single God as an alpha and omega of existence, it's definition and sub-categories are of a lesser importance. >They can co-exist side by side Entirely independently? <They are derivative from Ahura Mazda So then, should we define a religion according to a lesser (derivative) or greater (core) category? What defines Zoroastrianism more, Vohu Manah, Spenta Mainyu, etc. or Ahura Mazda? They obviously don't hold equal value, therefore cannot be a false dichotomy. Unless you find or come up with a third term for it, it's closer to monotheism than polytheism and can thus be defined as such.
>>15008 >So we can have multiple 'Gods' (with the capital G) then? No, I don't think so. The attributes traditionally ascribed to God (particularly omnipotence) do not allow for more than one. >What defines Zoroastrianism more, Vohu Manah, Spenta Mainyu, etc. or Ahura Mazda? Depends which texts we're reading here. If we turn to the inscriptions of Darius I, we will see that AM has a very central role. He is lauded as the greatest of the gods, and that one who worships him will be blessed in this life and the next. Along with that, Darius ascribes everything from his kingship to his victories over his enemies to the will of AM. It seems like Darius views himself as the representative of AM on Earth, dispensing justice and attributing those who rebel against him to falling under the influence of the Lie / Druj. Darius also acknowledges the other gods briefly though, saying things like "May Ahuramazda bear me aid together with the gods of (the royal) house!" Along with being described as "the greatest of the gods", Darius says "A great god is Ahuramazda who created this earth, who created yonder heaven, who created man, who created happiness for man, who made Darius king". The inscriptions of Xerxes are similar. In the Ohrmazd Yasht, it is clear that AM is '[c]reator of the material world', the 'All Conquering', the "All Fashioner", the "Most Beneficent", the "All Perceiving", the "Invincible", "Truth" and the "Highest Ruler". In this Yasht the Amesha Spentas are not forgotten though. Wohu Manah, Asha Wahishta, Xshathra, Spenta Armaiti, Haurwatat, Ameretat, Werethraghna and others are said to be "in my house" (i.e. in AM's house). In Yasna 44 it is clear that the father of Asha, Good Mind, etc. is AM, and that it is AM who holds the earth and heavens in being, who creates the day and the night, establishes the path of the sun and stars, who makes the son by nature respectful to his father, and everything else than one can think of. Clearly AM is an essential fact about existence from the Zoroastrian mindset. This said, many of the Yashts are devoted to various gods like Mithra, Rashnu, Werethraghna, etc. and are given great honor and praises. The fact that AM is supreme though is clear. >Unless you find or come up with a third term for it, it's closer to monotheism than polytheism and can thus be defined as such. I've seen the term 'qualified monotheism' used before.
>>15038 >>15008 Forgot to say - my citations come from here >>3353
>>15006 >Spinoza fag hates Nietschse, but likee a Christcuck monotheist philosophy No surprise here that you are mentally challenged.
>>15578 I never said I liked Spinoza. Nietzsche is much better than Spinoza for a host of reasons, especially for the cultural issues that Nietzsche was keenly aware of with nihilism, the death of God, and other existentialist-type questions. Even if Nietzsche is ultimately wrong in his solutions and in many of his views, he is still valuable for some of his thought.
>>15580 >I never said No but you clearly do apperiate his ignorant works. At worst you also constantly cope when someone proves that Socrates was a retard and then try to kick Nietschze out of fascism's greatest influences, even though he was one of the founding philosophers who inspired it. Also existentialism isn't Nilihism, once again you prove you understand Nietschze and are one of those gay philosophers he talks about. The left taking inspiration from him is because they agree only agee with the line that "God is dead".
>>15583 >No but you clearly do apperiate his ignorant works Showing that what someone was saying about a given philosopher was incorrect and proving this does not necessarily mean that one appreciates a given figure. Accuracy is important. Spinoza does not really influence me in any way whatsoever. >At worst you also constantly cope when someone proves that Socrates was a retard Rent-free. Let us remember that you falsely claimed that Socrates was a Phoenician and then rapidly backed off when pressed for any proof of this. >then try to kick Nietschze out of fascism's greatest influences, even though he was one of the founding philosophers who inspired it. Irrelevant. Nietzsche isn't the solution for anything. I stand by this point, because no one has been able to critique it. Nietzsche made a noble effort, but his solution is not one that would ever work. As I have said, there are very good reasons why Nietzsche is considered a seminal figure in the idea of postmodernism and similar ideologies. It's because he rejects any and all metanarratives, absolutes and things of this nature. >Also existentialism isn't Nilihism What are you even talking about? Nietzsche was very worried about the issue of a certain type of nihilism and the effect that it would have on Europe. I never once equated existentialism and nihilism. Read, nigger. >The left taking inspiration from him is because they agree only agee with the line that "God is dead". Yeah, and the fact that he rejects morality of any kind and replaces it with some weird ideas about 'interpretations' and 'perspectives' and 'symptomatology'. Nietzsche's influence on (((Freud))) is well-established in this regard. Saying that 'God is dead' is a multi-layered statement. It's the destruction of all absolute values, meanings and purpose. Nietzsche thinks that everything before him is just one giant error, and in fact there is an entire section on this in Twilight of the Idols.
>>15584 > Let us remember that you falsely claimed that Socrates was a Phoenician and then rapidly backed off when pressed for any proof of this. Socrates being called Phoenician was an insult by fellow Greeks. Also you still haven't debunked anything on the case that he was an idiot. >Irrelevant <The creation of fascism is Irrelevant >Nietzsche isn't the solution for anything. Who said he was a solution? Everyone here knows that he was a great inspiration in detecting shitty philosophy. I mean what you argue can also be said about Plato and Socrates. >there are very good reasons why Nietzsche is considered a seminal figure in the idea of postmodernism and similar ideologies You keep bring this point and it continues to prove that you are indeed an idiot. Who cares if Nietzsche inspired post-modernism? Hegel, Kant, Giovanni, etc were also big influencers of both fascism and post-modern philosophy. Degenerates like Foucault and such were inspired by him, because they agreed that "God is dead" line and that there should be new values sent upon Western civilization to rid of Christianity, although he never said anything about pozz should run rampant amongst world and that being queer is totally acceptable and cried about muh rich White men, as matter of fact he had and would call these things "slave morality" or just faggotry. Men like Foucault developed his creepy attraction towards boys himself not through one guy who wrote on how philosophy and modern moralities are dumb. Leftists do not need Nietzsche in deconstructing definitions. >Yeah, and the fact that he rejects morality of any kind and replaces it with some weird ideas about 'interpretations' and 'perspectives' and 'symptomatology'. He rejects Christian morality and perspectives which is why he came to the conclusion. I would argue that he was only specifically talking about the modern world, but wouldn't say this if he understood the old age/ancient world. He is right, they do not matter at all. >Saying that 'God is dead' is a multi-layered statement. Nah it's was a reference to how Christian values have died and no longer have any purposes, because everyone during his time were doing things by their own interpretations of God. >It's the destruction of all absolute values, meanings and purpose. Except that no one in the world truly knows what absolute values are and most meanings and purposes have deluded and their context have all been misunderstood or lied about for many years. To think that Nietzsche lead to the destruction of values is so retarded.
>>15587 >Socrates being called Phoenician was an insult by fellow Greeks Assuming that you can even prove that Greeks used this insult against Socrates, it is still irrelevant, in the same way that posters throwing the term 'kike' around here doesn't really mean that the other poster is a kike. Still waiting for proof though. You seemed so confident before! >Who cares if Nietzsche inspired post-modernism? Because it's a movement of degeneracy that is destroying the West. Nietzsche has even been called the first postmodernist by some. And since postmodernism is founded on the idea that values and many other aspects of society are mere products of social constructionism and nothing else, and that there are no teleological metanarratives to life (also ridiculed by Nietzsche in the very first section of The Gay Science), it stands that Nietzsche is basically another PoMo freak. >He rejects Christian morality and perspectives which is why he came to the conclusion. So he immediately jumps into being a psychoanalyzing kike? And no, he rejects all morality as just a result of psychological states. From Twilight of the Idols: <[T]here are no moral facts at all. Moral judgments have this in common with religious ones: they believe in realities that are unreal.Morality is just an interpretation of certain phenomena, or speaking more precisely, a misinterpretation. Moral judgments, like religious ones, belong to a level of ignorance at which the very concept of the real, the distinction between real and imaginary, is still absent, so that “truth” at this level refers to all sorts of things which today we call “fantasies.” Thus, moral judgments can never be taken literally: literally, they always contain nothing but nonsense. But they are semiotically invaluable all the same: they reveal, at least to those who are in the know, the most valuable realities of cultures and inner states that did not know enough to “understand” themselves. Morality is just a sign language, just a symptomatology: you already have to know what it’s all about in order to get any use out of it." This is pure Freudian bullshit (and no surprise since Freud, as I said, took much from Nietzsche). And it is almost identically with what PoMos and other leftist freaks believe. >Nah it's was a reference to how Christian values have died and no longer have any purposes, because everyone during his time were doing things by their own interpretations of God. Christian values most assuredly had not 'died' when Nietzsche came around, and you are just proving that you have not even read the man. For example in the fifth section of 'Raids of an Untimely Man' in the Twilight of the Idols, Nietzsche castigates G. Eliot for having gotten rid of the Christian God but still trying to act like morality of Christianity is some sort of self-evident truth. Or how in the Gay Science (section 108) Nietzsche rights how the shadows of God will be displayed in caves for millennia afterwards, lingering on. It's also said in the famous section 125 of the same work where the madman goes around crying out 'God is dead' that the atheists he is addressing have not even realized the fact yet. He of course blames Christianity for much of this skepticism in Western cultural development, which has eventually undermined any firm foundation for our lives and transcendent bases for our values and beliefs. He's very clear that if God is 'dead', we ought to give up all ideas of ultimate groundings for our beliefs about morality, purpose, metanarratives, values, truth, order and disorder, etc. It's clear to anyone who has actually read Nietzsche, unlike you, that this goes far beyond Christianity too, as he makes fun of people who would attempt to 'deify' nature or anything similar. They're all copes to him. >To think that Nietzsche lead to the destruction of values is so retarded. He says that values are all the results of psychological states and interpretations of phenomena. It's not hard to see how this destroys existing values and relativizes them. This is the natural result of a ‘There are no facts, only interpretations’ philosophy. >Except that no one in the world truly knows what absolute values are and most meanings and purposes have deluded and their context have all been misunderstood or lied about for many years. Doesn't mean they don't exist and shouldn't be sought. Nietzsche just cries out 'LE GOD IS DEAD' with rhetorical flourish and acts like there is no longer any reason to care about objective truths, anything beyond the immediately visible, morality, values, meaning in life or anything of that nature. Nietzsche is ultimately not even a philosopher. He is a rhetorician.
>>15587 >Socrates being called Phoenician was an insult by fellow Greeks It would be hilarious if they used that term just as we use the term kike today. Being a Phoenician could have easily been a synonym for subversion, scheming, degeneracy, mammonism and vileness. >>15588 Nietzsche was good in deconstructing Abrahamic slave morality, but he didn't offer a complete philosophy or worldview, we have already discussed this in the Nietzsche thread. He had some good ideas that are applicable within the NS/Fascist context, such as the Superman (in contrast to the last man), will to power, eternal return, etc. but he also had some bad (or rather, incomplete and misinterpreted) ideas that are not applicable to it. >Nietzsche castigates G. Eliot for having gotten rid of the Christian God but still trying to act like morality of Christianity is some sort of self-evident truth Secular humanists and Communists still adhere to the same values despite being formally opposed to Christianity. Those values didn't die in the sense that no one adhered to them anymore, but in the sense that they have lost any purpose. >which has eventually undermined any firm foundation for our lives and transcendent bases for our values and beliefs There is nothing transcendent about Christianity, and it's foundations were faulty to begin with. Nietzsche didn't undermine it, he merely pronounced it's death. It was crumbling under it's own weight and falsehoods, he might just have given it a final push. Ironically, he would do the same to the postmodern narrative if he was alive today. It doesn't make much sense for either side to claim him. >He's very clear that if God is 'dead', we ought to give up all ideas of ultimate groundings for our beliefs about morality, purpose, metanarratives, values, truth, order and disorder, etc Being against one value system does not necessarily mean being against all of them. He clearly had some ideas about what should be 'deified' , even if he didn't fully develop them. >Nietzsche is ultimately not even a philosopher. He is a rhetorician He was closer to being a rhetorician indeed.
>>15592 >Secular humanists and Communists still adhere to the same values despite being formally opposed to Christianity. Those values didn't die in the sense that no one adhered to them anymore, but in the sense that they have lost any purpose. I don't know if I would agree that he thought that they had 'lost any purpose' - he seems to reject it for slightly different, less utilitarian reasons, but in general I totally get what he is saying here against that person. Without assuming the truth of Christianity, there's no grounds for any of the bullshit that comes along with it. >There is nothing transcendent about Christianity Some of the Christians in the more distant past had a more mystical and transcendent aspect to it but it appears that the religion has become a soulless corpse. I mean even Nietzsche saw it in his day, as you point out. >Being against one value system does not necessarily mean being against all of them Of course I agree with this, but I don't think Nietzsche did. >He clearly had some ideas about what should be 'deified', even if he didn't fully develop them. I don't think he wanted any concept or idea 'deified'. Maybe except for the idea of the Ubermensch, which, at least, seems to be the case in one of the sections talking about the 'death of God' in The Gay Science where the madman says: <Do we not ourselves have to become gods merely to appear worthy of it? I don't think this would ultimately fix the problems that the West faces, personally, but that's beside the point I guess. The general ethos of the will to power is just common sense as far as I'm concerned. He pointed it out best when he compared it to Spinoza's idea of mere 'self-preservation'. Living things to do merely strive to preserve themselves and do nothing beyond that, they strive to become more.
>>15603 I think that what he truly attacked was the concept of blind faith and the structures that proceeded from it, he wanted people to revalue all values but without being against any values per se. He was just looking for something more substantial and less self-deceptive, got a vague idea about it, but never got to develop it due to going insane. >I don't think he wanted any concept or idea 'deified' Not in the sense of becoming a God of some religion, but rather of assuming the same position based on it's own merits and not beliefs. >I don't think this would ultimately fix the problems that the West faces "West" is a Spenglerian concept which I find a bit misleading and inadequate. While Nietzsche based his Superman mostly on character traits, it had to be expanded a lot to include or develop all the other aspects (racial/physical, intellectual, spiritual etc), that the NSDAP, and particularly the SS tried to do. This is also partially based on Spengler's idea (and common sense) that superior men create superior societies, and can thus enjoy a superior existence. While Marxist "New man" or homo sovieticus was supposed to be forged through nurture (and supposedly superior political system) alone, in practice it took a shape of a vilest last man imaginable. On the other hand, Fascist/NS systems focused on the quality of people (nature) as the basis of a superior society, and it showed impressive results. Likewise, Marxists focused on (economic) materialism as something more substantial than the dead God of Christianity, while Fascists/Nat-soc's found it in transcendent principles. That ended up with similar results. The quality of people (overall traits) is far more important than any political ideology or nurture. An inherently superior man can overcome bad nurture, bad political systems and bad circumstances, while no political system can help the inferior man. And there is a saying, like people - like government, meaning that superior people would naturally strive towards superior political ideologies, ideas and worldviews, while subhumans will seek inferior ones. Jews know this, that's why they seek to degenerate and racemix everyone so they can rely on pure quantity to brute-force their idiotic social systems and Talmudic hegemony. I'd rather pick to live in a country with the worst political system imaginable populated with overmen that the SS planned to create, then in the country with the best political system imaginable populated with genetically inferior last men. >Living things to do merely strive to preserve themselves and do nothing beyond that, they strive to become more Not all living things. In fact, almost all of them are perfectly content with preservation alone. Only Man, and to the most extent the White Man, has this impulse to overcome himself and become something greater even if he is not evolutionary pressured to do so. Seeing Fascism/NS as mere tools of White survival is very narrow-minded, it was supposed to reach much further than that. Obviously, there are very powerful forces in the world which want to prevent Man from reaching his full potential.
>>15615 I'm not sure, the will to power seems to be just a general fact of life for many organisms, human or otherwise. There is not just a will to survive, but a will to flourish, to thrive, to realize ever greater possibilities and powers. A tree does just spread its foliage and sink its roots to the minimum degree needed to survive. No, it keeps on growing and growing, and digging its roots deeper and deeper into the soil. This tree is exhibiting its will to power. Nietzsche makes it clear in section 259 of Beyond Good and Evil that the very essence of life itself is overpowering, appropriating, injuring, exploitation, etc. because these things are " alive, and because life simply is the will to power". You are right though that the Aryan man demonstrates this to the greatest extent, at least in past ages.
>>15636 >There is not just a will to survive, but a will to flourish, to thrive, to realize ever greater possibilities and powers There are organisms that didn't evolve or significantly change for millions of years due to lack of pressure to do so. >A tree does just spread its foliage and sink its roots to the minimum degree needed to survive. No, it keeps on growing and growing, and digging its roots deeper and deeper into the soil It's a mere extension principle that doesn't give it any greater possibilities and powers, on the contrary, it only increases the chance for it's survival. It only does more of what it can already do. Just as humans and many animals store food when they have a surplus because it might be eaten in times of scarcity, increasing their long-term survival prospects. >This tree is exhibiting its will to power In a blind and unconscious way yes. And the will does not belong to the tree, the tree belongs to the will. It's not possible for a tree to will to become something qualitatively better, for example something self-conscious. No matter how many forms and shapes it can take, it can't change it's nature. Additionally, it has no power over itself. Only Man, and by that I mean the White man, had the will to become (or return to being) something qualitatively better than himself. I doubt Nietzsche would focus on something as obvious as life seeking to expand at expense of other life so much, without hinting at something else. Otherwise this portion of his philosophy would be redundant. <Man is something that shall be overcome. Man is a rope, tied between beast and overman — a rope over an abyss. What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end <What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not a goal He obviously sought something qualitatively higher, not just expansion at expense of other life. <You have evolved from worm to man, but much within you is still worm. Once you were apes, yet even now man is more of an ape than any of the apes He wanted Man to overcome his bestial nature by facing it (rather than escaping it)
(374.99 KB 536x696 ClipboardImage.png)
>>15639 >There are organisms that didn't evolve or significantly change for millions of years due to lack of pressure to do so. Evolution is not real. It's a Masonic myth used to justify progressive ideologies and rampant capitalism. >In a blind and unconscious way yes. And the will does not belong to the tree, the tree belongs to the will Trees are much more conscious than most people would be willing to admit. Even smaller plants such as pea plants can respond to the sound of water and grow towards them, or can anticipate the direct from which light will come from if conditioned artificially or naturally. >it can't change it's nature Neither can a human being. Anyone who thinks this is possible is already a leftist at heart. This is the foundation of Marxist thought - the mutability of human nature. In his Theses On Feuerbach Marx outright declares that "...the human essence is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality it is the ensemble of the social relations." Jean-Paul Sartre operates off the same foundation, saying that man is no more than what he wills himself. There is no human nature. Man is radically free to endlessly reshape himself. Existence precedes essence. This is a radical denial of any nature, in the same vein as Marx, in the same view as Masonic evolutionary theory. The end result of this is, conveniently enough, other ideologies that are going to be used to control humans in the near future, such as transhumanism, which is heavily, heavily supported by Jews such as Ray Kurzweil, Marvin Minsky (who received over 100K from Epstein) and others. It's part of the plot to turn human beings into designed, bar-coded products and abominations. And needless to say, the denial of an essence or inherent nature is patently false. No matter how much a man pretends to be a woman, he is at his essence nothing but a man, and everyone knows it deep down. The same is true with any and all initiatives which attempt to turn niggers into upstanding citizens. The majority of them are incapable of doing so. No matter how hard you wash a nigger, they won't turn White. It's because they are a nigger in their essence. A man is a man. A tree is a tree. When you are saying this stuff about only man having the ability to become something qualitatively better than himself, you are actually directly echoing pic related and his atheistic existentialism: <Atheistic existentialism, which I represent, is more coherent. It states that if God does not exist, there is at least one being in whom existence precedes essence, a being who exists before he can be defined by any concept, and that being is man, or as Heidigger says, human reality [...] there is no human nature, since there is no God to conceive it. Not only is man what he conceives himself to be, but he is also what he wills himself to be after this thrust towards existence. > doubt Nietzsche would focus on something as obvious as life seeking to expand at expense of other life so much, without hinting at something else Even the tree practices this sort of will to power. It destroys and overshadows all of the other trees that grow around it, emerging victorious in the struggle for life over the others. It's pure will to life.
>>15639 >>15643 Check out the Aryan science Thread for info on evolution
>>15645 Definitely. Also good is: >>11825 >>11826 >>11827
>>15643 >Evolution is not real Organisms do adapt to environmental factors whether the prevailing theory of evolution is true or not. That's besides the point anyway, the fact remains that the great majority of living beings never change their function, which is mere self-preservation. (Reproduction being it's extension). >Even smaller plants such as pea plants can respond to the sound of water By that logic computers are conscious too. Environmental awareness is not the same as sapience >Neither can a human being As Nietzsche stated, and it was one of his truer realizations, a man is a bridge between a beast and a god. Essentially it's about the inherent potential, not about the manifestation. A tree doesn't have a potential to be anything other than a tree, while a man has a potential to become either a beast or a god. This duality of human nature has nothing to do with Marxism, Sartre or Transhumanism, because it's a noumenological position while all Talmudic philosophies are strictly phenomenological. Neither is it contrary to essentialism, since some essences/natures allow for a much wider range of phenomenological manifestation than others. You have adopted an egalitarian position by asserting that the will to power is essentially the same for a tree and a man (all life). >It's part of the plot to turn human beings into designed, bar-coded products and abominations That's like having a plan to turn a tree into a fence or firewood, not to change it's nature or qualitatively improve it. Completely unrelated. >No matter how hard you wash a nigger, they won't turn White That's because a term "human" is a misnomer >Even the tree practices this sort of will to power. It destroys and overshadows all of the other trees that grow around it, emerging victorious in the struggle for life over the others That's pure survival instinct, the more it overshadows other trees, the more sunlight it gets, and is thus increasing it's survival chances. It has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of will from our perspective. >When you are saying this stuff about only man having the ability to become something qualitatively better than himself To clarify, something qualitatively better than his current condition, that he (White man) already had an inherent potential for. It seems that you are trying to turn Nietzsche's philosophy against itself in order to support some kind of creationist narrative, which is not noumenological or essentialist but phenomenological. Atheistic existentialism and Abrahamistic creationism are actually a false dichotomy, since they are just different spins of the same core perspective. Proper essentialism doesn't need God at all. And again, only some aspects of Nietzsche's philosophy are useful.
>>15647 >Organisms do adapt to environmental factors Sure, but it's not an innovative force, it's just the reshuffling of existing genes. Past that point natural selection is a conservative rather than innovative force. I'd argue that any sort of adaptation to the environment is pretty much a passive process anyway. >By that logic computers are conscious too. Environmental awareness is not the same as sapience I'm not claiming that a plant is a rational being or anything of that nature, but even then they are far more complex and aware then commonly understood to be. One can just look into Mycorrhizal networks in old growth forests, and see how trees have been seen to exhibit resource sharing, transferring of chemicals alerting nearby trees of dangers (even of different species), and kin selection, etc. via the networks of mychorrhiza and tree roots. There are many more similar examples of this that can be found, such as plants seemingly anticipating drought due to inter-plant communication, etc. Another road to look into is the topic of primary perception. At the very least, it seems clear that plants of various kinds exhibit qualia in a way computers clearly don't. Computers just compute stuff and run algorithms. They are like primitive p-zombies, if anything. There's no qualia. >A tree doesn't have a potential to be anything other than a tree, while a man has a potential to become either a beast or a god. A man is a man, just like a tree is a tree. Humans could certainly reach more higher potentials than we have now, but we will never not be humans. >You have adopted an egalitarian position by asserting that the will to power is essentially the same for a tree and a man (all life). I am merely quoting what Nietzsche himself wrote in Beyond Good and Evil. To again point to section 259, he writes "life simply is the will to power. This is what the common European consciousness resists learning [...] 'Exploitation' is not part of a decadent or imperfect, primitive society: it is part of the fundamental nature of living things, as its fundamental organic function; it is a consequence of the true will to power, which is simply the will to live". So the life is fundamentally the will to power, and the will to power is the will to life, the will to life of all life. And to go to section 349 of The Gay Science, Nietzsche writes "The struggle for existence is only an exception, a temporary restriction of the will to live; everywhere the struggle, both great and small, revolves around supremacy, around growth and expansion, around power, in accordance with the will to power, which is precisely the will of life." Here it is clear that Nietzsche is speaking in generalities as well. It is not just the will to life, it is the will of life. This is doubtlessly related to the will to life in Schopenhauer's philosophy as well, which characterizes, in his view, everything in nature. It is not egalitarian to say that things operate on the same principles. Am I an egalitarian for saying that all organisms need sustenance? Am I an egalitarian for saying that all organisms are bound by the laws of physics? According to Nietzsche, a tree certainly exhibits will to power.
>>15647 >That's because a term "human" is a misnomer That's just another evolutionist meme. There's clearly a generic human nature which has many expressions, some of them qualitatively superior to others. But watch, you will claim that this is somehow an egalitarian statement, even though the generic is the least exceptional aspect of man, the one that should regarded the least. >That's pure survival instinct, the more it overshadows other trees, the more sunlight it gets, and is thus increasing it's survival chances. Nietzsche disagrees. The tree exhibits pure will to power in its capacity as a tree. It doesn't just preserve itself. It doesn't just put its roots in the bare minimum, it keeps digging them deeper, and deeper, spreading its leaves out more and more, overshadowing all other trees that would attempt to supplant it, and dominating over them. The tree flourishes, not seeking a static equilibrium. As Nietzsche writes in section 688 of The Will to Power "Spinoza's law of "self-preservation" really ought to put a stop to change: but this law is false, the opposite is true. It can shown most clearly that every living thing does everything it can not preserve itself, but to become more—" Notice again that Nietzsche here is claiming that this is a principle governing all life. >Abrahamistic creationism No one is talking about Abrahamism. >Proper essentialism doesn't need God at all. So why would there be universals like 'human' or 'dog' that is instantiated in numerous particular human beings, or particular dogs, all with unchanging essences (not to say there cannot be variation within a given category)? For these to just exist would make little sense, and of course, with any sort of evolutionary theory there can be no such thing as an essence. Evolution relies on nominalism. There is no universals of this kind, every variety is a potential incipient species.
>>15650 >Sure, but it's not an innovative force, it's just the reshuffling of existing genes My point still stands, there is nothing more to sub-human (and I don't use this as a derogatory term in this case) life than mere survival and expansion instinct. I don't know are there any species that auto-regulate this, but it seems that most of them just keep going until environmental factors stop them. That's when an ecosystem reaches a kind of equilibrium and any further growth gives diminishing returns. This is no more of an expression of will than a computer script is. >Another road to look into is the topic of primary perception. At the very least, it seems clear that plants of various kinds exhibit qualia in a way computers clearly don't They exhibit certain variables which are unique to life compared to artificial constructs, but they still lack the requirements to have any sort of higher consciousness, sapience or self-awareness. They are not the possessors of will, but it's manifestation. >They are like primitive p-zombies, if anything. There's no qualia So are most living things, including most people. >A man is a man, just like a tree is a tree Yes, there is clearly a great variety of phenomena based on noumenal Forms (as elaborated by Plato, among others) >but we will never not be humans That depends on how do you define "humans". I think that we are unique in the sense that our noumenal potential is much greater than that of other living things on earth. The margin is wide enough that we could theoretically become something that would be considered "non-human" by today's standards. And that goes both ways, from degenerating to a state lower than an animal to ascending to godlike attributes. Nietzsche recognized this, but he didn't develop the idea properly. Races likely play a role in this process and represent various stages of "human". Unfortunately, we didn't get a chance to develop a race of Ubermensch from Whites because of kikes, so the upper limit is yet to be discovered. Key word being develop, not create. I don't see how niggers could be developed into Whites however, so the process probably only works in reverse past certain point. As in, there being a threshold of bestial nature after which there is no going back, at least from a biological perspective. >I am merely quoting what Nietzsche himself wrote in Beyond Good and Evil I can see that, but what kind of point are you trying to make? I don't necessarily disagree, but it seems that you are drawing the wrong conclusions. Nietzsche just recognized some sort of animating force compelling living creatures to behave in a certain way and he was right in asserting that people are not exempt from it regardless of how much they deny it, but he did not address the concept of will properly. What purpose he tried to make of it, was strictly reserved for humans however. He did not envision a higher tree or a higher ant, but a higher man. Therefore, he obviously assigned some unique properties to men, when it comes to this principle manifesting itself. >It is not egalitarian to say that things operate on the same principles It is to assume that they are essentially defined by the principle acting as the lowest common denominator however. >Am I an egalitarian for saying that all organisms are bound by the laws of physics? It was only Man who managed to overcome laws of physics to a certain degree. Not to change them yet, but to utilize them.
>>15651 >There's clearly a generic human nature which has many expressions There seems to be a loosely defined archetypal container (pertaining to both shared physical and mental attributes) so it's correctly defined as a set, but given the differences it's not the most accurate category to use, since there are other, more unique sets and principles that are not necessarily shared among all. Otherwise you might as well use the term mammals, since they too have many shared genetic and even behavioral characteristics. Given how essentially 'non-human' some races are, and how different individual people can be, I'm convinced that "humans" are not a root archetype but an artificial hybrid of some sort. A fusion of two or more different essences. >It doesn't just put its roots in the bare minimum, it keeps digging them deeper, and deeper, spreading its leaves out more and more, overshadowing all other trees that would attempt to supplant it, and dominating over them The sole function of this being to ensure more minerals and sunlight for it's survival and extension/reproduction. >that every living thing does everything it can not preserve itself, but to become more You have previously claimed how living things cannot become more, explain. >So why would there be universals like 'human' or 'dog' that is instantiated in numerous particular human beings, or particular dogs, all with unchanging essences (not to say there cannot be variation within a given category)? To avoid touching on some very complex subjects, let's just say that Forms can exist into themselves. Their phenomenal manifestation depends on the right configuration and circumstances however >For these to just exist would make little sense In a sense, everything that can exist, exists. Since nothing can exist without differentiation, essences are inherently differentiated. Nothing can exist without convergence of some kind either, leading to pre-existent Forms and archetypes. > with any sort of evolutionary theory there can be no such thing as an essence Noumenal essences can exert influence on phenomenal life, this theory is seldom considered.
>>15659 >My point still stands, there is nothing more to sub-human [...] life than mere survival and expansion instinct. And it is characterized by the will to power. >So are most living things, including most people. I mean p-zombies in the sense they're actually meant, not as a derogatory. >I don't see how niggers could be developed into Whites however They probably can't, unless we have an extremely long time to artificially select among their populations. >It is to assume that they are essentially defined by the principle acting as the lowest common denominator however. That's on Nietzsche, not me. >It was only Man who managed to overcome laws of physics to a certain degree. Not to change them, but to utilize them. Man has never overcome the laws of physics. This isn't even an impressive statement. A beaver abides by ('utilizes') laws of physics in building his dam. As does a bird when it flies or builds its nest. Also, I doubt that humans will ever be able to change unchanging and universal variables that govern everything in the Universe. That would be extremely foolish too if one has looked into to what scientists have written about fine-tuning. >>15661 >Otherwise you might as well use the term mammals, It's a nested hierarchy. If you can recognize that mammals all belong to the class, it's not hard to see that a nigger and a White man belong to the same category as 'human'. It's the same archetype, in the same way that a Chihuahua and a Great Dane belong to same archetype ultimately. In fact human groups are far more similar than these two dog breeds in morphology alone. >You have previously claimed how living things cannot become more, explain. I am quoting Nietzsche's Will to Power here, like I said. I see it as no more than a driving towards reaching higher innate potentials and to flourish, personally. >let's just say that Forms can exist into themselves Why would there be an eternal self-existent Form of 'dog'? >everything that can exist, exists There are many things which could exist that don't.
>>13995 >Being THIS retarded Modern secularism is far, far more kiked than any denomination of Christianity. Granted, nearly every single prot denomination is kiked to hell, and modern catholic church has many semetic influences, but this doesn't make Christianity Jewish. inb4 >JeSUS was a jew lolol >le worshiping kike on a stick in 2011 + 10 Jesus was not Jewish, he was divine, Jesus could've been a shit flinging nigger, but he still would've been divine, and not limited by human attributes. Also, Christ doesn't preach values of submissiveness and just letting people stomp on you, that's a modern Jewish liberal interpretation of the bible taught in faggot state schools across the west. A good video on it is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULPH9yKj9DE Frankly if you'd actually stopped LARPing as a faggot pagan and actually picked up the New Testament and read it, most of your misconceptions would go away. The bible teaches of patience, virtue, nationalism, family and anti-degeneracy. The real translation is not 'Thou shalt not kill' It's 'Thou shalt not murder' Murder implies biblically justified places to kill, such as faggots, sluts, and more. Paganism teaches jack shit and is a religion so stupid it's on par with Shintoism. Your post is incredibly condescending for someone who has zero knowledge of what they're talking about.
>>15679 niggers can't be holy because they don't have souls
>>15679 Go check out the Christianity thread, pagans are being exposed as relativists who can't even account for their moral frameworks, any of their presuppositions about the world, or anything else for that matter. The movement is dead in the water.
>>15679 >Paganism teaches jack shit and is a religion so stupid it's on par with Shintoism. Do you have any idea where you are?
(153.91 KB 1024x667 jesus christ walking on water.jpg)
>>15694 It's the twilight of the gods, anon. They can't stand up to even the smallest amount of probing from Christian posters. Your position doesn't even exist outside of seething against Christians with high birthrates and more stable families than the rest of the population. You've gotten so used to your ebin pagan hugbox that you've forgotten how to even argue.
>>15693 >>15695 You talking about how you failed to defend your bullshit kike religion on its own merits so you tried to resort to deflection and obfuscation and none of us bought it? If so, then yeah, okay.
>>15695 What is Christianity's plan to defeat the jews, stop race-mixing, and expel all non-Europeans from our lands? I would be interested but I've only seen a few Christians like John Earnest who took action. Whereas the churches around me are all actively promoting homosexuality, and providing food, shelter, and other programs for immigrants from Asia, Africa, and South America. They are also promoting race mixed marriages. So I'm getting mixed messages here.
(63.48 KB 700x445 sodom.jpg)
(36.82 MB 1280x720 Paganism vs Orthodoxy.mp4)
>>15697 I think you're terrified of having your LARP exposed for what it is - baseless. >>15698 Churches are one of the most racially-segregated institutions in the United States even today. Something like 80 percent or more of churches remain monoracially dominant in one way or another. To no one's surprise, people group with their own, even if they share the same religion nominally. Race-mixing and stuff can easily be fixed by removing the Jews from power, banning usury, etc. People don't have an insatiable desire to race-mix. It's a product of social engineering. Ban the Jews from pushing their agendas onto the population and get rid of them, and the problem will be gradually solved. Ban interracial marriage again for good measure. I don't even see it is as a religious issue. It is an issue of public health. Bring back freedom of association. Don't let the government force people to cater to blacks or other minorities in their businesses. Stop accepting immigrants and realize that there is such a thing as too much altruism that can even be harmful to the people themselves, not to mention to the people who are helping them in the first place. End birthright citizenship. >Whereas the churches around me are all actively promoting homosexuality These are Satanic churches. God wiped out entire cities in the Old Testament for this behavior. In the Mosaic Law, sodomy was punishable by death. Even St. Paul said that such actions were 'deserving of death' in Romans 1:26-32. Over and over in the New Testament, sodomy is condemned. Those who practice sodomy and do not repent and cease will NOT inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). Echoing Deuteronomy, Paul is clear that we must "“Expel the wicked person from among you.” (1 Corinthians 5:13). Homosexuality creeping into our culture is a result of a re-paganization of society. >And providing food, shelter, and other programs for immigrants from Asia, Africa, and South America. This wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if they were temporary guests to be sent back to their lands, but they are part of a program of replacement migration against White Western countries, manipulated by the Jews and elites. It's also extremely profitable from the capitalsit standpoint of things. It's another product of Mammon. >They are also promoting race mixed marriages Actively promoting such behavior is part of the Jewish agenda. They want to turn everyone into racial mush so they can rule over mankind.
>>15695 I see a discussion on the contemporary fruits of Christianity which is obviously important but why do you believe Christianity to be true? Why should anyone be Christian in the first place aside from the benefits it may or may not bring?
>>15680 Yeap. Non-Whites Christians are slaves. Non-Whites themselves are slaves. There are either two masters, the kikes or Whites. The hooked noses and the Aryans are in a chess match and their pawns are the different "peoples".
>>15702 >why do you believe Christianity to be true? The Bible is unique for the prophetic dimension of the text itself. One good example of this is in the Old Testament book of Daniel, specifically chapter 9.24-27. If one interprets the period of seventy 'sevens' or seventy weeks (depending on the translation) as referring to seventy periods of seventy years, i.e. 490 years (in accordance with the idea of 'weeks of years' in Leviticus 25:8). Several things are predicted in this prophecy. But first, we know that it starts "From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem". This is widely believed to be in the 7th year of King Artaxerxes of the Achaemenid Empire in accordance with the dates given in the Old Testament book of Ezra (Ezra 7). He is believed by secular historians to have begun to his reign in 465 B.C. The seventh year of his reign would be ~458 B.C. The prophecy says that there will be 62 'weeks' (434 years) from the finishing of the restoration of Jerusalem (which would take '7' weeks or 49 years) until the coming of the Anointed One / Christ. So if Jerusalem takes 49 years to restore from the order of Artaxerxes, that brings us to 409 B.C. 434 years from 409 B.C. is 25 A.D., the beginning of the 69th week of the prophecy, corresponding, it seems, with the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist at the start of Christ's ministry. Sometime after the beginning of the 69th week, the Anointed One / Christ will be put to death. There are several possible interpretations of the Hebrew here. Either the Anointed One "will be put to death and will have nothing", or possibly, (and more Christologically) he will "will be put to death, but not for himself". In the middle of the 70th 'week' a covenant will be affirmed with many, and sacrifice will become obsolete in the temple. This would occur around 28 / 29 A.D. according to the math, and would likely be the date when Jesus was crucified. And of course, it says that "The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed". This seems to correspond with the coming of the Romans into Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, which would of course end sacrifice in the Temple forever. There are a few obscure parts of the prophecy, but I find it rather compelling, personally, especially for a few reasons.
>>15702 >>15707 For one, rabbis recognize the importance of this passage, and have declared curses on anyone who attempts to calculate the coming of the Messiah (Sanhedrin 97b, in particular). On top of this, there are Talmudic accounts that the scapegoats at the Jewish temple stopped having their sins forgiven in the forty years prior to the destruction of the temple (which comes out to literally 30 A.D., give or take). Jews would take a goat, tie a cloth around its horns or neck, and send it out into the wilderness for the forgiveness of sins: Rosh Hashanah 31b: <The ordinance was with regard to the strip of crimson wool used on Yom Kippur. As it is taught in a baraita: At first they would tie a strip of crimson wool to the opening of the Entrance Hall of the Temple on the outside. If, after the sacrificing of the offerings and the sending of the scapegoat, the strip turned White, the people would rejoice, as this indicated that their sins had been atoned for. If it did not turn White they would be sad. <During the forty years before the Second Temple was destroyed the strip of crimson wool would not turn White; rather, it would turn a deeper shade of red https://www.sefaria.org/Rosh_Hashanah.31b Yoma 39b <The Sages taught: During the tenure of Shimon HaTzaddik, the lot for God always arose in the High Priest’s right hand; after his death, it occurred only occasionally; but during the forty years prior to the destruction of the Second Temple, the lot for God did not arise in the High Priest’s right hand at all. So too, the strip of crimson wool that was tied to the head of the goat that was sent to Azazel did not turn White, and the westernmost lamp of the candelabrum did not burn continually. https://www.sefaria.org/Yoma.39b.5 There are other reasons as well, some of them coming down to some personal experiences and answers and pray that I have gotten from God. These I find more compelling than anything I have written here, but I do not expect these to mean anything to others, of course. I also think that the Bible is unique for how self-confident it is in its claims. It says over and over again that the days will come when the entire planet will begin turn to the God of the Bible, and that the gods governing the nations of the rest of mankind will be driven aside and the nations will be the inheritance of God (Psalm 82), and many new people will come to worship God (Psalm 86:8-10, Psalm 22:28). The nature of the gods of the nations is, I think, properly described in Genesis 6, showing how they came and mated with human women and produced offspring just like we see in pagan myths. Also, I believe that the resurrection has a lot of explanatory power as a historical event in explaining the foundation of Christianity, why the disciples were willing to die for these beliefs, how they even came up with them in the first place (the idea of messiah sentenced to death like a common criminal between two thieves was basically unthinkable from how the Jews interpreted it at the time, and even the disciples were initially despondent until they saw him risen and had their minds opened to the scriptures by Jesus). And then there is the fact that opponents of this movement gradually were even convinced, despite having every reason to the contrary to believe so (Second Temple Judaism did not believe in any sort of resurrection until the general resurrection of the dead at the end of the world). Paul for example.
>>15669 >I mean p-zombies in the sense they're actually meant, not as a derogatory. Yes, as they are actually meant. Most people are just autonomous biological machines, especially non-Whites. Jews are literal golems, the majority of them not only lack the Self entirely, but also the animic singular soul inherent to beastmen and other flora and fauna of this world. And it's nothing derogatory, just as calling a computer a machine is not. There are some exceptions of course, but it's a generic state for most. >That's on Nietzsche, not me. Why do you keep quoting him then? Are you trying to use those quotes out of context so his philosophy is rejected entirely? As I have already stated, some of his ideas are good, some are not, and many didn't get developed properly. It's not black and White so I don't really see what are you trying to do here. Other authors have picked up where Nietzsche has left, all over the political and philosophical spectrum. And his critiques can be used selectively, if one understands the overall context of his works. He would likely criticize postmodernists, modern existentialists and especially Marxists even more than he did Christians, because it took them less time to spawn the last man and mediocrity, crab mentality etc. as a way of life than it did for Christianity to accomplish the same. Although Christianity was just a stage leading to Marxism, modernism and similar views, just as chrysalis turns into a butterfly. They are part of the same Talmudic dialectics, regardless of their superficial differences. >A beaver abides by ('utilizes') laws of physics in building his dam No animal utilizes laws of physics to do something that it was not naturally endowed to do, except for 'humans'. Man was never meant to fly, dive deep underwater for a long time, move hundreds of times faster than walking, survive extreme conditions or go to space. Even if you somehow argue that it's just another degree of magnitude, the margin is wide enough to separate Man from all other living things on earth. >Also, I doubt that humans will ever be able to change unchanging and universal variables that govern everything in the Universe Those variables are upheld by the very inertia that keeps this universe together so yes, it seems extremely unlikely, at least without relying on external sources. But there might be other variables that might achieve the similar effect... >It's a nested hierarchy. If you can recognize that mammals all belong to the class, it's not hard to see that a nigger and a White man belong to the same category as 'human' Yes, as I have explained in that post. Using an overly broad class defined by the significantly lower common denominator can neuro-linguistically imprint an egalitarian context even if it was not strictly meant as such. That's why such terms, despite not being strictly incorrect, should be avoided. Part of the reason why it's so hard to deprogram people from Jewish mind-toxins today is their manipulation of language to create certain neuro-linguistic imprints since early age. Their control is far more advanced and insidious than mere control of media and blackmail/bribery of politicians. >In fact human groups are far more similar than these two dog breeds in morphology alone Given the level of mental development and other traits, morphology alone does not suffice. A dog behaves like most other dogs regardless of how different they look, some human groups are not like that. Differences among 'human' races are of essential nature, because the wide margin of 'human' quantitative container/class allows for it. For most other living things on earth it's too narrow to permit manifestation of different archetypal or individual essences, meaning that the quantitative Form (with smaller varieties) will correspond to the qualitative essence. This essence being based on the highest common factor(s), that defines the concentrated racial soul and fine tunes the physical form. >Why would there be an eternal self-existent Form of 'dog'? Your monitor is likely made with a panel containing a certain number of pixel dots. Those dots create the picture which you see. Out of all possible configurations, some of them are pictures of dogs. Extrapolate that to the dynamic, 3-dimensional world and you get the idea. >There are many things which could exist that don't. In this particular phenomenal configuration. If you don't see a picture of a dog on your monitor, does it mean that pictures of dogs don't exist?
>>15708 I appreciate the well thought out post. Anyways though, assuming that all the information you gave is correct it would show that the God of the Bible does have power in this world but that in no way shows that the God of the Bible is the sole God we should all worship or will lead us into truth. To use the example of the resurrection, it'd be quite spectacular if it happened but on it's own it proves nothing since one would first have to demonstrate other things to make it fully convincing e.g. the truthfulness of a Christian system of Metaphysics. Of course the claims of prophecy would back such a thing up but we must keep in mind that traditions such as Neoplatonism, Vedanta, Buddhism, and so on don't take empirical reality at face value and thus don't place as much emphasis on history as Abrahamic faiths do. So I don't understand why Jesus in the New Testament goes around trying to convince people through the use of miracles since as I demonstrated, the miraculous on it's own proves nothing as I don't know what's truly happening behind it all aside from some guy who claimed to be the Son of God was raised from the dead. Unless we're supposed to embrace some sort of Fideism, my mind is corrupted by sin, or the Bible wants us to search after some sort of apophatic knowledge (as Paul might've been pointing towards in 1 Corinthians) it would've been simply much easier for Jesus to create an infallible Metaphysical treatise since at the end of the day we're just using our reason to figure these things out it seems.
>>15712 >Yes, as they are actually meant. Most people are just autonomous biological machines, especially non-Whites. Jews are literal golems, the majority of them not only lack the Self entirely, but also the animic singular soul inherent to beastmen and other flora and fauna of this world I don't see any compelling reason to believe this. P-zombies are just a thought experiment about consciousness. >Why do you keep quoting him then? Because whatever conversation that was being had ITT had to do with Nietzsche originally. I was criticizing Nietzsche earlier in the thread and figured that whatever is going on now was an extension of that. You or someone else made a claim that the will to power was something human-exclusive, and I said that that is not what Nietzsche said (since we were talking about Nietzsche). >Those variables are upheld by the very inertia that keeps this universe together so ye I see little reason to believe that the laws of nature that hold throughout the entire universe are merely a product of 'inertia'. There's zero evidence of change. >A dog behaves like most other dogs regardless of how different they look, t. never owned numerous breeds of dogs Dogs differ markedly in intelligence, personality and similar traits between breeds. >Differences among 'human' races are of essential nature They're clearly not. They're of the same species / kind, thus they have the same essence. I know it's embarrassing to be of the same species as a nigger, but you are. >Your monitor is likely made with a panel containing a certain number of pixel dots. Those dots create the picture which you see. Out of all possible configurations, some of them are pictures of dogs. Extrapolate that to the dynamic, 3-dimensional world and you get the idea. I don't see any point of comparison here. There is a massive difference between a computer, designed by intelligent entities such as humans, being able to show a picture of a dog on a screen (a being which already exists in the natural world) and there for some reason there existing a Form of the dog that exists inexplicably in the natural world, apparently just popping into existence without any cause.
>>15700 >These are Satanic churches. OK but that is the vast majority of churches I see, every time I try to engage with Christianity... the only one I ran into that wasn't like this was a tiny Greek orthodox church with nothing but old people and a couple families. Obviously I agree with your first paragraph about plans to fix the problem, but that is orthoginal to Christianity or the churches since they are not putting those plans into motion, and the general trend of the religion and its practioners seems to be agitating for our destruction with these gibs programs for ethnic replacers. I actively sought out Christianity for its positive values but was repulsed every time by what I ran into in real life. So I think you'll have to be more practical with what it can offer us because there doesn't seem to be much pro-European vitality other than higher birth rates which won't be enough to save us especially when those same values are being promoted for the latinos, blacks, and asians in our own countries as well.
(81.29 KB 979x617 1581771750018.jpg)
(61.31 KB 720x540 1581208977836.jpg)
(15.37 KB 229x220 orthofrog.jpeg)
>>15719 my priest won't let me get away with being a racist, but he will let me get away with only wanting to be with certain women and valuing the idea of Whiteness.
>>15715 I feel like the historical focus of the Abrahamic religions is a strength of these religions. For example, at one time I was very interested in aspects of Hinduism. I attempted to practice various bhakti practices for some time, however, I could never bring myself to believe that Krishna or Rama or any other the other avatars really existed. I had nothing really to go on except for what these ancient Vedic scriptures said. When it comes to Christianity, I feel like we have a major intersection of religion and history at one point in human history, around 30-33 A.D. It seems to break right into human history and out of the mythical. I think even secular scholars have to really wrangle with this, and this really shows in how many competing explanations there are out there for what 'really' happened with Jesus death, and how many of the accounts are picked apart by their colleagues. It's one event where there is so much speculation and nothing seemingly settled. I can be amply assured that Jesus certainly existed and walked this earth at bare minimum, which is more than I can say than about Krishna or any similar figure from a competing tradition. I would think though that the resurrection would essentially vindicate his radical claims about his nature though, such as when he tells the Jews "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am" in the Gospel of John, which is in the Biblical context, of course, an affirmation of his divinity and a nod back to Exodus 3:14 where God appears to Moses in the burning bush and says: <God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” The Septuagint uses more interesting language here, saying ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν - lit. "I am the Being" or "I am the Real / the Actual". This is certainly a radical claim, as are claims that “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6). >Unless we're supposed to embrace some sort of Fideism, my mind is corrupted by sin, or the Bible wants us to search after some sort of apophatic knowledge Our mind is limited, but reason is an extremely powerful faculty even in the fallen state. This is amply demonstrated in the last few centuries. What is disputed by the Christian, however, as by the Vedantist, is the fact that reason cannot grasp what is beyond the purview of reason, i.e. God and other transcendental questions. Vedanta of course has the shabda, while Christians throughout the centuries, such as Augustine, have spoken of 'divine illumination' or experiences of the 'uncreated light' of God. Barring this sort of mystical experience, we have scripture , and there are tons of Church Fathers which have philosophized on this topic better than I can, as I'm sure you're aware. I'm not going to lie, I'm not super educated on the topic of Christian metaphysics or anything like that, but the book 'The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church' by Vladimir Lossky is a good read drawing on what a lot of Eastern Orthodox philosophers of the past wrote on theology and mysticism - as well as their apophatic and cataphatic approaches to God, mystical union. There is somewhat of an suspicion towards philosophy in some areas of the New Testament though, you're not wrong. Colossians 2:8, for example. There is a grain of wisdom in this statement, but on the opposite side of the coin (1 Peter 3:15), it says to always be able to mount a defense and justification for belief, so engaging in philosophy is important.
(106.73 KB 693x1003 olaftryggvason.jpg)
oops sorry didn't see that this was the pagan thread. didn't mean to tread on your guys' turf. that being said, your guys' gods are weak and our God who is Christ easily destroyed them. jews are the enemy of all (1 Thessalonians 2:15); Europe was at its strongest under an anti-semitic Christianity. I was actually just talking to an Orthodox Bishop a few weeks ago about the jews, and he agreed with me when I said that most current attacks against Christianity are jewish. another Bishop I know rejected challa because he "did not want to eat that jew-bread." anti-semitism and heresy are directly correlated. the formerly Aryan nations you see now are crumbling because they have rejected the Truth.
>>15729 antisemitism and heresy are inversely correlated*
>>15729 >>15730 >>15726 How does one get involved in an Orthodox Church? Do I just show up? I know you can't do some stuff if you're not baptized. I just want to peak around and look into becoming a catachumen.
(1.18 MB 693x946 ClipboardImage.png)
(106.53 KB 750x732 liberal christians.jpg)
>>15719 >OK but that is the vast majority of churches I see, every time I try to engage with Christianity... Oh, certainly. We live in an age where serious Christianity has been under attack for centuries now. It's rough, but it's the truth, of course, so there is no abandoning ship. Jesus said that this would happen. I'm nominally a Protestant at the moment, but as I do more research, it is becoming more and more clear to me that Protestantism is in fact a modern deviation from the Christian tradition of the 1500 years that preceded it. Protestantism started with Martin Luther throwing out numerous books of the Bible because the Talmudists didn't have these books in their version (which was dubiously canonized only after Jesus was crucified, perhaps around 100 A.D., which Christians finalized their canon slightly later and included more books in the OT). Regardless, this is never a good look. Luther also attempted to throw out the epistle of James, the brother of Jesus, because it didn't fit his personal interpretation of theology. He was prevented here, though. The point here is, that Protestantism threw out tradition, it seems to have devolved into some sort of crude bibliolatry while simultaneously not respecting the Bible enough to keep all of the books that it had for over a millennia in a (failed) attempt to convert Christ-hating Jews. Protestantism is based on personal interpretation of scripture without reference to tradition, which has led to a fracturing of their traditions into over 30,000 types of Protestantism. Now we see everything from Mormons, to Charismatics babbling in tongues, to 'Pastor Jim' in his tiny strip-mall church, to Christian Identity. It is an absolute mess. I am planning on attending an Orthodox Church soon. >the only one I ran into that wasn't like this was a tiny Greek orthodox church with nothing but old people and a couple families. Not surprised that it was one of the only ones that weren't pozzed, for reasons mentioned above. That probably would have been a nice comfy church from the sound of it. > but that is orthoginal to Christianity or the churches since they are not putting those plans into motion, It's worth pointing out that the obvious here too that the Church isn't a state, of course. That is why I am sidelining some of these issues to secular political questions. If anyone wants Christianity just because it is BASED and just gives them theological support for their political beliefs, they are probably just wasting their time. Now if they have an interest in God, starting a family, and stuff like that, then they should definitely look into it. Churches outside of the globohomo sphere don't fall into this shit. Pics related - Armenia, the oldest Christian country on the planet, versus burgermutt USA
>>15718 >I don't see any compelling reason to believe this. t. NPC >Dogs differ markedly in intelligence, personality and similar traits between breeds Not nearly as much as 'humans'. There is also no essential variety, only phenomenal. <Differences among 'human' races are of essential nature, because the wide margin of 'human' quantitative container/class allows for it. For most other living things on earth it's too narrow to permit manifestation of different archetypal or individual essences, meaning that the quantitative Form (with smaller varieties) will correspond to the qualitative essence. [For some human races] this essence being based on the highest common factor(s), that defines the concentrated racial soul and fine tunes the physical form. This principle still applies >They're clearly not. They're of the same species / kind, thus they have the same essence. You are using the evolutionary category and the egalitarian/progressive interpretation of it. As well as a purely phenomenal interpretation of the essence. Weren't you supposed to be against those? Or you think that merely using the term "essence" somehow changes this? You are using the broadly defined quantitative container/form based on the significantly lower common denominator as the definition of essence. >I don't see any point of comparison here Real dog is made of a configuration of atoms, light reflects from dog into your eyes and you "see" a dog. There is no difference in principle compared to seeing a picture of dog on your monitor, because your monitor is equally real. I just tried to illustrate it in a simple way. The world is not what you think it is. Any configuration of atoms (subatomic particles, points etc.) that's mathematically possible, already exists in the domain of potential. When those configurations have certain general traits (varying in degrees of complexity, function and differentiation from other configurations), they are called Forms. A Form of a dog would be more of a template that can manifest in a limited (but large) number of varieties depending on various external configurations (environment, climate etc.) >apparently just popping into existence without any cause Your consciousness is so trapped in time that you can't realize that time is only a part of the phenomenal equation. Let's imagine that you have a glass of water on your desk. If you remove the glass, that doesn't make the superconfiguration where the glass is still on the table stop existing in the noumenal domain. You have merely switched from one superconfiguration to another in the phenomenal domain because it can't have two mutually exclusive superstates, or their portions at least, exist simultaneously. Causality is a phenomenal illusion. The dog didn't pop into existence, it was always there. The only question is will you encounter it or not, in which variety and circumstances. No God or creator is needed at all.
>>15736 >>15736 >t. NPC Not an argument. >Not nearly as much as 'humans'. I don't know if we know enough about dog intelligence to really make a comparison. >You are using the evolutionary category and the egalitarian/progressive interpretation of it. I don't believe in evolution. I believe that within a certain species of kind there are varieties, of different qualitative natures. It's all about what genes are given expression. Change can only happen within limits of a given archetype. Anything too far out of that is a literal monstrosity and botched version of what it was meant to be. There's zero egalitarianism here, no matter how many times you try to ham-fisted interpretation onto what I am saying >lower common denominator as the definition of essence. Literally what an essence is. It's the universal nature, which is then instantiated in particular individuals. Of course it's a shared aspect. As I've already said though, >>15651 "But watch, you will claim that this is somehow an egalitarian statement, even though the generic is the least exceptional aspect of man, the one that should regarded the least." >Real dog is made of a configuration of atoms, light reflects from dog into your eyes and you "see" a dog. There is no difference in principle compared to seeing a picture of dog on your monitor, because your monitor is equally real. Now show that a dog can assemble itself into that form with no cause. This monitor stuff is completely beside the point. >The dog didn't pop into existence, it was always there. The only question is will you encounter it or not, in which variety and circumstances. No God or creator is needed at all. Retarded.
>>15731 Why would you, as a fascist posting on a fascist board, want to worship a foreign deity?
>>15731 Just show up brah. The only thing you can't do is receive the Eucharist. I would recommend going to a Saturday night vespers service, that way you can talk with the priest afterwards as he'll probably be swamped with people after the liturgy on Sunday. I also just uploaded a couple books for you that I don't think you can find on most warez sites. >Wounded by Love by St Porphyrios >https://anonfiles.com/13R5q9Mcu2/Wounded_by_Love_pdf I spent some time on Athos and this was by far the most recommended book. The first half is the biography of St Porphyrios and the second half is his spiritual teachings. >The Life in Christ by St Nicolas Cabasilas >https://anonfiles.com/xdRbq8Mbuc/The_Life_in_Christ_pdf A wonderful work by a layman in Byzantine times, this is a description of the sacramental life of the church. I have never heard the sacraments described in such a beautiful way. >>15741 What is fascism but the ultimate unity of the people, and what greater unity can there be between God the Son and the Father? Jesus Christ prayed (on the cross, mind you) that we might be one as he and his father are one.
>>15743 A european people cannot achieve unity with a semitic god.
>>15748 what about the last 1800 years don't you understand dude? literally every united European people group was Christian. we need to 1) repent from our sins and try to lead a righteous life 2) handle our women and 3) defeat the jew. if we do those two things (in that order) then we'll achieve success.
>>15740 >I don't know if we know enough about dog intelligence to really make a comparison. Dogs are actually geniuses, they are just pretending otherwise >There's zero egalitarianism here <Using an overly broad class defined by the significantly lower common denominator can neuro-linguistically imprint an egalitarian context even if it was not strictly meant as such. >Literally what an essence is. Maybe I should have used the term nature or quintessence, bur even with essence, I could say that the essence of the White race is in the divine, qualitative form and not in the overall 'human' container that's also utilized by beastmen, whose noumenal essence is elemental and based on purely quantitative forms. Also that only this divine essence can lead to the expression of certain genes within the 'human' category, as well as it being exclusive to those who can utilize it to it's fullest potential. Semantics doesn't really change anything. >It's the universal nature, which is then instantiated in particular individuals. Of course it's a shared aspect. Why stop at 'human' with your definition? We have a lot of similarities with apes as well, in fact, a nigger has more similarities with a gorilla than with a White man, so we should call ourselves Hominidae because it's more generic. <The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnɪdiː/), whose members are known as great apes or hominids (/ˈhɒmɪnɪdz/), are a taxonomic family of primates that includes eight extant species in four genera: Pongo (the Bornean, Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutan); Gorilla (the eastern and western gorilla); Pan (the chimpanzee and the bonobo); and Homo, of which only modern humans remain. >I believe that within a certain species of kind there are varieties, of different qualitative natures You are referring to quantitative natures, variety of shapes and functions, not qualia. Different assemblies of matter don't achieve qualitative differentiation before the appearance of self-awareness or sapience. >even though the generic is the least exceptional aspect of man, the one that should regarded the least But regarded as one of "us" nonetheless >Now show that a dog can assemble itself into that form with no cause The noumenal, eternally pre-existent, quantitative Form is the cause. It didn't assemble itself, it got born by another dog. And if you somehow tried to trace this all the way to origin, you would only go in circles. There is no prima causa, no true (((creator))), everything is cyclical and pre-existent. Including the universe itself. >Retarded Projecting much? You are clearly incapable for understanding abstract subjects and the true nature of reality.
>>15750 >what about the last 1800 years don't you understand dude? I understand that Christianity is part of the decline that has been going on for millennia. >1) repent from our sins and try to lead a righteous life 2) handle our women and 3) defeat the jew. if we do those two things (in that order) then we'll achieve success. Yeah, except separate from yahweh.
>>15752 ok, I see where you're coming from if you're talking about a decline from an Atlantea or Hyperborea. but still, in Orthodox countries (and even in America), you can find people who now, in real life, resemble the mythologized figures of a Hyperborean golden age.
>>15731 >How does one get involved in an Orthodox Church? Just keep having sodomy with other men and you will learn the ways of Jesus soon enough.
>>15750 >what about the last 1800 years don't you understand dude? What about before that, when christianity wasn't practice amongst Europeans and was just a religion for jews? > literally every united European people group was Christian. Yes that is after you murdered and subverted them. >we need to 1) repent from our sins and try to lead a righteous life Repent from what sins? I can live a religious life without being spiritually retarded. > 2) handle our women Lol, christians fail at this all the time. >3) defeat the jew Impossible when with Jesus worshippers since they worship a jew and are spiritual kiked. Your solutions are dumb dum dum.
>>15748 Unity with their god is literal self-annihilation. I don't mind them doing it since they were non-entities to begin with, but trying to draw PC's and the rest of the White race into their spiritual suicide and absolute and unconditional slavery to the Jewish god is unacceptable. And that's without mentioning the negative effects that those religions bring in the practical domain. Also, the pattern when one poster starts promoting some kosher, righteous gentile religion that's compatible with Noahide laws and Talmud, and then another poster appears like he is interested in learning more about it is quite curious to say the least. It seems that Orthodox Christianity is on the menu tonight. Not that it matters too much, but when will it finally be a turn for Judaism? Talmudic, Kabbalistic, doesn't matter. Don't tell me that someone is afraid that his entire worldview will get ... shattered :>) Or would discussing it with someone whose very existence is the ultimate blasphemy to their god be too much to handle? >anti-semitic Christianity It was either people getting sick and tired of their kikery as usual, /ourguys/ infiltrating the church or creating alternatives at certain points of history. It was never about any particular religion or political system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_IV_of_France
Hey basically I'm just not going to worship Rabbi Yeshua ben Yosef (a Jew!!) I know...UGH I know...I'm sorry!!!!! It's just that I'm not gonna worship a Jew is all hahahahaha
>>15768 based
>>15741 >>15748 >muh foreign deity It’s pretty clear that the root of modern pagan LARPing is pride and hatred towards God for daring to have the Son incarnate in a people different from themselves, a people that God knew were ‘stiff-necked’ (Exodus 32:9), and that he knew would rebel against his commandments (Deuteronomy 31:27, 29). And yet God brought the highest good out of the bad in the person of Jesus Christ, and fulfilled the prophecies, the prophecies which anyone can go and see for themselves, and which predict the coming of Jesus with pinpoint accuracy. If one rejects Christ at this point, there’s just no excuse for them. Mumbling ‘b-but muh semites...’ won’t cut it.
>>15780 >It’s pretty clear that the root of modern pagan LARPing is pride and hatred towards God Yes we hate (((Yahweh))), a false deity, there is nothing LARPy about that, mossad. Still no argument on why he is the true God, just more actual LARPing.
>>15751 >Why stop at 'human' with your definition? We have a lot of similarities with apes as well This is an evolutionist meme. I bet you think think that we are like 99.7% percent identical with chimps too. But then one goes and looks at the morphological level and sees massive differences. There is a much larger gap between a nigger and a gorilla than there is a nigger and a White man, and to claim otherwise is to be in some serious denial about reality. The rest of this is just jibber jabber.
(28.95 KB 550x250 christians.jpg)
It's pretty obvious that the wholesale failure of Christianity to stop our ethnic replacement, and them presiding over it happening, is going to have people abandoning that faith and looking elsewhere. Why not spend your energy fixing the problem causing people to abandon your religion in the first place instead of bashing marginally held pagan beliefs? It's a real bad look for Christians. Gives similar vibes to some British people complaining about Polish immigrants while Pakis and niggers are raping their women and replacing them every day. It's like getting lectured on how to build muscle from a weak person. Can't be respected. Let's be real if Christianity was respectable you wouldn't have to come here and pick fights with fringe pagans to begin with. People would flock to you from your innate qualities. But that's not what's happening. I'm sure you are in the silent minority of based race-aware Christians, but all we see is the subversive minority. So fix them, not us. And then we'll come to you when you are strong, instead of weak. And shitting on paganism isn't going to bring people to Christianity, either. So not only is it counter-productive, but a huge waste of time as well. Focus on fixing your own failing religion first that seems to be embracing growth among shitskins and the mixed race population. Meanwhile we will try to build something, any, alternative at all in a desperate attempt to fill the void you have left. If you can't understand why we would do that, and resent us for it, maybe you care more about your religion than your own racial brethren. After all there was the famous litmus test would you pick a White pagan Europe or a brown Christian Europe that many Christians seem to have failed so embarassingly.
>>15800 >>15800 >Focus on fixing your own failing religion first that seems to be embracing growth among shitskins and the mixed race population What is there to fix? Christianity is a failure of a religion. Whether they have read the bible and go to church their inaction make them less than what they make themselves out to be. They have reduced themselves to only giving their corrupt priests money and power, and see that believing in Jesus is the only thing that matters in order to go to a promised paradise. They look towards converting shitskins, because they are the only ones dumb enough to worship the hippie kike, instead of reconnecting Christianity with European identity again. It's quite sad that instead of holding their ground they only know how to abandon and treat what they once lost.
(371.06 KB 1347x1017 not all christians.jpg)
>>15804 That's nice but it doesn't really solve any of these issues. A lot of the dispcrepancy can even be explained by foreigner arabs, indians, east asians, and jews not being Christain and thefefore not associating national identity with ancestry. If this is your gotcha it's just a big miss sorry to say. >>15807 >What is there to fix? Yeah that's for them to figure out as far as I'm concerned. I genuinely wish them the best but if I'm a betting man they I have to put it all on them completely letting us down based on their attitudes and track record.
>>14039 >idol this is just calvinism
>>15825 Pope Francis is a pagan. He has been caught on camera literally blessing pagan idols from South America, and lords over a 'church' that puts exorbitant amounts of time into shielding homosexuals and pedophiles. On top of that, the Catholic Church has officially been in dialogue with the modern world since Vatican II, and also dropped much of its opposition to Jewry since the same period. To go either further back than that, the Rothschilds have long been partners of the Vatican: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_loans_to_the_Holy_See And even more recently, Pope Francis entered into yet another project with the Rothschilds with the formation this year of the The Council for Inclusive Capitalism, which is a globalist project adjacent to the Great Reset. The entire church is Satanic. Then the study that is also included in your image says 'among pastors', aka among figures in Protestant churches, which are a modern deviation created by an autistic German who threw out multiple books of the Bible because the Jews didn't have them in their canon. Protestants historically are the biggest Jewish cocksuckers on this planet.
(127.76 KB 1280x720 kike in a box.jpg)
>"you worship a tree" >goes back to worshipping a box
>>15856 False equivalence. The Ark carried the stone tablets given to Moses and God manifested between the cherubim on top of the Ark, i.e. on the Mercy Seat. Meanwhile worshiping a tree is worshiping a created living being. Honor the Creator, not the created.
>>15851 >Pope Francis is a pagan What a lovely cope, but Pope Francis is a Jew who's job is to humiliate and prove that anyone can join the Vatican and be retarded. Your pagan argument is BS, because he knows and shows that he knows bible and was able to become pope because he fitted the requirements to become a priest in the first place. Instead of finding bad excuses you could try doing something about Christians turning into degenerates and cucks. But hey you would rather be a loser who cries about pagans than doing anything and wonder why you fail. >the Rothschilds have long been partners of the Vatican Further proving that Christcucks will willingly work with kikes. >Protestants historically are the biggest Jewish cocksuckers on this planet. No that just the entire history of Christianity and Islam in general. >>15857 >False equivalence <makes up a bunch of excuses >b-but muh box is h-holy!!! lmao
(1.40 MB 959x686 ClipboardImage.png)
(656.93 KB 689x430 ClipboardImage.png)
(873.28 KB 801x493 ClipboardImage.png)
>>15859 >What a lovely cope >Your pagan argument is BS He literally brought a pagan fertility idol into their churches and blessed it. That is idolatry and paganism. Injuns were present at this event bowing down to this statue. This caused at least enough controversy within the Catholic Church that these idols were thrown into the Tiber. Francis is a pagan. The Catholic Church is literally Satanic. People have known this for centuries >b-but muh box is h-holy!!! Not even a good faith response. Very big difference between being COMMANDED BY GOD to put the tablets within a box built to certain specifications and then a form of God would manifest on the seat, and going out into the woods and worshiping some random-ass tree.
>>15860 >He literally brought a pagan fertility idol into their churches and blessed it. That is idolatry and paganism. He literally did something that Jews wanted him to do to humiliate you losers. He isn't a pagan, but a pluralist. He stated before that he believes in the co-existence, the thing you see kikes go on and advocate. Blessing a pagan idol is no different than him going to Israel and touching the western wall or licking niggers and other Islamist feet. >Not even a good faith response. No, I'm just mocking your retarded assertion that has no evidence nor any accountability for why we should believe that a stupid box is holy. Claims do not prove anything, it's just shows that you're schizo. >m-muh magical box was summoned by GOD!!! IT'S MAGICAL N SHIET!!! This is you anon.
>>15862 >to humiliate you losers I'm not a Catholic though. This stuff is par for the course for the Catholic Church. It's Satanic, just as the entire church has been for five hundred plus years at minimum. >He isn't a pagan, but a pluralist. If you participate in pagan rites, you are a pagan. You're certainly not a Christian if you do those acts. When he went and prayed with Muslims and Yazidis in his trip to Iraq, he further confirms that he is not a Christian. >I'm just mocking your retarded assertion that has no evidence nor any accountability for why we should believe that a stupid box is holy It was important because God commanded that it be built, that it contain the tablets that Moses was given, and because God manifested himself on the seat of the Ark. Not that he didn't manifest in other ways in the OT, though. >m-muh magical box was summoned by GOD!!! IT'S MAGICAL N SHIET!!! Read the Bible, there are entire chapters specifying the materials and specifications for the Ark. It's not 'magical', it was built out of normal wood, normal materials, etc.
(417.42 KB 786x1033 orthodox-mlk.jpg)
>>15860 >catholicism is satanic paganism >protestantism is jewish cocksucking Damn looks like this semitic religion is really on the way out. I hope that post wasn't supposed to make us want to convert. Maybe the Orthodoxy can turn it all around for you but it's not looking good for the tithe box.
>>15857 >God manifested between the cherubim on top of the Ark So your saying your god is the box? The box created by israelite jews out of gold and wood? Got it. I'll make sure to worship the true God, and not the god of jizzrael and yeshua.
>>15870 >>15871 No, anon. God manifests in the Old Testament multiple times. He walks in the Garden with Adam, he manifests to Hagar in the desert, he appears before Abraham, he wrestles with Jacob, he appears in the Burning Bush, he leads the Israelites within a pillar of cloud, and he also manifested himself in the Tabernacle and particular on the Ark. A lot of these are believed to be the pre-incarnate Christ in some form. >>15869 I'm pretty sure Orthodox is the true church.
>>15866 >I'm not a Catholic though. This stuff is par for the course for the Catholic Church. This stuff humiliates all christians, because it proves that no one, not even your church masters care about the bible nor see it of value anymore. It doesn't matter what you believe in, the point still stands that christian is the biggest joke today. Don't think Orthodox and Protestants aren't doing anything to stop homosexuality either. >If you participate in pagan rites, you are a pagan. Really? So has the entirety of catholicism and orthodox christianity been paganism for believing in reincarnation before it was declared a heresy? Or how about the fact that each and every single sect had pagan rituals that originally came from the Hellenics and Germanics, such as sun-day, Christmas, Easter, and tongue originating from Greco-Roman channelings? You're just making excuses, the pope isn't a pagan for he knows nothing of it at all. It's in-denial and absolute arrogance to call someone they clearly aren't. Funny enough you have yet to accuse him of being a kike, which is quite telling. Attitudes like this is why Protestants, Orthodox, and Catholics have suffered from corruption for the past 5 centuries and it's because they refuse to stop acting like spergs. >It was important because God commanded that it be built, that it contain the tablets that Moses was given, and because God manifested himself on the seat of the Ark. >Read the Bible The bible is not proof, and Noah's ark is nothing, but a re-telling of what ancient pagans have told concerning the global flooding of the world back then for the Hebrews. >>15873 >I'm pretty sure Orthodox is the true church. If a church is true, then it should establish itself that way and not be so out of touch with the younger generations and face a largest number of scandals. There is no true church just old-men making fools out of themselves.
>>15862 >He literally did something that Jews wanted him to do to humiliate you losers. this. turning the Pope into a cuck is a way of humiliating not only Catholics, but the West as a whole, given the historical significance of the Papacy. I was raised under Catholicism myself, and even though I realize that Christianity is ultimately a semitic religion not of my people, I still feel a sense of loyalty to the Church, and respect the emphasis on tradition. more and more, I relate to the Sedevacantist position. >>15866 >This stuff is par for the course for the Catholic Church no it's not. the Catholic Church was nothing like this before Vatican II. that was the beginning of poz, and the viral load has only increased since then.
>>15875 >Noah's ark is nothing, but a re-telling of what ancient pagans have told concerning the global flooding of the world back then for the Hebrews. It's all the the same story, anon. Noah wasn't a Hebrew, they didn't even exist yet. All of humanity descends from Noah and his family, it makes sense that all of humanity remembers the flood. Manu, Utnapishtim, etc. are all folk memories of Noah. In Hawaii people remember Nu'u as the man who built an ark and landed it on the top of Mauna Kea. Even the rainbow is set in the sky by Kāne in this story, just like with Noah and the covenant God made with Noah afterwards. But then the real question is how do we know which tradition is the purest one? It comes down to the prophecies. The prophecies in other religions have not came true, but for the Old Testament, the prophecies have come true relating to Jesus, therefore we are amply justified in saying that Christianity is true. Daniel 9, etc. >>15879 > the Catholic Church was nothing like this before Vatican II. that was the beginning of poz, and the viral load has only increased since then. They were already accepting Rothschild money by that point, but Vatican II was definitely a new step in the wrong direction.
>>15881 >It's all the the same story, anon. Noah wasn't a Hebrew, they didn't even exist yet. "Noah" didn't exist either and the story of the Ark exist in all cultures and have different interpretations, so the claim that he was saved and sent by Yahweh is nothing, but stolen ans retold accounts of what the Mesopotamian story wad concerning global floods in a Hebrew perspective. Earth's global flooding concerns all of mankind and each respective's culture take on it, not your sand-demon. If anything this post does confirm you are mentally retarded and brain-washed. And you wonder why anons want you banned. >>15881 >They were already accepting Rothschild money by that point, but Vatican II was definitely a new step in the wrong direction. So is the Ortohodox Church. They are working with (((Putin))) after all to promote his Judaic form of nationalism. Orthocucks have a long history of protecting and working with jews, so your slap fights between the other two Jesuits has no purpose.
>>15888 Again, the prophecies which came true validate the rest of the text. You completely ignored that, and I can understand why, because it BTFOs your entire interpretation. >So is the Ortohodox Church. They are working with (((Putin))) <being so dumb that he doesn't know that the Orthodox Church exists outside of Russia
>>15890 >the prophecies which came true validate the rest of the text. The prophecies written by jews that were then verified by jews. This isn't proof. You keep presenting it as if it is fact when it isn't.
>>15891 Jews curse anyone who tries to calculate the date of the messiah according to the Talmud. They don't want you to find the proof, and it's literally right there for you to read and discover. It's the ultimate proof staring you right in the face.
>>15890 >Again, the prophecies which came true validate the rest of the text. You completely ignored that, and I can understand why, because it BTFOs your entire interpretation. None of the prophecies your ancient kikes claimed to have come true have ever shown to come be fulfiled at all, so once again you're making claims without any confirmation. You Hebrews call themselves the "purest", a people and culture known for deceptions, lies, and thievery is delsuional and laughable. You can easily recognize that it isn't true when you note that came Abrahamicism's spread amongst the Earth came the downfall mankind and many lushes green environments becoming lifeless deserts in places like the Middle East. Calling your traditions pure is nothing more, but delusional zealousy. >being so dumb that he doesn't know that the Orthodox Church exists outside of Russia When you're so ignorant that you do not realize that I was using Russia's churches as an example. Do you think the Balkans are any better?
>>15892 >They don't want you to find the proof, and it's literally right there for you to read and discover. It's the ultimate proof staring you right in the face. Then where is the proof? Do I have to hit my head with a hammer to able to comprehend the schizo nonsense that you're spouting. Does it literally require the retardation of my own mind to see the truth that you constantly are vague about?
>>15890 >Again, the prophecies which came true validate the rest of the text. No it didn't. As a matter of fact for the courses of years it has shown to be the exact opposite. Hebrew traditions are nothing, but lies and stolen works from other cultures (Greek, Egyptian, Persian, etc). Indo-Europeans shown to be the purest and greatest culture out of all the rest. The Greeks even knew long before that they were full of shit. You really enjoy sucking your own dick by calling some a BTFO even when it isn't. >>15894 >Then where is the proof? There is no proof, anon suffers from Schizophrenia and jewry. He simply cannot prove what has never existed.
>>15894 Daniel 9.24-27. This has already been mentioned earlier ITT: >>15707 >>15893 >You Hebrews call themselves the "purest" You're just being dishonest again. 'Purest' was used in the sense of the 'least distorted'. When it comes to the Jews themselves and their nature, even God knew the Jews were a stubborn, stiff-necked (Exodus 32:9) and rebellious people (Deuteronomy 31:27, 29), Aaron, brother of Moses, said that they were inclined towards evil (Exodus 32:22), so what are you talking about? God also said that the Israelites were not being given their land because they were righteous, but because the people who occupied Canaan were wicked, sacrificing their children to Moloch and other atrocities (Deuteronomy 9:5) > You can easily recognize that it isn't true when you note that came Abrahamicism's spread amongst the Earth came the downfall mankind and many lushes green environments becoming lifeless deserts in places like the Middle East. False correlation. There's zero connection here.
>>15896 >muh bible That's not proof, that's delusion and bias. You just confirmed 8ad6cb's point lol. >You're just being dishonest again. 'Purest' was used in the sense of the 'least distorted'. Do you think that changes what he has said or any meanings? Do you think the kikes were the least-corrupted out of all the cultures? They were all corrupt and they always were since their beginnings, which is why every religion universally hated them and called them out for their thievery and trickery. The bible is not an argument, we're asking for proof and you bring nothing to the table. >False correlation. There's zero connection here. <the destruction of many environments that have existed for thousands of years unchanged or unaffected does not have anything to do with a religion that seeks to have total dominion over nature and change everything it sees into what they desire.
>>15896 >Daniel 9.24-27. This has already been mentioned earlier ITT: You keep citing the bible as proof even tough it has been previously established that all of the books of the bible were written by ethnic jews. It cannot be used as proof. All you can do is go in circles.
>>15896 >Daniel 9.24-27. That's not proof, we're asking for something concrete. Nothing the bible says speaks of whole and eternal truths. >You're just being dishonest again. 'Purest' was used in the sense of the 'least distorted'. It's same fucking thing. Jews were not the least distorted and were by far and no the ancient Isralites weren't any better either. >Bibical nonsense Like anon said, that's not proof that's, excuse my cuckchan lingo, unsaturated cope. After aby victory the jews also paint their defeated enemies as the wickest. Think I'm lying? Than you can look at how they make up stories about the holocaust and christianity's history of exiling the jews as the best examples.
>>15897 >That's not proof, that's delusion and bias. The Bible is a collection of numerous books, not a solid unit. Daniel was written hundreds and hundreds of years before Jesus came, and just happens to get the exact date and predict the future. Just a coincidence, look no further! This isn't even the only proof, as evidential accounts and others could be built, as has been done in other threads already. Daniel proves Christ, and you would know it deep down if you looked into it. >Do you think the kikes were the least-corrupted out of all the cultures? "Kikes" didn't exist until after 30/33 A.D., so you're speaking anachronistically. "Kikes" is a term used that was used to label Jewish immigrants to the United States that were afraid to make a 'X' on immigration papers because they thought it resembled the Christian cross, so they drew circles. The culture of the ancient Israelites, at least on paper, was definitely closer to the truth in that they acknowledged a single God, and refrained from idolatry. Of course though, the narrative of the Old Testament is them rebelling against God continually, and whoring after false gods like Baal, Moloch, etc. >which is why every religion universally hated them Clearly not, since as soon as Christianity came along, people like Emperor Julian the Apostate desperately tried to help the Jews rebuild their Temple and even wrote entire tracts against Christians showing how the Jewish Christ-rejecting traditions were true and the Christian ones false. Celsus did the same thing. Of course, God didn't permit them to rebuild the Temple. And today it stands destroyed, as Jesus predicted. And as was predicted in Daniel 9. >the destruction of many environments that have existed for thousands of years unchanged or unaffected does not have anything to do with a religion that seeks to have total dominion over nature and change everything it sees into what they desire. We are commanded to exercise stewardship over the Earth. Caretaking, not abusing. The Old Testament gives the Israelites many laws were they are made to let the land lie fallow after six years of use, allowing it to replenish the quality of the soil. Similar stuff in Lev. 25:4. >>15898 >all of the books of the bible were written by ethnic jews. It cannot be used as proof This is a presupposition that you hold that I reject. You are trying to find any way that you can to dismiss this clear proof that predicted things which actually came to pass. >>15899 >That's not proof Did the events in it happen or not? Yes they did. >Jews were not the least distorted and were by far and no the ancient Isralites weren't any better either. Where are your prophecies that have come true which would validate this claim? >Like anon said, that's not proof that's, excuse my cuckchan lingo, unsaturated cope. After aby victory the jews also paint their defeated enemies as the wickest. Think I'm lying? Than you can look at how they make up stories This sort of stuff was an established Phoenician practice which appears throughout the histories of multiple people talking about them and their traditions. Mass child sacrifice was practiced in Carthage as well, and this is why the Romans destroyed them. The Israelites did the same thing in Canaan.
(93.64 KB 643x1024 1633230559699m.jpg)
>>15875 I mean the pope is a jesuit so basically a kike. And the biggest issue with pagan rituals being appropriated by christians is that the christians act like they're better than us. Even though all of their ideas come from us. They just inserted jews to the center of them >>15890 The stories were written so that it would seem like Jesus fulfilled the prophecies. We know almost nothing about his actual life, assuming he even existed. He didn't fulfill all of them either, which is why the vast majority of jews reject him as moshiach >>15896 >zero correlation between civ and Abrahamism The abrahamic idea of dominion has been the single most toxic influence on humanity's relationship with nature. Agriculture is exploitative. The idea that animals don't have souls is another issue Everyone in this thread is saying basically the same things and yet this nigga still doesn't get it. Autism
>>15901 >The stories were written so that it would seem like Jesus fulfilled the prophecies We have copies of these works that were written pre-Jesus. The same book is used by non-Christians today that hate Jesus and nailed him to a cross. >We know almost nothing about his actual life We have four independent accounts of his life written by followers of Jesus, and we have mentions of him in numerous non-Christian sources both within the century of his death, and in the century afterwards. The letters of Paul, of course, give us some basic details as well that are corroborated in other texts, Christian and non-Christian alike namely the name of his brother, the way that he died, etc.
>>15901 >>15902 Also, the fact that the Temple was just conveniently destroyed right after this Messiah-claimant died just like Daniel 9 says goes against your claim that it is just written like that.
>>15900 >This is a presupposition that you hold that I reject. You are trying to find any way that you can to dismiss this clear proof that predicted things which actually came to pass. You presuppose that the bible is truthful. Denying it doesn't change that fact that the bible is a jewish book entirely written by jews. Jewish religion, jewish mind.
>>15900 >The Bible is a collection of numerous books, not a solid unit. Daniel was written hundreds and hundreds of years before Jesus came, Again written by ethnic jews, I can write a book can claim it's nothing more, but a collection and say it's all true as well and you can bet that I can get at-least a hundred morons to follow behind me. You keep repeating yourself, I think we can confirm that this means you do not have proof and that your bible is indeed a Judaic lie. >"Kikes" didn't exist until after 30/33 A.D. so you're speaking anachronistically. Fun fact! The jews have been kikes even before the term's creation, so trying to correct me on its chronology does not make the term less true nor invalidate my points in any way or form. Again I'm not seeing an argument I just see nitpicks. >Clearly not, since as soon as Christianity came along, people like Emperor Julian the Apostate desperately tried to help the Jews rebuild their Temple and even wrote entire tracts against Christians showing how the Jewish Christ-rejecting traditions were true and the Christian ones false. Emperor Julian helped the jews to prevent any further uprisings, due to the current mess the Roman empire was in at the time, and to also stop the christian take over of Rome and the destruction of all her foundations. You aren't making a point, because the Roman-Jewish wars debunk what your stupid points when they've learned the jews' true nature. Helping the kikes was merely to appeal to the inhabitants of wherever Rome conquered. They did the same for local pagans as well. >We are commanded to exercise stewardship over the Earth And look where that has gotten us. Environmental destruction is happening all across Earth, muh caretaking isn't happening today nor did it happen during the medieval periods, except for that time in England, but that was only merely convenient. Actions speak louder than words anon.
>>15900 >The Bible is a collection of numerous books, not a solid unit. Daniel was written hundreds and hundreds of years before Jesus came, and just happens to get the exact date and predict the future. Just a coincidence, look no further! This isn't even the only proof, as evidential accounts and others could be built, as has been done in other threads already. Daniel proves Christ, and you would know it deep down if you looked into it. Here you are assuming that the bible portrays and accurate history, which it most certainly doesn't considering its jewish nature. They wrote the story! Just because they wrote a story saying that jesus was born on a certain day, does not mean it is true. >"Kikes" didn't exist until after 30/33 A.D., so you're speaking anachronistically. "Kikes" is a term used that was used to label Jewish immigrants to the United States that were afraid to make a 'X' on immigration papers because they thought it resembled the Christian cross, so they drew circles. This is actual pilpul. You are picking through definitions and purposely misunderstanding questions.
>>15898 >Did the events in it happen or not? Yes they did. The claims of what happened according to thr Hebrews did not happen and you still haven't proven anything. You're arguing in circles. >Where are your prophecies that have come true which would validate this claim? >Whataboutism More fallacies and non-arguments. The prophecies that corruption, lies, and new religions will spread globably has certainly come true and Abrahamicism is its fuel. >This sort of stuff was an established Phoenician practice which appears throughout the histories of multiple people talking about them and their No has ever confirmed that the Phoenicans had child sacrifices, there are just mere claims of them doing so. But let's say its an established fact after all, what makes you think the Isralites, a people who stole almost every ritual and tradition from the Canaanites had not done the same thing? >inb4 muh bible I want concrete proof, the bible can easily be re-written and has been before. Especially to dispell it's corruption. >>15903 >Also, the fact that the Temple was just conveniently destroyed right after this Messiah-claimant died just like Daniel 9 says goes against your claim that it is just written like that. Or maybe historians are jewish liars as well? Historian in itself is literally based on accounts of Roman, Greek, and Hebrew histography aftet all, although they will accept what the jews say first over the Greeks. Do you think anything would of changed if all of Israel became christians, because the Romans didn't like you guys either.
>>15902 No I meant the gospels were written to align with the OT prophesies. You're assuming the new testament is a reliable source, which is cope and clearly retarded >>15903 The temple was destroyed before the gospels were written, and there were plenty of messianic claims at that time. Of course the nascent christians would attribute its significance to their guy
>>15901 >. And the biggest issue with pagan rituals being appropriated by christians is that the christians act like they're better than us. Even though all of their ideas come from us. They just inserted jews to the center of them It's still hypocritical to claim someone or something is pagan, when like 60% of your culture and faith originate from pagan customs and norms. We might as well call the entirety of chrisianity pagan, because they hold so many traditions and rituals that don't even originate from the Hebrews. We know the pope is a kike, but he's so ass-hurt about us that he needs to latch his degeneracy as a fault of something that has nothing to do with the holy see at all.
>>15904 Actually, I am not presupposing that the Bible is truthful, because that would defeat the entire purpose of even posting ITT. We have a prophecy in Daniel 9, and it appears to be confirmed in the life of Jesus. This isn't even just an event that happened and we can't get an insight into either, because we know the Temple was destroyed, we know that sacrifices aren't done anymore, we know that it was destroyed by a foreign army, we know that the Messiah was killed, etc. All of this is said in Daniel 9. And it all came to pass. On top of that, there are remarks in the Talmud that seem to indicate that the Jews' sins stopped being forgiven in the forty years before the Temple was destroyed >>15708, indicating further that Jesus was who he said he was. >>15905 >I can write a book can claim it's nothing more, but a collection and say it's all true as well and you can bet that I can get at-least a hundred morons to follow behind me Will any of the prophecies that you would write come true almost to the letter and the year? Doubt. >The jews have been kikes even before the term's creation Jews have been anti-Christian since before the term was ever created, we know >Emperor Julian helped the jews to prevent any further uprisings, due to the current mess the Roman empire was in at the time, and to also stop the christian take over of Rome and the destruction of all her foundations. [...] Helping the kikes was merely to appeal to the inhabitants of wherever Rome conquered. So basically he helped the Jews, got it. <Julian's attitude toward the Jews was generally defined by the needs of his polemic against the Christians. Just before Julian embarked on his Persian campaign he promised to abolish the anti-Jewish laws and to rebuild the Temple where he would join the Jews in worship (Letter to the Community of the Jews, no. 51, 396–8). Shortly after this he wrote that "even now the temple is being raised again" (Letter to a Priest, 295c). <Julian discussed Jewish monotheism from two viewpoints: first, he refuted the Christian claim that Jesus, the Logos, is God, since the Bible recognizes only one God (Againstthe Galileans, 253Aff.); second, he attempted to fit Judaism into the pagan pantheon and isolate Christianity. He therefore argued that the Jews are the chosen people of their god, who is their particular national and local deity (or daemon) and watches over them, just as do other city gods and national deities "who are a kind of regent for the king" (ibid. 99E, 115D, 141C–D, 176A–B). https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/julian-the-apostate-x00b0 A seething anti-Christian becomes a massive philosemite, a tale as old as time. >And look where that has gotten us. Environmental destruction is happening all across Earth, muh caretaking isn't happening today nor did it happen during the medieval periods, except for that time in England, but that was only merely convenient. Actions speak louder than words anon. This is a product of capitalism, greed and Jews, ironically enough. It's not Biblical stewardship.
>>15906 >Here you are assuming that the bible portrays and accurate history, which it most certainly doesn't considering its jewish nature Yet another unfounded presupposition. But again, we have a prophecy and we can calculate when it was supposed to come to fruition, and it came to fruition exactly as written. Where is the Jewish temple? Destroyed! Where the sacrifices? Nowhere to be seen! Who destroyed the temple? A foreign people! What happened to the Messiah? He died!
>>15910 >Will any of the prophecies that you would write come true almost to the letter and the year? lol is this a dick-scaling challenge or something. Make an argument and stop being a faggot. Your prophocies cannot be properly recorded. >Jews have been anti-Christian since before the term was ever created, we know Jews hate Whites period. Also christians have been pro-Judaic since their creation. Jews and christian are not different from each other. Your bible scriptures do not speak louder than history. >So basically he helped the Jews, got it. Yes, he helped jews, because christian niggers LITERALLY TRIED TO TAKE OVER ROME AND DESTROY HER CULTURE. The Jews at the time only wanted their stolen homeland and to be free of goys who conquered them, while christniggers wanted to take over the entire empire and destroy it, hell I bet even some jews converted to christianity just so they could takeover the empire. His response to christianity made sense, because you were public enemy number one at the time, although Julian should of just killed all the Abrahamics in general. You're not a making a point again. >seething Go back to cuckchan >This is a product of capitalism, greed and Jews, ironically enough. It's not Biblical stewardship. Capitalism originates from judaism, and christianity. You have to be the biggest idiot on here.
>>15907 >The claims of what happened according to thr Hebrews did not happen and you still haven't proven anything. I don't even think you read the passage we are discussing, so I think you should go read it and realize how foolish you look. Where is the Jewish temple? What time-frame did the prophecy give? >More fallacies and non-arguments So you can present no evidence that other traditions have prophecies that show that they would be a better standard for what actually happened than the Bible, got it. >No has ever confirmed that the Phoenicans had child sacrifices, there are just mere claims of them doing so When multiple groups at multiple points of time say that Phoenician / Canaanite people are doing the exact same thing that should begin to raise your eyebrows. Also, tens of thousands of sacrificed children have been excavated in Carthage mixed with animal bones. >what makes you think the Isralites, a people who stole almost every ritual and tradition from the Canaanites had not done the same thing? It wasn't entirely unknown, anyone who has read the Old Testament knows that the Israelites were prone to lapse into idolatry and paganism of various kinds. This is why God legislates against it: Leviticus 18:21, Leviticus 20:2-5, Deuteronomy 12:31, Deuteronomy 18:10. The Israelites were not as bad as what was going on around Canaan though. Sodom and Gomorrah are good examples of this. >Or maybe historians are jewish liars as well? Jews and Romans got together to lie about the same thing? Did the Romans just pretend to destroy the Temple right on time? It happened, and you just need to accept it.
>>15911 Mark 24: 1-2 <Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. 2 And He said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down.” What is the western wall?
>>15913 >I don't even think you read the passage we are discussing, so I think you should go read it and realize how foolish you look I'm not going to take something seriously that you jews lie about. Your passages are fake stories and you lie to validate yourself. Either prove you are true or go sperg on a christian board. >So you can present no evidence that other traditions have prophecies that show that they would be a better standard for what actually happened than the Bible, got it. No retard, you are the one making claims that your prophecies are true and happened. We are demanding concrete evidence to a certain that they did happen. All you have been doing here is making fallacies and repeats of old arguments. Most of the claims that the temples of Jerusalem fail after Jesus' death are NT BS which are only recorded and written years afterwards. There is no credibility whatsoever in the bible at all. Anything can be re-written to validate a lie. >When multiple groups at multiple points of time say that Phoenician / Canaanite Bad argument, multiple groups can all simuantelously lie. No one else have the claims of child sacrifices other than jews and psuedo-archeologist who are servants of ZOG. Either prove it or shut-up. >muh bible Another non-argument, you're very predictable. >Jews and Romans got together to lie about the same thing? No just jews, because I can't trust any modern or recently made books that are all re-written to valdiate christianity. We do have proof as well that works from Roman histograpghy such as Tacitus and Josephus have been edited. Repost, because I accidently hit replied.
(1.31 MB 2000x1000 john Chrysostom jews.png)
>>15908 >No I meant the gospels were written to align with the OT prophesies This is based on a presupposition that he could not have really came and fulfilled them. >The temple was destroyed before the gospels were written Proof? You're operating on the naturalistic presuppositions of atheistic historians who believe that it was quite literally impossible for Jesus to have predicted the Temple's destruction forty some years before it happened, so atheistic historians are practically forced to date Mark post-70 A.D. And let's remember that again you are refuted here by Daniel 9, which written hundreds of years before the events of 70 A.D. predicted that the Temple would be destroyed around the time of the Messiah by foreign armies, putting an end to sacrifices, and that the Messiah would indeed be killed. >>15912 > Also christians have been pro-Judaic since their creation HAHAHAHAHA You have to be completely ignorant to say such a thing, just spend an afternoon reading St. John Chrysostom and what he said against the Jews, particularly in Adverus Judaeos. Pic related. St. Jerome also said: <Judas is cursed, that in Judas the Jews may be accursed... their prayers turn into sins" St. John Chrysostom: <But at any rate the Jews say that they, too, adore God. God forbid that I say that. No Jew adores God! Who say so? The Son of God say so. For he said: "If you were to know my Father, you would also know me. But you neither know me nor do you know my Father". Could I produce a witness more trustworthy than the Son of God? Paul in 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16: <For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of God’s churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own people the same things those churches suffered from the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last >Yes, he helped jews All I need to know. Imagine helping proto-Talmudic kikes who want to enslave you 'own le Christcucks'. God brought his attempts to naught and ended his life pathetic life. >Capitalism originates from judaism, and christianity. Even if one were to grant this, it's a genetic fallacy. Christianity is founded on opposition to Mammon. One cannot serve wealth and God. The individualistic, greed-oriented and anti-God ethos of capitalism could not be more anti-Christian. It is purely Judaic.
>>15920 > Imagine helping proto-Talmudic kikes who want to enslave you 'own le Christcucks'. God brought his attempts to naught and ended his life pathetic life. Yeah, imaging making tough choices in an effort to preserve your native traditions and empire. Totally retarded, right? Why not just let your people be plagued by a malignant semitic religion for thousands of years that causes us to fight religious wars with each other for nothing. Appreciation of the human and natural forms, stupid. Unbroken ancestro worship, gay. Having a positive outlook on humanity, retarded! We don't need any of that. We have yahweh, and he'll give us our little place as beasts of burden for the jews in the next world!
>>15920 >One cannot serve wealth and God. I guess one cannot serve his race and god, too, then. The christcuck reveals his true purpose once again.
>>15916 >What is the western wall? This is just pilpul. What he said came true, in that the temple and all of Jerusalem was laid to waste. One can easily say that Jesus was speaking hyperbolically. Anyone who has read the New Testament knows that Jesus taught using hyperbole and similar rhetorical tools. Matthew 18:9 is a good example of Jesus' use of hyperbole. He's saying the temple would be utterly destroyed, which is what happened, to the extent that the Jews have nothing but a wall to bang their head against in prayer today. Some have said that that wall is a remnant of a Roman temple too. >>15919 >I'm not going to take something seriously that you jews lie about. So you won't even read the passage. You're afraid to do the math for yourself and figure out that it actually happened. The rest of your post is not even worth my time, since you admit that you haven't even read the thing in question.
>>15921 I'm glad that you admit that pagans literally are willing to cooperate with Jews that think the goyim are animals made to serve the 'Chosen People'. You are the ultimate shabbos goy. 'I must rebuild the Temple for my Jewish masters, oy vey the prophecies are coming true!"
>>15924 >I'm glad that you admit that pagans literally are willing to cooperate with Jews that think the goyim are animals made to serve the 'Chosen People'. You are the ultimate shabbos goy. 'I must rebuild the Temple for my Jewish masters, oy vey the prophecies are coming true!" First of all, you literally want the third temple to be rebuild so that you can worship at it in the "new world". You literally follow jewish scriptures, and carry out the teachings of these jews whether from the old or new testament. Second of all, I do not agree with the actions of Julian in helping to rebuild the temple. I only appreciate the mettle he showed in defending his people and culture, something I'm sure you would not understand. >Anyone who has read the New Testament knows that Jesus taught using hyperbole and similar rhetorical tools. But I though it came true exactly s Jesus said, or are you lying to us? Can scripture just mean exactly what you want it to mean at any time? Doesn't seem like you respect the word of the son of yahweh very much.
>>15920 True unsaturated autism. >You have to be completely ignorant to say such a thing, just spend an afternoon reading St. John Chrysostom and what he said against the Jews, particularly in Adverus Judaeos. Pic related. St. Jerome also said: Empty words for a empty religion that never does what lie about being so proudly of. For example Constantine and the Theodosian Code >>Theodosian Code was translated into English, with annotations, in 1952 by Clyde Pharr and others <Books 1-5 lack the level of manuscript support available for books 6-16. The first five books of the surviving Codex draw largely from two other manuscripts. The Turin manuscript, also known as "T," consists of 43, largely discontinuous folios.[4] The second manuscript is the Breviary of Alaric, and a good part of the Breviarium that is included in book 1 actually contains the original text of the respective part of the original codex.[4] <The first laws granting tax exemption to the church appear in the Codex and are credited to Constantine and his son Constantius II. These laws specify that all clergy, their family members, and church-owned land was exempt from all compulsory service and tax payments, with the exception that land owned by the clerics themselves was still taxed.[23][24] Now Charlemagne: <‘Jewish merchants prospered under Charlemagne and even more under Louis the Pious, by supplying the court with wine, spices, and textiles, and they enjoyed wide-ranging privileges. These included the right to be tried only in accordance with their own law, to have Christian employees, and to practice their religion even within the Imperial palace.’ -Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 290 <‘The protection of subjects involved in international trade was one of the sovereign specific duties. In negotiations with King Offa of Mercia, Charlemagne requested favourable conditions for “our merchants” when operating in England. Later Louis the Pious granted the merchants who supplied the palace exemption from all taxes collected within the empire, with the exception of customs duties in Quentovic and other parts of the border.’ -Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 291 Two saints, two very powerful and notable christian being very Israeli-pilled here. Your saints claim that jews are dogs, but never do you christianiggers treat them as demons they are. Let's not forget the numerous times that you chose to slaughter native Europeans for being "goys", but many times gave the kikes free passes and only wanted to force convert them from the Torah to the NT. If your spirit is not Judaic, then you should prove and should that being the case by acknowledging that the jews are entirely separate in both spirit and race, but the christnigger did neither. Gentiles are only ever accepted if they are willingly to destroy their foundation for something Israeli. Again you're an idiot and the red-text and as said before, actions speak louder than words. >All I need to know. Imagine helping proto-Talmudic kikes who want to enslave you 'own le Christcucks'. But they weren't a thread to Rome, which is the part that you miss lmao. Also imagine if Christianity did not grow throughtout the empire, the kikes never would of been as powerful as they are today and had control over European civilization and the jews would be contained. Julian did this, because you wanted to destroy Rome. What's even funnier is that you are perfectly find christianity's Talmudic-like actions in taking over the empire and also are perfectly fine with the jews converting over to christiantiy to control over White Europeans. Siding the jews to own the pagans is literally your motto. >Even if one were to grant this, it's a genetic fallacy. One, you don't know what a fallacy is and two, christianity literally inspired capitalism way before the Protestants became a thing. >https://www.acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-10-number-3/how-christianity-created-capitalism >It's purely Judaic Remember when you admitted that christianity was Judaic as well in the christian thread? Stop pretending you're any different. You are spiritually a jew and haven't proven otherwise. Nothing you spout will convince us to switch over to christianity, you aren't a saint and never were any of your "saints".
>>15925 >First of all, you literally want the third temple to be rebuild so that you can worship at it in the "new world". The idea that there will be a third temple at all is not a universal view. It is mostly held among certain types of Protestants. Plus, both Jesus and Paul transfer the imagery of the Temple onto both the body of believers (the body of Christ) and onto Jesus himself, as can be seen when Paul refers to the church, and indeed to individual Christians, as 'the temples of the Holy Spirit' (1 Cor. 3:16, 6:19). The example of Jesus referring to himself as a temple is in John 2:18-19: "Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” He's clearly referring to his death and resurrection here. So many believe that the need for the Temple has been completely superseded by the Church. However some believe because of some select prophecies that the Antichrist will sit in the Temple and declare himself God that there will indeed be a Third Temple in the future that will probably be occupied by a Jewish antichrist. >I only appreciate the mettle he showed in defending his people and culture Giving assistance to Talmudic Jews isn't defending your people and culture. >But I though it came true exactly s Jesus said The Temple was destroyed by foreign armies and sacrifices stopped. This is what Jesus predicted. Jesus referred to it there in a hyperbolic fashion. Hyperbole does not mean 'false'. >Can scripture just mean exactly what you want it to mean at any time? I think you just don't like that I have answers.
>>15927 >Giving assistance to Talmudic Jews isn't defending your people and culture. They were assisting them to stop (((you))). Again muh talmudic jews weren't trying to take over Rome, it was the reformed jews, you're scapegoating them in a scenario where they weren't even the villains of history just yet. If christians truly hated jews, then they would of sided with the Romans and accepted Rome for what she was, not take over the entire empire by appealing to those who hated the Romans and wanted to destroy it internally, and then allow the kikes to usurper power which is exactly what Constantine did by the way.
>>15923 >So you won't even read the passage. You're afraid to do the math for yourself and figure out There is no math, only lies and claims. Again no arguments just stupidity. Being a sperg does not mean you've won the argument it proves we are correct. http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/paul.htm
>>15927 >The example of Jesus referring to himself as a temple >Jesus and Paul transfer the imagery of the Temple onto both the body of believers This is the same thing as the talmudic third temple. A body of gentile "believers" is needed to wait hand and foot on their new jewish lords. You still seek the third temple, only in a different form. This is not any different. >Giving assistance to Talmudic Jews isn't defending your people and culture. No, he could have been like any of your jew loving saints instead, that facilitated the growth of jewish trade networks and jewish power. That would be better? Christianity facilitates the spread of jewish power because of its kinship with judaism . >Hyperbole does not mean 'false'. It does. If he had predicted it perfectly, it would have been completely annihilated, and yet it is not. So much for your prophecies. >I think you just don't like that I have answers. It's telling that you cannot answer this question. All that seems to matter to you is your jewish god, and not honor nor people.
>>15926 >the Theodosian Code Isn't pro-Jewish at all. I'm getting tired of this meme. Everyone who refers to this conveniently forgets that Jews hate that law code, took away the equal rights Jews had formerly, turning them into second-class citizens, barring them from military and civil service, prohibiting them from owning slaves, banning the construction of synagogues and many other things. Similarly Jews were forbidden from carrying out judicial sentences, and not permitted to be wardens of jails. This is readily available information to anyone who takes the time to read the code. Pagans had given Jews equal citizenship with Romans before this under Caracalla. >Charlemagne Not as black-and-White as you think it is. You're clearly unaware of Charlemagne's Capitulary for the Jews. Clearly giving the Jews the ability to lend money of any kind was a mistake. But one learns from the mistakes of a past. https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/814capitul-jews.asp >Two saints Charlemagne is not a Saint. And Theodosius II isn't recognized as a Saint except by Eastern Orthodox, but even then, that doesn't matter, because he did nothing wrong. The pro-Jewish narrative about the Codex Theodosianus is ludicrous. >But they weren't a thread to Rome You are implying that it is ever a good idea to ally with Talmudic Jews. You are a shabbos goy. >Julian did this, because you wanted to destroy Rome. The empire lasted until 1453 though. It was Christian longer than not.
>>15928 Stop defending literal Talmudists, retard. "you're scapegoating them" - you're literally sounding like an ADL kike right now. There's nothing to defend here
>>15929 You won't even read it because you're pre-presumed it to be false. Wallow in your ignorance. >>15930 >This is the same thing as the talmudic third temple. A body of gentile "believers" is needed to wait hand and foot on their new jewish lords. You still seek the third temple, only in a different form. This is not any different. You're literally just spouting bullshit. The Talmud has nothing to do with what is being spoken about here, as it wasn't a thing for centuries after Jesus and never had anything to do with Christianity, and there is nothing about serving 'jewish lords' in any of these texts. I wish you could at least argue in good faith, but none of you ever do. >It does. No, it doesn't. It means overstatement to make a rhetorical point. This is what Jesus did, and you were already provided evidence of this. The Temple was annihilated, right like the prophecy in Daniel 9 said, and just like Jesus said it would.
>>15933 >You won't read my bullshit! You're right. Either prove your passages are true or maximum cope.
>>15932 >samefagging How pathetic. But i'm right actually, there's no reason to hate talmuds when they weren't our enemies just yet. The war on the talmuds were a christian war not European. Retorting to samefagging is proof that you lost the argument to prove that christianity was not worse than Jews. >>15931 >Isn't pro-jewish at all Except for the fact that they allowed Jews to hold jobs concerning accounting, banking and as merchants? Jews were still give the right to have major influences on the Byzantine economy, which is why it fail. Also despite the codes barring Jews from civil services and the military you still have Andronikos II Palaiologos who tolerated them in the end. >Pagans had given Jews equal citizenship with Romans before this under Caracalla. You're making no point here, because Caracalla gave every freeman citizenship. Pagans were also very skeptical about giving just allowing anyone to become a citizen, especially Jews. >Charlemagne is not a Saint. Yes he is, he's not acknowledge by the Holy see, but he was in the Holy Roman Empire. But this means nothing, because he's still one of the most praised christians in the world and is viewed as the "savior" of Europe. >And Theodosius II isn't recognized as a Saint except by Eastern Orthodox Constantine is though and he was very pro-Jewish. Anyway what I said should of brought up was the codes that inspired Theodosius' codex. Despite their supposedly anti-Jewish laws, it did not stop them from having major influences within Christian European politics. You don't seem to realize that being anti-Jewish does not mean you're not Jewish, Marx debunks this mindset. >You are implying that it is ever a good idea to ally with Talmudic Jews. You are implying that Rome should of surrendered itself to early Christian Jews, which by the way lead to what Europe is today. Julian getting rid of the christians would of contained the jews either way. Prove to me that the "talmuds" were a threat to Rome. >The empire lasted until 1453 You're chronology and pilpuling is awful. No one should ever recognize the Christian empires as Roman successors, especially when they've acted nothing like it. Only you retards recognize those christian shit-holes as Roman, but pretend that Rome never fell, because of Christianity and died due to their inaction to rid of the jews. Byzantium wasn't Roman, just a bunch of christcuck Greeks LARPing.
>>15931 I don't see why any of you said matters, because a good sum of Christian Roman emperors have protected synagogues. I don't why the Theodosian Codex keeps being brought up as pro-Jewish rather than the fact that it was a failure, because in the end they were protected many times by other Byzantine emperors and the court for economic and political purposes. The Christian view on Jews is rather mixed, not of hatred nor one where they see themselves as an entirely different entity from them, despite what any priest or saint Christian says. It definitely shows when during the reinassiance and later that many Jews were viewed to be European or White by Christians, despite having Talmudic practices. On case of Julian the Apsotate, he was in the right, the Galileans sought to usurper the empire out of the native Latins. This was ulimately achieved through associating, socializing, and then converting slaves, women, and freeborns, who all worked and sought to destroy Rome or at-least take over her cultural norms (slaves being freed, women destroying the patriarchy, freeborns gaining more rights). This is quite literally worst than reviving the temples of a people who were only threatening to the Romans in the sense that their nationalism would lead to another mass revolt for their independence. No one is defending Talmuds for what they are, we are stating that it made sense to side with the enemy of my greater enemy to stop the horrendous social change the Roman Empire forever.
>>15933 >annihilated Lol. How could it be annihilated when there is a entire portion of it intact. Prophecy not fulfilled.
>>15936 >How pathetic Take your meds. Why defend the actions of Julian? He was clearly in the wrong. Never side with Jews of any variety.
>>15943 >Take your meds More cuckchan lingo. You are the same person. >Why defend the actions of Julian? He was clearly in the wrong. Ah yes, the guy who wanted to defend his heritage from christian jews was in the wrong. You're totally not the same guy who just used the same argument from earlier. >Never side with Jews of any variety. Ironic for a christian to say this, But he did that with purpose. His goal was to eliminate christianity and get former pagans back into his reformed version of Hellenicism and to do this was a temporary alliance to rid of the Galileans and send them back to where they came from. This was a strategic attack, to rid of jews and curtail christian influence. Julian shouldn't have revived their temples, but it wasn't like he had a choice anyway especially, when the empire was rumbling apart and society was collapsing. You're retorting to samefagging as your way of making me look bad, because I'm right?
>>15910 >we know that it [the second temple] was destroyed by a foreign army A foreign army led by a jew named (((Tiberius Alexander))). If it indeed happened at all, the sacking of the second temple is just another example of jewish self-fulfilled prophecy. Aside from that, he was related to noteworthy jews; his uncle was Philo of Alexandria, the jew who created the logos as son of God and as (((moshiach))) myth. Interestingly, Philo makes no mention of Jesus in any of his writings, despite supposedly living during the time of Jesus and having his theories confirmed. Pure coincidence, I'm sure. >muh prophecies Oh boy, I can't wait for the prophecies of Isaiah to come true! I'm so excited to be ruled over by jews through the supreme court of mankind! I'm getting fit just so I can better serve my jewish masters! Those fields won't till themselves!
>>15960 The first screencap about Philo is not the grand 'BTFO' that the writer thinks it is. Yes, the idea of the Logos was understood even pre-Jesus, and quite often identified with the Angel of the Lord that appears throughout the Old Testament. Philo believed that the Angel of the Lord was the Logos of God, and Christians believe the same thing. This Angel of the Lord is identified as divine in the Old Testament already (Genesis 16, Exodus 3, etc), so what we are really seeing here is the notion of the Holy Trinity even in the Old Testament. Instead of having an austere monotheism like modern Talmudic Jews had, some Hellenized Jewish thinks had ideas closer to the Christian conception of God. >the jew who created the logos as son of God and as (((moshiach))) myth. Philo didn't think that the Logos was the Messiah lol. >Isaiah chapter 60 and 61. This is referring to the Church, who is the new Israel. Isaiah 56:6-8 refers to foreigners joining themselves to God, that his house shall be a house of prayer for all nations, and that even more will be gathered to God. It's noteworthy to point out that the nations in Isaiah 60:3 are said to come to the light, which is referenced by Jesus in Matthew 5:14-16. The Psalms, of course, foretell an age when all of the world will come to God. Psalm 22:27-28. Psalm 86:8-10. Micah 4. And again, this never had anything to do with race. Esther 8:17 has Persians becoming Jews. Ruth was also a Moabite who joined Israel. The prohibitions against marriage with other groups were to keep the Israelites away from idolatry and paganism. Right after the reference of Deuteronomy 7:3 is a warning that if you intermarry with them they will bring you to worship their gods: "for they will turn your children away from following me to serve other gods, and the Lord’s anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you. 5 This is what you are to do to them: Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down their Asherah poles[b] and burn their idols in the fire". Moses' wife wasn't even an Israelite either, and these warnings against intermarriage come from the books of Moses. Israelites were never biological. Once again you're projecting Talmudism onto the Old Testament. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism All of those who did not become Christians will perish, this is what is meant when it says that all nations who do not submit will perish, just as all of humanity perished when God sent the Flood and Noah and his closest kin only survived because of the Ark.
>>15935 I can't prove them if you don't bother to read them, retard. >>15936 >Except for the fact that they allowed Jews to hold jobs concerning accounting, banking and as merchants? And no one ever said that this was a perfect law-code. It wasn't awful either. I know you will be mad at anything short of genocide, though, anyway. Jews were reduced in status under the law, kept them out of the military, kept them from buying slaves, kept from building synagogues, and kept out of the government except for one position that of tax collector - now you are going to say aha! but even this isn't too great for the Jew, since by Byzantine law, the decurio was required to make up any shortfall in tax revenues out of his own pocket. <From the 3rd century ad, when prosperity declined and the demands of the central government increased, responsibility for tax collection and liability for deficits gradually made their position difficult. https://www.britannica.com/topic/decurio Theodosius II was based. >You're making no point here, because Caracalla gave every freeman citizenship. Pagans were also very skeptical about giving just allowing anyone to become a citizen, especially Jews. Yet they gave Jews equal citizenship anyway, which they never should have been given. Given out any sort of equal citizenship under the law to everyone is pozzed. >but he was in the Holy Roman Empire. Who cares. >But this means nothing, because he's still one of the most praised christians in the world I never hear his name mentioned except from people online crying about him. They must be upset about the prohibitions he levied against the Jews involved in commerce and money-lending in his capitulary on the matter! >Constantine is though and he was very pro-Jewish Living in a fantasy land. <Constantine, newly converted to Christianity, was unsympathetic to Jews and during his reign passed several anti-Semitic laws. Jews were severely punished when they tried to rebuild their temple in Jerusalem. https://ehistory.osu.edu/biographies/flavius-valerius-constantinus-constantine-great <After his victory over Licinius, Constantine inaugurated a more and more hostile policy toward the Jews. It is true that as early as 321 a law was promulgated which made it obligatory for Jews to fill onerous, expensive municipal offices; while on the other hand such Jews as had devoted themselves to the service of their own religion were exempted in 330 from all public services, and those who were already "curiales" were freed from the levying of taxes. In 329, however, the Jews were forbidden to perform the rite of circumcision on slaves or to own Christian slaves; the death penalty was ordained for those who embraced the Jewish faith, as well as for Jews versed in the Law who aided them. On the other hand, Jewish converts to Christianity were protected against the fanaticism of their former coreligionists. Simultaneously with this an edict was issued forbidding marriages between Jews and Christians, and imposing the death penalty upon any Jew who should transgress this law. Some of these enactments were affirmed in 335. Noteworthy is the hostile language of several of these laws, in which Judaism is spoken of as an ignominious or as a bestial sect ("secta nefaria" or "feralis"). https://archive.fo/5GkkP (and before you attack the source blindly and commit another genetic fallacy, you better check the sources for the entry!) >rove to me that the "talmuds" were a threat to Rome. Prove they weren't, They're a pack of evil pedophiles who think that (you) are literally an animal made to serve them. Good goy. >You're chronology and pilpuling is awful. The Eastern Empire is still the Roman empire, as much as you want to deny it.
(21.60 KB 1058x232 On Grant 1.PNG)
(23.03 KB 1065x286 Grant 2.PNG)
>>15970 >And no one ever said that this was a perfect law-code. It wasn't awful either. No it was total garbage and it failed. You're still not getting it. If you are against Judaism you do not allow them to establish communities and have influence within your politics and economy. Christianity's view on jews are literally blue-pilled and is no different than how Marx claimed to hate his own people, but then has solutions and teaches his followers a kikery mindset. This sets an example that christians are too retarded to exterminate the people they claim to have a hatred for even after all they've done. Only destroying synagogues only for them to be revived by other christian rulers, exiles only for the jews to come back, and forced conversions as if that will stop them from being crypto-christians. >Yet they gave Jews equal citizenship anyway, which they never should have been given. They also gave it to loyal christians and other semitics, so your point is meaningless here. If anything by bringing up Caracalla's edict it only serves to prove my point that you don't give Abrahamics citizenship, you kill them and burn the bodies. The Romans learned the hard way, although their elites were corrupt anything so it should be expected. >Given out any sort of equal citizenship under the law to everyone is pozzed. I agree, but apparently you don't see that christcucks have been doing this type of shit for years, especially right after Constantine took over Rome and the only requirement was to be a loyal convert. I'm glad we can agree that something you guys have been doing for hundred of years and are still advocating today admit that you're a bunch of faggots and retards. >I never hear his name mentioned except from people online crying about him. Thou shalt not lie? He's literally beloved by cathtrads, he's one of the most commonly talked about figures within christian circles, especially when ever there is a debate between christians and muslims. >Constantine, newly converted to Christianity, was unsympathetic to Jews and during his reign passed several anti-Semitic laws. Jews were severely punished when they tried to rebuild their temple in Jerusalem. <Christian bishops and some other priests were granted exemptions from undertaking magistracies and other expensive services for their local community. The same privilege was later extended to Jewish rabbis and synagogue leaders. -How Rome Fell: Death of a Superpower Goldsworthy, Adrian p 198 <A few of Constantine’s pronouncements are overtly hostile to the Jews as the killers of Jesus, but his actions were not markedly more anti-Semitic than those of many earlier pagan emperors. The Jews were again forbidden to seek converts or to attack those of their own number who converted to Christianity. -ibid I looked at your first quote and there's nothing that leads back to definitive proof, but I went further in my research to see if that quote was legitimate and it seems that you have taken a random site as your source of information without even fact-checking it. Especially if you actually read back at Grant's account of Constantine, he's called out for being biased as pic describes. The only harsh thing Constantine did was forbade jews barring them from owning christian slaves, converting christians, and forced circumcisions. Also Your archive also doesn't give any sources at all, but it's funny that you used (((jewishencyclopedia))) as your argument that he was totally anti-semitic. There's a lack of evidence that the Edict Of Milian lead to jews losing rights, which are only claimed from jews themselves. They love to make themselves out to be the victims of everything after all and Constantine affects and changes from Rome has only ended up being good for the jew than it was under Hellenic Rome. >genetic fallacy It's not a genetic fallacy when I can prove that anything that comes from jews are inherently bad and you seem to kind of agree with me, although you don't agree and are in-denial when we tell you that jews have always been eternally evil since their birth. I'm the one that should be calling you out for it, because your previous post is just "muh bible!" and "well it felt real to me!' >Prove they weren't, <Y-you have to prove something I c-claimed! You're asking me to prove something that I have asked you to prove as per your claim that Julian was in the wrong. >They're a pack of evil pedophiles who think that (you) are literally an animal made to serve them This has nothing to do with the argument, but you wanna cry fallacy. Lol cuckchanners aren't sending their best. Them being pedophiles has nothing to do with Julian's decisions. >The Eastern Empire is still the Roman empire You wish, the Byzantines were about as Roman as the Ottomans. They only practiced and followed Roman law, but with Judaic assets attached to them.
>>15797 >This is an evolutionist meme It's not, I was mirroring the same logic that you are using to pilpul your one race, the human race category error, and there is no reason whatsoever to stop with niggers, when the similarities extend into the other ape species. Are you racist towards bonobos or something? Just because they are >I bet you think think that we are like 99.7% percent identical with chimps too You share most of your DNA with a banana, the point is that small differences enabling the expression of the highest common factor lead to most biological differences. The more differentiated a species, the more 0.001% of genetic difference matters. In that sense, a White man is MUCH further from a nigger than a nigger is from a chimp or a gorilla. >But then one goes and looks at the morphological level Even a quick glance at a White man and a nigger is enough to determine that they are not the same species, which was also confirmed by pretty much every morphological theory before it was banned. Also, people never considered niggers and many other non-White races human for most of the history, before kikes starting enforcing egalitarianism. Differences between Whites and niggers go much further than mere looks as well, so your strawman doesn't really make any difference overall. Gorilla is still closer to a nigger than nigger is to a White man. Nigger is the ubermonkey though, they would feel much better about themselves if they stopped trying to pretend to be human and just accepted their master race status among their own (monkey) kind. And yes, they also have entirely different generative/spiritual natures. Cope more >The rest of this is just jibber jabber. <I'm too stupid to understand abstract concepts You are free to worship whatever generic mechanism has spawned "you", but don't try to put us in the same basket. I don't entirely agree with Teleology but it's still a superior concept to creationism. As far as creationist worldview is concerned, gnostics were right about pretty much everything. But your god is not the actual creator of all that exists, he is just the cosmic kike.
>>15988 >there is no reason whatsoever to stop with niggers, when the similarities extend into the other ape species. Are you racist towards bonobos or something? Show me bonobos and gorillas interbreeding with humans and having offspring. Show me the bonobos and gorillas learning to speak a human language and being able to at least minimally function in human society. Blacks are absolutely the same species as humans because they are able to interbreed with other races, they are able to learn and speak any human language, they can function in human societies to a minimal degree and they have similar morphology to every other type of human. It is just obvious to even try to deny. You are just an evolutionist shill
>>15859 >he knows bible and was able to become pope because he fitted the requirements to become a priest in the first place. He practiced under V2. The Vatican is no longer catholic, and Francis blesses pagan idols, so he (and everyone following the post-Vatican 2 church) is pagan.
>>16182 It's amazing to read the 1864 Syllabus of Errors which condemns liberalism, communism, socialism, rationalism, naturalism, Protestantism, freedom of religion, securalism and everything else under the sun, only to see a complete inversion of this a century later. It's no wonder the Catholic Church is declining so hard in the West, along with all of the scandals of various kinds. I'm not even sure a more traditionalist pope would salvage it at this point.
>>16187 >securalism secularism
(136.17 KB 934x955 1634108815872.jpg)
>>15988 >a White man is MUCH further from a nigger than a nigger is from a chimp or a gorilla. Just like a jew is much further from a goy than a goy is from a beast of the field? In my experience a lot of blacks are annoying and entitled but I can't help but notice the resemblance between certain strains of wignat ideology and Judaism. I'm a cultural supremacist; I have yet to be convinced that IQ is the end-all be-all, especially since jews always score the highest on that shit. Judging by Jared Taylor's affinity for Jewish power I've always assumed "race realism" was a distraction if not outright controlled opposition. You don't need to appeal to IQ to convince people that importing a bunch of shitskins will make society worse. No one wants to live in Africa except for me, but only so I could shoot negroes trying to kill White farmers kek >>16020 Exactly. Blacks may be stupid but they aren't subhuman. And mixed people are generally pretty chill in my experience I don't like asians either and they're supposedly higher IQ than Whites. Their culture just turns them into soulless burden as the meme goes >>16182 Wtf based I love Catholicism now
>>16193 bugmen, not burden, but either works tbh
(355.58 KB 1125x1456 jesus 2.jpg)
>>16193 Regardless of one's view of Christianity, I have always seen those CGI images that the Jews always pump out of Jesus being some ugly mulatto to be pure anti-White propaganda against Christians but it's funny to see even Arabs(?) saying that this shit is disgusting garbage.
>>16020 And here comes the final strawman >b-but they are able to breed with other races and create disgusting mutants that will lose all recessive traits of the higher races, but at least this creature can survive and function in an entirely Judaized society that was fine-tuned to enable them, therefore all races are the same category. You keep denying evolution while using the exact same biological framework as mainstream evolutionists do. You not only equate 'humans' with animals and apply the same criteria for grouping, but also deny that quality is an exponential function where tiers are not distributed in a linear fashion. Speaking of physiognomy, dogs that look very differently can have fertile offspring, so you are sort of contradicting yourself by using both arguments. >they are able to learn and speak any human language They are not, that's why every European language turns into ebonics for them. >they can function in human societies to a minimal degree So can many animals. And there is no such thing as human society, the Judeo-Masonic abominations that we live in today are just a specific type. >>16193 >Just like a jew is much further from a goy than a goy is from a beast of the field? They are different, but not in a way that they think. Their essence is more like that of insects or viruses than beasts, so they are partially correct. To deny these essential differences and think how we are all the same group is foolish and only serves their agenda. >the resemblance between certain strains of wignat ideology and Judaism On the surface maybe, but the basis for the seemingly similar elements is entirely different. >I've always assumed "race realism" was a distraction if not outright controlled opposition Probably, but it doesn't need to be so supremacist, counter-productive and Jew-enabling. >I have yet to be convinced that IQ is the end-all be-all, especially since jews always score the highest on that shit IQ is just the processing power, a cockroach with a high IQ will still be a cockroach, just much better in what it does. Higher IQ doesn't change one's nature, only enables it to express more of what it already is. There are different types of intelligence anyway. >No one wants to live in Africa No one wants to live around niggers, not even niggers themselves. Africa is not that bad otherwise. You don't seem to get it, we don't need to hate non-Whites or even look down upon them, we can cooperate with them, but we will never be the same. Most racial conflicts are rooted in the lie that we are all 'human', when such category is not applicable to how various races express themselves. I can tolerate a lot of non-Whites but I can't tolerate identifying with them in any way. >MEMRI You realize it's literally run by Mossad, right?
>>16204 >You not only equate 'humans' with animals Humans are animals. > Speaking of physiognomy, dogs that look very differently can have fertile offspring Wow, it's almost like they're the same species! >They are not, that's why every European language turns into ebonics for them. Refuted by the fact that there are niggers who are very well capable of switching between standard English and their niggerspeak. It's called code-switching. >So can many animals. Where are the dogs that drive cars and work wagecuck jobs? I'm waiting.
(111.05 KB 960x1200 anus finger.jpg)
>>16204 >You don't seem to get it, we don't need to hate non-Whites or even look down upon them, we can cooperate with them, but we will never be the same. no I agree with you >MEMRI = mossad sure, it's still fucking hilarious though lol
>>16196 Go away thuletide.
>>16232 If there are people like the Druze and Levantines that look nothing like the Jewish CGI images of Jesus today, it's not hard to conclude that Jesus must have looked more like them than the images made today, this is a reasonable conclusion to make as well due to the fact that this board has discovered that most of the ancient world was White, from China, to Mongolia, to India, and to even figures in the Arabian peninsula some 1,400 years ago such as Muhammad (a White-skinned red-head). The Bible as far back as Genesis reports that there were people in the line of Abraham who had the genes for red hair, namely Esau. Interestingly as well, in sources such as Josephus we can read thing such as the following: >And when he had given them leave, they also hid the circumcision of their genitals; that even when they were naked they might appear to be Greeks. Accordingly they left off all the customs that belonged to their own country, and imitated the practices of the other nations. This implies that the only way that they would be able to discerned as Jews by the Greeks would be if they were shown to be circumcised when naked (e.g. such as in the Greek gymnasium) https://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/ant-12.html This is further supported by mosaics that have been found in Huqoq, depicting what has been interpreted as Alexander the Great meeting with Jewish priests. Alexander is the red-head, while the priests are the Jews. Jesus wasn't some disgusting mutt, and there is loads of evidence to show this, regardless of how much one may dislike the religion.
>>16235 No one gives a fuck what Jesus looks likw you retard. He's isn't real and him being Levantine is even more of a reason to not like him. Fuck Jesus, let the kikes mock him, because Christianity is what lead to Jews taking over the West. Ever since you started taking StJ's cock in your mouth, you've become more retarded.
>>16240 Also mossaics and claims of muh red heads are Abrahmaic nonsense. Red head doesn't mean they're White and there still exists no evidence that Muhammad was a White guy or was even real for that matter. This is just more we wuzz Israelite nonsense.
>>16241 The evidence is literally everywhere, dude, and everyone knows it. Muhammad has living ancestors who look like redheaded Europeans. Pic related is from Syria and is the 34th-generation grandson of Muhammad. There are dozens of ahadith describing Muhammad as explicitly “White” as well. If you’re prepared to deny both textual and archeological evidence there is no helping you. Just as redhead genes have left Greece, they left Mesopotamia and the Levant as well.
>>16241 >This is just more we wuzz Israelite nonsense. We wuz everybody, actually. This used to be a predominantly White planet, especially before the Kali Yuga began. China was almost entirely White, and all of the cultural inventions of ancient China (paper, etc) were made by Whites. Confucius and Lao Zi were White too. The Chinese government actively covers this information up today, especially in the area of the Tarim Basin. The ancient Vedic civilization was White too, as we all know. Ancient Greece was White, predominantly inhabited by redheads and blonds of a Nordic phenotype. Same with Iran, same with modern Pakistan, same with modern Afghanistan, and beyond. There are reports of ‘White gods’ founding every major civilization in the Americas well. Islam was founded by a White man as well, as the evidence from the hadith and living biological descendents of Muhammad clearly supports. The ancient Israelites were certainly White as well, given the evidence on hand.
>>16246 >We wuz everybody, actually. Then where the hell do shitskins come from?
>>16284 They gradually have appeared as a result of the degenerative processes of the Kali Yuga. They likely always existed to some extent, but the elite in these societies I described were almost invariably White.
>>16245 >The evidence is there <presents nothing as evidence only things that are claimed and interpretated into your perpsective <literally no living evidece that a White guy is Muhammad's descendant <trying hard to shill muh original Isrealite nonsense Kill yourself and be a kike somewhere else. >>16246 >WE WUZ VERBODY!! No we weren't. You're LARPing and going into nigger-tier we wuzzing. We don't know what China was like nor do we know anything about ancient history and what happened.
(84.90 KB 679x320 EJbFaXHU0AAvj6C.jpg)
(416.34 KB 998x1024 2199836329_a4b700c68d_b.jpg)
(116.46 KB 1200x675 EmgssFwU4AA_1r0.jpg)
(32.08 KB 480x479 d76.jpg)
>>16326 WE WERE KANGS Some of the oldest chinese mummies were literally White.
>>16339 6f4cea is a christfag shitting in basicaly ALL threads about aryan religion, archeology and history, the way he type is very characteristic by the excessive use of pink quotes and blind hate for anything aryan.
(194.12 KB 500x673 love being white.jpg)
>>16326 Anon, the evidence has literally been compiled in the other thread >>2541, there's no excuse for this level of ignorance. Every major civilization got off the ground because of Whites. It's just a fact. We wuz because we literally were
(135.83 KB 665x874 1607827750353.jpg)
>>16355 Checked 5 Hyperborea >there's no excuse for this level of ignorance. There is if he's a bad faith actor shilling judaic philosophy for damage control.
Even if Jesus was secretly an Aryan Godhead Deva, wouldn't believing in a religion that teaches tolerance amongst racially foreign peoples be kinda cucked?
>>16381 I don't see how Jesus is any different than from any of the figures in Dharmic teachings told here, except that Jesus has more of a messianic dimension to him. The perfect example of this is the Dhammapada, for example we have very Christian teachings like: <Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal. Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal" This is little different from turning the other cheek and loving your enemies from a Christian standpoint. <Let none find fault with others; let none see the omissions and commissions of others. But let one see one’s own acts, done and undone. This is actually worse than Christianity here, because while Jesus taught not to judge others lest one becomes a hypocrite, saying that they should first fix their own faults before focusing on the faults of others. I could undoubtedly find more points of comparisons in the Dhammapada, but I know people will point out that this is a Buddhist text. I do not think it matters that much though, because the entirety of Buddhism's basic system is drawn directly from Vedic teachings, ethics, etc.
>>14116 Jehovah's Witness. I get a bonus to being totally ostracized by society, oldest friends are mainstream liberal, family are JW. There's quite a lot of ex JW's in these threads actually. It leads me to respect everyone who takes this path, because if you are weak, you die.
>>17118 This board sometimes looks like a battleground between Hare Krishnas and Jehovah's Witnesses lol. I guess Jews don't mind which cult bad goyim get lured into as long as it's kosher. >There's quite a lot of ex JW's in these threads actually They don't seem to be able to get rid of the programming
>>14116 I was raised Catholic. Since my teens, I've read about all the other major faiths, as well as the various sects within Christianity. I'm familiar with much of it, although to me, Catholicism will always be normal religion, and anything else feels different and foreign. Of the other faiths, I've studied Buddhism the most, its philosophical character appeals to me. From my more recent, red-pilled perspective, I realize that despite its long partnership with Europe, Christianity is ultimately Abrahamic and Levantine, and an ill fit for my race. However, I consider Catholicism the best branch, not only because of my personal bias, but also because it retains pagan traditions. As an aside, I still can't get over the conditioning. I realize that even the best flavors of Abrahamism are still incompatible with Whiteness, but I can't part from my tradition. Recently, I was visiting a grave to pay respects (I won't get into details), and I couldn't help doing the Sign of the Cross. At least I'm loyal to the best denomination, but still, it's like I can't break the mental bonds.
>>14116 Generally raised as a "Christian" in the bible belt, got the fuck outta there ASAP. I say "christian" because really my mom and pop were pretty much discount Walmart christians. Hardly read the bible, went to the nearest church and mindlessly threw money at the preacher and got to hear the good word of god and how israel is so great; while he drove off in a limo and they wondered why they're struggling to make ends meet. Needless to say it kinda skewed my perception of religion in general, considering how "turn the other cheek, love your enemy" was basically whipped into me. Not only that, but Christianity came into my branch of the family after my grandma just wanted to try it, and my grandpa was adopted and whipped into it himself (he'd later grow to be a bitter old man). Personally I believe any religion, if in the wrong hands, can easily be skewed like how the churches I was forced into were. Sage for blogpost.
(31.05 KB 367x600 germanicus-cross-marked.jpg)
(81.74 KB 500x765 AFRODITEHEAD1.jpg)
(12.10 KB 220x286 aphrodite.jpg)
where can I read about the destruction of paganism? about the destructive nature of Christianity, about the burning of northern and middle-eastern Europe, any good books on the subject? I'm currently reading about the devastation of statues
(493.37 KB 406x627 ClipboardImage.png)
>>17688 Check out this book. Also, here is something that seems to have been from an entire college course on this topic, maybe there are some good readings in there: https://history.ucsd.edu/_files/courses/syllabi/spring-2013/hieu161.pdf
>>14116 Atheists who still followed Christian morality unbeknownst to them and dismiss all religion as fairy tales.
>>16020 <Blacks are absolutely the same species as humans because they are able to interbreed with other races Meanwhile: >https://wolf.org/wolf-info/basic-wolf-info/wolves-and-humans/wolf-dog-hybrids/ >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grizzly%E2%80%93polar_bear_hybrid Dogs can breed with wolves, and grizzly bears with polar bears. Both produce fertile offspring. Shut the fuck up, subhuman. You will never fool us with this shit.
>>17704 >doesn't know about baraminology Even Christians have figured this stuff out decades ago
>>17705 >Both polar bears and grizzly bears are still bears Different species of bear. >dogs are simply domesticated wolves Different species of canine. On the same note <dogs, coyotes and wolves are the same thing or my bullshit of nigger being likes Whites would be null! Fuck off, niggers are a different species of humanoid, simple as that. >>17705 <L-look we butchered our own bullshit decades ago! Lol, I don't care, it's further evidence of your religion being false, as it needs constant "reinterpretations" to stay afloat. It's probably why the bible changes much from translation to translation: Because the agendas keep changing. Soon muh "baraminology" will be fused with the "intelligent design" and in a few decades (if there's still someone to care in your religion) it will be the same with darwinian evolution theory, plus Dog's intelligent design. Anyways, your bullshit is <we NEED to live with niggerinos! UWE we are the same! Dog's will! Christianity truly is a trojan horse.
(384.50 KB 722x1199 science believer soy.png)
>>17708 >Different species of canine. Yet they can interbreed, showing that your definition of "species" is a biologically flawed one
>>17710 <Science is always set in stone! I belive it, and whoever I consider is a science soy must too What a strawman, kill yourself you filth. >Yet they can interbreed, showing that your definition of "species" is a biologically flawed one Because what limits them, is their biology, not a man-made definition (which the one you imply I use, I don't even use, as I myself cited some species who contradict the old definition of species). We try to put things in classification to ease our study of them. Viruses can inject their genetic material in other creatures, other creatures are not viruses. Some bacterias can share genetical material yet they have enough difference, we classify them appart. You are a faggot implying I said something like the good ol' >species is a group of individuals that actually, or potentially, interbreed in nature when things – like mules existance (mostly infertile hybrids), or dog-wolves existence (mostly fertile hybrids) occuring at the same time that some different species of foxes, who are in the same genus (just like the parents of the hybrid in the other two exemples), are incapable of producing hybrids – broke this bullshit defininition into being changed in another. Today species are even having their genetic distance taked into account, in some cases. You piece of shit need to invent shit and call me soy while, if you are the other poster, your endgame would be to literally live with niggers and yellows. Go die in a fire.
The definition of species is complete nonsense. No scientist forces two animals to interbreed to see if they can generate fertile offspring. The classification is based on limited observation of a natural environment. And given that Europeans and niggers don't normally interbreed in a natural environment, there's definitely a case to be made that niggers belong to a different species.
>>13995 Op, Where did you get the idea for /AAG/ ?
jews are not even slighlty related to old Christianity. Modern “jews” were the tribes that split from the true israelites a long time before Christ and instead became satan worshippers. They’ve only recently, through mistranslating and “reinterpreting” the Bible have made themselves look like jews. I was raised atheist and am now believe in God and the after life, as well as all sorts of other weird shit that would make me look crazy had I not actually looked into it. Trust in God and do not go worshipping weird nephilim.
>>18111 Another big redpill for me is that modern day Jews are actually borderline polytheistic pagans and gnostics after doing a deal of study on the Kabbalah. Many of these rabbis believe in reincarnation (called 'gilgul') and that they must follow the Jewish law to restore the nature of the universe which was damaged when Ein Sof contracted to create space for this world. They are worshipers of the Star of Remphan alluded to by Stephen in Acts 7:43. It's really amazing how these Khazars have swindled so many into believing that they are Biblical Israelites.
>>18625 Israelites are a stupid meme regardless of who pursues it. Whites are self-evidently superior, they don't need a pact with some desert demon to be "chosen" and given favors. Jews had to rely on it because there was no other way to justify their complexes and unwarranted self-importance.
>>18085 He got it from the globalist kike order which is trying to undermine the Christian foundations of White civilization
(205.15 KB 460x842 christians national identity.png)
(217.66 KB 232x198 angry jew.gif)
>>18779 That study's results have nothing to do with christianity, and more to do with the polling for it and where it took place, rural regions tend towards christianity, for a variety of reasons and those people still hold onto a somewhat racial national identity. They are, however; largely against any form of National Socialism, and most you speak to are hard against racial awareness, and racial identity politics largely as a result of christian teachings. Said teachings are against holding your racial identity as important in any way, unless you are an ethnic jew. You can keep trying to say muh paganism is from kikes as roundabout as you wish but nobody is falling for it, take your semitic bullshit and tactics and go somewhere else.
>>18864 >That study's results have nothing to do with christianity, There's a clear correlation between attending church and not being a complete self-hating leftist bugman. > and more to do with the polling for it and where it took place, rural regions tend towards christianity, <people outside of the cities aren't bugmen and are closer in touch with their religious, ethnic and cultural roots You don't say.. >They are, however; largely against any form of National Socialism We're not talking about National Socialism >and most you speak to are hard against racial awareness, and racial identity politics largely as a result of christian teachings Europe for two millennia didn't important refugees and feel the need to mix with other groups, they took over the planet. There's zero correlation between 'muh Abahamic' religions and a lack of ethnic or cultural identity. This has already been proven in the Islam thread, and it's been cope all the way down. The destruction of Europe began with the reversal of its Christianization in the Renaissance and so-called Enlightenment, which led to a reversion to pagan sources and inspirations, and later things such as humanism, deism, liberal values, rationalism, etc. as can be seen in the French and American revolutions, the former of which was blatantly anti-Christian in its aims. >Said teachings are against holding your racial identity as important in any way, unless you are an ethnic jew. It's so easy to know when some retard here on this board has never opened a Bible in their life. The religion of the Israelites in the Bible is not even exclusively ethnic, and foretells that the whole world will eventually join the Israelites in worship. Moses has a non-Israelite (i.e. non-Jewish) wife, Zipporah, who was a Midianite (Exodus 2:15-21), non-Israelites were occasionally accepted into their people (such as Rahab, and the entire Book of Ruth is about this, and Ruth is an ancestor of King David and Jesus). Esther 8:16-17 tellingly says "For the Jews it was a time of happiness and joy, gladness and honor. In every province and in every city to which the edict of the king came, there was joy and gladness among the Jews, with feasting and celebrating. And many people of other nationalities became Jews because fear of the Jews had seized them." The Biblical idea of a Jew or Israelite doesn't have to do with race. You're projecting a Talmudic framework back onto a text that wasn't written with a Talmudic mindset. >You can keep trying to say muh paganism is from kikes Paganism isn't from kikes. Kikes are pagans though, and modern civilization is a pagan civilization
(115.89 KB 867x627 1597340093951.png)
>>18779 Unironically neck yourself.
>>19013 This doesn't negate the data posted above, buddy.
>>19016 It does, you semite-worshipping vermin. Deeds speak louder than words. You can post your little quiz-tier "studies" all you want, nothing will change the truth.
One can never trust a christcuck not to dive mouth first into a jewish dick the moment they see it.
>>19023 THIS --Especially Baptist and Methodist pastors. They do it so much that there's no gag reflex at all.
>>19017 >data doesn't agree with your narrative >rejects it Positively Jewish.
>>19033 >data >rando quiz pick one and only one. While you're at it, open up the dictionary and look up the word hypocrite. The point stands, subhuman filth. Deeds > words.
>>18906 >There's a clear correlation between attending church and not being a complete self-hating leftist bugman No you're both the same people and retroactively allow muslims and jews to fuck over Europe. You're not even addressing his argument, just making excuses. >people outside of the cities aren't bugmen and are closer in touch with their religious, ethnic and cultural roots People outside of cities are also apolitical and continue to provide no contribution to defeating the anti-Whites. You're not making a point here, because bugmen do a better job changing society into what they want than Jesus worshippers who do nothing, but live comfortably in rural areas. Muh ruralism just makes you out to be a coward. >Europe for two millennia didn't important refugees This is the same argument commies use when referring to how the Soviet Union was better for the White race, despite disincluding their connections with powerful kikes and jews in state. The situation is no different than the SU who had no desire to imporant muh migrant of the crisis that did not exist in past, but did see that anyone can become as European or better than us as long as they are as spiritually retarded. At the end of the day Christianity has lead to all events that are on-going right now. It's delusional to say otherwise, so cope with that as you will.
>>18906 >kikes are pagan You don't know what pagan means. >modern civilization is a pagan civilization Lol another schizo cope, modern civilization lead the rise of Christianity around the world dumbass. Christian institutions can still be practiced if it does not challenge secularism. You also contradict yourself, because rural areas are also apart of modern society. You are an example of low-quality posters.
>>19076 >Christian institutions can still be practiced if it does not challenge secularism. Sorry for the triple fagging, but to add on to this, modern secularism was also inspired by Christian institutions! All secular humanist thought ultimately originated from both Judaic and Christian theology, while also rejecting the radical theologians and church. TLDR, Christians were the first bugmen. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_theology#:~:text=Secular%20theology%20holds%20that%20theism,without%20basis%20in%20historical%20events.
>>19076 >You don't know what pagan means. Talmudic Judaism is a pagan religion. As 1 John 2:23 says: "No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also." Jesus says essentially the same thing in John 8:19 - "You do not know me or my Father,” Jesus replied. “If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” Since Jews deny Jesus Christ, they do not know God the Father. They do not know God at all. Their synagogues are temples of idolatry as long as this remains true. Modern day Judaism is founded on ideas such as Kabbalah, which is polytheistic in character, and reincarnation, which the Jews call 'gilgul'. On top of this, significant strands of Kabbalah, such as that of Isaac Luria, are positively gnostic in character. Gnosticism has always been a pagan concept. And finally, even the Bible points out that the God-hating Jews worship some sort of 'star' (which is the 'Star of David' today) - immediately before being stoned by the Jews, St. Stephen declares in Acts 7:43, quoting God: <You took up the tent of Moloch and the star of your god Rephan, the images that you made to worship; and I will send you into exile beyond Babylon.’ This is a reference back to Amos 5:26 - <"You shall take up Sikkuth your king, and Kiyyun your star-god—your images that you made for yourselves" Kiyyun = Rephan. Who is Rephan or Kiyyun? Saturn in Coptic is 'Rephan'. The term Kiyyun comes from Akkadian or a related language, meaning Saturn as well. Modern-day Judaism is a Saturn cult. >>modern civilization is a pagan civilization Yes. Modern civilization is founded on a return to the pagan sources of antiquity. This essentially happened during the Renaissance and Enlightenment periods. The pagan sources were rediscovered and celebrated, and the cult of reason and humanism steadily metastasized. This was concurrent with individualistic, anti-hierarchical Protestantism which is founded on a rejection of 1,500 years of Tradition. Following this, our society has more and more slipped into paganism. Homosexuals run rampant, just like in the days of Greece and Rome. Transsexuals are more and more coming into the mainstream due to Jewish propaganda, pornography and the influence of non-Christian thought, just like pagan priests of Inanna, or the cult of Magna Mater in Rome (literally recognized by the government, lol), led by transexual priests. Modern day atheistic materialism is just a resurfacing of pagan thinkers from ancient India such as the Charvaka, or people such as the Epicureans. Nothing is new under the sun. >>19078 >modern secularism was also inspired by Christian institutions! Protestant heresy is a key part of modern civilization, we know. They themselves are judaizers. Protestantism is one of the reasons why Western civilization has imploded, along with the fact that the Western Church went corrupt at some point. >>19075 >No you're both the same people and retroactively allow muslims and jews to fuck over Europe Jews and servants of Mammon are flooding Europe with refugees. It's all about money and destroying Christendom and White people.
Pagan is just the christcuck equivalent of goy. It's a word created by christcucks to refer to everything that's not christcuck. I wouldn't agree that modern society is pagan, though. It's very much a society created and made by christcucks.
Is it true that Christianity is very compatible to communism and that they are the pioneers of it?
>>19131 No, anyone who repeats this meme should ask themselves why atheistic communist regimes spent the twentieth century killing nearly 50 million Christians, demolishing their churches and attempting to stamp out belief in total. The very philosophical foundations of Christianity and Marxism are antithetical to one another, as Christianity, needless to say, is a theistic worldview, and Marxism is a materialistic, atheistic worldview based on inverted Hegelian notions of progress, development and dialectic. While Christianity views history taking place in a fallen world distorted as a result of sin, placing the future redemption of the world in an eschatological future in communion with God, Marxist ideas view history as progressing through material stages to an extent where class contradictions and material conditions will lead to a utopia on earth with no classes, material abundance, etc. It is necessarily a this-wordly doctrine at its core, based on the idea of a totalitarian technocratic state as the means of achieving it, as is demonstrated when Lenin says "The whole of society will have become a single office and a single factory, with equality of labor and pay." in his work State and Revolution. Essentially this relies on a genetic fallacy. Some people point at the core Christian ideas of loving your neighbor as yourself and helping others and pointing out that wealth can lead one into sin pretend like this has its inevitable conclusion in communism, but this is ridiculous because Christianity has never taught that the rich are inherently evil, or that people are all equal in any sort of material sense (Christianity affirms traditional gender roles, sanctions slave ownership, kings, government, etc), not to mention that one of the ten commandments is to not covet the possessions of other people, and not to steal. This assumes ownership of property by default. Communism is of course based off of the envy of the wealthy and wanting to destroy the society and take their stuff. If Christianity is someone how 'Communist', then by that logic, the trannies on the Internet who pretend to be NatSoc are authentically NatSoc
>>19131 Yes and this essay will lead you to all the evidence which proves it as do numerous elements of evidence in the previous thread Ignore the resident christcuck he refuse to acknowledge the truth.
>>19132 Seems legit. Most people on this board would rather just fantasize about killing innocent White people who show up to church and taking children as ‘war brides’ though
You need to stop samefagging, also >muh 50 gorillion >>19136 Thanks anon.
>>14681 Christianity evolved on par of rabbinic judaism, the real founder of christianity was Saul of Tarsus and he was an agent of many more in the long history of jewish attemps to subvert the roman religion (see: Jews trying to bring the cult of Jupiter Sabacius, which then leaded to the banishment of the jews from Rome in 139 BC); jesus didn't even exist, meaning that any event encompassing the proposed time-lapse of the life of 'jesus' and the 'apostles', it's just a fable placed purposely on a distant past to make the events untraceable.
>>19146 >the real founder of christianity was Saul of Tarsus Paul / Saul is one guy among a host of people. Peter, James, Mark, etc. There’s no reason to point at Paul more than any of the others. >Jews trying to bring the cult of Jupiter Sabacius, which then leaded to the banishment of the jews from Rome in 139 BC Not excusing the fact that searching “Jupiter Sabacius” brings up exactly zero results on my search engine even when in quotation marks, “Jupiter Sabacius” would seem like a pretty straight forward reference to the god of Israel, i.e. “The LORD of Hosts”. Romans were suspicious of the Jewish religion because they thought that their refusal to worship Roman gods was a sign of atheism, the exact same charge leveled against Christians. They were unable to understand why Jews and Christians were not willing to be syncretists like they were. The Romans loved to take foreign gods as their own, such as Isis, Attis. Cybele, Elagabalos, etc. >jesus didn't even exist Retarded claim. >>19145 >muh 50 gorillion <literally mocking dead White people killed by leftists Yikes
>>19158 >literally mocking dead White people killed by leftists Wanna know how I know you're a right-wing retard? Muh 50 gorillion is overexaggerated estimation and includes non-Whites. It's not possible to kill 50 million White people in the Soviet Union, just like it is to kill 6 million Jews that did not exist within either Germany, Russia, nor Poland. And no, I'm not a commie, because soycalist are lower than dirt. Christian theology lead to communism, cope with as you will.
>>19171 > Muh 50 gorillion is overexaggerated estimation and includes non-Whites. It's not possible to kill 50 million White people in the Soviet Union You're such a retard it's not even funny. For one, I said in my original post on the matter that 'atheistic communist regimes' (PLURAL - the USSR is only one piece of a larger phenomenon) spent the twentieth century killing "50 million Christians" (Did I mention race? - no). So your entire response to the one you are responding to has nothing to do with my claims. >Christian theology lead to communism There's no connection. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not covet. Again these fundamental commandments assume property. This in itself immediately does away with Marxism, as it is based on theft and envy in the masses. Christianity is based off of loving your neighbor as yourself, worshiping God and building strong and healthy families. Communism is godless and wants to destroy families and wage class warfare in pursuit of some dubious theory based on materialism. Even if one was to say that there was some sort of vague connection, this would be a genetic fallacy, especially since Christianity is antithetical to Marxism. Anti-Christian posters always expose themselves as anti-White, and roll out the same tired arguments over and over again. They don't see truth.
>>19172 >For one, I said in my original post on the matter that 'atheistic communist regimes Not that anon, but, 1. The Communist regimes in Europe do not surpass the death of 10 million Christoids, most accounts of death usual come from Jews or biased Orthodox and Catholics who did not like the Marxists regimes in Russia and Poland. 2. There exist no evidence for direct persecution of all Christians other than priests and rebels to have been killed for merely being Christian. Along with the book of communsim only creates an assumption of deaths rather than honest estimation and calculation. 3. The 50 million estimate includes the Communist regimes of Asia, fun fact, most East Asians were ethnic folklorists, Muslim, Buddhist, Shinto, etc. >Did I mention race Yes you did, here >>19158, most of the deaths of Christians during Communist regimes weren't even White. Although worshipping a Semitic church makes you as White as a mutt. Being spiritually and physically Aryan is what matters really. Although this doesn't mean I think the Jews should of killed Ukrainians and Russians. >I-m n-not samefagging Sure you aren't. >There's no connection Straight and obvious lie or you simply did not do your research, but Wikipedia does the job for me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism Communism's atheism is an option to uptake, but not required. Marx's attack on religion has not stop Christians from holding sympathy or outright advocating his Comminist Manifesto nor him from taking inspirations from the bible, and you've got to wonder why. >Why? Because's Christianity's core tenets desires to eliminate the concept of ethnicity, class and race, aka univeralism for Christ as explained by Wikipedia's overview and basis. The Gospels mostly contribute to proto-Communist mentalities. The difference between Marxism and Christianity is that, Marxists want harmony, the erdication of wealth and unity of the proletariat under Marx's idealism, while Christians want it under the banner of Jesus and spiritualism. It isn't a concidence that commies are also very similar to the Puritans. Past conflicts and struggles do not contradict Marxism's inspirations and compatilbilty. >Anti-Christian posters always expose themselves as anti-White We've never done such a thing, you're just extremely butthurt at the truth that Christian theology is inherently Jewish and anti-Aryan. You most certainly aren't Pro-White trying to hog hold us onto a Semitic religion that has only increased muh birth-rates somewhat, but ultimately lead to dysgenic and terrible forms of mental illness, because you guys unironically believe genes are nothing compared to spiritual impluses and therefore we should allow the genetically sick to reproduce and poison our bloodlines. This is what is truly anti-White.
>>19180 > The Communist regimes in Europe do not surpass the death of 10 million Christoids For the USSR alone, there have been multiple estimates ranging from 12 million, to 15-20 million. The numbers really aren't the point though even if the number may have been too big. Anytime body-counts come into the argument it really comes down to a question of sources, because minimization and maximization are wanted by different groups of people. I believe that it is impossible to deny, however, that communist regimes have been anti-Christian, and have indeed killed huge numbers of Christians in the 20th century. Marxists hate Christians, and Christians hate Marxists. Most religious people aren't fond of Marxists, really, for obvious reasons, as the foundations of Marxist theory are the ideas of people such as Feuerbach, who defined religious impulses as a projection of one's highest ideals essentially - i.e. basically a cope. >There exist no evidence for direct persecution of all Christians other than priests and rebels to have been killed for merely being Christian. There was a general war in these states against the religious people in the population. A good deal of these were Christians in the Eastern Bloc. The goal of these Marxist states was the total eradication of religion and complete submission to the state. Any actions the state takes must be understood with this in mind. Even the anti-rural activities of communists can often be understood implicitly in this way, as the rural peasants were rooted in their traditions, customs and indeed were far more moral than the rootless proletariat of the city being created by capitalism and by the encouragement of the communist state. When we look for evidence of White Genocide, we are quite skilled in looking for implicit anti-White policies. This is the same sort of stuff here. You also mention priests and other clergymen. This is very vital, as for Orthodox Christianity there is an aspect of so-called 'Holy Tradition' along with the Bible. If this is destroyed, the religion is cut off at the root. It makes sense that the Jews in the government would attack the church authority the most, especially since the church would have been key in any counterrevolution. Those who were religiously active too were more likely to be targeted by the state as 'wreckers' or 'counterrevolutionaries' too. >Sure you aren't. Meds >Straight and obvious lie or you simply did not do your research, but Wikipedia does the job for me. <Kikepedia I'll repeat myself - there's no connection. Pointing at the Acts of the Apostles isn't an argument either, as this is describing the very first days of the church when it was weak, persecuted by Jews, and just getting onto its feet. Therefore there was a pooling of resources for a time. If we look at actual Christian history, this sort of practice is irrelevant, and indeed, as I have said several times now, core aspects of Christianity and its assumptions conflict with the idea of a propertyless society. This article points at a small and persecuted newly-founded church and some retards throughout history who have tried to pretend that Christianity is about communism, when again (which no one has addressed lol) obviously the Ten Commandments assume a society of property, ownership and families. If anything, such practices only have occurred in monastic communities, which are by definition tiny and full of dedicated people, and are therefore irrelevant. >while Christians want it under the banner of Jesus and spiritualism. Christianity is compatible with hierarchy, government, property, ownership, sex roles, and the existence of the wealthy. The meme about the camel passing through an eye of a needle that leftists love to parrot literally ends with Jesus saying that with God all things are possible because the disciples despair at hearing how difficult it is to enter heaven, and of course, it is not because of wealth that one cannot enter heaven, but because of the temptations that come with wealth. Completely different things here, and directly explained in the Parable of the Sower. >Marxism's inspirations and compatilbilty. They're not compatible. And again, even if (you haven't lol) you demonstrated linkage, this is called a genetic fallacy. >you're just extremely butthurt at the truth that Christian theology is inherently Jewish and anti-Aryan. This has already been debunked hundreds of times. I know that this board would rather kill every White Christian family on the planet before they would ever harm a Jew.
>>19183 >For the USSR alone, there have been multiple estimates ranging from 12 million, to 15-20 million I already said that the estimations are not accurate, but of course you continue the lolberg talking points without any proof that it was 12 gorillion. >The numbers really aren't the point though even if the number may have been too big. Then why use the numbers then moron? You could of just said >Communism has lead to the death of millions of Christians! And it would of been consistent and true, but only to an extent. >Anytime body-counts come into the argument it really comes down to a question of sources, because minimization and maximization are wanted by different groups of people. This is correct and applies to you. Although you have not brought any sources at all and want to maximization Christians deaths to make yourself out to be the sole victim and true anthesis to a universal and Semitic ideology to your own. >I believe that it is impossible to deny, however, that communist regimes have been anti-Christian, and have indeed killed huge numbers of Christians in the 20th century. Marxists hate Christians, and Christians hate Marxists Communist regimes have been anti-religious in general. The Soviet Republic have had been Jewish, but the notion that it was anti-Christian is vague and not supported by evidence. The Communists have persecuted and kill other religious groups, although for being of apart of that specific group is debatable, because not all Marxists are not against religious support only institutions. >Most religious people aren't fond of Marxists You're pipuling, whether most are for or against Marxism does not matter, the argument is whether Christianity is compatible and influenced it. >There was a general war in these states against the religious people in the population What war? Again persecutions happened because they rejected religious doctrines and schools. But a civil war as an answer would be wrong, because Communists were mostly against other ideologists not religion inherently. Rememeber generalization of Communist regimes and not only radical atheists. >The goal of these Marxist states was the total eradication of religion and complete submission to the state So you're literally contradicting and arguing against yourself. Also again Marxists were not all radical atheist. They wanted secularization, but erdication which was even acknowledged as to be impossible by most of them. >When we look for evidence of White Genocide, we are quite skilled in looking for implicit anti-White policies Lol, killing Christians is not an anti-White policy, again you contradict yourself as you acknowledged that 50 million were only Christian, not White. You're not very bright. >You also mention priests and other clergymen. This is very vital, as for Orthodox Christianity there is an aspect of so-called 'Holy Tradition' along with the Bible Note that Communists arrested clergies, because they wanted to replace and control their instiutions similar to what the National Socialists attempted. No one cares what the bible says and this does not defeat my compatiability and influence argument, because you are arguing against secular Marxism, Leninism and Stalinism. >If this is destroyed, the religion is cut off at the root. Except they didn't, so what are you talking about? >since the church would have been key in any counterrevolution. Thus the real reason why they attacked churches and not merely, because they are Christian. Solidifying my point. >Meds You samefagged in the Christian thread and we caught you doing it. Man cuckchanners reallly are dumb as niggers. >kikepedia So no no argument? Thanks. >Pointing at the Acts of the Apostles isn't an argument It actually is, because the Acts of the Apostles shares many similarities with Communist thought and ideals. Nice to know that not even you can not argue against this other than being indenial. >this is describing the very first days of the church when it was weak, persecuted by Jews, It's almost as if you've never read the acts or pretending it isn't pozzed. The purpose of this book was literally to polytheize what they described as "poor, weak, ill" masses by using them to work and act against the rich Roman elites by using proto-Communist rhetoric. Whether the church were weak or not is not an excuse.
>>19183 >Christianity is compatible with hierarchy, government, property, ownership, sex roles, and the existence of the wealthy. No it isn't, early Christianity and it's general theology has literally advocated against these things before the Catholic and Orthodox split. Overtime Christian priests have made acceptations due to their failures to erdicated paganism, although still held sympathy to their oldested values and traditions. Christianity can become compatible with anything as long as you re-write the bible. >And again, even if (you haven't lol) you demonstrated linkage, this is called a genetic fallacy. I have and no it isn't retard. You always cry this word, but nevet know it means. Also you can't use logical fallacies against me and act as if you're 300 IQ when you're constantly deflecting and pipuling arguments or just being vague in general. Oh btw you're a hypocrite, because you've done the same with my Wikipedia link, which contains valid sources and pretty accurate on the history of Christian theology. >This has already been debunked hundreds of times You've never debunked that it is Semitic, you've only denied it. And you can't because it literally comes branched off of Judaism, aka a Semitic religion. >I know that this board would rather kill every White Christian family on the planet before they would ever harm a Jew. You don't know this, because we've never shown such a thought. Muh appeal to emotions won't make Christianity less cucked nor Semitic.
>>19158 >literally mocking dead White people killed by leftists >>19172 >atheistic communist regimes' spent the twentieth century killing "50 million Christians" (Did I mention race? - no). Uh... yes. lmao Wtf... you literally mentioned right there. The pilpul is strong with this christcuck. Are you a honorary kike?
This is a great example of why christcuckery is so pernicious to society and why it ought to be shunned. Christcucks don't give a single fuck about European people. They care only about other christcucks. Their so called "brothers in christ". The average christcuck will pull out their ass hairs for the suffering of some nigger in Congo who practices voodoo and happens to be a christcuck because their village has some christcuck mission or something. They'll whine about China trying to get their christcucks to stop behaving like retards or the things that the JEWS (not the "atheists") in the soviet union did to christcucks. But the focus is always on christcuckery. Most of them will never say the word White. That's because at the end of the day, the christcuck is just a cultural prostitute. Their identity is not based on anything real like blood and soil. but rather some retarded jewish tale about some dead kike.
(92.48 KB 600x600 smug pepe.png)
>>19196 Give me one reason why it is objectively worth caring about the European race when we concern ourselves with the notion of eternity. Answer wisely. I want philosophical arguments and actual deep thoughts. Berating me is not an argument. Consider this a devil's advocate. You claim that there is objective value in your race, and that this should be put above God. Substantiate your claims, or your arguments are worthless. Note that this argument need not be Christian exclusive. I expect you to give a good answer, or I will make fun of you.
>>19196 >Give me one reason why it is objectively worth caring about the European race when we concern ourselves with the notion of eternity <W-why should you care about your race and your people, w-we're going to heaven anyway! Be delusional like me! All of our problems will be solved in heaven and we will have nothing to worry about! Let's the Jews win, because fighting your enemies within the earthly realm means you lose! And you dare argue that you guys aren't Jewish cucks. Let's turns this on (((You))). Why should Christians care about Christianity going extinct on Earth with the notion of eternity? You act very smug, despite being a massive retard.
>>19190 You're not even worth addressing in detail. For one, you've admitted that your argument relies on a genetic fallacy, and is thus fallacious. You've lost this part of the debate. Next, you have proven that you have never read Acts in your life despite claiming to, because far from being some sort of anti-Roman communist book, we can see numerous points in Acts where Paul's life is literally saved by the Romans from the hands of angry Jews who wish to kill him and stone him. Paul is escorted out of Jerusalem by contingent of two hundred Roman soldiers (Acts 23:23-24) and appeals to the emperor for protection, and is taken to Rome to address and preach before the emperor of Rome. Even the first gentiles who come into the newly founded church is literally a Roman centurion named Cornelius (Acts 10), and all of his soldiers convert due to the experiences they have. Paul literally has a Roman soldier to guard him in Rome too (Acts 28:16) You haven't read Acts lmao. You could probably make a better argument that Christianity is some sort of Roman plot given how Jesus says to pay your taxes to Caesar and commends the faith of a Roman soldier above anyone in Israel before saying the Jews by and large will go to hell (Matthew 8:5-13). And this is exactly what Jews say, actually. Convince me that Christianity isn't a Roman plot to destroy the Jews given this abundant and irrefutable evidence.
>>19201 >W-why should you care about your race and your people Tell me why. C'mon. It should be easy. >Why should Christians care about Christianity going extinct on Earth with the notion of eternity? Most Christians will apostatize and be terrorized and killed before the end of time. If you read the Bible you'd know this. And this is no problem, because from the religious point of view in general, the earth isn't the only thing that matters. Now I eagerly await your justification for your views. I want the 'why'. You're acting like a leftist faggot - "I CAN'T EVEN RIGHT NOW'.
>>19201 Meant for>>19197
>>19206 >Tell me why. C'mon. It should be easy. Not the same person, but I quite literally described to why it's retarded and cucked to abandon your race for something that you only hope and pray to exist out of mere belief. Without race there is no ethnos, society, community or a meaning in life. What good is life if you just need to wait and die for something that only a stupid book says? Life isn't about being an autistic faggot and by you what said you've clearly outsed yourself as an honoary retard for the kikes. >If you only read my retarded book! Then you can become retarded too! Ah, I see, no argument. As expected. Fuck your book. >
(27.38 KB 1155x203 ClipboardImage.png)
(29.30 KB 1166x329 ClipboardImage.png)
>>19210 >Not the same person, but Obvious samefag is obvious
>>19197 >Give me one reason why it is objectively worth caring about the European race when we concern ourselves with the notion of eternity If you don't care about your own people then that is where you stand. What else is there to say? It's not a matter to have talmudic debates over.
(47.70 KB 640x640 smugblackman.jpg)
>>19213 >Accidently click on the wront anon <Y-you're obviously samefagging! Literally brain-dead lmao. >>19216 >If you don't care about your own people then that is where you stand also you >Give me one reason why it is objectively worth caring about the European race when we concern ourselves with the notion of eternity Was I responding to a bait poster this whole time? Pretending to be retarded for the lulz?
>>19210 >I quite literally described to why it's retarded and cucked to abandon your race for something that you only hope and pray to exist out of mere belief. No you didn't. You are basically on the level of Richard Dawkins or (((Christopher Hitchens))) if you think that the 'faith' of Christians is the total lack of evidence for anything they believe. You also assume that spiritual experiences aren't real. Basically, you have never talked with a Christian in any substantial extent in your life, and it shows. >Without race there is no ethnos, society, community or a meaning in life. This isn't an argument. You're positing these things as being 'good' with no basis to ground your positions philosophically. Meaning in life? - lol you are giving a subjective like of yours, and thinking that having a White neighbor means your life is so deep and meaningful as a result now. You are arguing on the level of 'I like chocolate icecream, therefore chocolate icecream is the best, if you don't eat it, you're a cuck!' >What good is life if you just need to wait and die for something that only a stupid book says? Becoming closer to the Creator of the Universe, laying down my life in the pursuit of higher, transcendent ideals, seeking eternal life in heaven, etc. The average White Nationalist today literally wants to die for genes, and for a race who doesn't give a shit about him. This is why people like Tarrant, Breivik and Crusius are so pathetic. They are dying for flesh and blood, and in a billion years, or after eternity, it won't even matter. Attack me all you want, but deep down you know it's true. This is not even an anti-White statement. I prefer White people, I think White people are more intelligent, I believe that White people are more attractive, etc. and I would never marry a non-White, but I don't make my race into an idol, because it is not a concern of mine. You've yet to show why it should be the meaning of life, the end-all, be-all. Your assumptions are far from universal or obviously true. You have no arguments and you are as emotional as a woman.
>>19218 >implying >>19216 is me LMFAO is that a selfie you're posting, nigger?
>>19204 >Your arguments are g-genetic fallacies! >You are fallacious, because I and Jesus said so! Very psuedo post. >anti-Roman I never said it was anti-Roman, but that they sought to work against the rich pagan elites. You cannot read for shit. >Paul's life is literally saved by the Romans This is once again pipul and does not matter. Roman soliders were conscripted all across the continenent and we can clearly see that they regreted this afterwords, because the Romans hated Christianity and its effects on Roman society. A bunch of Romans soliders and the emperor does not mean that all Romans were for Christcuckoldry. Although the bible is the only thing telling the story, so it's likely fake and gay as Jesus. You didn't debunk anything I said. Amazing, it's almost as if you're admitting that you have been btfo'd by not addressing my arguments. Thanks for the good feels though.
(23.53 KB 600x600 laughing pepe emoji.jpg)
>>19223 This is your brain on the writings of syphilitic incel like Nietzsche. >that they sought to work against the rich pagan elites. The Roman elite help Paul against the Jews in Acts. This is just a fact. Claudius Lysias? The Roman commander and chiliarch in Jerusalem, commanding one thousand soldiers. He saves Paul's life from a mob of Jews. Refer to Acts 21:31-33, Acts 23:26-30). Paul was so highly valued by the Romans that, as I said, the Romans escorted him with 'two hundred heavily armed Roman soldiers to Caesarea, just to keep the Jews from killing him (Acts 23:23-24). Clearly Paul was a Roman stooge. The Romans even put him before the king of Judea to speak, as well as the Sanhedrin. All more attempts to subvert the Jews, one might say. Not once, however, does Paul mention anything about wealth or rich people. Curious. > Roman soliders were conscripted all across the continenent Cope. Cornelius from Acts 10 is explicitly from the Italian Regiment (Acts 10:1), and if we look into the biographies of the Romans mentioned in Acts, they are all either pure-blood Greeks or Romans. >because the Romans hated Christianity and its effects on Roman society. Nope, they were suspicious of Christians for monotheism. They were happy to let socially destructive cults such as the cult of Cybele with its tranny priests into Rome as an official religion though. Cut off your penis to own the Christcucks
>>19219 >Y-you're an atheist for not beliving in the bible! Lmao, the nigger who cries fallacies and enacts upon them 24/7. You're retarded, because I'm not even an atheist nor denied any of your stupid accusations. >This isn't an argument This is an argument dumbass. >You're positing these things as being 'good' with no basis to ground <biology has no basis I truly feel sorry for the cucked and mentally retarded. >Meaning in life? - lol you are giving a subjective like of yours, This isn't subjective, it's objectively retarded to live for a hippe kike and magical paradise that you cannot prove to exist as a means to sacrifice your race. You still have not proven me wrong. >You are arguing on the level of 'I like chocolate icecream, therefore chocolate icecream is the best, if you don't eat it, you're a cuck!' No I'm not, look another fallacy known as a strawman! You literally argued in a passive aggressive fashion here >>19197. >Becoming closer to the Creator of the Universe You wish the the Semite was the creator. >The average White Nationalist today literally wants to die for genes, and for a race who doesn't give a shit about him. You say as if it's a bad thing, cry more about it as you worship a dead Jew who's still getting btfo'd by Talmuds. Being mentally and genetically retarded is not spirituality. You're proving anon right about how your le faith is just religious communism. >This is why people like Tarrant, Breivik and Crusius are so pathetic. They are dying for flesh and blood, and in a billion years, or after eternity, it won't even matter. Again, you say it as if it's a bad thing, but cannot explain why. >I believe that White people are more attractive, etc. and I would never marry a non-White You may not, but you will allow your children to be as dumb and dysgenic as (((You))) are. >race idolatry You're using this stupid word every Christnigger uses when they admit to being anti-White. We're not or at-least I'm not, because I see that race and spirit are equally imporant and must be perserved pure at all cost. But I still would rather be a race idolator, then a dumbass who worships a Semitic loser who probably didn't even exist. >>>19220 No it's a picture of yourself for everytime you think you've said something smart, but in reality, just a retard who doesn't know what they are talking about. Find another board to shit up Jude.
>>19224 >This is your brain on the writings of syphilitic incel like Nietzsche I'm not an incel nor Nietzschean. You're not just dumb dangerously retarded. >The Roman elite help Paul against the Jews in Acts. This is just a fact. Claudius Lysias? The Roman commander and chiliarch in Jerusalem, commanding one thousand soldiers. Again, you're retarded, I stated *Pagan*, secondly these reported accounts mostly come from Christcucks which have no legit support of evidence that many of the ethnic Romans were supportive of Jesus. Paul tolerated the Romans, because they tolerated him for now, although his grander scheme of things were still to destroy Rome from within. You are using a book that teaches psuedo-history as an argument. >Cornelius from Acts 10 You're stupid book is not an argument. We have scholars who counter refute this with accounts of the Romans using auxilaries and some non-Roman descent with citizenship becoming apart of the legionaries. >Nope, they were suspicious of Christians for monotheism No they detested Christians, because they were Jews who sought to overturn Roman pagans from their native faith, thus why there were so many persecutions despite their religious tolerance edicts. Just stop posting you're embarrassing yourself.
(353.22 KB 1078x651 the absolute state of pagans.PNG)
>>19225 >biology has no basis This is called a naturalistic fallacy. Logic 101, here. >it's objectively retarded By what standard? Your own mind isn't the standard of objectivity haha >No I'm not, look another fallacy known as a strawman! Not a strawman. You've yet to demonstrate that you are making any objective claims. You make assertions, and then claim these assertions are somehow objective by fallacious means. You are making subjective, groundless claims that are on par with liking a certain type of icecream. > I see that race and spirit are equally imporant and must be perserved pure at all cost. Why? Answer me, it's not hard. >No it's a picture of yourself <nuh-uh, it's you Lol you're like a little kid. Pagans and Nietzscheans cannot make objective claims because they do not root their beliefs in the mind of God. Every time.
Interesting article I didn't know where to put, about Catholic support for fascism in the 1940s: https://archive.org/details/ClericalFascismInTheUnitedStatesJamesJ.Murphy1944/mode/2up
>>19224 >They were happy to let socially destructive cults such as the cult of Cybele with its tranny priests into Rome as an official religion though These are all accounts said only by Christcucks, you really do believe in everything your retarded priests say, even though they're fanactic liars. No it's not genetic fallacies, because the bible only makes mostly biased claims without any basis. This is acknowledged by scholars even Christian.
(140.54 KB 500x344 tranny 3.png)
>>19230 >These are all accounts said only by Christcucks Literally just lying now. Livy and Dionysius of Halicarnassus (and thus Greeks and Romans living far before Christianity) report the same things about the Galli and the cult of Cybele. Extremely based and redpilled pagans literally had trannies in the position of a 'priestess' in their city. Are you going to cut off your cock so you can RETVRN TO TRADITION? Vgh... remember what they took from us...
>>19228 >This is called a naturalistic fallacy No it's not, you don't know what fallacies are, stop crying. All biological beings stick with their own tribe which is filled with their own race and species. It's a fact, because monekys are smart enough to realize that it's important to preserve themselves or they will be destroyed. >By what standard? Common sense. >Not a strawman You're a nigger monkey, because you're repeating what we say against (((You))), but it is, because nothing of the such and you haven't proven otherwise. >Why? Answer me, it's not hard. I gave you answer, you're too cucked to understand why. >Lol you're like a little kid. Ironic. >Pagans and Nietzscheans cannot make objective claims because they do not root their beliefs in the mind of God. You have no made a single objective claim here and why biology is inferior to a hippie kike. Cope more. >pic related What does this have to do with us? That's probably just you samefagging as a cope. How pathetic. >>19229 Take this shit to /lgbt/, by the way, it was Catholicism who killed fascism. Pius XI worked against us and condemned it as incompatible. Fucking retard.
>>19231 >These are all accounts said only by Christcucks Literally just lying now. Livy and Dionysius of Halicarnassus (and thus Greeks and Romans living far before Christianity) report the same things about the Galli and the cult of Cybele. If that's the case you would give me a source, if it's from Christcucks, then you have lost the argument. >Extremely based and redpilled pagans literally had trannies in the position of a 'priestess' in their city. No they didn't, again you're making accusations, because you know that you have no basis.
>>19229 >clerical fascism This is literally a meme and the stupidest thing to exist. Fascism cannot work with a theocracy for it rejects it. The amount of butthurt here, no one is going to convert, you're only here to be a faggot, not argue honestly. Your religion is dead.
(56.05 KB 640x478 pagan gay.jpg)
>>19232 > All biological beings stick with their own tribe which is filled with their own race and species. Definition of a naturalistic fallacy. Pointing out an 'is' does not entail an 'ought', dummy. >Common sense. Prove to me that common sense exists. According to the modern-day 'common sense' view, sodomy is good, women are equal to men, race doesn't exist, etc. I am sure you thus affirm all of these, as they are deemed to be a sense common to the vast majority of modern humanity. >You're a nigger monkey Ad hominem. Another fallacy >You have no made a single objective claim here and why biology is inferior to a hippie kike. Shifting the burden of proof. Another sign of a bad argument. You're the one sperging out against Christianity, and I asked you the questions originally. I've already BTFO you on many of these points, such as the prophecy of Daniel 9.24-27.
>>19234 You obviously didn't read the article. The NSDAP worked with the Catholic Church. And I'm not a christian, I just thought it was an interesting piece of history where the catholics supported fascism.
(157.66 KB 646x789 1529502069015.jpg)
>>19235 >Definition of a naturalistic fallacy. Pointing out an 'is' does not entail an 'ought', dummy. Didn't I just say that if you don't perserve the race that it's destroyed dumbass? Now you're seeking attention or think having the last post is a victory, which is quite sad. >Prove to me that common sense exists. <Prove to me that a commonality that exist amongst all beings except most humans, exists. Lmao. >Ad hominem. Another fallacy You didn't establish an argument dumbass. Also I don't want to hear from the guy who strawmans and pipuls 24/7. >Shifting the burden of proof. Another sign of a bad argument You have not made a single good argument on this thread. And proceed to make accusations that does not match your description. You're not smart nor a good debator. You've lost, cope more. >You're the one sperging out against Christianity Look at >19231 and trying calling someone a sperg again. >I've already BTFO you on many of these points, You haven't done any of this, you're just coping hard, because you cannot argue nor articulate coherent sentences. >>19236 >The NSDAP worked with cathcucks No, the NSDAP worked with Cahtolics to defeat Bolshviekism, if you think it's because Hitler and co-leaders were Catholic, then you really don't know anything. The NSDAP was a secular state and had no means of allowing religious instutitons to usuper control from them. Again Pius XI condemed both fascism and NS as incompatible.
>>19233 >If that's the case you would give me a source Lucretius (Epicurean philosopher): <Do name Idaean Mother, giving her <Escort of Phrygian bands, since first, they say, <From out those regions 'twas that grain began <Through all the world. To her do they assign <The Galli, the emasculate, since thus <They wish to show that men who violate <The majesty of the mother and have proved <Ingrate to parents are to be adjudged <Unfit to give unto the shores of light <A living progeny. The Galli come: <And hollow cymbals, tight-skinned tambourines <Resound around to bangings of their hands; <The fierce horns threaten with a raucous bray; <The tubed pipe excites their maddened minds <In Phrygian measures; they bear before them knives, <Wild emblems of their frenzy, which have power <The rabble's ingrate heads and impious hearts <To panic with terror of the goddess' might. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0131:book=2:card=581&highlight=galli <A begging eunuch priest of Cybele was wandering through the upland forests of Ida, and there met him a huge lion, its hungry throat dreadfully gaping as though to devour him. Then in fear of the death that faced him in its raving jaws, he beat his tambour from the holy grove. The lion shut its murderous mouth, and as if itself full of divine frenzy, began to toss and whirl its mane about its neck. But he thus escaping a dreadful death dedicated to Rhea the beast that had taught itself her dance. https://archive.org/details/greekanthology01newyuoft/page/412/mode/2up?view=theater <The long-haired priest of Rhea, the newly gelded, the dancer from Lydian Tmolus whose shriek is heard afar, dedicates, now he rests from his frenzy, to the solemn Mother who dwells by the banks of Sangarius these tambourines, his scourge armed with bones, these noisy brazen cymbals, and a scented lock of his hair. https://archive.org/details/greekanthology01newyuoft/page/422/mode/2up?view=theater Strabo: <But the Galli, who are eunuchs, pass inside with such impunity that they even approach the opening, bend over it, and descend into it to a certain depth, though they hold their breath as much as they can (for I could see in their countenances an indication of a kind of suffocating attack, as it were),—whether this immunity belongs to all who are maimed in this way or only to those round the temple, or whether it is because of divine providence, as would be likely in the case of divine obsessions, or whether it is, the result of certain physical powers that are antidotes against the vapor. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0198:book=13:chapter=4&highlight=eunuch%2Ccybele The gala, similar to the Galli, were the priests of the Sumerian goddess Inanna, who were also tranniesaccording to the historical sources.
(952.58 KB 1500x2121 paganism.jpg)
>>19237 >you don't perserve the race that it's destroyed dumbass This is a descriptive statement (an 'is'), you've yet to show how you draw the 'ought' (the ethical and indeed axiological aspects) from this statement. You can't. >Prove to me that a commonality that exist amongst all beings except most humans, exists. So you can't do it, and you are are making another fallacy - argumentum ad populum. >Also I don't want to hear from the guy who strawmans and pipuls 24/7. Pilpul is a term used by copers when they are losing the debate. No arguments, just passive-aggressive and feminine whining. Did you forget to dilate to, O priestess of Cybele?
>>19238 >Lucretius >translator by William Ellery Leonard >He accepted an appointment with a Unitarian church in Bolton's Landing, Massachusetts and moved the family there. He joined Phineas Quimby's New Thought movement and left the Unitarian church in 1898. >Among his prominent students at Wisconsin were literary critic Leslie Fiedler, activist Carl Haessler, poet Marya Zaturenska, activist Mildred Harnack, and poet Clara Leiser,[8] the latter two outspoken opponents of Nazism. >The definitive edition was made by Constantine Cephalas in the 10th century, who added a number of other collections: homoerotic verse collected by Straton of Sardis in the 2nd century AD; a collection of Christian epigrams found in churches; a collection of satirical and convivial epigrams collected by Diogenianus; Christodorus' description of statues in the Byzantine gymnasium of Zeuxippos; and a collection of inscriptions from a temple in Cyzicus. You literally did what I said you were going to do. Why even continue the discussion when I'm arguing against someone who is below room temperature IQ. Siding with Jews and liberals to own the pagans. Christians lying about paganism is what lead the rise of sodomites. You fools shot yourself in the foot making shit up and being inconsistent with the original translations. >inb4 genetic fallacy It is known that Christians are liars, biased and forge tells to work against religions they find superior or a threat to their own. If you told 18-20th century Whites that Norse supported sodomy, then they wouldn't think of converting back in which many could gain access to scholar's translations of old works. You're just a waste of time and a useless retard. >NSDAP worked with the church They did it, because Pius XI was their bitch and Hitler along with Mussolini wanted to get Christians stop their slapfights and deflection of Bolshevism, although after the decline of both Mussolini's and the NSDAP's government, the Catholics betrayed and actively worked against fascism. Clerical fascism is just a shitty theocracy with the word 'fascism' next to it.
>>19239 >This is a descriptive statement (an 'is'), you've yet to show how you draw the 'ought' (the ethical and indeed axiological aspects) from this statement. Good on you for looking up what it means. But explain to us why a religion for the weak and stupid has any merit for a solution than caring for the very thing that leads to our birth? The most important aspect of living is to continue to exist. All you have is muh Jesus and heaven. >inb4 muh anti-degeneracy Nope, Christianity has lead to this present. I see no rise nor counterments from Christians, just LARPs and cries. >So you can't do it, and you are are making another fallacy You are now being fallacious by crying fallacies rather than establish an argument. You live to be ignorant. Argue or stop posting. >Pilpul is a term used by copers Look an actual fallacy. Pilpul is worthless information abd as a deflection towards an argument in which you've done several times. Only mouth-breathers pilpul and do so to avoid giving a confrontation to what the other is saying. >just passive-aggressive and feminine whining. All of your post have been exactly this.
(45.37 KB 564x952 hermaphroditus.jpg)
(657.12 KB 2000x3008 greek statue.jpg)
(88.90 KB 720x960 paganism 5.jpg)
>>19240 Your cope is off the charts. Notice how you are unable to refute Strabo, who thus proves all of the other accounts. We have multiple independent accounts which refer to these trannies who were running rampant in Rome, and we have a direct analogue even in the name with the Gala in Sumeria. More Strabo: >They showed me also some of the works of Thrason, who made the chapel of Hecate, the waxen image of Penelope, and the old woman Eurycleia. They had eunuchs as priests, whom they called Megabyzi. And they were always in quest of persons from other places who were worthy of this preferment, and they held them in great honor. And it was obligatory for maidens to serve as colleagues with them in their priestly office http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Strab.+14.1&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0198 It was a great honor to be a tranny! So many statues to them as well!
>>19241 >But explain to us why a religion for the weak and stupid Daily reminder that Christian Europe conquered the planet. Tired meme, Nietzsche. >The most important aspect of living is to continue to exist. Tautological statement. Banal. Still haven't drawn the 'ought' from the 'is' though, buddy. >Christianity has lead to this present. Modern society is rampant with paganism and you blame Christians ahaha. Homosexuality and trannydom are endemic to pagan cultures. The legends of the 'gods' are full of homosexuality, rape, bestiality and ever sort of abominable act. Imagine living in a secular and increasingly atheistic culture, founded on the Enlightenment and the Renaissance, i.e. a move away from Christian sources and ideas, on Christianity. This is your brain on the syphilitic incel Nietzsche.
>>19242 >le cope So no argument? Glad to know that you admit defeat and have trannies as they rent free in your head. Your favorite Christian translator created homoerotic accounts that you wouldn't think of and, your entire gallery of degeneracy supports my point that Christianity is as spiritually dry as the hottest desert on Earth. God is not the only one who is dead, but so is the entire Christian framework and legitmatacy.
(136.56 KB 970x646 paganism 2.jpg)
>>19244 >ignores Strabo and latches onto an irrelevant author You've lost. >have trannies as they rent free in your head #EndTransphobia > your entire gallery of degeneracy supports my point that Christianity is as spiritually dry as the hottest desert on Earth. Why? Not enough sodomy in Christianity? That would be a negative to one of your ilk
>>19243 >Christian Europe conquered Delusional and retarded, Europe conquered the world long before Christanity, aka the native Europeans you consider to be goys and slander as sodomites were even able to establish empires than your shitty colonial empires that ended up becoming welfare states. You don't see Christian spics, niggers, nor the mentally retarded conquering the world, try to guess why. >Tautological statement. Banal. Still haven't drawn the 'ought' from the 'is' though, buddy. It's outright, because it's a fact. >Modern society is rampant with paganism No it's not cope more. We are in a post-Christian society, and all has happened is because we did not treat Christians like women. Even if what you say is true, then it is proof that Christianity is inferior to both paganism and degeneracy and that you are forever submissive to your enemies. Anyway pagan is just shortend Latin for 'hill billy' anyway. You're scapegoating an insigificant religious minority, seethe, cope and dilate. >Trannies Like anon said you have trannies rent-free in your head. Don't go sucking on troon cock now anon.
>>19158 >Elagabalos Elagabalus was a degenerate Roman emperor who tried to deify himself, not an established god. >>19172 Christianity and Marxism are two different intellectual traditions, but they both emphasize egalitarianism and slave morality. so it's not a simple either/or in this case. >>19242 there were trannies in Greco-Roman culture, but only in times of decline. it's not a coincidence: normalization of transgenderism is a sign of societal decay.
>>19253 >transgenderism is a sign of societal decay. And is always - ALWAYS - preceded by either an influx of either jews or christians (which back in the day were indistinguishable) attempting to 'save' you. Yeah.
The history of the second half of the 20th century is the history of the complete failure and inadequacy of christianity to provide any sort of spiritual or philosophical guidance to a nation in the modern world. It started with America, a self-confident, thriving world power, with unmatched productive and technological capabilities and ended with America, a dying nation, completely subservient to foreign interests, chasing its own tail as it pursues dead end goals and fades away at break neck speed into complete irrelevancy. At the center of this exceptionally fast transformation of wine into water is not only judaism but also its pathetic lapdog, christianity, without which none of it would be possible. Christianity not only failed to provide a bulwark against evil but either went gleefully along with it, or timidly followed its footsteps, providing ample justification in its irrational, magical interpretations of ancient jewish texts and pacifying any sort of resistance against jewish evil. As a result, we must accept that christ is dead. Christians killed him, and he's not worth resurrecting.
>>19247 >Europe conquered the world long before Christanity Delusional and retarded. Pre-Christian Europe never even went beyond the Mediterranean and North Africa. >slander as sodomites Many of them were sodomites and trannies. A fact is a fact. Sorry I'm insulting your queer morally degenerate ancestors, bro. >it's a fact. And you still haven't shown how you draw the 'ought' from this 'is' lmao >We are in a post-Christian society Thank you for admitting we live in a pagan society. >You're scapegoating an insigificant religious minority, seethe, cope and dilate. <not the heckin satanists!
>>19253 >Elagabalus was a degenerate Roman emperor Hahaha, retard. Where do you think Elagabalus the emperor got his name? From Elagabalus the god, retard. I'm not even talking about the imperial tranny. <Elagabalus was initially venerated at Emesa in Syria, where the Arab Emesan dynasty acted as its priests. The name is the Latinised form of the Arabic "Ilah Al-Gabal" ("إله الجبل"), the Emesene manifestation of the deity, which is Arabic for "God of the Mountain. <The cult of the deity spread to other parts of the Roman Empire in the second century, where he would be revered as Elagabalos (Ἐλαγάβαλος Elagábalos) by the Greeks and Elagabalus by the Romans. For example, a dedication has been found as far away as Woerden, in the modern-day Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elagabalus_(deity) >they both emphasize egalitarianism and slave morality Christianity allows slavery, tells women to obey their husbands, tells children to obey their parents, has historically in all branches organized hierarchical systems of bishops, priests, deacons, laity, etc. Christianity is not egalitarian, and only someone whose brain is fried by Nietzsche would even spout such nonsense. Saying that everyone is capable of being saved is not egalitarianism, as much as you might hate this idea. And not everyone will be saved. Never forget that pagans believe that you have the exact same soul as a dog and a worm. >there were trannies in Greco-Roman culture, The texts mentioning Galli stretch over hundreds of years of time, and the Gala that they originated from going even further back in time. The evidence suggests that the Romans adopted the tranny religion around 300 B.C., long before they were even an Empire, and there were still mentions of them by Livy, Strabo and Lucretius centuries later, all before Christianity. Rome was terminally pozzed long beforehand. So >>19254's cope has already been refuted. Even scholar Walter Burkert in his book "Greek Religion" mentions several similar cases: <On the island of Kos sacrifice was made to Heracles by a priest wearing women's clothing, and the story was told that Heracles himself had once concealed himself in such garments Author sources from: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:2008.01.0215:section=58 <By way of contrast there is the exchange of sexual roles in mummery and festivals of license, and also in connection with marriage, which upsets the familiar status: clothes are taken over from the opposite sex, and we find youths in girls' clothing and girls with beards, phalloi, and satyr costumes. <they perform their Hybristica (i.e., their sacred rites of incivility), clothing the women with men's coats and cloaks, but the men with women's veils and petticoats. To repair the scarcity of men, they admitted not slaves, as Herodotus saith, but the best sort of the adjacent inhabitants to be citizens, and married them to the widows; and these the women thought meet to reproach and undervalue at bed and board, as worse than themselves; whence there was a law made, that married women should wear beards when they lay with their husbands. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A2008.01.0208%3Achapter%3D4
Christianity is hilarious I am ethnically jewish (ohhh, noooooo!), but I look White, and I don't follow the teachings of modern judaism, except for a handful of instances such as not supporting Israel (real jews technically can't support the modern satanic state of Israel because messiach hasn't returned yet). So if anyone asks I'm Orthodox jewish. Or maybe un-Orthodox jewish? Lmao I think national socialism is the only logical way to preserve diversity while also creating the conditions necessary for advancement and refinement of each of the distinct races. Just as destroying the Amazon rain forest is a tragedy (where diverse and unique species that are proven to hold the key to an unlimited number of scientific advancements) the mixing the distinct races is a similar tragedy, for a number of reasons. I think judaism overall is too self serving and corrupt to benefit mankind as a whole, and it is diametrically opposed to White identity and culture. It's also not even that good for proliferating jews (consider their dwindling numbers and cultural degeneracy) I know the U.S. was founded as a White ethnostate and wish we had kept it that way. Mixing races has mostly created large swaths of people who no distinct cultural heritage who hate racially pure people and typically identify with / gravitate toward the lowest common denominator of their heritage. Half black / half White people typically consider themselves colored and have intellectual capabilities closer to that of blacks. There were a handful of powerful jews who worked and advocated against keeping the U.S. White. I think they did this because they see any other group having ethno-nationalist tendencies as being a threat to their divide & conquer agenda. Racially homogenous nations are more effective than racially mixed ones. The U.S. is a perfect example. We're more inefficient because of becoming mixed with so many different races and cultures. We're also less able to unify and become organized against threats because there are too many different cultures. White people are genetically superior to most other races as evidenced by their intellectual contributions and the high trust civilizations they create. Jews may have some intellectual contributions but have zero modern high trust civilizations to their credit, which is why I believe the ethnic supremacist political movement that is judaism can only survive or thrive parasitically off of a White civilization. Christianity creates the perfect breeding ground for the enslavement and extinction of White people. Consider the fact that Christianity teaches White people that they're born fucked up, defective from birth, due to some 'original sin', so they should feel guilty unless they accept Christian brainwashing and worship jewish literature, spend their time worshipping superior jewish beings like David, accept jewish hearsay evidence, and worship some jewish rabbi who may not have ever even existed (but you MUST have blind faith and blindly accept what you are told as statements of fact). In sales, people purchase for illogical reasons but justify logically after they've made their decision. Same is true for Christianity. Christians buy this bullshit for illogical reasons (and in most cases under duress as children) and then try to find 'logical' (yet totally unverifiable) evidence to support their claims. If Christianity was taken to court, none of it would hold up under cross examination because the "proof" is heresay evidence. In a laboratory, Christianity doesn't hold up because it is not reproducible, it's hypothesis are not verifyable. And in matters of the proliferation of the White races, Christianity is completely uninterested in maintaining them. Not only uninterested, but completely incapable of proliferating White races as evidenced by all majority White nations rapidly degenerating and becoming brown + judaised. Consider Galatians 3:28, there's no such thing as White people in God's eyes. John 4:22 tells White Christians their salvation comes from jews. Because Christianity is centered around jews, Christians unconsciously treat jews simultaneously as superior beings and also foolish cousins that just don't "get it". Jews have yet to create a single functioning jewish nation state (Israel was handed to them and survives solely by welfare from White nations) Several times I discussed Christianity with a White Baptist of northern European ancestry, who was gradually trying to convert me. One time, this Baptist told me my superior intelligence is due to my jewish genetics. I stood there thunderstruck. I didn’t know what to be more amazed at: his agility in worshipping / deifying jews, or his virtuosity at devaluing his own race. It's mind boggling how White Christians can simultaneously denounce ethno-nationalism, and deny White ethnic supremacy, while also advocating for Jewish ethno-nationalism and literally worshipping Jews as being ethnically superior to them.
>I am ethnically jewish
>>19280 In B4 some D&C jew calls me a kike and tells me I'll go into the oven too. Hitler had jewish officers and generals.
>>19282 You are a kike. You are filled with kike genes. You will never be White.
>>19285 >You are a kike. >You are filled with kike genes. Correct... and White Christians worship my blood while they vilify yours... lmao You're either jewish, or White & retarded, not sure which. >>19285 >You will never be White. Lmao... No shit, but you say that like it's a bad thing, and I couldn't care less as it's just luck of the draw. Besides, I can still support natsoc ideology without being White. The beauty of being jewish and looking White is you get the best of both worlds. There is tremendous irony in you. The irony of retarded White people putting more energy into hating everyone, than they put into loving their own kind, is that by alienating everyone who supports them, they have sealed the fate of their own race and ideology, dooming it to extinction. Best of luck with your ethnostate or whatever, though! I'd like to see White people stick around.
>>19294 >by alienating everyone who supports them, they have sealed the fate of their own race and ideology, dooming it to extinction Kikeanon or not, he's absolutely right. We (Whites) should be thinking much more long term, and using every single weapon at our disposal. Blacks, chinks, pajeets, 'White' jews ... whatever. ALL wars need cannon fodder.
>>19270 >Hahaha, retard. Where do you think Elagabalus the emperor got his name? From Elagabalus the god, retard. I'm not even talking about the imperial tranny. you're right, Elagabal was a deity borrowed from the Arabs. but in my defense, "Elagabalus" usually refers to the tranny emperor who claimed godhead, as I said. >Christianity allows slavery, tells women to obey their husbands, tells children to obey their parents, you're referring to the ancient Hebrew religion, which borrowed/plagiarized from Aryan teachings (not to be confused with the Talmudic religion that exists today). >has historically in all branches organized hierarchical systems of bishops, priests, deacons, laity, etc. you're referring to the Catholic Church here, which again had some Aryan infusion despite its Levantine core. Protestantism is a different story. >Christianity is not egalitarian <Matthew 19:30 <And many that are first, shall be last: and the last shall be first. <Galatians 3:28 <There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. and here's what it says on Natural Order, and loyalty to your clan: <Matthew 10:34-39 <34 Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. <35 For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. <36 And a man's enemies shall be they of his own household. <37 He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. <38 And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. <39 He that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me, shall find it. >The texts mentioning Galli stretch over hundreds of years of time, and the Gala that they originated from going even further back in time. The evidence suggests that the Romans adopted the tranny religion around 300 B.C., long before they were even an Empire, there's a key thing to understand here: there wasn't just one decline phase. the first decline was after the Peloponnesian War, and especially in the Hellenistic Period, when Alexander's conquests had seemingly brought the Greek world to its apogee of power. Yet the dynasties descended from him (Ptolemy, Seleucid, etc) declined and were conquered one after the other, and leave far less of a legacy than the real golden era of the city-states. This is a common motif in history: societies can seem as mighty as ever, while in fact they are decaying within. the rise of Rome bought the Greco-Roman culture a new lease on life, a new Golden Age under the Republic, until it too eventually declined and succumbed to poz centuries later. Bacchanalian festivals aside, if my hypothesis is correct, we would expect to see the proliferation of trannies during the Hellenistic and Late Imperial Eras, which is exactly what we see in the historical evidence. Thus, it's as I said, trannies are a symptom of decay.
>>19297 >Kikeanon or not, he's absolutely right. We (Whites) should be thinking much more long term, and using every single weapon at our disposal. Blacks, chinks, pajeets, 'White' jews ... whatever. ALL wars need cannon fodder. Utilizing all resources is essential. Plus, it's a special kind of stupid that thinks you have to hate and work against all other non-White races to preserve your own. Not even Hitler was like that. See picrel. Quotes from a tangentially related thread: >>19301 >Being pro White doesn't have to include being anti-everyone-else. Its just that pro-White causes should take precedent for White people. Unfortunately a lot of ethno-nationalists are really just hateful cowardly fucked up people who seek the approval of a group of equally hateful cowardly fucked up people. Mysteriously, these groups inevitably succumb to bad-jacketing, infighting and eventually implode... Who would have thought intolerant people are bad at maintaining groups? >>19301 >The real goal should be creating decentralized and unrelated groups that share a similar ideology, the ideology that everyone has the right to self determination for each identity-group. with: >everyone being the key. The easiest way to kneecap any pro-White identity movements is by amplifying division within these groups, as well as between Whites and nonWhites who share similar ideology for their respective groups. Ultimately, all groups should support the continued existence of their own kind. If you can focus on what everyone can agree on, you'll have an easier time gaining support and assistance from other groups. So to bring my points full circle, if pro-racial ideology truly is of greater value than universalist religions, White people will either have to change parts of the bible to be expressly pro-White, or they'll have to create a new "religion" that is pro-White identity, similar to how judaism is pro-jewish ethnicity.
>>19297 >>19294 You will never be White, you will never be accepted. You will be found out and expelled from any rank you worm your way into.
(188.51 KB 439x470 neuron.png)
>>19303 >>19285 Notice how they only ever sow division, and yet never address the content of the message. Instead of discussing the validity of the message, they attack the messenger? Really gets the ol' noggin joggin... Gotta ask yourself, with D&C posts from "Whites" like these guys, (((who))) benefits? My advice to you two is to read these posts again >>19280 >>19302 and try to formulate an intelligent rebuttal this time. I can't fix you being stupid, but if you're not completely retarded, then you can certainly clean up your act and offer higher quality discussion. I guarantee you jews hate everything I'm saying more than you do!
>>19299 >you're referring to the ancient Hebrew religion, which borrowed/plagiarized from Aryan teachings No, I'm not. You're wrong if you think that Christianity doesn't have direct continuity with the Old Testament. The Law of Moses has been superseded, and many aspects of it have been fulfilled in the New Covenant, such as dietary laws, the requirement of circumcision, animal sacrifices, etc. Many of the principles of the Law are retained, albeit in a higher, spiritualized form. The Law of Moses was, writes Paul, for the lawless and disobedient (i.e. the Israelites), see 1 Timothy 1:9-10. This isn't to say that there is a completely new set of teachings in the New Covenant though. Many times the Apostles quote directly from Leviticus, Deuteronomy and similar texts in order to make a point. Jesus reveals the deeper meanings behind aspects of the OT law, such as summing up the Law and the prophets in the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself and God with your whole heart, which is practically applied via treating others as you wish to be treated—“for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 7:12). Romans 13:8-10 is also clear that loving your neighbor is the fulfillment of the law. The law is spiritualized and summed up in the New Covenant, for the New Covenant is not for the lawless. Aspects of the Old point to the New, and it is not a total break, it is a higher form. Similarities between Aryan forms of paganism and Christianity in some sense are only to be expected. Natural Law is a real thing. As Paul writes in Romans 2:14-15 "Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them." There is a Natural Law that is written on the hearts of all human beings. This is why certain ideas can be found in many religions, such as the so-called 'golden rule', to name one. >And many that are first, shall be last: and the last shall be first. This isn't a statement of egalitarianism or worldly politics. You ought to read the verse in context. In the verses beforehand Peter is asking Jesus since they have given up everything for Jesus, what will happen to them, and Jesus says that when the Son of Man sits on His throne in judgement that everyone who has given up things for His sake "will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first." This is bad hermeneutics on your part, since it is talking about some sort of end-times judgement and the followers of Jesus who have given up things in the world for His name. >There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. Again, read the context. This isn't a political statement. This is placed in the larger context of Galatians 3 where Paul is talking about how God is going to justify the Gentiles by faith, and not by the letter of the Jewish Law, and that sonship comes through faith in Jesus Christ and baptism into the Church. Even then, in reading 1 Corinthians 12, Paul uses organic metaphors to refer to the Church, talking of different limbs in one body, each with different roles and purposes. Difference implies inequality and division of labor within a larger entity. The apostles set up ecclesiastical hierarchies in their travel too. Egalitarianism is not Christian. >Matthew 10:34-39 I don't get your point here. Does not your adherence to ideas of National Socialism and your redpilled views put you against friends and family? Could there not be a conflict of loyalties between your family and your race? Jesus is essentially saying the same sort of thing. There would be tension resulting from the coming of the Messiah. He knew that the Jews were going to reject Him, and many people were persecuted, killed and driven out for following Jesus. That's all he's saying. Only a bugman would never come up against his family if he had to in a clash of ideals, especially when it is life or death. >Thus, it's as I said, trannies are a symptom of decay. So basically paganism was a degenerate religion from the beginning, because deviancy behavior of this sort (sodomy, etc) can be found even in the earliest sources.
>>19280 > John 4:22 tells White Christians their salvation comes from jews. Out of context verse— John 4:20-24 >(20) Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. >(21) Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. >(22) Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. >(23) But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. >(24) God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. Keyword is BUT in verse 23 right after the statement in 22 Also it should be interpreted along with this that if Jesus is the Messiah he was a descendant of David so as to fulfill Biblical prophecies. Jesus is FROM (originates from) the Jews. Who is salvation dependent on in Christianity? Jesus. Not a pack of hooknosed goblins who reject Jesus. They have been repudiated. Synagogue of Satan, etc. Also this verse needs to be understood in the full context of both the dialogue, and the other instances where Jesus reveals himself to Gentiles (he is accepted), and the instances where Jesus reveals himself to Jews (they attempt to kill him, until he submits to his own death willingly). Jesus is revealing himself, again to a Gentile woman, that he is the messiah. The times that Jesus reveals himself to Gentile women, he is accepted, indeed, the majority of the Samaritan woman's village is saved by her witness, if you go lower in the same chapter: >39. And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did.
>>19280 Israel is a Rothschild puppet state that serves a specific purpose, hardly anything resembling the Mosaic Israel. Why would anyone want to "improve" all the races? The kind of diversity that you envision is like setting up a plate with delicious and artistically arranged food, then throwing a bunch of diarrhea, vomit and menstrual blood on it for the sake of diversity, and since they are obviously not as appealing as the delicious food, trying to add some spices (or artificial flavor in case of transhumanism) to "improve" it. I would support a White ethnostate even if I was a Jew or a nigger.
>>19306 I understand perfectly well that the New Testament builds upon the Old, while transforming and succeeding it. but the fact remains, much of the tribalism & hierarchy is found in the Old Testament, as opposed to the egalitarian, universalist appeal of the New. >This is bad hermeneutics on your part, since it is talking about some sort of end-times judgement and the followers of Jesus who have given up things in the world for His name. that is the context, but it ties into the larger point of appealing to slaves and others low in the hierarchy. consider: <Matthew 18:3-4 <3 And said: Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. <4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven. >Difference implies inequality and division of labor within a larger entity. The apostles set up ecclesiastical hierarchies in their travel too. I get the context, but I still think there's a larger point being made. the early Church may not have had strict equality and communism, but it was still a significant departure from the hierarchy and master morality of the Greco-Roman culture. >I don't get your point here. Does not your adherence to ideas of National Socialism and your redpilled views put you against friends and family? I have in fact had personal conflicts over disagreeing with tranny madness. but the point here is that Christianity demands your loyalty and obedience to the teachings of Jesus above and beyond, and even against, your family and race. I think that's different from National Socialism which emphasizes loyalty to one's clan and race, notwithstanding the conflicts involved with other ideologies. >So basically paganism was a degenerate religion from the beginning, because deviancy behavior of this sort (sodomy, etc) can be found even in the earliest sources. not so. Paganism was an ethnic and communal religion which permeated public life. During better times, deviancy was the exception, not the rule. it's specifically when deviant, degenerate behavior patterns become normalized that the society is in a precipitous decline. we see that in the Hellenistic period, and in the Late Imperial periods, both times of decline. you said that trannyism was already coming to prominence in 300bc, which is early Hellenistic period, which fits. Elagabalus (the emperor) reigned in the early 3rd century AD, not long before the Crisis of the Third Century, which initiated the Decline and Fall. so it all fits together. bear in mind, I'm not associating decay with Christianity, as other anons have. it's a common myth that the rise of Christianity was correlated to the Fall of Rome, but I think there were many other causes at work; Christianity simply filled a void. likewise, I wouldn't blame the current times of decline on Christianity, there are other forces at work for us as well.
>>19320 > but the fact remains, much of the tribalism & hierarchy is found in the Old Testament, as opposed to the egalitarian, universalist appeal of the New. Hierarchical is inseparable from the message of the New Testament. It's indisputable that Paul set up structures of authority wherever he visited, appointing elders, deacons and other types of authority over the newly-founded churches. See Acts 14:23, Titus 1:5, etc. 1 Timothy 3:1 and the following verse deal with the qualification for being an 'overseer' (episkopēs, from where we get the word 'bishop' in English. Even after Judas kills himself, the Disciples come together and select someone else to fill his position. When it is said "‘May another take his position" in Acts 1:15-20, the word used is 'episkopé', referring to an 'office' or a 'position', and is the same root as 'episkopēs'. The Twelve were a formal body in the early Church directly given authority by Jesus Christ. Egalitarianism is nowhere to be found. The existence of institutionalized Church hierarchy is present from the earliest days of Christianity. St. Ignatius was the second Bishop of Antioch after St. Peter himself, a direct Apostle of Jesus Christ. In the Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, Ignatius writes: "I salute in the blood of Jesus Christ, who is our eternal and enduring joy, especially if [men] are in unity with the bishop, the presbyters, and the deacons, who have been appointed according to the mind of Jesus Christ, whom He has established in security, after His own will, and by His Holy Spirit." https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0108.htm Given that Ignatius died early in the 2nd century A.D. and was in the first generation of Christians, it is indisputable that Church hierarchy is a feature of Christianity from its earliest days, not to mention the Biblical evidence already provided. Regarding the alleged radical differences between the message of the New and the Old Testaments, I am again forced to disagree and say that this is read through a Talmudic hermeneutic of Bible which has no grounds in the text itself. The Israelites were never an exclusively racial label, and the sooner you understand this, the more the Old Testament will make sense to you. The ‘nations’ or ‘gentiles’ refer to any sort of pagan or anyone who does not follow God and instead serves idols and demons. In Genesis 12 Abraham is told by God that “and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you”. In Genesis 22 the Angel of the Lord tells Abraham that “and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed”. What could this mean? Firstly it means that God’s plan involves all of humanity. Second, it is looking forward to Jesus Christ, a descendant in the flesh of Abraham. The Gentiles were always to come to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of you and me. Scripture attests to this: Psalm 22:27-28 <All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations will bow down before him, for dominion belongs to the Lord and he rules over the nations. Psalm 86:8-10 <Among the gods there is none like you, Lord; no deeds can compare with yours. All the nations you have made will come and worship before you, Lord; they will bring glory to your name. For you are great and do marvelous deeds; you alone are God. Also Isaiah 56:6-8. In Esther 8:17 we read that “And many people of other nationalities became Jews because fear of the Jews had seized them.” If Judaism was some ethno-supremacist religion how are other people becoming full-fledged Jews? We must also remember that Jesus had non-Israelites in his geneology. Rahab, a Canaanite, for one, and Ruth, a Moabite, on the other. Moses himself had a Midianite or a Cushite wife (it’s a matter of debate whether this refers to the same woman), i.e. a non-Israelite wife. The nation of Israel, while predominantly of one group in the time of the Old Testament, was never exclusively racial in any sense, and is best seen as the Church of the Old Testament. Those truly of the seed of Abraham are those who have faith in Jesus Christ. They are the new, the true Israel, and the true Chosen People of God (1 Peter 2:9, Galatians 6:16, Galatians 3:29, etc.) Scripture confirms this.
>>19326 I wouldn't call it a radical change. I will say that the New Testament builds on the foundation of the Old, and Christianity grew in Hebrew soil. However, there is a transformation and alteration of character from Old to New. there's this whole change from God's Chosen being a specific genealogy to anyone who has faith, a shift from arbitrary rituals and the letter of the law to esoteric experience and the spirit of the law. specifically, >“and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you”. originally, this meant that the Israelites would be a priestly nation, ministering to the rest of the world. this was transformed in the New Testament into Jesus' universal appeal, in which any human of any lineage can be sanctified by believing in and following him. as for hierarchy, again, of course there was some degree of hierarchy, it wasn't purely egalitarian. But there are more than a few strands of egalitarian thought woven into the fabric of Christianity. there's a reason why, early in its history, that religion spread rapidly amongst the enslaved peoples of Rome. it had a powerful appeal to them that Paganism and neo-Platonism did not.
>>19320 >3 And said: Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. >4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven. I don't see the problem here, it's a general call to humility. The opposite in the Biblical worldview is being haughty, arrogant, thinking that you are God when you're not. Unless you see being a boasting arrogant shithead as a good thing, there's no problem in this verse. It doesn't preclude having a bit of pride in your job or being proud of your children (or whatever) when something good happens. This isn't based on arrogance or haughtiness. > the early Church may not have had strict equality and communism No. This has already been refuted in earlier posts and refuted here as well: >>19326. Taking one verse from Acts from a context of heavily persecuted and newly formed Church doesn't mean the Church was some egalitarian communist entity. Jews were literally stoning and killing Christians, they wouldn't have survived if they didn't come together and help one another. Of course it didn't last, because there's nothing in Scripture or Tradition that says property, family, or anything else is intrinsically evil or unchristian. And again, all of 1 Corinthians 12 speaks of differentiation, differences in talents, needs, abilities, etc. and working organically as the Church. This is how any group or nation works. And when we take into account the hierarchy of the early church (again, as shown here >>19326) we get a quite different picture of what was going on here. >master morality of the Greco-Roman culture. Didn't exist. Christian ethics are hardly different than Aristotelian virtue ethics, and the popular schools of philosophy such as Stoicism (which again has overlap with Christianity in some areas), (Neo-)Platonic and Epicurean philosophy were all 'cucked' by the retarded analysis of Nietzsche. There's a reason why early apologists for Christianity such as Justin Martyr put so much effort into emphasizing the connections between philosophy and Christian religion: <"We have been taught that Christ is the first-born of God, and we have declared above that He is the Word of whom every race of men were partakers; and those who lived reasonably are Christians, even though they have been thought atheists; as, among the Greeks, Socrates and Heraclitus, and men like them; and among the barbarians, Abraham, and Ananias, and Azarias, and Misael, and Elias, and many others whose actions and names we now decline to recount, because we know it would be tedious." https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm >but the point here is that Christianity demands your loyalty and obedience to the teachings of Jesus above and beyond, and even against, your family and race. Yeah, so it's the same principle. You just don't like the idea of having even higher concerns than what happens in this world. I love my race, but I also love God infinitely more, just as I love God infinitely more than my family too (and can I thus be said to hate my family? Certainly not, I love them dearly). >I think that's different from National Socialism which emphasizes loyalty to one's clan and race, notwithstanding the conflicts involved with other ideologies. So Hitler can be said to have brought a sword to divide people between those loyal to National Socialism and those who opposed it. Hitler, like Jesus, didn't intend for division, but knew it would happen. Not everyone supported the Third Reich, sadly. Christianity is not built to bring division, else why would Jesus champion the classic ethic of reciprocity and to tell people to love their neighbor as themselves? A Christian society would be a stable society in an organic harmony, similar to as how Paul describes the Church in 1 Corinthians 12. There's no division for the sake of division. We are also told to honor our mother and father, to care for our wife, our children, etc. > Paganism was an ethnic and communal religion which permeated public life. Of course sodomy was not the norm, and pagan sodomy was not like the homosexual 'orientations' of today, I am aware of that. Even the ancient art and sources occasionally indicate pederasty and similar practices. I do not any of say this to excuse it of course. Please don't get the wrong idea though, I do not think that ancient Europe was completely evil or irredeemable, or completely benighted. I do up the rhetoric for sake of argument while staying within the bounds of truth though, I believe, because there certainly were highly degenerate aspects of these societies that I am glad are gone. Ancient Europe was an interesting place.
Gunpowder and Iberian navigation conquered the world. Christianity was always the spoiled red headed stepchild with delusions of grandeur that went along for the ride because nobody had the balls to say no to it.
>>19327 >there's this whole change from God's Chosen being a specific genealogy to anyone who has faith The Messiah was to be through a specific lineage, but the faith aspect was there from the beginning. If we look at the genealogy of Jesus, we can even see people who were born gentiles in it. Again I will point to Ruth and Rahab. Rahab was a Canaanite woman whose family was spared by Joshua and the rest of the Israelites for the aid that they gave them. Ruth was a Moabite, and thus from a pagan group that was often not friendly with the Israelites. So King David, to whom God promises in 2 Samuel 7 a descendant that God will treat like a Son, and whose kingdom and throne will endure for eternity, has a fully gentile great-grandmother in Ruth. But one might wonder then did Ruth's Israelite husband break the Law of Moses in marrying her? The answer is no, because the laws against exogamy are always framed in a context against intermixing with polytheistic tribes. As Paul is quick to point out in his Epistle to the Galatians, even the righteousness of Abraham is via faith. As it says in Genesis 15:6 "Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness." >a shift from arbitrary rituals and the letter of the law to esoteric experience and the spirit of the law. specifically, I agree with this. It was foretold in Jeremiah 31. >originally, this meant that the Israelites would be a priestly nation, ministering to the rest of the world Only if you are relying on the assumption that Christianity is not the genuine fulfillment of these prophecies. God repeats the blessing of Genesis 12 in Genesis 22:18, but the context only strengthens that it pointing forward to Jesus. Genesis 22 is where the famous story of Abraham being stopped from sacrificing his son comes from. This story is seen as inexplicable to Jews and Muslims, but reading it through the method of typology (the entire OT is immensely typological, pointing to the antitype of Christ via the principle of Luke 24:25-27 when Jesus points out that the Scriptures and the Prophets were all talking about Him). The entire Abraham story here with Isaac just prefigures Jesus. He goes to sacrifice his son on the third day of their journey, Abraham makes his son Isaac carry the wood of the burnt offering, God emphasizes over and over how this is Abraham's only son. Isaac even asks his father where is the lamb for the offering, to which Abraham says God shall provide the lamb. Jesus = Lamb of God. Wood for burnt offering carried by the son = Jesus carrying the cross of his crucifixion. The symbolism of the third day is too obvious to go over here. Worth mentioning that it seems like Abraham even knew that this wouldn't be carried through all the way if one reads it themselves. There's even more parallels but I won't belabor the point. >But there are more than a few strands of egalitarian thought woven into the fabric of Christianity The idea that theoretically anyone could be saved is a pretty banal one though, it doesn't change the fact that there exist different races, that there are men and women, and inequalities even within all these groups and the need for government and Church hierarchy in the world that we live in now. The same sort of ideas are in pagan philosophies in a different form, especially those stresses the transmigrating soul, allowing one to reincarnate even into the forms of animals, or different sexes after death, or to become exalted into some sort of disembodied bliss or divinity after death. Theoretically anyone can do it, but the path is a narrow path, and the road is wide to destruction (Matthew 7:13-14). The nature of the modern world only underlines the wisdom of that. > there's a reason why, early in its history, that religion spread rapidly amongst the enslaved peoples of Rome This isn't a very interesting statement when one really ponders it though. Slavery in the ancient Mediterranean was about as common as being a wage-cuck today, and it was nothing like chattel slavery that we tend to think of such as that of the Southern US. Christianity appeals was much broader though, given how many of its earliest champions in the intellectual sphere were highly educated Greeks and Romans such as Justin Martyr (who studied Peripatetic, Stoic and Pythagorean philosophy before Christianity) and Minucius Felix (whose works show a familiar with Cicero and Stoic philosophy), etc. >Neo-Platonism I believe neo-Platonism may have been too ascetic and esoteric for the average person. Many of the early Church Fathers were quite educated in this school though, and modified some of its terminology in order to better explicate important theological concepts such as the Trinity.
>>19332 >expel Mudslimes and Jews from the Iberia Peninsula >go onto conquer half the New World I'm thinkin' it's based.
>>19329 >Didn't exist. Christian ethics are hardly different than Aristotelian virtue ethics, and the popular schools of philosophy such as Stoicism (which again has overlap with Christianity in some areas), (Neo-)Platonic and Epicurean philosophy there may be surface similarities and parallels here and there, but profound differences remain. >Yeah, so it's the same principle. You just don't like the idea of having even higher concerns than what happens in this world. not true at all. I'm concerned with things above and beyond this world, but I don't want to abandon this life either. >So Hitler can be said to have brought a sword to divide people between those loyal to National Socialism and those who opposed it. there are still differences. National Socialism, as well as Paganism, emphasizes one's Volk, or ethnic community. that doesn't mean holding other peoples in contempt, it just means we should stick to our own. Another issue is Christianity's characteristically Abrahamic insistence on being the one, true belief system, which doesn't allow for the plurality of Dharmic religions. Overall, the teachings of Christianity are such that it leads to significant race-mixing, which leads to trouble, as history has shown. >The same sort of ideas are in pagan philosophies in a different form, especially those stresses the transmigrating soul, allowing one to reincarnate even into the forms of animals, or different sexes after death, or to become exalted into some sort of disembodied bliss or divinity after death. there's a difference though, in that Pagan religions are tailored to a particular ethnic and cultural group, a Volk, which doesn't translate to other peoples. Dharmic religions can be universalist, but they also have the capability of adapting to the needs of different Volks. Abrahamism places a much stronger emphasis on universalism, which as I said, leads to race-mixing moreso than Dharmic or Pagan religions. >Slavery in the ancient Mediterranean was about as common as being a wage-cuck today, and it was nothing like chattel slavery that we tend to think of such as that of the Southern US. that's true actually. I'll have to give this some more thought.
>>19280 I'll ignore that you're a jew for the sake of argument but know this no matter what you support or how "based" you appear to be you will be found out, and you will be executed for the sake of the Aryan race. >I think national socialism... National Socialism is placing Nature and the Natural Order above man. If a man is living in accordance with Nature he will know the truth that following the Laws of Nature leads only one place; the extermination of all other hominid competitors for the safety and security of his people. No true National Socialist, not even Hitler, did not know this at any point in time. We see Hitler quite explicitly acknowledging it in numerous places. I'm sure you know of them they have been discussed on this board time and again. The reason Hitler aided Non-Whites was misguided Honor, and some remaining christian moral underpinnings, that's also why he didn't order or have any part in commiting the holohoax and allowed some jews to remain in positions despite most of them working against him, or rather more likely his failure to oust Christians did not allow him to discover this treachery of jews in which he placed trust. Oddly enough there is little else in this post that I disagree with >>19282 You will be exterminated, whatever you may believe. >>19294 Plenty of us do put effort into lloving our own kind but the existence of Christniggers such as the nigger shitting up this thread(and really just christniggers in general) really just fucks up every effort to do so, because as soon as the most "conservative christian" finds out you put your race at the highest level in all matters and thus inherently reject their religion and despise it, they become your enemy, without fail even Christian Identity kikes. They do this even if you would otherwise let them and their religion be to die the death it has been spelling for itself since Gamaliel and Sha'ul worked out the first iteration of it using John the Baptists cult as inspiration as well as a fair amount, which survives to this day. >>19297 No he's not and the very fact that you think he is shows how fucking delusional you are, Note that Rockwell and others tried the "ally with non-Whites" shit and it has bitten them in the ass every fucking time, they hate us and oppose us at every turn at an instinctual level, there is no "use" to be made of them, except as fertilizer, short or long term. >>19302 I believe I directly addressed that post and PF and their putrid cowardice in another thread, take your attempts to reasonably subvert true NS and put a bullet in your worthless semitic mutt brain.
>>19341 >there may be surface similarities and parallels here and there, but profound differences remain. There's many more than you would think if you begin to dig deep enough, but they are certainly not identical. Same can be said about some types of Vaishnavism. >I'm concerned with things above and beyond this world, but I don't want to abandon this life either. Then there's no real problem with the verse then. Friction will arise, problems will happen. That's the essence of the message there. It's worded bombastically (as Jesus often does - just think of him saying to cut your hand off or to pluck out you eye if it will land you in hell, which is a dramatic way of explaining the grievous nature of sin). It's powerful imagery and it sticks in the head of the listener (now the reader). >there are still differences. National Socialism, as well as Paganism, emphasizes one's Volk, or ethnic community. that doesn't mean holding other peoples in contempt, it just means we should stick to our own. In the particulars there are indeed differences, but if we were to apply the language of what is being said there to any other similar situation as I did with the National Socialism comparison, we can then better see, sans interpretative lens, what is being said. I totally agree with the basic message you are describing here, however there is a value hierarchy, just as anyone who adheres to a given worldview has. On a personal level one might quite often choose to follow God over giving into or associating with degeneracy, especially in this modern environment, but I really can't think of any situation that would come true that would lead me to throwing Europeans under the bus in my own personal choices. Though Christian, European descent is a core part of my identity on Earth, and would be so even if I pretended it wasn't. White concerns are certainly my concern, just as attacks on Whites are attacks on me. > Another issue is Christianity's characteristically Abrahamic insistence on being the one, true belief system, which doesn't allow for the plurality of Dharmic religions. Christianity is the fullness of Truth, that's the best way to see it. Other religions are closer or further to the Truth depending on what they teach. As to whether people will be saved outside of it, God knows best. Think of it like this - It may not be the case that every sick person who doesn’t go to the hospital dies but the hospital is clearly the best place for one to get well, both sooner and more completely. We don’t know what one’s chances are if they don’t go—it would be great if most people recovered without going, but we don’t know if most will, and it’s very likely most won’t. Only God knows. The Church is the hospital, Christ is the greatest possible physician for our souls. Honestly, I think it’s absurd to think that the God “who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4) will be be damning massive amounts of people who have not had a chance to hear the Gospel but who have followed the law written on their heart their entire lives. I could again appoint to what Justin Martyr said here >>19329 on people like Socrates, Heraclitus, etc. >Abrahamism places a much stronger emphasis on universalism, which as I said, leads to race-mixing moreso than Dharmic or Pagan religions. I disagree with this. This was said in another thread, but just look at the case of Islam. The religion is nearly 1500 years old, and yet the Muslim world remains linguistically, ethnically and culturally diverse. The same with historically Christian countries, most of which have been Christian for a millennium or more, sometimes nearly two. Race-mixing as a large-scale phenomenon is a result of social engineering. My theory is that aside from obtaining sheer dominance and power over every other group, the Jews and elites want to get rid of anything that could cause tension and threaten the functioning of their global system. In an age where communication and transportation are faster than ever, and where people from different cultures and backgrounds may work side-by-side, it is bad for business if these people hate each other. So they have to mix us up and attempt to destroy us all. Whites in particular, but all groups in a broad sense, as race-mixing is mutual destruction. When we look at it though, Dharmic religions didn't stop race-mixing at all. We all know about the genetic studies in India. India still became completely Dravidianized even despite the doctrines which are likely racialist in origin in some sense. I'd say, given the case of Islam, Christianity and Vedic traditions, that there is little to no correlation between a religion and marriage habits in this sense, especially given how the one example of a thoroughly racialist religion is actually an example of one of the biggest race-mixing disasters on the planet.
>>19308 >I would support a White ethnostate even if I was a Jew or a nigger This is the stupidest text I've seen on here.
>>19393 It makes sense. If your other groups have healthy communities, they won't seek to come live in your community. That's the issue with capitalism, in that it has vastly exacerbated the wealthy imbalances and gaps between different parts of the world, and in fact made them more impoverished and dependent on the West, which leads these countries to become shitholes with no opportunities. Exploiting this situation, the Jews invite them to come live in the West, and this process is made more severe by the fact that Jewish bankers and Zionists purposely bomb and destabilize poor countries in order to forward Jewish imperialist schemes. The wars between European states as well in the 20th century created a convenient way for the Jews to begin White Genocide as well, because due to alleged labor shortages after the war, many European nations had non-Whites imported. The Jews created the problem, and they created the need among the non-White workers. Capitalism inherently has this logic to it. These people are victims in a sense, but they have to go back.
>>19393 I would manage to overcome even the limits that such a lowly existence would impose on me. I don't expect you to do the same though, just as I wouldn't expect a dog to understand Plato or enjoy the music of Wagner.
>>19409 Yes lets waste resources(food, fuel, troops, etc) sending the Shudra back, and finding out where they even came from in the first place(time, more food feeding them, staff to care for and research their origin points) rather than executing them on sight(bullets, some troops possibly), or collecting them and force marching them without food or water to a place where we simply starve them en masse and let their corpses feed the earth. that sounds perfectly logical.
>>19423 I have nothing against helping people back to their countries. Many of these people are victims to globalism acting in their own interests, invited in by the Jew. If they refuse to go back, then we can rough them up or kill them if necessary. Funny that you use Dharmic terminology when you are advocating for what would be seen as Adharmic actions.
>>19430 It is not Adharmic to kill your enemies, it is not Adharmic to kill, just to kill, as told to Arjuna, or to war simply for the sake of war, as told to Arjuna by Lord Vishnu, if I recall the Bhagavad Gita correctly. It will never be Adharmic to kill the subhumans who even without our interference destroy the environment and torture and kill animals simply for the pleasure of it. I find it hilarious that you somehow think them being "victims" of Globalist jews makes them somehow worth sparing, it doesn't.
>>19432 >it is not Adharmic to kill, just to kill, as told to Arjuna, or to war simply for the sake of war, as told to Arjuna by Lord Vishnu, if I recall the Bhagavad Gita correctly. Imagine misinterpreting the Bhagavad Gita this badly. Do you even know why Arjuna is told just to kill? It has to do with a dynastic struggle over the throne, and a war which was began due to the fact that the Pandavas were dishonored and cheated out of their rightful place on the throne. Arjuna and his allies had the high ground, i.e. they were in the right. It was dharmic for Arjuna, as a Kshatriya, to kill them, even though it conflicted with his dharma towards his kin. But even then, if you had true understanding of what dharma entails, you'd realize that the dharmic exercise of violence is nothing like the nonsense you are advocating for. Dharmayudda, i.e. dharmic warfare, prohibits the killing of women, the unarmed, those fleeing battle, those engaging in combat with another, killing those who surrender to you, and the use of deceit in warfare. It is an honor-based warfare, not a complete slaughter. The essence of Dharma according to the Mahabharata (where the Gita comes from the in first place), is to "never do something to others that one would regard as an injury to one's own self. In brief, this is dharma. Anything else is succumbing to desire". (Anushasana Parva chapter 114). The message of the Bhagavad Gita is not just to kill people, it is a message of devotion to God (Krishna), doing everything as an offering to God, to seek refuge in God, and to give up the fruits of one's actions and simply surrender. Anyone who says otherwise has never read the Gita and is a LARPer. Indeed, according to chapter 16 of the Gita, you'd actually be a demon (asura) >It will never be Adharmic to kill the subhumans who even without our interference destroy the environment and torture and kill animals simply for the pleasure of it. What is adharmic is determined by Dharma-shastra texts. You're also confirming yourself to never have read really any text from the Vedic tradition as well, because Shudras have a purpose within the cosmic order, which is to serve Brahmanas.
>>19435 Niggers and other shitskins are less than Shudra, deserving only of complete extermination so that Aryan society can fall into the pattern it was in prior to Christcuckery and that it should be in today. I did not misinterpret the Bhagavad Gita, I correctly identified Arjuna being told how those rules of honor didn't apply to his kinfolk who had chosen to fight against what was right and natural, in essence he was given license to be "sinful" to correct things to be in accordance with the natural order. Now lets point out how retarded those rules are against non-Aryans, despite mostly being fine between Aryans. >Prohibits the killing of women, Killing our enemy's women limits their ability to replace themselves and gone far enough will lead to their extinction, Dharmic Law says we can't do this yet our enemies, every other race on earth, and even enemy Whites, are engaging in this as we speak. To not do this in return is retarded, they seek to wipe us out, so we should and rightly will do so. >the unarmed, No man is ever unarmed so long as he has some way in which to fight back, but our enemies do this to us. If we do not do this in return, we would be simply wasting resources, that would better serve Aryans, keeping enemies alive, and ultimately will end up aiding our enemy in our destruction. >those fleeing battle, Fleeing battle is sometimes necessary but our enemies will not relent if we should flee so neither shall we if they do, if a subhuman is running away and you do not shoot at it, you are leaving an enemy alive who will seek out revenge on the first innocent White, or even Aryan, they come across for what you did to their comrades. >those engaging in combat with another, Seems like this applies in duels and duels alone, on a battlefield this has never been possible to not do, and if you see a single nigger and a White guy fighting and don't step in, what kind of Aryan are you? >killing those who surrender to you, Our enemies kill us daily in manners far more cruel, and even when the person surrenders they do not deserve the mercy of this in return and they will not get it >and the use of deceit in warfare All warfare between different racial groups is based on deceit, even the most basic strategic and tactical rules, push for deceit, so that your enemy cannot prepare for what you are bringing to the table, and even Hitler engaged in deceit while waging his war for Germany, as the Indians have been known to do so as well, this is a stupid rule particularly and could only be used between equally honorable Aryan peoples, no others. It's actually kind of ironic that you made this post in the anti-abrahamism thread, your post goes further to prove the overall point of me and this thread. Those rules and similar rules that many of our ancestors held between themselves, stop working once you involve Christians. They do not now, never have had, and never shall have, a concept of honor. The prime example is what Charlemagne did to the Saxon "Pagan" Kings of the British Isles. The went to a parley, a peace talk, and the kike servant himself slaughtered them all when he found they had brought no weapons, as was customary in talks between Aryans. >you'd actually be a demon (asura) or one other figure in Vedic lore, one who brings Dharma but whose very name belies the actions he will have to take. There are several theories I've seen that state all of the warriors of the coming war will be akin to this figure. >What is adharmic is determined by Dharma-shastra texts. What is Adharmic is allowing our race to fall and die, due to our failure to realize that engaging in honorable warfare will only get us killed. What is Dharmic is not up to a text, no matter how holy you might think it is. Those texts aren't the Word of Orlog, and even if they were, it's been in the hands of fallible men, and subhumans for far too long, as such it isn't it isn't infallible, or even close to perfect even in an oral tradition. >You're also confirming yourself to never have read really any text from the Vedic tradition as well, because Shudras have a purpose within the cosmic order, which is to serve Brahmanas. That they have a "role", which should never have been given to them, does not negate that their very existence is a danger to us and our dependence on their labor will make us lazy, our descendants will eventually loosen restrictions on them, as all things fail with Time, which will lead us right back here. I'd much rather my descendants live in an entirely Aryan world, even if they themselves end up of a Shudra type caste, than to risk them forgetting what we have warned, and leading us right back into extinction. btw I just used Shudra as shorthand for subhuman/non-White, I am a Norse Aryanist and don't really care what there is in Vedic lore, what little might be useful, I can and have gleaned insight into it by communing with the Ancestors and the Gods.
>>19468 With all this in mind, it boggles me how the average indian today worships in a hindu temple with all of what you mean in thought. It's the most ironical joke I've heard.
kek @ that anon getting banned for being a Jew >>19361 you make good points. even if Christianity is compatible with a Volkish society, we're obviously a long way from that point. first, we'd need to establish such a society, preferably on the ashes of institutional structures which tell us that race doesn't exist while also persecuting Whites and promoting degeneracy. I think a Pagan revival would be useful in pursuing our goals. >to cut your hand off or to pluck out you eye if it will land you in hell, which is a dramatic way of explaining the grievous nature of sin). I see your point here, and yes, Jesus often taught with parables and dramatic imagery. but the more specific meaning of the passage you quoted is really an argument against biological determinism. That is, cutting off your hand because your hand is sinning would be absurd, and it drives home the point that your body isn't sinning, you are. eg your dick doesn't force you to be a coomer, you choose to do that.
(173.94 KB 750x937 jesus christ son of god.jpg)
>>19477 >we're obviously a long way from that point. first, we'd need to establish such a society, preferably on the ashes of institutional structures which tell us that race doesn't exist while also persecuting Whites and promoting degeneracy. Definitely. >I think a Pagan revival would be useful in pursuing our goals. It depends what you mean by this. When it comes to the idea that almost all of us here (I hope) support of a Europe that comes back into touch with its national cultures, traditions, languages, festivals, music, architecture, clothing, etc. I am fully on board. Most of this has only been destroyed (in some places more than others) in the last few centuries due to industrialization, globalism and the move from rural to urban living which disconnects people from their roots and alienates them from their culture, from their extended families, from nature, from God, and indeed from their own self as well. There is something about large cities that dehumanizes, brutalizes and degenerates human beings, something which, interestingly enough, the Bible seems to recognize as well. When it goes much beyond this, though, I began to question it. I am not sure if any of these entities are worth sacrificing to, worshiping or trying to contact. One would be infinitely better off aiming for what is the source of 'good', rather than beings with ambiguous motives. There are moves towards this even in pre-Christian Europe, at least in philosophical circles. I put a lot of these pre-Christian beings on the same footing with UFOs and ghosts. They are of ambiguous motives and goodness, and can quite often be sinister. >the more specific meaning of the passage you quoted is really an argument against biological determinism. That is, cutting off your hand because your hand is sinning would be absurd, and it drives home the point that your body isn't sinning, you are. eg your dick doesn't force you to be a coomer, you choose to do that. I can see where you're drawing that interpretation from. I'm not sure if I'd agree that that is the primary meaning though. People certainly have free will in a sense, but I think I would have to stress the fact that there is a sort of feedback loop between mind and body, and body and mind. The mind is shaped of course by environment, genetics, one's gender, etc., but I believe that in some sense that there is an aspect of the individual which transcends the purely causal / deterministic nexus that would otherwise exist. This is a general truth which I think can be observed in real life, and is reflected scripturally. Women, for example, can be saved like any other person, but still, it's a truth that "I found one upright man among a thousand, but not one upright woman among them all." (Ecclesiastes 7:28). Just as it applies for ~50% of humanity, this also applies between human groups.
>>19477 >Niggers and other shitskins are less than Shudra It depends on their behavior. That is how caste is determined. By the standards of the Vedic scriptures, most Whites today are chandalas and subhumans for not following the Vedas. That's what a chandala is, someone who doesn't follow the injunctions of the shastras and their own dharma. > I correctly identified Arjuna being told how those rules of honor didn't apply to his kinfolk But they did. The Bhagavad Gita has a context in a larger scripture. Arjuna fought according the following rules: <Persons equally circumstanced must encounter each other, fighting fairly. And if having fought fairly the combatants withdraw (without fear of molestation), even that would be gratifying to us. Those who engaged in contests of words should be fought against with words. Those that left the ranks should never be slain. A car-warrior should have a car-warrior for his antagonist; he on the neck of an elephant should have a similar combatant for his foe; a horse should be met by a horse, and a foot-soldier, O Bharata; should be met by a foot-soldier. Guided by considerations of fitness, willingness, daring and might, one should strike another, giving notice. No one should strike another that is unprepared or panic-struck. One engaged with another, one seeking quarter, one retreating, one whose weapon is rendered unfit, uncased in mail, should never be struck. Car-drivers, animals (yoked to cars or carrying weapons) men engaged in the transport of weapons, players on drums and blowers of conches should never be struck. https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m06/m06001.htm Even more is said here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurukshetra_War#Rules_of_Engagement >What is Adharmic is allowing our race to fall and die, due to our failure to realize that engaging in honorable warfare will only get us killed. What is Dharmic is not up to a text, no matter how holy you might think it is. Those texts aren't the Word of Orlog, and even if they were, it's been in the hands of fallible men, and subhumans for far too long, as such it isn't it isn't infallible, or even close to perfect even in an oral tradition. So there's no reason for you to be using Vedic terminology if you don't even care what the Vedas say.
>>19503 No, the castes are fixed. The people were BORN into it. Civic nationalists are not welcome here.
>>19512 Vajrasuchika Upanishad BTFOs you, and it is considered to be Śruti, i.e. the highest level of authority along with the other Upanishads. The Ramayana BTFOs you as well, given how the Balakanda has a lengthy story of how Vishvamitra, by birth a kshatriya, becomes a great brahmana. The Mahabharata BTFOs you too, as would you would be aware if you had read the Dana Dharma section of the Anushusana Parva, in particular the 113th chapter, which reads: <If a kshatriya or vaishya follows a brahmana's dharma and lives in the manner indicated for brahmanas, he too can obtain the status of a brahmana. If a person abandons the status of a brahmana and follows the dharma of a kshatriya, he is dislodged from the status of a brahmana and is reborn a kshatriya. The status of a brahmana is extremely difficult to obtain [...] However by performing the acts associated with virtuous conduct, a shudra can obtain the status of a brahmana and a vaishya that of a kshatriya. [...] A shudra who is pure in deeds, pure in his soul, and has conquered his senses can obtain the status of becoming a brahmana. Brahma himself said this. It is my view that a shudra who is naturally pure in his deeds should be known as one who is purer than a brahmana. Birth, sacraments, learning and humility are not sufficient reasons for a person to be a brahmana. Conduct is the only reason. The Law Code of Manu BTFOs you as well for saying that people can lose their caste statuses as well, and be demoted. >Civic nationalists are not welcome here. Varna has to do with role in a societal hierarchy, it has nothing to do with race, retard.
>>19243 >Daily reminder that Christian Europe conquered the planet. Tired meme, Nietzsche. False. Europe re-introduced to its' Greco-Roman roots conquered the world. Kikestian Europe lived in squalor, was humiliated and conquered on all fronts. >Tautological statement. Banal. Still haven't drawn the 'ought' from the 'is' though, buddy. Mentally ill semite-worshipper does not know how to formulate sentences and use proper punctuation. Like clockwork >Modern society is rampant with paganism and you blame Christians ahaha. Homosexuality and trannydom are endemic to pagan cultures. Atheism is kikestianity with the jew nailed to a doorframe. The same disgusting, slave-moralist pig-drivel underscores it like a plague. Tolerance, empathy, love, matriarchy. Nothing to do with the Ancient, true world of Europe.
>>19521 >Tolerance Not a Christian virtue. Romans 12:9—"Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good." So clearly genuine love involves willing what is good for the other, and abhoring what is evil and ungodly. Likewise in 1 Corinthians 5:11-14—"But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”" Not even charity is for the ungodly: "Give to a godly man, but do not help the sinner. Do good to a godly man, but do not give to an ungodly man" (Wisdom of Sirach 12:4-5). Ephesians 5:11-12—Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret. TL;DR - Expose evil, hate evil, do not associate with evildoers. True love does not involve tolerance, but showing and proclaiming the truth. >love Jesus taught to love God and to love one's neighbor, the practical application of this is found in Matthew 7:12 "So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets." This same teaching was repeated over and over again by ancient European philosophers. It is an ethic of reciprocity and altruism Isocrates <Manifest your good will towards me in deeds rather than in words. Do not do to others that which angers you when they do it to you <Deal with weaker states as you would expect stronger states to deal with you < they exulted less in the exercise of power than they gloried in living with self-control, thinking it their duty to feel toward the weaker as they expected the stronger to feel toward themselves https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0144%3Aspeech%3D3%3Asection%3D61 https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Isoc.%202.24&lang=original https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Isoc.%204.81&lang=original https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isocrates Plato <may I be of a sound mind, and do to others as I would that they should do to me https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1750/pg1750-images.html Sextus the Pythagorean <What you do not want to happen to you, do not do it yourself either. http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/sent.html Thales <"How shall we lead the best and most righteous life?" "By refraining from doing what we blame in others." https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0258%3Abook%3D1%3Achapter%3D1 No wonder Europeans accepted Christianity so quickly, as the fundamental basis of the Law and the Prophets was taught by eminent European philosophers for hundreds and hundreds of years beforehand! >matriarchy. Ephesians 5:22–24: "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands." 1 Timothy 2:13-15: "For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control. Titus 2:4-5: "and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled"
>>19535 It's hilariously pathetic how long and drawn out your pathetic response is. You just kept waffling on like subhuman that you are. Crying like a bitch about evil even though you are specifically told to turn the other cheek. Exposing things is irrelevant. Only action against it matters. Not to mention that it is evil that is needed, not goodness. Then you immediately proceed to shit it all up by mentioning the kike Yeshua explicitly used the golden rule in his teachings, on of the most common arguments of egalitarian vermin. For fuck's sake, you're legitimately retarded. Finally, you choose to cherrypick from your repugnant kike-book, picking the most obscure, irrelevant and denounced verses, whilst infamous ones like no jew or greek continue to dominate kikestian ideology today. Neck yourself.
(44.64 KB 383x420 jew brain npc.jpg)
>>19554 > Not to mention that it is evil that is needed, not goodness. Everything I need to see right here.
(107.95 KB 900x675 xcvfghghjmhjk,jhklyh.jpg)
>>19556 Whatever gets you through the night, little kike-worshipper. We are coming for you all.
>>19501 salient points, as before. the pagan gods can be a strange bunch of entities, even if they're of my people. but criticisms can also be made against YHWH. my final issue with Christianity is that it's a Levantine religion. it sprouted from the Near East, specifically Roman Judea. while it's been grafted onto the West for many centuries, its roots are ultimately not of my people. >The mind is shaped of course by environment, genetics, one's gender, etc., but I believe that in some sense that there is an aspect of the individual which transcends the purely causal / deterministic nexus that would otherwise exist. there is nature (genetics/instinct), nurture (culture/environment), and the soul (metaphysical self). all these components influence who a person is, and the ratio between them can vary.
>>19584 >the pagan gods can be a strange bunch of entities, even if they're of my people. I see pagans say that the gods are 'of their people' quite often, but I often find myself skeptical of this claim. Even the ancient Europeans pre-Christianity tended to stress whenever they could, even when talking about non-European peoples, that a given god that a people worshiped was actually just a god that these themselves worshiped among their people. For example, when Tacitus writes of the Germanic tribes, he writes things such as: <Above all other gods they worship Mercury, and count it no sin, on certain feast-days, to include human victims in the sacrifices offered to him. Hercules and Mars they appease by offerings of animals, in accordance with ordinary civilized custom. Some of the Suebi sacrifice also to Isis https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~wstevens/history331texts/barbarians.html Instead of saying that these people worshiped completely different deities, a Roman writing writing in the 1st and 2nd centuries looked at their practices and concluded that they were worshiping Mercury, Hercules, Mars, Isis, etc. The fact that Isis is mentioned too is significant, because Isis is an Egyptian goddess originally. I don't think the evidence supports this idea of people having completely separate gods in pagan religions from other peoples. The pagan practices were highly syncretistic. A perfect example that exists to this day is the figure of Heracles. Heracles is still worshiped in Japan. Heracles in Greco-Buddhist thought was connected with Vajrapāṇi, known in Japan as Shukongōshin. Even today, these statues of Heracles still stand before Buddhist temples as representations of the Dharmapala, i.e. the defenders of dharma. See some of the pics and links attached: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nio#Hellenistic_influence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajrapani Many more examples could be provided, but the general concept of recognizing one's own gods in the gods of other peoples was frequent in ancient Europe and also in ancient Japan, regarding the kami and the buddhas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretatio_graeca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretatio_germanica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honji_suijaku One can find exceptions to the rule, though, of course not every god be 1:1 identified with that of another people. >but criticisms can also be made against YHWH. The main difference comes down to the nature of the pagan gods and the nature of the God of the Bible. What sets YHWH apart is that He has no mythology in the sense that pagan gods do. He has no legends of personal debauchery, bestiality, rapes, homosexuality, etc. He has no theogony, He has no one who can oppose Him in His omnipotence, and thus no theomachy in the way that Greek and Near Eastern gods always had in their legends. Older generations of pagan gods were overthrown and replaced. The Titans were surplanted by the Olympians, many of the Titans were killed, etc. YHWH cannot be replaced, YHWH is not threatened by anything, YWHW is not born, He does not die. His theophany to Moses in Exodus 3 defines Him - <So Moses said to God, "Indeed when I go to the children of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers sent me to you,' and they ask me 'What is His name?' what shall I tell them? <Then God said to Moses, "I AM the Existing One." He also said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: 'The Existing One sent me to you'" That's what the Septuagint says - "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν" is how God identifies Himself, as the Existing One. The Hebrew gives the more familiar - "ehye ’ăšer ’ehye", 'I am who I am'. Tellingly, the best theories of the origins of Yahweh's name (for it has no parallels in parallel cultures) is that it comes from this Hebrew phrase said to Moses. We have One who claims to be 'The Existing One', and then on the other hand we have a bunch of gods named 'Thunder' (Thor) or 'Sky' (Zeus) and similar things. One could of course complain about aspects of the Old Covenant (circumcision, animal sacrifice), but as was mentioned earlier, this was for the lawless and disobedient according to 1 Timothy 1:9-10. The New Covenant was foretold in the OT, namely in Jeremiah 31 among other places, and everything in the Old is merely a shadow of the New (Hebrews 10:1).
(148.40 KB 1200x1303 jesus transfiguration.jpg)
>>19584 2/2 >my final issue with Christianity is that it's a Levantine religion. it sprouted from the Near East, specifically Roman Judea. while it's been grafted onto the West for many centuries, its roots are ultimately not of my people I consider the origins to be essentially irrelevant, personally. I don't think the modern Jews have much if anything to do with the Jews of today, who are largely mongrels of Mediterranean, Turkish and Slavic roots. Surviving artistic depictions of Israelites, their features and certain things mentioned implicitly in accounts of certain authors testify that they were mostly indistinguishable from Greeks at the time. Even if this is true (and I could provide more information if pressed), this too is irrelevant, for reasons already mentioned elsewhere, such as gentiles being in the genealogy of Jesus, the prophecies in Psalms and Isaiah about the whole world coming to worship God, and accounts of non-Jews becoming Jews in places such as Esther 8:17, showing that the Talmudic readings of the Bible are groundless. Even with the nation of Israelites themselves (for they were predominantly of one group, true), it is not hard to see that these people have major problems. The story of the Israelites is one of constant rebellion against God, constant slips into paganism and degeneracy. In their own book. It's almost uncanny. And then, with the fulfillment of the prophecies, God Himself took on the flesh among them, and what did they do? Exactly what we would expect, they nailed Him to a cross. And at the end of the day, we can see that the philosophies of Europe were tending in the same direction as Christianity right around the time that Christianity came to Europe. Very good (if not providential) timing. >there is nature (genetics/instinct), nurture (culture/environment), and the soul (metaphysical self). all these components influence who a person is, and the ratio between them can vary. Agreed
>>19635 >I consider the origins to be essentially irrelevant That is because you are cucked and can be easily swayed to worshipping a brownoid mythical tale of how they wuz divine n shiet. >. I don't think the modern Jews have much if anything to do with the Jews of today Ancient Jews were different than Talmuds in the sense that they weren't as massive degenerates, although the racial tribalism and ethnonationalism still remained, despite their plagarism of Hellenic philosphy. Again more cuckoldry perspectives out of (((You))). >largely mongrels of Mediterranean, Turkish and Slavic roots. You're talking about modern Jews dumbass, not Jews during Jesus who did not intermix much. Judaism was still cancer before the Khazars, the Greeks and Romans saw their true nature long before. >Surviving artistic depictions of Israelites, their features and certain things mentioned implicitly in accounts of certain authors testify that they were mostly indistinguishable from Greeks at the time I think you mean Jews are trying to we wuz by creating fake accounts. Jews and Greeks weren't the same and they looked nothing like. We wuzzn't Israelis n shiet. Again the Greeks hated the Levantine and monotheists. Jesus weeps in hell knowing his followers are all single digit.
(355.58 KB 1125x1456 jesus 2.jpg)
(973.27 KB 1080x941 huqoq synagogue art.jpg)
>>19689 >and can be easily swayed to worshipping a brownoid mythical tale of how they wuz divine n shiet. Jesus wasn't brown though, so your point falls flat. There's a lot of evidence for this. From Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews: <And when he had given them [Jews /Descendants of the high priesthood] leave, they also hid the circumcision of their genitals; that even when they were naked they might appear to be Greeks. Accordingly they left off all the customs that belonged to their own country, and imitated the practices of the other nations. So the obvious implication here is that the Jews were able to completely blend in with the Greeks when they were naked other than their cultural practice of circumcision. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/ant-12.html <We reconstructed the genetic structure of the Levantines and found that a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316 Artistic evidence from uncovered synagogues such as that of Huqoq and Dura-Europos depicts numerous Biblical figures in ways that are indistinguishable from European phenotypes (attached images). This is even supported by Biblical evidence such as the statement in Genesis 25:25 of Esau, brother of Jacob, having red-hair, which is a trait which is of course most frequent in Europe and those with a European phenotype. All of this is perfectly in harmony with the thread here 'The Hidden History of the Aryan Race' >>2541. Even if you don't like Christianity, these people were White. Muhammad was White too, even though he's an obvious false prophet.
>>19705 >Jesus wasn't brown though Since there is now and has always been a historical debate as to the *existence* of this (((person))) we'll just call this a spit-balling discussion. The skin color of a jew is totally and completely irrelevant. A jew is a jew. Every jew that has ever taken a breath of air on earth is evil - it is a defining trait in their DNA and is not by any choice. ERGO: 'if' (((jesus))) was 'god made flesh', then (((jesus))) was evil at (((his))) very core. ALL of this is even further proof that all the jesus bullshit is all made up and as a person this thing never existed.
>>19714 >A jew is a jew. Every jew that has ever taken a breath of air on earth is evil There's no proof for this statement that Jews are inherently and always pure evil. There's a tendency, sure. The Bible supports this though, if you had ever read it. When it comes to the Jews themselves and their nature, even God knew the Jews were a stubborn, stiff-necked (Exodus 32:9) and rebellious people (Deuteronomy 31:27, 29), Aaron, brother of Moses, said that they were inclined towards evil (Exodus 32:22). They continue this behavior to this very day. This is the major theme of the Old Testament, that they struggle with God, which is why Jacob was renamed 'Israel' for wrestling with God in Genesis. This is the history of these people, then and now. >ERGO: 'if' (((jesus))) was 'god made flesh', then (((jesus))) was evil at (((his))) very core. If Jesus was God made flesh, He Himself is the Source of the very standards of 'good' versus 'evil', as goodness is defined from accordance with the nature and character of God. You have no objective standard to ground these categories, so you fall flat. >ALL of this is even further proof that all the jesus bullshit is all made up and as a person this thing never existed. We have four independent Gospel sources, the letters of Paul, the mentions of Jesus by Josephus (which, even if you discount the one in part or in whole, no one disputes the authenticity of the other), the mentions of Jesus in the Talmud as some sort of sorcerer and magician who was killed on the eve of Passover just like the Bible says, the letter of Mara Bar-Serapion from the 1st century, the 2nd century Roman sources from Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, etc. Also worth noting that there is zero evidence that non-Christians (and even anti-Christians) at the time or ever after disputed the existence of Jesus, such as Celsus, Julian, etc. Not to mention the other figures whose existence no-one doubts who were in direction succession from the disciples of Jesus, such as Irenaeus of Lyons (130–202 AD), who was a disciple of Polycarp (AD 69 – 155), who was a disciple of John the Apostle (c. 6 AD – c. 100 AD). Same with Ignatius of Antioch (died c. 108/140 AD), who was a disciple of the Apostle John with Polycarp, and was the second bishop of Antioch after another disciple of Jesus, Simon Peter. Of course people like Ignatius also have many epistles where they refer to the crucifixion of Jesus.
(171.09 KB 1287x308 1465341687896-1.jpg)
(208.12 KB 1888x782 1461349086858-2.png)
(221.71 KB 1706x341 1464373676315.png)
>>19715 >(((halakha))) is the antithesis of the laws of nature Weird how ancient Jews thought the exact opposite, it's almost like (((Halakha))) is Talmudic nonsense What actual ancient Jews thought: <Hence it follows that Moses, as the author of the Torah, “had reached the very summit of philosophy” and “had learnt from the oracles of God the most numerous and important of the principles of nature” (Op. 8). Moses was also the interpreter of nature (Her. 213). By saying this Philo wanted to indicate that human wisdom has two origins: one is divine, the other is natural (Her. 182). Moreover, that Mosaic Law is not inconsistent with nature. A single law, the Logos of nature governs the entire world (Jos. 28-31) and its law is imprinted on the human mind (Prob. 46-47). Because of this we have a conscience that affects even wicked persons (QG 4.62). Wisdom is a consummated philosophy and as such has to be in agreement with the principles of nature (Mos. 2.48; Abr. 16; Op. 143; Spec. leg. 2.13; 3.46-47, 112, 137; Virt. 18). The study of philosophy has as its end “life in accordance with nature” and following the “path of right reason” (Mig. 128). Philosophy prepares us to a moral life, i.e., “to live in conformity with nature” (Prob. 160). From this follows that life in accordance with nature hastens us towards virtues (Mos. 2. 181; Abr. 60, Spec. leg. 1.155), and an unjust man is the one “who transgresses the ordinances of nature” (Spec. leg. 4.204; Cf. Decal. 132; Virt. 131-132; Plant. 49; Ebr. 142; Agr. 66). https://iep.utm.edu/philo/ Cities are dens of degeneracy in the Bible as well: >>18993.
>>19722 >Gustav Mahler >a Catholic Jew Ironic.
>>19714 Jesus was a sandnigger.
(1.87 MB 1998x2161 1460775204357-1.jpg)
(369.73 KB 1117x1017 1383168045338.png)
(776.46 KB 485x4823 1383099685883.jpg)
(307.99 KB 1263x1329 1423799652432.png)
>>19721 >(((Halakha))) is Talmudic nonsense Call it nonsense, but nonetheless (((they))) act on and observe such in more than typical fashion. >What actual ancient Jews thought: Again you misnomer and misrepresent, maybe you're more well referenced, but nonetheless full of pilpul. Oncemore, ancient Israelite's, those of the 12 tribes, of which one was named Judea, however this modern tribe clling themselves Jews are the usurpers of this name, in actuality unhuman gene stealers, perverted mimics of mankind. The text you cite is miscontextualized and I suspect intentionally so.
(88.27 KB 1441x826 1482952072551-0.png)
(535.92 KB 896x5808 1585457937157.png)
(3.15 MB 1705x1068 1459515658473.png)
(79.35 KB 720x679 1582599595516.jpg)
>>19727 >his modern tribe clling themselves Jews are the usurpers of this name I would never deny this. Even genetics show it.
>>19730 if christians whish to recover the religion then they must remove all the jewish elements and make a pure crosstianity, purely the ancient aryan beliefs that were plagiarised by kikes that might be pretty good actually
(1.31 MB 2000x1000 john Chrysostom jews.png)
>>19731 It wouldn't work. The Old Testament is valuable because it contains the prophecies for Jesus, and is traditionally read typologically, i.e. as pointing completely to Jesus (and there's a lot of surprising parallels even in the least expected of stories, really). And then in the New Testament itself, there are so many parallels, citations and sayings by Jesus that are from the Old Testament that any separation between them ruins the other and saps it of its significance. This kike-worship by Evangelical Zionists is a modern phenomenon, and is essentially a kind of idolatry. Instead of worshiping golden calves like ancient Israelites did, now the modern heretic bows before Christ-hating Jews and their criminal nation. It's mostly Protestants who fall into this, because they do not have a concept of 'tradition', they have scripture alone, and the interpretation of the Bible is left to relativism and masses. This is dangerous with any scripture, especially the Bible, which is more complex and multi-layered than many scriptures. The plagiarism stuff is a complete meme, too.
>>19732 >which is more complex There's not a single thing 'complex' about it - it's all judaic lies.
(21.06 KB 360x450 JESUS CHRIST 4.jpg)
>>19749 You've successfully demonstrated my claim.
>>19750 You have successfully demonstrated your impotence at running your country, christnigger.
>>19732 christianity is a cancer. There's nothing else that needs to be said.
>>19729 3rd picture is retarded. Also that isn't Khazarian warrior. It is Sviatoslav of Kiev, a Pagan Kievian king that defeated the Khazars. Also there was/is no genetic difference between Edomites, Caananites, and Israelites.2
>>19750 No, I didn't. What I said is that 'muh bible' is all Judaic lies. This includes in it's totally the lie of a person called 'muh jeezus' that only ever existed in the book of fiction called 'muh bible'. It's *ALL* a lie. Not a single word of it is true. It's all borrowed bits and pieces from other religions, then demonized by jews. The drawings, images and pictures that you post are all bullshit LARPs.
>>19816 >3rd picture [...] that isn't Khazarian warrior. It is Sviatoslav of Kiev, a Pagan Kievian king that defeated the Khazars. Ah, you are correct sir. A proper rebuke, it's been too long. Perhaps I'll even get around to updating the meme sometime soon.
(405.22 KB 828x1792 1595507228028.jpg)
>>19728 >>19729 > WE WUZ JOOOZ kek neck yourselves. Judeans are kikes are canaanites. They are all one and the same. No, it doesn't matter what your kikebook says on the subject, it is not a source for anything. They genetically indistinguishable from one another (modern day kikes, Yeshua-day kikes, pre-Yeshua day kikes and canaanites)
>>19718 >proof for this statement that Jews are inherently and always pure evil GigaKEK - look around nigger. >If Jesus was God made flesh, He Himself is the Source of the very standards of 'good' versus 'evil' Went right over your head dinnit? >four (((independent Gospel sources))) You're just digging yourself in deeper, doubling down on bullshit.
>>20022 >GigaKEK - look around nigger. In order to prove this you are going to have make a deductive argument where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. You won't be able to do this without begging the question, but feel free to try. You're relying on inductive reasoning here, which by definition cannot give you conclusive proof of your assertion, but can only rank them via how probable it is that this is true. At best, you can conclude that it is highly probable that modern Jews are prone to being anti-White and in positions of influence disproportionate to their numbers in non-Jewish societies. There is strong inductive evidence for this claim. >You're just digging yourself in deeper, doubling down on bullshit. Cope however you'd like. Your IQ is the sum of the digits of your post, and it is quite obvious. >>20014 >We reconstructed the genetic structure of the Levantines and found that a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316
>>20029 >In order to prove this you are going Pure Pilpul (tm) > Your IQ is the sum of the digits of your post IQ posting .. really. kek. ...and you end your shilling with a post to a kike 'study' It's so fucking easy to peel back the layers of you and see the kike feces.
(429.17 KB 399x614 not an argument.png)
>>20045 >doesn't know anything about inductive and deductive arguments >can't even formulate an argument for himself I've gotta say, there was a time when pagan-posters here could actually bring good arguments, but those days are long past. Sad.
>>20052 It's hard to take anything that comes from a christnigger seriously.
>>20014 Pardon my interjection, but Mormons are ironically the only "real Jews" who posit that Jesus was a White man born on another continent. As poz'd as they might be, they are the least poz'd version of Christianity. When someone is brainwashed (or brain-polluted as Ben Klassen puts it) since early childhood, it becomes very difficult to show them the truth. Maybe it would be more efficient to convert them into Mormons instead? It would make them slightly less subversive, if only just a little bit. And you can always quote the original materials to support the belief that niggers were created by satan and that modern Jews are fake af.
>>20065 Mormons have the same Old and New Testament as other Christians do, so in their view the main works of the incarnated Son of God happened in Judea and Galilee just like other Christians believe. What the Mormons add is that some of the lost tribes of Israel came over to America. Once Jesus resurrects and ascends into heaven apparently the Mormons believe that he descended and appeared in America too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon_chronology#The_coming_of_Christ >And you can always quote the original materials to support the belief that niggers were created by satan and that modern Jews are fake af. They don't believe that though, they just believe in some sort of 'Curse of Ham' thing. The kiked central church overturned it anyway.
>>20029 >>We reconstructed the genetic structure of the Levantines and found that a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316 Illiterate kikestian rat. Pre-Islamic = Roman, Greek. My studies = All the way back to 2000BC, clearly showing genetic compatibility between modern day kikes in Israel and all other semites who have lived there for the last 4000 years.
(51.04 KB 800x723 consider the following.jpg)
>>20029 >>20108 Genetics sperging is gay. Both of you kill yourselves, immediately. It's literally 'he said she said' nonsense, and none of you can test your claims by yourself, and a million different geneticists, most of them Jewish or funded by Jewish institutions, claim a million different things. This comes down to whatever claim a person likes better. There's a board for you retards on cuckchan, it's called /his/.
(8.21 KB 225x225 0.jpeg)
I have a genuine feeling that /fascist/ is run by a glownigger trying to D&C the WN movement using the most idiotic conflict possible: "Redpilled Christians vs Redpilled Pagans". You both have the same goals you fucking niggers, and the kikes hate both groups equally.
(5.48 MB 425x240 christcuck.gif)
>>20177 Not really. The main goal of christcucks is to make everyone worship their fake jewish messiah. Never forget that. That'll always take precedence over every other concern for them. This semitic slave cult is the backdoor through which jewish influence spreads itself. There's no point in building anything upon this rotten foundation. Likewise, christianity has never been weaker, more corrupt, divided and useless than it is today. It has proven itself unfit to provide any spiritual or moral foundation in the modern world. It is a grave mistake to ignore or embrace these schizophrenic desert fantasies and let it run amok for the sake of unity, especially as there's less and less to gain from it.
>>20179 Corneliu Zelea and Jose Antonio were a jewish cocksuckers?
>>20182 Oh, dear. Your christnigger brain is malfunctioning as usual. Next you'll cite Thomas Sowell as example of b-b-based blags and try to convince me that niggers aren't actually criminal, violent retards because of this one pseudo intellectual blag who parrots cuckservative ideology.
>>20182 Codreanu said he would still defend his people even if it meant that his immortal soul is being at risk of eternal hellfire. Not very christian of him. Much more pagan rather to commit phyletism which is viewed as an heresy just to defend his nation.
>>20186 Can you stop thinking about niggers for at least one minute and answer my question? >>20187 Humility and sacrifice are not exclusive to pagans.
>>20177 >kikes hate both groups equally This is SO not true. Do you actually believe that kikes would allow all of the 'muh jeezus' horseshit on (((their))) media if it weren't overwhelmingly furthering their cause? We all need to be thinking in these terms. If it's allowed on (((their))) media, it is ONLY for (((their))) benefit. And it's ALL lies.
>>20125 >Genetics sperging is gay Not NEARLY as fucking gay as posting queer anime memes faggot.
>>20177 > "Redpilled Christians" .... do not exist. Or they would not be (((christians)))
This user was banned.
>>20179 >The main goal of christcucks is to make everyone worship their fake jewish messiah. Never forget that. That'll always take precedence over every other concern for them Pure truth is written here.
>>20179 >It has proven itself unfit to provide any spiritual or moral foundation in the modern world. It's actually done quite the opposite: it's cucked a large portion of the White race. It is the greatest weapon of all time.
>>20192 When at least once kiked media showed a positive reference about how Jesus drove the jewish moneylenders out of the temple? Or  Revelation 2:8-9 and Revelation 3:7-9 about Synagogue of Satan? They subverting the truth, as all kikes do.
>>20194 >Redpilled Christians do not exist. Or they would not be (((christians))) Pure retardation.
>>20203 Rockwell was not a Christian, He hated Christianity and that was made known from his correspondance with Savitri Devi. Mosley was an abject failure who submitted to the british authority with only token resistance and died rather peacefully for a so-called fascist. Codreanu willingly submitted to certain death at the hands of the romanian king forsaking the stance he had just above where he would fight for his people even if his "immortal soul" were at risk of perdition.
>>20189 I answered your question but you didn't like it because I called you out so you pretend I didn't. Now you post black and White pictures from 70+ years ago as if any of this crap matters when we're talking about current trends. Even on their day these figures were fringe edgelords. You have to come to grips with the fact that christianity has failed. It wasn't christians who failed, it wasn't christian nations, it was christianity itself. Christianity has been waiting and promising the kikelord would come back for 2000 fucking years. Get a clue, faggot. People are not going to wait forever for this fantasy to come true. It boggles the mind they have waited this long. It was only through force that stupidity was maintained but now you don't have that anymore. Some of the more insane christian sects have downright turned themselves into slaves for the kikes and are trying to start ww3 or something as a last ditch effort to make the faggot kikelord come back but even if they succeed it's not gonna happen because it was all a lie from day one.
(2.52 MB 360x360 Trisagion.mp4)
>>20210 It's so sad to read posts like this, because they are founded on a complete ignorance of actual Christian teachings and a utter disdain for great fascist men such as Corneliu Zelea Codreanu and José Antonio Primo de Rivera, men who actually fought and suffered for their country, lambasted by LARPers on the Internet for being Christian and actually daring to actualize their beliefs to the best that they could. You show yourself to be off a petty mob-mentality when you dismiss these men as 'fringe' and 'edgelords'. You also completely fail to understand the purpose of Christianity because your mind has been tainted by Enlightenment conceptions of the world. Christianity isn't like Marxism, or Liberalism or the modern mindset in general, it doesn't seek to build a 'Heaven on Earth', because it doesn't view this life as the be-all and end-all of existence, but it is a mistake to say that Christianity does not think this life matters, that is a complete misunderstanding and lie. The goal of Christianity involves growing ever closer in likeness to God, and participating in the uncreated and eternal love shared in the Holy Trinity by the grace of God. God became man so that man might become a god. St. Athanasius wrote that. The Bible teaches this sort of theosis as well. Christianity cannot 'fail' because Christianity is the truth. Jesus Christ is coming back. If you had had experiences of Jesus Christ, you would have faith in His promises as well. I pray that you come to discover this one day. All of the Earth waited thousands of years for Christ to come and to recreate things anew, and we cannot know when Christ will come back. It is obvious that things are following what the Bible foretold as we speak. And if you studied the pedigree of the (((revolution))) of the last few centuries, you would see that the ideology is uniformly Satanic in character, and largely peddled by Jews and other occultists. Only Jesus Christ can make sense of this picture. I can already anticipate the replies to this post, and most of them will just be vitriol, and just won't get it. I feel bad for the people who are leading themselves to hell over Jew-loving Protestant evangelicals, throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
>>20187 >rather to commit phyletism which is viewed as an heresy just to defend his nation. There is no historical Christian theologian, priest or bishop of any prominence who has ever taught this nonsense you are peddling. You don't even know what phyletism is, and it is not the same as patriotism. <In the [Muslim] Saracen encampment they asked St. Cyril [Enlightener of the Slavs]: “How can Christians wage war and at the same time keep Christ’s commandment to pray to God for their enemies?’ To this, St. Cyril replied: “If two commandments were written in one law and given to men for fulfilling, which man would be a better follower of the law: The one who fulfilled one commandment or the one who fulfilled both?’ The Saracens replied: “Undoubtedly, he who fulfills both commandments.” St. Cyril continued: “Christ our God commands us to pray to God for those who persecute us and even do good to them, but He also said to us, Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13). That is why we bear the insults that our enemies cast at us individually and why we pray to God for them. However, as a society, we defend one another and lay down our lives, so that the enemy would not enslave our brethren, would not enslave their souls with their bodies, and would not destroy them in both body and soul.” * This excerpt is from “The Prologue of Ohrid” by St. Nicholas Velimirovic of Zica
(598.04 KB 1028x1488 WiK68Da.jpg)
>>20205 >Rockwell was not a Christian, He hated Christianity and that was made known from his correspondance with Savitri Devi. Yeah, William Dudley Pelley would be more appropriate here. After all, Silver Shirt is board's mascot. >Mosley was an abject failure who submitted to the british authority with only token resistance and died rather peacefully for a so-called fascist. A rather harsh attitude towards one of the greatest man in history of Britain. Nevertheless, does his failure make him any less Christian or redpilled?
(1.42 MB 2500x3000 fascist with flag.png)
>>20224 One of our best pieces of OC
>>20226 I wonder what that Pol Pot thread has
>>20219 You're just another retard who made up your own christianity and acts like you're the allknower of the universe, all while feigning humility and concern for others. But your pride is made obvious when you repeatedly declare how much you know and much others don't know. Meanwhile all you have to back up your claims are your personal feelings, flowery language and kike tales. Go fuck yourself with a chainsaw, faggot.
(146.65 KB 600x534 shepard question marks.jpg)
>>20233 I haven't made up anything, everything I said is founded on well-founded and time-tested teachings. I challenge you to show me one thing I 'made up'. And it's simply a fact that that anon and others like him are ignorant of basic facts about Christianity. Falsehoods and misunderstandings ought to be corrected. I know anons here get assblasted when you try to show them actual arguments and truths though
>>20235 I'm sure many christians would consider it heresy for you to think you can become a god.
(201.29 KB 700x400 theosis.jpg)
>>20238 A person cannot become God in the sense of becoming a person in the Holy Trinity. The created cannot become uncreated. What the Bible does affirm, and what the Church Fathers do affirm, is becoming a god by the grace of God, i.e. partaking in the divine nature and the divine likeness. This is called theosis and is held by all ancient churches and the Apostolic churches today. This is also what the language of adoption and being made co-heirs with Christ in the Pauline epistles is referring to as well (e.g. Romans 8.14-17). This is the telos of human existence, but sadly forgotten by most Christians today. A few examples - 'John 10:34 >Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 'John 17:20-26 >I am not asking on behalf of them alone, but also on behalf of those who will believe in Me through their message, that all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May they also be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. I have given them the glory You gave Me, so that they may be one as We are one—I in them and You in Me—that they may be perfectly united, so that the world may know that You sent Me and have loved them just as You have loved Me. Father, I want those You have given Me to be with Me where I am, that they may see the glory You gave Me because You loved Me before the foundation of the world. Righteous Father, although the world has not known You, I know You, and they know that You sent Me. And I have made Your name known to them and will continue to make it known, so that the love You have for Me may be in them, and I in them.” '2 Peter 1:3-4 >His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through the knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence. Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature St. Athanasius > For man is by nature mortal, inasmuch as he is made out of what is not; but by reason of his likeness to Him that is (and if he still preserved this likeness by keeping Him in his knowledge) he would stay his natural corruption, and remain incorrupt; as Wisdom Wisdom 6:18 says: "The taking heed to His laws is the assurance of immortality;" but being incorrupt, he would live henceforth as God, to which I suppose the divine Scripture refers, when it says: "I have said you are gods, and you are all sons of the most Highest; but you die like men, and fall as one of the princes." https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2802.htm 'St. Irenaeus >[T]he only true and stedfast Teacher, the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.vii.i.html St. Justin Martyr >[Men] were made like God, free from suffering and death, provided that they kept His commandments, and were deemed deserving of the name of His sons, and yet they, becoming like Adam and Eve, work out death for themselves; let the interpretation of the Psalm be held just as you wish, yet thereby it is demonstrated that all men are deemed worthy of becoming "gods," and of having power to become sons of the Highest." https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iv.cxxiv.html St. Clement >yea, I say, the Word of God became man, that thou mayest learn from man how man may become God https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.ii.i.html St. Gregory Nazianzen >"Because," said he, "this is not the will of my real Sovereign; nor can I, who am the creature of God, and bidden myself to be God, submit to worship any creature." https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/310243.htm St. Basil of Caesarea >Just as when a sunbeam falls on bright and transparent bodies, they themselves become brilliant too, and shed forth a fresh brightness from themselves, so souls wherein the Spirit dwells, illuminated by the Spirit, themselves become spiritual, and send forth their grace to others. Hence comes foreknowledge of the future, understanding of mysteries, apprehension of what is hidden, distribution of good gifts, the heavenly citizenship, a place in the chorus of angels, joy without end, abiding in God, the being made like to God, and, highest of all, the being made God. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3203.htm
>>20240 I don't think they 'forgot'. I think they consider it heretical. That's literally the temptation that the serpent used 'ye shall be as gods'. These saints of yours talk like a serpent.
(37.41 KB 480x530 jesus christ.jpg)
>>20243 The writings of the Saints are founded and rooted in Scripture and Tradition. This is where this doctrine comes from, and even from the standpoint of Scripture alone, this is the conclusion that we come to (as would be expected, given that this doctrine would not exist if it were not eminently scriptural). Psalm 82 is the locus classicus of this idea, and it is of course what Jesus is quoting in John 10. It only really comes to shine in the New Testament, as theosis becomes open to us with the incarnation of Christ, and it is a process that will never end, because the finite can never become the infinite, there is always more room to grow. As Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 3:18, "And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit." The prayer of Jesus in John 17 is another beautiful example of theosis. As can be seen in the quote above, Jesus prays that we may become one as the Father and the Son are one, the Son in the us, and the Father in the Son "perfectly united". Those who write of these doctrines are clear to point out that we may never become God in essence, or by nature, for we by nature are created, finite beings, who, through God's grace, can partake in His eternal and uncreated love that is shared among the Holy Trinity, becoming ever nearer to God in communion, and in His likeness. But never shall we become anything like eternal hypostases within the Holy Trinity. This is impossible. If one thinks of a sword put into fire, we know that the sword will begin to brightly glow and heat up to extreme temperatures, partaking in the nature of the fire. This is what St. Peter describes in 2 Peter 1:3-4 with the divine nature. To call the words of the early church fathers like that of the serpents is dangerously close to claiming that the Church that Jesus Christ founded and sent the Holy Spirit unto failed within a generation of its founding, as St. Clement was a 1st century church father and early bishop of Rome, St. Irenaeus was a disciple of St. Polycarp, who was a direct disciple of St. John the Apostle himself. The doctrine of theosis has been a core doctrine of authentic, apostolic Christianity from the very beginning. The difference between the words of the serpent and the words of the Bible, the Apostles and the Saints is clear. What did the serpent say? The serpent told Adam and Eve to question God's words, and to disobey the one commandment that God gave them in Eden. Does anything of the nature of goodness, godliness or truth come from rebelling against God and shifting from an outlook of theocentrism to sin? No. This is why, when Adam and Eve failed to repent, that they were given over to corruption, strife, and death. Through the incarnation of Jesus Christ and His assumption of a human nature along with His divine nature we can come closer to God than ever before, and grow ever more into the likeness of the God in Whose image we are created. This is the telos of human existence, which begins in this life, continues after death and continues for eternity. "But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2).
Christianity being a theological reform of Judaism, is naturally polytheistic, because Judaism is a branch of Caananite native religion. Jews and Christcucks know that there's multiple consciousnesses in the universe. They just use angels, demons, and saints as coping mechanisms as explanations Yahweh is El, and Jesus is Baal. The gods of Mount Zaphon are now the gods of Mount Sinai. What is old becomes new again.
>>20194 >This user was banned. *PROOF* this board fucking kiked.
This user was banned.
>>20203 >Pure retardation. Rockwell? Christian? *Who's* the retard?
>>20248 Better watch out. People get banned here for talking against muh Jah-ee-zus. It appears that speaking out against the (((bible))) is becoming verboten here.
>>20192 >>20193 >>20194 >>20195 >>20196 >User FashBO banned the posters of the following posts: 20194 from board /fascist/ until Wed Dec 22 2021 20:16:54 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with reason "quadposting like a retard". >>20257 >>20258 >>20259 Stop being a fucking retard
>>20258 I already said that I was wrong about Rockwell here >>20224 But I have yet to hear what makes others "not fascist" despite being Christian.
why visit an anti-Christian thread for the purpose of discussing Christianity with those that quite openly hate him? have common sense, this site is owned by Godless aussies and sodomords most of modern "Christians" are anti-White cowards who will burn in the lake of fire anyways either make a Christian NSG or stop casting pearls before swine
>>20266 The ones who claim Christianity is "Jewish" in any way hate not the Jews, but Christ. Do you ever see them campaigning against anything aside from Him? Look for similarities between them, and every other leftist's emotional [illogical] reason. Their reason to believe is not conscious, because they are not conscious. They are the crowd beast, as are all who are degenerate & weak to satanic influence.
>>20270 You're the one who sounds like an outraged leftie though. You were so buttmad you even double posted.
>>20244 I have no idea what makes a person behave like this but you sure are on all levels of mind fuckery. You say you feel sad for me but you should feel sad for yourself because you have clearly replaced reality and lived experience with this self-reinforcing jewish fantasy that comes built-in with all sorts of rhetorical tricks to protect and maintain itself. It's clearly some kind of memetic disease that hijacked your brain and funnels your efforts into its propagation like a virus. It was not this mindset that made the west great, And its not this mindset that has any chance of standing up to its enemies. But that probably doesn't concern you since you convinced yourself you're not of this world. That's truly insidious.
>>20271 >All books of the bible written by jews >even in the bible, jesus is a jew >jesus promotes race mixing in the bible >jesus OUTRIGHT TELLS everyone reading that evil book that he is a WEAPON sigh. anon, you've allowed yourself to be cucked and then you've doubled-down on your own cuckery. Then, you come and shit up a pagan fascist board. Do you think you're going to 'convert' someone here, kek?
>>20271 >aw, gawd they hate jewsus So jewish.
>>20278 You forgot, Christianity was supposed to be for jewish people only, until Paul realized it was useful for weakening White civlization. Jews realized very soon they had to abandon Christ to survive. Whites haven't yet. Also remember, where does interseccionalistm come from? communism and progressivism. Liberalism. Protestantism. Christianity. "The first hippie". They think Catholicism is the answer, it's just a troyan horse, outside is White tradition, but inside it's still Christ: equality as the highest moral value. The same thing they fight against. They would be much better without him.
(440.59 KB 3043x1924 jesus last supper.jpg)
>>20283 They evidently can't stand the dude so much that Jews refuse to use the plus sign in Israel, writing ﬩ instead of +, and likewise refused to sign their own names with an X, instead writing an O, giving them their nickname 'kikes' (which ironically enough, then, is a nickname which highlights their hatred of the cross) >>20269 >why visit an anti-Christian thread for the purpose of discussing Christianity with those that quite openly hate him? I try to look for people who want open and honest discussion, but there are two many one-track minds and people who refuse to admit they are wrong even when it is demonstrated to them. Most of it is casting pearls before swine, and isn't worth wasting time on, such as this person: >>20273. >>20278 >All books of the bible written by jews All of the books of the Bible were written by Israelites, though two major books of the New Testament were written by Luke, namely Acts and the Gospel of Luke. Luke was a Gentile by birth. The Biblical definition of Israelite doesn't have to do with race anyway, as has already been demonstrated with Moses wife / wives, the Book of Ruth, Esther 8:17, prophetic Psalms and parts of Isaiah, etc. So it's really irrelevant. I've yet to see any rebuttals to these claims, which are drawn straight from the Bible. >jesus is a jew Jesus is a Judahite, which is one of the twelve tribes of Israel. And even then, he has several non-Israelites in his lineage such as Ruth, Rahab, etc. who became Israelites. >jesus promotes race mixing in the bible Another classic example of someone taking verses relating to salvation and putting them on a material level that only a soulless modern person with a materialistic hermeneutic could make. >jesus OUTRIGHT TELLS everyone reading that evil book that he is a WEAPON No, retard, he said that what he taught would be divisive, and that his followers would inevitably suffer and die, as with every higher ideal and cause followed to the end. You have a conformist mob mentality if you think what he taught here is bad. If you think about it, Jesus was basically the Übermensch, killed by a resentful democratic mob of bloodthirsty Jews. The definition of quality over quantity. The same sorts of conflicts arise today when one fights against the narrative and pursues higher ideals. I really hope you aren't a bugman who puts conformity about truth and righteousness. Plus, Biblical prophecies prove that Jesus Christ was legit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvcacfA9WRg
(147.15 KB 943x1200 jesus 3.jpg)
>>20293 >Christianity was supposed to be for jewish people only Hahaha Retard alert. It’s so easy to tell when people have never opened a Bible. He has many interactions with non-Jews, and His interactions with Gentiles are all positive. Jesus commended the ‘great faith’ of a Roman centurion in Matthew 8, and uses this opportunity to say that “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. I say to you that many will come from the east and the west to share the banquet with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” In John 4 Jesus speaks with a Samaritan woman and due to her faith in Christ, whole villages of Samaritans came to Christ (John 4:39-42). In Matthew 15 Jesus expels a demon from a Canaanite woman’s daughter, saying “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted“. And let’s not forget the Great Commission at the end of every Gospel, where Jesus tells his disciples to baptize ALL NATIONS in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And finally, Jesus says in Matthew 21:33-46 a parable that predicts that the ‘tenants’ of the vineyard who have killed the prophets and who would kill the Son would be kicked out and that the vineyard would be given to a ‘new people’. The Pharisees sperg out, realizing that Jesus is condemning them. As God said to Abraham, all nations of this earth would be blessed through him, and by ‘through him’ is meant the coming of Christ. We must also remember that Jesus had non-Israelites in his geneology. Rahab, a Canaanite, for one, and Ruth, a Moabite, on the other. Moses himself had a Midianite or a Cushite wife (it’s a matter of debate whether this refers to the same woman), i.e. a non-Israelite wife. Even Acts testifies to the existence of large numbers of Gentiles who followed the God of Israel in the 1st century, but who had not become full Jews due to things such as circumcision requirements. The New Covenant, predicted in the OT, needless to say, abolished these onerous requirements. Psalm 22:27-28 <All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations will bow down before him, for dominion belongs to the Lord and he rules over the nations. Psalm 86:8-10 <Among the gods there is none like you, Lord; no deeds can compare with yours. All the nations you have made will come and worship before you, Lord; they will bring glory to your name. For you are great and do marvelous deeds; you alone are God. Isaiah 56:6-8 <And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord to minister to him, to love the name of the Lord, and to be his servants, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant—these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations.” The Sovereign Lord declares—he who gathers the exiles of Israel: “I will gather still others to them besides those already gathered.” Esther 8:17 <And many people of other nationalities became Jews because fear of the Jews had seized them.
>>20295 That's what I was saying, by inviting everyone into judaism he was destroying jewish identity. That's why Christianity became for White people only after Paul, to destroy White identity. Why do you think the jews let Paul live? He saved them.
>>20297 >Why do you think the jews let Paul live? We can see numerous points in Acts where Paul's life is literally saved by the Romans from the hands of angry Jews who wish to kill him and stone him. Paul is escorted out of Jerusalem by contingent of two hundred Roman soldiers (Acts 23:23-24) and appeals to the emperor for protection, and is taken to Rome to address and preach before the emperor of Rome. >That's why Christianity became for White people only after Paul It's not though. The Book of Acts shows thousands of Jews coming to Christ at Pentecost, and continuing after that. They were to first come to the Jews, and then to go to the Gentiles. In every city Paul visited, he went right to the synagogues and began arguing and fighting with the Jews over the Scriptures, which led to him being chased out of cities, stoned and imprisoned multiple times. Even the Pauline epistles talk about the relations of Jews and Gentiles in the Church and questions of the Law and its relation to the New Covenant. So what you are peddling is a myth.
>>20298 He went rigth to the synagoges, to argue for Christianity to not follow jewish tradition, they let him live even though he was a traitor, and then when some violent mob came the Roman police was already there to protect him.
(106.52 KB 750x732 christcuck 9000.jpg)
>>20294 Not using the cross doesn't show that they hate jewsus, it shows they don't want to use your stupid symbols and want to differentiate themselves from you. I can understand that desire given how dumb you are. Some people feel loyalty towards their beliefs because they come from blood and soil. It's not like christians who adopt every new age paraphernalia they come across as a holy symbol.
>>20299 >Th-they l-let him live! Whatever helps you sleep at night, buddy.
>>20303 Whatever helps you. Christ was wrong.
(29.80 MB 1280x720 orthodox liturgy.mp4)
>>20301 >posts some Unitarian loser Not Christianity. They don't even believe in the Trinity or that Jesus was God incarnate.
(51.39 KB 359x330 Jesus on electric chair.jpg)
>>20309 Give it a few decades and you'll think it's holy.
>>20309 What about the Pachamama of the pope?
>>20315 The popes have been innovating in doctrine for over a thousand years. Orthodoxy (shown in that video) is where it is at.
>>20317 I bet I'll find all kinds of pachamamas if I go looking into that. Maybe even some duginist pachamamas. The turbochristcuck up there was literally saying the orthodox church allows him to become a god. But of course, you can become a god, but not god. Because that makes perfect sense according to some 80 iq sandnigger that lived 1900 years ago or something.
>>20319 >But of course, you can become a god, but not god. Because that makes perfect sense according to some 80 iq sandnigger that lived 1900 years ago or something. It makes perfect sense. One who partakes in justice is said to be just, that doesn't make him 'justice in itself'. Same with goodness. A good man partakes of the good, he's not 'goodness in itself'. Read Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy. Though a Christian himself, he proves all of these points via the Greek philosophical tradition. <Knowest thou not that we say a man is wise who has wisdom, and righteous who has righteousness? And so we name God that which has the divine nature and happiness, and every happy man is a god. Yet there is only one God; he is the stem and base of all forms of good; from Him these forms all come, and to Him they return, and He ruleth all. Though He is the beginning and foundation of all good men and all good things, yet the forms of good that issue from Him are many, even as all stars receive their light and brightness from the sun, yet some are more, others less bright. Likewise the moon shines according as the sun illumines her; when she is fully lighted up by him, she shines with all her brightness.' <I remember thou didst tell me a marvellous tale about it, saying that Happiness and the Highest Good were all one. Thou saidst that Happiness was firmly rooted in the Highest Good, and the Highest Good was God Himself, who was abounding in every happiness; and thou didst say that every happy man was a god. Next, thou saidst that God's goodness and His happiness were all one with Himself, even the Most High God, and to this God all creatures that are true to their kind tend and desire to come. Moreover, thou didst say that God governed all His creatures with the rudder of His goodness, and that all creatures of their own will and undriven were subject to Him https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/King_Alfred%27s_Version_of_the_Consolations_of_Boethius/The_Consolations_of_Boethius#I
>>20324 Maybe you should just make a pachamama instead of this EXTREMELY AUTISTIC version of christianity you have.
>>20271 >The ones who claim Christianity is "Jewish" in any way hate not the Jews, but Christ. This shit right here is plain pilpul if you actually had read most of this thread or any of the last one, you would know that a good portion of our hate for jewsus is that(aside from not existing at all) he is, in fact, a jew. Most everything that every single one of you fucking christcucks have brought up or tried to pilpul into being "based and redpilled" from jewcovksuckerianity was laid bare here or on a previous iteration of the board. Nobody who can actually hold their own with you wants to argue with you, because no matter how many times we blow you the fuck out, you find some bullshit way to rationalize it out of existence or just outright ignore any evidence provided no matter it's source. Get off the board, National Socialism and Christianity are not compatible and never have been. That Hitler allowed Christianity to operate as freely as he did, burned him several times throughout the war and burned Germany after, has nothing to do with him liking it or it's compatibility with National Socialism and entirely to do with his hangups about his mother and how he would not wish to take away what he thought gave her comfort. It was a grave mistake on his part, and he knows it as he sits in Valhalla.
>>20329 It's funny how you claim that Christianity was BTFO in previous iterations of the board. This board was a circlejerk of people posting the same two or three """arguments""" over and over again with no resistance except for a few people who weren't able to argue. Now that there is a person or two here who is actually able to respond to your criticisms, the anti-Christian LARPers can literally do nothing except for cry about 'subversion' and 'pilpul', showing that they have no arguments, and are being refuted. Meanwhile Christian posters give large responses almost every single time. The difference is stark. It's degenerated to the point where LARPagans ITT are using something being 'autistic' as an argument. It's ogre for LARPagans on /fascist/. >National Socialism and Christianity are not compatible and never have been. Yet the Third Reich was 95% Christian. And millions of White Christians in the Third Reich, not to in Italy, and in Romania, and in many other countries, all fought for the Axis and saw no conflict with their Christian commitments. This alone destroys your argument. The most you can do is to point at some retarded tiny groups or Rothschild-bought churches and claim that this is ALL Christians. This alone is fallacious, and I might as well be posting image of so-called 'NatSocs' online who think that they can wear diapers and take estrogen and still be real NatSocs. Christianity allows slavery, tells women to obey their husbands, tells children to obey their parents, has historically in all branches organized hierarchical systems of bishops, priests, deacons, laity, etc. Christianity is not egalitarian, and only someone whose brain is fried by Nietzsche would even spout such nonsense. >It was a grave mistake on his part, and he knows it as he sits in Valhalla. Hitler made fun of Viking LARPers like you in Mein Kampf. I will keep BTFOing you retards until the end of time.
>>20335 The problem with your "arguments" is that they're all based on fanciful jewish texts and the opinions of your self selected saints. None of these sources hold any authority for anyone outside of your tiny branch of christianity, and so they're all null and void. It doesn't matter how much you sperg and how much BTFOing you think you're doing by copy pasting your faith based beliefs. Debate only actually exists when all parts agree on basic premises. I can tell you that it's my faith based belief that you don't exist and pretend that you've been BTFO. That's in essence what you're doing, and it's completely pointless.
>>20336 >The problem with your "arguments" is that they're all based on fanciful jewish texts and the opinions of your self selected saints. Though this is a lie, even if this was solely the basis of my arguments against you, it is sufficient to refute you, because you attack Christians for believing XYZ, when even the Bible does not support the things that you desperately attempt to impugn on Christianity. The question comes down to what exactly people ITT mean by Christianity? Are we talking about ultra-liberal Protestants, Evangelicals, Episcopalians, Unitarians, etc? Yes, they are cancerous and worship Jews. The problem is that they are heretics in the first place. The average normalfag in the West going to church isn't these people, and everyone ITT knows it. >None of these sources hold any authority for anyone outside of your tiny branch of christianity The Bible is a pretty universally agreed upon source. None of these saints quoted ITT are particularly from one branch of Christianity, as they are extremely early, pre-schism saints, and are shared by Eastern Orthodox, Coptic, Ethiopian, Oriental and Roman churches to this very day. So this isn't really an argument. I don't give a shit about Protestants who make up things as they go along and have been innovating into more and more judaizing for 500+ years now. >It doesn't matter how much you sperg and how much BTFOing you think you're doing by copy pasting your faith based beliefs When someone claims the Bible claims X, they can be refuted by showing that X isn't biblical. It's that simple. All of the arguments that I made here could be made on the basis of the Bible alone, so your argument about 'muh obscure sect' doesn't even work either.
>>20337 You seem to think that orthodox is some kind of big branch of christianity when they're by far one of the smallest and least powerful christian groups. Catholics are about 50% of christians worldwide and protestants are 35%. These are the largest groups and the groups that dominate countries that matter in a geopolitical context. Orthodox is just about 10% and are completely meaningless in most places in the west. For the longest time I didn't even know they existed, and I'm actually a person who takes interest in researching religions. Even after I learned they existed I just brushed them aside as some weird Russian thing and never took much of an interest. When we talk about christianity we're talking about christian groups that matter and hold political and economical sway in important countries. Not fucking Egypt or Greece. The bible is an authoritative source for christians. However, most people in an explicitly non-christian thread are not christian. So, you might as well be quoting a spider-man comic book written by a jew, it would be the same thing as far as I'm concerned.
>>20338 The critique still fails then. Because the majority of the TikTok Christians people are seething over on /pol/ or similar places are fringe ultra-liberal Protestants who don't even follow their own Bible. Almost all of the cancerous practices that people like to sling shit at Christianity over are explicitly condemned in the Bible. You're harping on Orthodoxy, but as I already said, that doesn't matter, because if Protestantism is founded on the idea of 'scripture alone', and they don't even follow Christian scriptures to any significant extent, the nonsense they preach can't be impugned on Christianity. >However, most people in an explicitly non-christian thread are not christian Ahaha, again, I can't see how you don't understand that when someone claims that Christians believe X, that referring to the authoritative source to Christians shows that Christians SHOULDN'T believe X if they are to be actual Christians. It's the same shit with anyone who masquerades under a given title and uses it for ends that aren't even in line with the philosophy itself. Do you think NatSoc LARPers who shill for homosexuality and transgenderism are authentic NatSocs? Probably not. Do you think that someone who claims to be a White Nationalist yet fucks non-Whites is a real White Nationalist? Does a man who claims he is a woman become a woman? Same shit. Even despite the widespread pozz, normalfag Christians involved in their local churches are significantly more immune to the widespread social engineering and pozz in the general society, and are more fertile than their atheistic counterparts.
>>20339 The bible is just a very fucked up jewish book with a lot of contradictions, translation problems, and straight up nonsense. It relies heavily on interpretations and other people telling you what to believe, so the bible really doesn't matter as much as you seem to think for determining what christians believe. >Even despite the widespread pozz, normalfag Christians involved in their local churches are significantly more immune to the widespread social engineering and pozz in the general society, and are more fertile than their atheistic counterparts. People with traditional religions tend to be more traditional. Wow, you needed a study to figure that out?
(511.66 KB 1049x1013 1488.png)
>>20339 >and they don't even follow Christian scriptures to any significant extent, the nonsense they preach can't be impugned on Christianity. If the majority of Christians don't follow Christian scriptures doesn't that demonstrate a failure of Christianity? How are we supposed to believe that investing our time, energy, and trust into a failing institution is going to save our race? And the stuff you might call TikTok Christianity, like acceptance of replacement migration, I am also seeing among "conservative" boomers...
>>20341 >The bible is just a very fucked up jewish book with a lot of contradictions, translation problems, and straight up nonsense. It relies heavily on interpretations and other people telling you what to believe Every written work on the planet requires interpretation and is full of nuance and issues which may or may not be actual problems, again this depends on one's knowledge, hermeneutic and assumptions about the nature of the text. Unless you have some sort of weird PoMo view where the authorial intent is irrelevant, you will always run into this. Not sure of your point. > so the bible really doesn't matter as much as you seem to think for determining what christians believe. It absolutely does. This will depend on how progressive or traditional a given Christian is. >People with traditional religions tend to be more traditional. So basically attacks against Christianity as a whole are attacks against traditional-leaning Whites, many of whom are potential allies if not alienated by occult and Nietzschean vitriol
>>20341 >The bible is just a very fucked up jewish book with a lot of contradictions, translation problems, and straight up nonsense. It relies heavily on interpretations and other people telling you what to believe Every written work on the planet requires interpretation and is full of nuance and issues which may or may not be actual problems, again this depends on one's knowledge, hermeneutic and assumptions about the nature of the text. Unless you have some sort of weird PoMo view where the authorial intent is irrelevant, you will always run into this. Not sure of your point. > so the bible really doesn't matter as much as you seem to think for determining what christians believe. It absolutely does. This will depend on how progressive or traditional a given Christian is. >People with traditional religions tend to be more traditional. So basically attacks against Christianity as a whole are attacks against traditional-leaning Whites, many of whom are potential allies if not alienated by occult and Nietzschean vitriol
>>20345 Not at all. If you give a well written article about a plane crash to 100 people with reasonable text comprehension skills they'll all understand the article. Different sects of christians can't even agree what parts of the bible are metaphorical. And it's all full of jewish nonsense anyway. >So basically attacks against Christianity as a whole are attacks against traditional-leaning Whites No, attacks against christianity are attacks against christianity. You're not christianity.
>>20344 >If the majority of Christians don't follow Christian scriptures doesn't that demonstrate a failure of Christianity? Not necessarily. According to the New Testament the path to destruction is a broad one, and the road to life is narrow, and few find it. It also says that Christians will be killed and persecuted due to Jesus' name. At times in history this has been true, but in the heartland of Christianity, of course, this stopped occurring after a while as it became institutionalized and the society thoroughly Christianized. I'd say that path is still narrow though, and it will only become more clear if Christianity continues to degenerate and latch itself onto worldly doctrines such as progressivism, Marxism, etc. It might be a blessing in disguise, as the wheat will once again be separated from the chaff. It would only 'fail' if Christianity went completely extinct as a religion, I would say. As long as there are even a few actual Christians left (however one defines this), it cannot be said to have failed. By our everyday standards this might be seen as failure, but it wouldn't be according to the Christian worldview itself. >How are we supposed to believe that investing our time, energy, and trust into a failing institution is going to save our race? Finding a good church can be a good way to find community and sane people among those in an insane world. It can also be good for spiritual fulfillment, of course. When it comes to saving our race, I would tell anyone who is attending pro-Zionist churches to leave them, and to try to awake people to the nature of the Jews and their machinations against the West. Same goes for churches that are openly contributing to the demonization and marginalization of White people. One can always seek out and find people and do informal gatherings as well if all of the churches have fallen under the grip of Zionists and their stooges. They don't deserve a red cent. >acceptance of replacement migration, I am also seeing among "conservative" boomers... It's just a result of Jewish social engineering. The idea of replacement migration is mainly a result of economic agendas of the Jews and their method of having revenge against Whites for the last millennia or more (they've classified Europeans as 'Amalek'). It is a war against Whites, and there's no reason why this position should be supported. It doesn't contribute to loving your neighbor, because these people are hostile foreigners sent by Jews who want to turn our lands into an atomized anonymous ocean, it's not based on humanitarianism for similar reasons, as it is an anti-social agenda designed to further uproot and destroy native cultures, languages, and communities, and it's certainly not based on any love for the environment, because bringing the third world into the West actually makes the West even more polluting and overcrowded. Even giving them much assistance has in the long run been almost exclusively negative for these people. If someone cannot stand on their own two feet without help from White people, there's only so much we can do. What I am saying here would have been seen as commonsense a century ago.
>>20347 You're speaking about a completely different matter in your example. Spiritual questions, regardless of the tradition we are talking about, are not of the same nature as a strictly informative work about a plane crash. Religious scriptures often often read in a variety of different ways and nuances. Most simplistically, one will just read it for what it says, but this is actually a newer way of doing things historically. I do not downplay literally meanings, but literal meanings often exist side-by-side with mystical, spiritual, allegorical, tropological, etc. and other sorts of meanings that may be lost on the average reader of the text. Interpretations can very wildly depending on what assumptions one is holding. Spiritual texts are hardly ever straight forward, especially when they addressing topics outside of the purview of the normal senses. > Different sects of christians can't even agree what parts of the bible are metaphorical You're arguing for me at this point. If every man is his own authority and final-word on what the text says, we end up with hermeneutical anarchy.
>>14055 He put up some very good criticism but sometimes it comes off as a bit fedoran. Still very good overall.
>>20354 >bringing the third world into the West actually makes the West even more polluting and overcrowded Leaving them in their original lands would do the same. The problem is their existence and numbers. >What I am saying here would have been seen as commonsense a century ago. How could this work when you have to spread Jesus' message everywhere, which implies missionaries and conversions, and then everyone is a Christian and you have a duty to help Christians. The only reason you can come here, in this very thread, and still manage to pull off some blatant shilling for your cult is because it is not explicitedly anti-White, while it is absolutely clear that is denies the importance of the race and denies the equally superiority of Whites. Negroes don't move out of their own lands unless they are uprooted by force. Christianity cannot spread without long ranged travel and a sufficient form of technology and a sufficient level of urban development. Christianity wants us to care about the other races and even go teach them that they need being saved on the basis of a scam centered on the made up Original Sin. That is, go tell people who are absolutely fine with their own lives and beliefs that said lives and beliefs are wrong and the relative bliss they enjoyed thus far must come to an end because they have to repent otherwise they will end being grilled for eternity. That is so fucked up.
>>20373 There's nothing inherently wrong with the existence of these people in my view. They are adapted to their environment and conditions they've lived in for millennia. Varieties of humans are as real as the diversity we find within breeds of dogs or horses. When you try to artificially mix and mash people up, that leads to friction, conflict and problems inevitably. On some level people will certainly have an issue with some of the stuff that I say. I don't inherently 'hate' non-Whites, as I don't see the affirmation of my own people as necessarily implying the negation of all others, just as how I do not see my especial love for my own mother, father, cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. as necessarily implying a negation of all who stand outside of that circle. I do feel an attachment to my race though, as any human being should, and naturally does provided that they have not been totally brainwashed by Jews. There's a dual-aspect to everyone's identities, on one hand there is that which is given by nature, and then there is that which the individual has more control over. When it comes to the God-given identity that we are born with, no matter how much we fight or it or deny, we are tied to that group, and we stand and fall with that group. Thus, attacks on White people are attacks on myself. It's clear what they're trying to do. >How could this work when you have to spread Jesus' message everywhere, which implies missionaries and conversions, and then everyone is a Christian and you have a duty to help Christians. To just take what is said here at face-value, this still doesn't imply mass-immigration, let alone replacement immigration. >it is not explicitedly anti-White, while it is absolutely clear that is denies the importance of the race and denies the equally superiority of Whites. Well, I've never tried to claim that Christianity is some sort of White identity religion. If one wants to look at it in terms of value hierarchies, I think that race absolutely has a high place on the value hierarchy. After all, Jesus taught that "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). Everyone I know and love is White, and if they are under attack, as I said, I am under attack. And we ought not let them go extinct just because some globalist social-engineering scheme or Talmudic designation of us as 'Amalek' dictates our destruction. I can't think of any situation which would involve me personally betraying my race for religious ends. One could come up with retarded hypotheticals, but I'm talking about actual things that could happen to me. I will question what you said about the superiority of Whites too. Superiority in what sense? If we're talking about intelligent, creativity, etc. this can be empirically confirmed via scientific methods, it doesn't really have anything to do with a spiritual question. The Bible doesn't talk about what breeds of dogs are superior either, even though we can figure this out empirically. > blatant shilling for your cult Nah, I'm just here to discuss stuff. >Negroes don't move out of their own lands unless they are uprooted by force. Unless they are invited by Jewish NGOs that have already lobbied for liberal immigration laws and destroyed the fertility of the host nations, you mean. >That is, go tell people who are absolutely fine with their own lives and beliefs that said lives and beliefs are wrong and the relative bliss they enjoyed thus far must come to an end because they have to repent otherwise they will end being grilled for eternity. That is so fucked up. You sound like quite the liberal, here, honestly. Even if we never bothered them at all, they would still be liable for judgement according to how they conducted themselves even without revelation on the basis of the innate natural law written on their hearts.
>>20346 >(((interpretation))) and is full of (((nuance))) You kikes and your kvetching oy' veeeeeyyyyyyy Responding to the (((christian))) in this thread is pointless as it is nothing more than a time-wasting demoralizing shill from 4cuck
(65.33 KB 900x900 bowers smug.jpg)
>>20381 Big boy texts too hard for you, huh?
>>20335 >It's funny how you claim.... I don't know what you're talking about here. A good portion of those threads was me and the BO btfoing you niggers on the regular and covering much of the same ground you try to retread here. All you've really added is a false intellectual veneer that falls apart when one realizes that most of what you're covering out of your ever so fucking holy scripture and beyond, we have already eviscerated several times over in the last thread. Which is still up on the board, not to mention everything we discussed on Anon.cafe which is still the home of /christian/ afaik. >Now that there is a person.... They're not being refuted you're dancing around the central point of each argument you're presented just like every other christfuck before you. You are no different. you are just trying to bring conversion to an already comped form of Christianity(The Orthodox church continued relatively unmolested in Soviet Russia, else it wouldn't exist today) to a thread full of people who despise Christianity because as a moral foundation it is objectively ill-fitting for the Aryan race. That poison was in fact pushed from the top down, with truly disgusting means, on our race to invert our natural morality and open us for the subversion of the jew. I hold the most extreme variant of the stance against Christianity, more extreme even than Friedrich Nietzsche and nothing you've said has shaken that whatsoever. I still want every one of you stinking fucking race traitors dead, every shred of your false holy book excoriated from Earth. I want nothing to do with you no matter what you try to claim, would I use you in a War against ZOG? certainly, but I will never trust you and I will forsake you and your poisonous creed at the earliest opportunity. >Meanwhile Christian posters... Christians give large responses that have no merit, it's just more an more and more of the same shit of quoting a worthless book full of lies, that has absolutely no historical basis whatsoever. Alternatively, you niggers try to quote people who literally thieved everything they wrote from true Aryans and then ripped out everything that had real meaning and bastardized it with muh jewsus, muh Yahweh. Thomas Aquinas is a prime example whose objection to the jews had nothing to do with race, and everything to do with them killing a fictional jew. >Yet the Third Reich was 95% Christian. We've dealt with this, several times. Anyone who thinks Hitler was absolutely flawless and did the right thing in every situation and on every matter is an idiot. We need to do better than he did because SHOCKER he failed to achieve the Victory the Aryan race is destined for. He knew he would fail, but he did his best to prepare for the Coming Man, that some think is Kalki from ancient Vedic lore, or an Avatar of Othinn, as that was not he, even Hitler would think this. In fact, he would probably smack any so called National Socialist upside the head( or perhaps just kill them) for thinking Christianity IN ANY FORM can be of aid to our cause, especially considering the detriment it was to National Socialist Germany. Your examples to prove compatibility, are in fact the opposite. They are simply examples of lemmings who, no matter what their beliefs, follow the dominant order whatever form it takes, even if it seeks to destroy uproot and replace, their false moral foundation as the NSDAP did. I can point to many examples of christians being absolutely detrimental to this cause stretching back even BEFORE hitler attained power in Germany, many during his tenure, before and during the war as well as to Germany after the war and if you were half as well read as you seek to appear to be, you would know all of the examples I could bring up and would no longer be Christian. >Hitler made fun of Viking LARPers like you in Mein Kampf. Except in context, he was not criticizing belief in the Nordic/Germanic Gods, even if he personally did not agree with utilizing it. He was criticizing the tendency among occult groups who delved into Our natural beliefs, to over-focus on the spiritualist side becoming useless intellectuals in the process. we see this today with Esoteric Hitlerists who follow Serrano, or List, or any of the dumbasses who thought Christian Kabbalism is actually an ancient Aryan system of magic stolen by the jews. >I will keep BTFOing you retards until the end of time. You haven't BTFO'd shit.
>>20373 >That is so fucked up. Sure but it did remove the homicidal rituals and terrible practices. But now that the White man has awakened and realized that in order to gain back his throne, he needs to exchange nonWhite people's better living status for his own status. Truly a grim perspective. What kind of a world is this? Some us or them kind of view. Unfortunately, this is the way. I do not get people who say that "some nonWhites can be saved". Yeah good luck saying that when the most alpha White males will deny you straight away and quote the Natural Law.
>>20382 Not at all. I use them for what they're good for: they work a treat on constipation.
>>20386 One of, if not *the* most intelligent posters on this board.
(24.36 MB 1280x720 Judaism.webm)
When Christians aren't busy trying to convince National Socialists that Christianity is totally based and redpilled, Christians are busy trying to convince Jews that Christianity is Jewish. They seem to be having more luck with the Jews for some reason. yid related might have an interesting perspective as to why.
(92.48 KB 600x600 smug pepe.png)
>>20386 >>20389 First of all, obvious samefag is obvious. > A good portion of those threads was me and the BO btfoing you niggers on the regular and covering much of the same ground you try to retread here I'm not very impressed by the showing here. >who despise Christianity because as a moral foundation it is objectively ill-fitting for the Aryan race Yeah, you're relativists with no concern for truth, we already established that ITT. Your talk of 'our morality' just further establishes this point. We already know if I asked you to establish on what or how you ground this system of morality objectively or philosophically you would fail and start screaming about pilpul. > I hold the most extreme variant of the stance against Christianity, more extreme even than Friedrich Nietzsche So you're an even bigger clown? Do you add more syphilis? Even more more moral relativism? Even more inability to even reproduce? > I still want every one of you stinking fucking race traitors dead, every shred of your false holy book excoriated from Earth And we know that you're even more impotent than Nietzsche and will never do anything, haha (is that what you meant by more extreme?) >He knew he would fail, but he did his best to prepare for the Coming Man, that some think is Kalki from ancient Vedic lore Whatever, LARPer. We already know you get your ideas from childless cat-lady Savitri Devi, the biggest LARPer on the planet. You do know that Kalki appears in no Vedic text? That's right, Kalki only appears in the later works that were made hundreds, if not over a thousand years later, when India was already smelly and brown. This is the true savior of the White race, huh? Have you started shitting in the street yet? This is some capeshit-tier nonsense. When does Odin come back, when the next Marvel movie hits theaters? >I can point to many examples of christians being absolutely detrimental to this cause stretching back even BEFORE hitler attained power in Germany Irrelevant. The country was 95% Christian, and it was almost all Christians who thought and died for the Reich, and you spit on their sacrifice when you point a tiny minority of retards. Again, this is like if I point at homosexual / transgender infiltrators online as being representative of National Socialism. Failed argument. >he was not criticizing belief in the Nordic/Germanic Gods t. stultified retard. He makes fun of Nordic god LARPers again in Table Talk <It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan. Our old mythology had ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund. At that period the ancient world was divided between the systems of philosophy and the worship of idols. It's not desirable that the whole of humanity should be stultified Imagine samefagging. Reported also, btw
(181.33 KB 1080x1120 true form of the christkike.png)
(285.08 KB 351x750 pagan_hitler.png)
(277.85 KB 459x1432 Pierce-On-Christianity.jpg)
(2.25 MB 1300x6247 ThirdReichAndReligion.png)
Friendly reminder that Christians are Jew-worshippers, either willingly or in denial, and that one of the main goals of any fascist movement should be to destroy Abrahamism and its poisonous hold on the world. You cannot separate the Jew from the Christian, for no matter how the latter may object that he is not like his master, he shares exactly the same characteristics in argumentation. Necessary, of course, to gather the goyim together for universalist lies of peace on Earth and goodwill towards men. "And so I gradually began to hate them," as Hitler once said. One thing ever fascist should notice, which is not hard since that is their only non-Biblical, non-Church Elder "argument", is that these Jews always resort to calling their detractors "fedoras" and "LARPagans", while they themselves are practically in a LARP themselves. I posit that most of these Christkikes do not genuinely believe in their YHWH it should be noted, of course, that YHWH is nothing more than a puffed-up volcano god who bound himself like a parasite to the Jews, a Saklas if ever there was one, but instead worship the "traditionalism" and "aesthetics" that come from their religion. In essence, they are not truly spiritual; these Christkikes are secular atheists, hylics who a decade prior would've been the fedora-wearing atheists they so often complain about. They throw away the fedora and replace it with the Templars' great helm and chainmail, perfectly unaware of how silly their LARPsading is and how the Crusaders often fought more against European pagans and other Christians than they ever did the Muslims. In short, the Christkike screeches out in pain as he slaps you. They are liars, fools, miscegenators, kinslayers, race traitors, life-haters, slaves, shit, filth, and scum of the Earth.
(1.04 MB 396x216 goebbels laugh.gif)
>>20423 >these Christkikes are secular atheists Lol imagine typing these words and thinking they made sense
>>20424 Let me dumb it down for your Semitic-poisoned mind: you are not a Christian because you genuinely believe in God or Christ. No, it is because you're shopping around for whatever 'looks cool', to put it simply, and your professed Christianity is merely a fashion statement. Spiritually, you are empty, and you fill that hole with what in essence a LARP. Christ himself, I am told, would have thrown your kind away as the chaff.
(11.07 KB 260x244 asuka 2.jpg)
>>20426 So your whole post is a strawman. Boring. You cry about 'Templars' but no one has even said the word Templar in the 500 plus posts of this thread until you have brought it up out of the blue today as well. The only mention of the term 'Crusader' is in your own post as well. Even in the Christian Fascist Thread, there are only four mentions of 'crusades' in the 354 posts in the thread, every one of them by assblasted anti-Christians like you. Not a single mention of 'Templars' either. You're literally arguing against a figment of your imagination. Pathetic
>>20423 Source on 2nd pic please.
>>20406 >First of all I'm pretty sure the guy you're claiming is also me, is the dude who was banned for quad-posting in another thread, I love how you use this to dance around the point just like all the other christniggers. >Yeah, you're relativists with no concern for truth, we already established that ITT. You have not established anything of the sort nor have any of the other christniggers. >Your talk of 'our morality'.... I talk of our NATURAL MORALITY as did Nietzsche, we based our morality off of what living as part of nature taught us and it taught us much wisdom that christianity lacks entirely, and always has no matter how many Philosophy's it has or doesn't have. >So you're an even bigger clown? Nietzche was no clown, he didn't attack morality itself, he attacked Christian morality, which is false and not objective in the slightest he also and most specifically attacked the objectivity of Moral Value judgements, good bad, higher lower etc. >Do you add more syphilis? Considering that he had few symptoms that match up with syphilis, it is more likely he had brain cancer, the syphilis narrative is most likely just more smear bullshit by jews and Christjews, aka anti-nazi's https://www.smh.com.au/world/nietzsche-died-of-brain-cancer-20030506-gdgprc.html#:~:text=Friedrich%20Nietzsche%2C%20the%20philosopher%20thought,certainly%20died%20of%20brain%20cancer. >Even more more moral relativism? Nietzsche used moral relativism as a tool to show one the path to the natural Aryan morality, he did not disavow all morality, and sought to show how Christian morality will lead only to where it stands now. >Even more inability to even reproduce? I have seen nowhere that he was unable to reproduce, simply that he didn't. Nobody is quite sure why, as he sought to encourage the best and brightest to reproduce. >And we know that..... Nietzsche was not impotent in his philosophy or his manhood, but you can continue believing whatever you wish, for now, will enact my will, the will of the gods, on this world. >Whatever, LARPer.... Nevermind that I do not care about the concept of Kalki, and was simply using it an example of what some people think. You do know that the puranas he is mentioned in are themselves mentioned in parts of the Vedas dated back to 1000BCE at the latest, so your assertion is false, the knowledge and prophecy existed at the time of the Vedas, it just had not been written down. Your slander of Savitri is also false, as she was following the long Aryan tradition of women who felt a higher calling dedicating themselves and their bodies to the gods. >This is the true savior... Odin already walks the earth as a mortal man, believe it or not, I don't care. All this little tirade shows is that you buy right into the jewish bullshit pushed by the Christian Zionist and jewish elites, good on you. >Irrelevant. My point is that it wasn't irrelevant, disregard the argument all you wish. It wasn't just one individual or even many such individual, the traitors within Hitler's ranks(mostly among Germans who were not National Socialists but their involvement in the cause as Germans was non-trivial) who fought him and resisted him and betrayed Germany on the grounds thats not to mention the institutions of the various churches themselves who in many cases resisted Hitler and even advocated for Germans to betray their own. It's not a failed argument, it's an argument you cannot rebut and as such you attempt to make it into a mockery, poorly. >Hitlers Table talks full quote: <It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan. Our old mythology had ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund. At that period the ancient world was divided between the systems of philosophy and the worship of idols. It's not desirable that the whole of humanity should be stultified—and the only way of getting rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little. <A movement like ours mustn't let itself be drawn into metaphysical digressions. It must stick to the spirit of exact science. It's not the Party's function to be a counterfeit for religion >t. stultified retard. I love how you cut out the insult to Christianity that shows his disdain of the religion. Hitler is reputed to have performed rituals to the Nordic/Germanic gods, at many points throughout his life, not the least of which was during WW1. Within context the discussion was about the Party, and on a political front, I think he was mistaken, about how to kill christianity, he seems here to have forgotten the vital importance of the Gods and spirituality itself, but this is from a poorly translated french edition which was again poorly translated into english, so it must be taken with a grain of salt, thankfully there are other sources and other talks which further prove his disdain of christianity.
>>20429 Hitler speaks the name of the man he's talking to right in the text, search the man up.
>>20428 So instead of addressing the idea that you imageboard Christians aren't even genuine believers, but the very LARPers you accuse pagans of being, you shift direction, complaining that I mention the crusaders. As I said before, Jewish argumentation tactics.
>>20433 >I'm pretty sure the guy you're claiming is also me, is the dude who was banned for quad-posting in another thread Exactly what a samefag would say. >I talk of our NATURAL MORALITY as did Nietzsche You've never read Nietzsche. Nietzsche was an immoralist and perspectivist. When Nietzsche says "There are no facts, only interpretations", that includes there being no moral facts, and thus no moral realism, and only interpretations of phenomena. >Nietzche was no clown, he didn't attack morality itself "There is no such thing as moral phenomena, but only a moral interpretation o f phenomena . . . (Aphorism 108, Beyond Good and Evil) You're proving yourself to be just as big of a clown as Nietzsche. Truly more extreme! >aka anti-nazi's Nietzsche was a Jew-loving philosemite, cope. His biggest disciples are homosexual pedophiles like Foucault (who died of AIDs lol) and Freud (another