OH HOLY SHIT, POPE COMPARES ISIS' CONQUEST TO THE LIKES OF JESUS

Into a fucking volcano.

This is a fulfillment of Catholic prophecy.

Catholics like to hedge their bets with many different stupid prophecies for each contingency. The church doing well? Prophecy confirmed. Church doing poorly? Well we have a prophecy for that too. Heretic Pope? Prophecy fulfilled. Church run by Jews? Just the prophecy bro, deal with it.

Christianity in the west needs a complete reset. Altering the original creed was just the start of the degeneration into this self-flagellating madness.

But it's not too late to go back. Though it seems hard to believe from a western perspective, there are still Christians who are not afraid to defend western civilization, and who happily bestow prayers and blessings on the righteous like Donald Trump and Golden Dawn. The question is, do you stand with them or with the marxist Bishop of Rome?

Is the Pope a chaos heretic now or what?

Just fuck my shit up, I'm actually going to leave the church and tell these faggots he's the reason.

Reminded that Orthodox is just as cucked.

From Jewtin's court patriarch Kirill:

Saviours my arse

...

he isn't the perfect representation of Catholicism
amoris laetitia is heresy, as is many of his other claims

man chooses the pope, not god, and man is fallible
there have been shit popes before as well and the church has survived

Did not Argentina take pride in being >white?

What the fuck has driven this man to such cuckery?

Nope. You are alone in this cuckery.

Catholics = best goyim.

fucking retarded shit cult.
image obligatory

dick cutting shabbos faggots.

It kills me on the inside to know that even people here on Holla Forums are this stupid.

The "Peter the Roman" prophecy about the final pope that will lead Christendom astray until the Vatican is destroyed?

To what? The original teachings of Christ that became popular with the mongrel masses?

To the Old Testament and all her kiken rules?

Your just preaching another form of protestantism and all it will do is remove even more tradition, and make it even more easier for radicals to force lefty believes on people.

Abandon Christianity, embrace racialsm.

If you are so smart I am sure you can give a good reason, why theism is stupid.

What is it with this fucker? I literally never heard anything of the former pope while this fucker is in the news on a daily basis? Did the Kikes bought him or is he just a brainwashed faggot? How can one be so fucking OBSESSED that Christians are guilty and to blame for everything bad in the world??

Also, why the Vatikan hasn't assasinated this fucker is beyond me. He turned everything upside-down and wants #OPENBORDERSFORVATIKAN. This nigger is a threat to Rome, Vatikan and the West!

So is the second Vatican council. Pope Francis is a perfect representation of that.

The Pope is not the problem. Pope Francis is 100% Catholic within the neo church. The real Catholic Church died in the 1960s.

I don't see any holy war. And pretty sure the entire Chechen population now resides within Moscow.

Yep. And its just pure coincidence that the guy who's likely to succeed francis is even more cucked, more far left and named peter.

Yup, pure coincidence.

Have I just caught a shill in action?

They're probably trying to appeal Rapefugees to Poland and Hungary in Europe, since those countries are fairly religious/catholic, especially Poland. Already heard accusations about Poland like "how they can be Christian but not helping" and shit in the media several times. This shit is becoming way too obvious. Luckily East europeans don't fall for it, it seems.

thanks, commie pope

Do barbarians need to sack Rome again for this fucker to get any sense back? or maybe he just is a fucking huge cuck for Islam and wants to see the religion that he's leading fail. I'm not even a christian but this guy seems more and more like a saboteur.

...

*ftfy

They'll sooner become Sedevananists, Atheists or Orthodox than allow Francis to cuck them.

I see, no arguments.

Typical

Aside for the declared one you mean?

rt.com/politics/342097-russian-orthodox-patriarch-declares-international/

Fuck christcucks, they will eventually cause the destruction of our movement, they are worshipping a fucking KIKE for fuck's sake. Christianity or any other form of judaism has no place in Europe and only exists in the west because it was forced upon us just like islam was forced up middle-eastern nations.

*upon

No one wants your shitty paganism either.

Listen buddy, if paganism was so much better than Christianity, then the Romans wouldn't have adopted Christianity over paganism, the Greek people wouldn't have grassroots converted to Christianity en masse, and the Scandinavians wouldn't have ditched their pagan gods for Christ.

Looking at it simply, Christianity is a more appealing and fulfilling religion than paganism, and the conclusion of the existence of only one god, the Creator, is further down the philosophical train of thought than polytheism, which is just a neat excuse for why it rains or why an earthquake happens.

Many Christian leaders have been cucked since the Great Cucking of the Western World in the 60's, and the co-opting of Jesus' message that for thousands of years had been used against the Jews and degeneracy all of a sudden flipped and many (Protestant) churches have begun preaching the exact opposite of what Jesus intended.

For the love of God you moron, actually read the New Testament where Jesus comes into theological conflict every damn day with the Pharisees, aka the head kikes whose message forms the core of modern Judaism. Don't forget how Jesus died at the hands of kikes scheming so that Jesus and his CHRISTIAN message wouldn't threaten their power, and this fact had been recognized by the Catholic church prior to Vatican II. Don't forget that the vast, vast majority of Europeans converted to Christianity willingly after hearing its message, the only few times Christianity was actually forced on a people was Charlemagne with the Saxons, and the Crusades in the Baltics, while western, central, and southern Europe all willingly renounced the false pagan idols and accepted God.

I'm not sure if you've read the New Testament or not, but give it a read, I'm sure that no one on Holla Forums will disagree with the value of at least reading a book for study purposes. I'm also sure you'll find that Jesus preached the exact opposite of kike doctrine, as that was the entire reason God had sent him in the first place.

Also, for all Catholics and those of you with Catholic friends, remember to remind your friends that the pope has NO AUTHORITY when it comes to political matters. When he tries to give guidance on those, his words are, by official Catholic teachings, only his words as a man, and not as a representative of God. His position as pope is irrelevant unless he is speaking on purely theological matters, otherwise his opinion has the same value as any other Catholic's opinion.

...

I want paganism, even with its inevitable LARPing elements. I just can't stand the kebabs and kikes pretending to be Volkish and White just to shit on the vastly dominant religion of Whites for the last millennium.

Religion isn't just some shit you can pick and choose like your favourite flavour of ice-cream. At least the majority of Christcucks were raised to be that way. You've just chosen paganLARPery because you think it's what "muh ancestors would've wanted".

Multiple gods make more sense to me. Odin and his wife Frigg has children and created more Gods. Gods creating Gods just like humans.

Anyways, I don't believe in the literal story, I like the story, the imagery, and what the Gods represent.

Don't be retarded.

Decent point.
However, I personally have the belief that if you think that gods behave like humans and aren't all-powerful in every sense of the word, then your standards for what makes a god are too low. Believe it or not, Christianity doesn't say that the gods of pagan religions don't exist. It's just that they aren't a god in the way that God is a god. Christianity only says that we worship God as the one true god, as all others who claim to be gods are false idols, or simply other creations of God who are more powerful than humans. If you want to know more about Christians who believed in the existence, but not the divinity of pagan gods, look into C.S. Lewis's thoughts on the matter.

Which is why even if I ever decide to break away from Christianity, I'll always be a Deist. The conclusion we've reached of the divinity of only the creator of the universe, God, seems to trump all other religions to me.

That's horseshit. Half my family are white catholics and they all like him. The only thing I've heard them say remotely questioning him is, "Maybe he shouldn't get into politics so much."

popery is false

Semitic religions and peoples have to GTFO of the West.

ISIS is a force that has been spoken about in the Bible many times.

Essentially they are the "Assyrians" located in the land of the Tigris and Euphrates. One of their major cities is Nineveh aka Mosel.

The Assyrians constantly attack the tribes of Israel when they go away from God's path. This took place in Kings. It is prophecy, in that it was fortold this would take place in the future, in the books of the minor prophets aka the twelve prophets.

This takes place mostly in the books of Joel and Amos. Joel speaks of a locust army that invades the house of Judah, who we know as the Jews. Amos speaks about an enemy raised up against Israel (the 10 tribes) as well as a locust invasion.

These books tell of a time, just before the Lord's day which is when Christ returns, when there is a society where sin runs rampant, who's people have forgotten our father, they don't even know God's word in the church itself, and men have become too weak to fight off enemies. In this time an enemy has been risen against them.

Now if you combine this with the knowledge that the ten lost tribes of Israel have become the people of Europe, America and Canada, it is clear that we are seeing these things unfold before us.

Thank you, it's nice to see that someone is left on Holla Forums who understands how to interpret Biblical prophecies.

And before any paganLARPers attack, I have to say that even if you don't like Christianity, you still should admit the importance of some of these messages. Such as this, which basically says that any nation that gives itself up to degeneracy, complacency, and loses its way is doomed to destruction by violent foreign powers.

Hence a church that invests so much power and status in their "Holy Father" is a fallacy, and a man who wishes to be closer to god should chose a better church.

The ties that bind you are the devil's.

Is this a good thing?

It means is right and that the End Times are truly upon us, once and for all.

top posts lost in shitposts.
The greatest lesson of history is that no one learns from it

He's a Jesuit that's why.

Any bad shit that has occurred at least from the 1700s onwards in regards to catholicism has been dealt by those marxists. They're the super-evangelizers, the group specifically tasked with spreading the gospel to the third world. Basically the distilled essence of the most dangerous aspects of Christianity (the unstable zealous change and suicidal glory). They, as far as I can tell, are the worst when they turn their eyes inward. What might work outward doesn't work inward. They're the kinds that believe in insane martyrdom as the only pure and good service, and as a side effect of their specific training, expect everyone else to act the same as them, despite the fact that acting liking a bunch of retarded Baptists 24/7 is absolutely heretical in its most literal sense.

Jesuits are fucking nuttier than squirrel shit in a walnut farm. And one of then has been given practically free reign to do whatever he thinks is morally righteous with very little checks on his power.

Fucking Jesuits.

Liberation theology mang

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7716

Them fucking Jesuits and their theology BASED ON THE WORKS OF KARL MARX AND OTHER COMMIE SYMPATHISERS

You're god damn right I'm mad

Fixed. The Romans were already long gone down the road of spiritual degeneracy before they institutionalized the Greek slave faith we know today as Christianity.

Stop that Holla Forums bullshit.

I'm sorry bro. I used to consider Catholicism, but I thank God for Francis. He brought to surface it's issues. I pray you guys sort it out.

Do you abandon America for Obama?
Or Canada for Truecuck?

No m8, Catholicism is the one true faith, and like all things, it is in spirtual warfare with the Jews.

You're as good as a liberal cuck with that attitude

Thank God I'm a fedora now.

Sorry, I was vague.

I meant that I considered joining the Roman Catholic church, but due to Francis and his supporters. I'm nondenominational.

Aye I'm being a bit edgy lad but all in all you're a heretic. Only through the Catholic Faith will you find salvation and understanding.

No point in not doing the right thing because liberals make it difficult

Holla Forums please go

being nondenominational is the only way to go about it these days organized religion seems cucked at best and heretical at worst.

miss the part where he came back, chaim?

I'm starting to suspect this Pope is a former KGB agent who resents the Imperialist Church.

Christianity was a much better religion to enslave your people with, any good tyrant would have easily seen that.
The old gods wanted no tribute, judged you by your character only, demanded no ornate houses of worship, & stayed out of politics.
But the new Christian religion admonished those that sought the overthrow of their tyrants by force, & encouraged people to pay their taxes peacefully, regardless of how draconian those taxes may be. It also told people to love their enemies and turn the other cheek, and to not worry about how miserable their lives may be on Earth, because the streets of Heaven were paved with gold, and that's where their rewards were…they only had to die to get it, if they followed orders.

you're confusing every ruler ever with religion.

The rulers were always the first to adopt Christianity, and demanded everyone in their nations accepted it or die.
All I said was it's easy to see why.

Nah mang don't be worrying about the Jewish PR.
Shits bad now but the Saints were so great because many of them were learned men who stood for tradition in times far darker than now.

To be non denom and not tap into the great history, knowledge and divinity of the one true Church foolish.

You'll find people in every direction already who value the Holocaust above all else, it seems silly to hold back on practising something just because others do not do so properly

That's a fair bit of intellectual dishonesty on your part chaim

Your problem is seeing religion as a way to rule the people, and like the other pagan nobodies you hope to best reinvent religion into something to suit your interests (how very marxist)

When really Christianity is an acknowledgement of the one true faith, and the Son of God

Everything you mentioned, rulers did with any other religion ever.

Is there no true believer among the princes of the church who could put a little polonium in his breakfast tea for the sake of Catholicism and Europa?

PETRUS ROMANUS
E
T
R
U
S

R
O
M
A
N
U
S

Reminder that this is the real Peter the Roman
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pietro_Parolin

God save us all.

yeah and after you adopted christianity your lands were raided by vikings paid for by you know who. Pagans attacking european bloodbrothers (B L O O D & S O I L) for talmud money. DISGUSTING. Pagans belong to the garbage bin.

We talk about vikings a lot here, pagans too (mostly shills bringing it up), but it seems to me that the vikings did not accomplish much? When you think of europeans, you think of the French, the British, the Germans. If you count those three's contribution to science and art it must well be 80% of the world's.

Is it really a coincidence that sweden is the most progressive country and the most pagan country? These things go hand in hand! This is what happens when you take 19th century fanfic and make a religion out of it.
Rome was pretty pagan. Guess what it was? A multicultural empire that genocided european blood brothers so it could pillage their resources and support the north africans in their empire.

The Church doesn't get to redefine Catholicism to its liking. The reformations of the 20th century were heretical, and thus not the true Church. Catholics aren't leaving the Church because of the heretics for the same reason white people aren't leaving Europe because of the sandniggers.

user…

take it up with the fella the wrote it

To be fair, European Christians did have their fair share of genociding European blood brothers.

–what the Holy Father actually said. Doesn't seem like anything to start tearing your hair out over to me.

The Truth itself. Only Catholics remain consistent in changing times. For those with short memories, it always seems like the Church is about to collapse, but there have always been crises the Church has survived, on a fairly cyclical basis over the centuries. As Chesterton pointed out in Orthodoxy, we're the only ones who manage to refrain from chasing after intellectual fads. Our brothers nationalists who want to abolish Catholicism because of bad things the Pope says in unauthoritative interviews remind me of Marxists who wanted to abolish the same because they thought it was all that stood in the way of a worker's paradise. The irreligious may think they're edgy, but they're no more forward looking than Albania was when it became the first Atheist state before the Iron Curtain fell.

Catholicism, that glorious religion ordained by God to give the Truth to all mankind and inaugurated by good Jews two millennia ago, will always be present in Europe, offering the Light of Christ to Europeans as she does to all nations, until the end of the world.

And there's nothing you can do about it.

Sweden is Christian/fedora, Iceland is most Pagan

if you include protestants then you are right. Those heretics are scum. Read about sweden genociding poland/lithuania or their other atrocities while they spread lies about the catholic church. Wonder where the lies you often hear repeated come from? Protestant schools and churches. They indoctrinate their young to justify their religion. Dark ages, Inquisition, Paganism, Idolatry and other nonsense.

If you're talking about catholics then I don't believe they did. Pagans just attacked their catholic neighbors then they got their shit deus vulted.

There's plenty of larping going on in sweden, those people in that region were rice christians. That's to say that they converted so they could trade with rich german christians. Then they jumped on the first heresy that allowed them to make whatever shit up. and larpers are fedoras, trust me.

they do say the vatican is full of freemasons, jesuits and similar groups, this only reinforces the pope is a complete NWO/illuminatti/kike shill.

Please don't be this retarded.

Why would you quote something he did not say?

They demanded tribute and persecuted Christians for not attending sacrifices.

Romans believed it was superstition to believe a god punished sins. They rewarded their chosen by bloodlines or whims.

From Ziggurats to temples they demanded the best even, golden idols.

From Gilgamesh to Nero emperors deified their dead relatives in order to secure power. They derived their rule from being the emissary of the gods. Hence why atheism was illegal in Rome. It was a threat to their power . Also a good reason to kill Christians who do not recognize the gods who crowned you their vicar.

It was a simplification of what he heavily implied. If you weren't mentally defective you might have picked up on that.

FTFY

Good goy.

please quote which passage heavily implied that catholics did not engage in wars and that you simplified. Maybe then your delusion will be lifted from your eyes, because I was replying to someone who was talking about genocide and not specifically wars and specifically between europeans.

The Assyrians are a Christian ethnicity living in nothern Syria. They have suffered from the Kurds and other Muslims.

So apparently Israel also means something different to you, as neither Assyrians nor ISIS have attacked Israel.

Okay, so then you do mean the Jews. Well, your botched version of history is wrong.

Christianity. Not even once.

I've lost faith in the Catholic Church at this point, Christianity in general as well.

No, I'm not an atheist. That's a senseless position to take.
I do believe in a Divinity, but the Christian god is a bit too ridiculous for me.

Aquinas piggybacked off of Aristotle, both of who argued for the existence of a prime mover movers on the part of Aristotle, but he ended up settling for one if push came to shove, but not any great arguments for the existence of the Christian god.

As for the rest of Holla Forums, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Understand that the West has had a religious tradition long before Christianity became the dominant face.

Paganism is possibly the worst fucking answer to this.
It died, and the belief that gods act in the same manner as us (sometimes worse) is patently ludicrous.
It's telling that more educated pagans (more so in the Graeco-Roman tradition) developed more sophisticated beliefs (Stoicism, Platonism, etc.).
There's also Hermeticism and the various occultic traditions developed in Europe over the years, which I've yet to really study in-depth.

tl;dr atheism and paganism are shit, Christianity is worn out and shit, seek out philosophy and occult

I somehow KNEW that this was connected with the Book of Kings.

In the Bible, there's a "tribe" that targets Israel for succumbing into degeneracy and angering God. Assyrians and Babylonians were one of those assailants.

You won't get his words at all if you haven't read the Book of Kings, Book of Samuel, and the Book of Revelations.

It's not good to antagonize based on implicitly. Just question instead.

asserting there is a divinity is just as idiotic as asserting there isn't one. We can never ever know whether a divinity exists, because if it does, it would reside outside of our material world and thus, beyond our realm of understanding.

Be honest, no one has a neutral stance about divinity in practice. It's either one or the other.

care to go into detail?

Unless Christ is risen, and he is.

In terms of practical use, belief in a divinity is much more expedient than non-belief.

That's why I think the Divinity is transcendent. It rarely, if ever, interacts with us in meaningful ways.
Finding ways to get in touch with it is difficult, but not improbable.
Besides, atheism in of itself can lead to fairly destructive shit (cultural relativity, religious relativity, etc.).

The term "agnostic" was never meant to stand by itself, by the way.
All it means is whether one thinks they can prove without a doubt that the Divinity exists/does not exist.

For example, the agnostic atheist does not believe in a God, and firmly holds that he can prove it so.
The agnostic theist believes in a God, and firmly holds that he can prove it so.
Anyone who calls themselves Agnostic by itself should be disregarded.

If you don't mind, give me a second to collect my thoughts and write them down.

Alright, I think I've compiled a few good paragraphs to explain some of my positions.
I apologize in advance if it seems sloppy or is strewn with errors, I've had a long day and I'm pretty tired. I'll begin posting them in a second.

Firstly, I find issue with the historicity of the scriptures. Don’t get me wrong, I think Jesus was an historic person, but the narrative of his life can get a bit dodgy.
For example, the first Gospel that we think was written (Mark) was written almost thirty years after the crucifixion. Thirty years. Presidential terms don’t last that long. It would be as if no records were kept on the Carter administration, and people only began writing about Carter’s presidency right now.
Paul never goes into any explicit detail on Jesus’ life. Sure, he mentions him, but Jesus’ historicity isn’t an issue.
Nor do the other letters of the New Testament (Peter, James, John, etc.).

When it comes to the authorship of the Gospels, only two of them were claimed to be written by actual Apostles (Mark and Luke being secondhand witnesses). However, the writing styles of the Synoptic Gospels are very similar to the style of biography common in the Graeco-Roman world. The thing is, one of the common things for a writer to do would be to sign the name of a famous person of the day to give his writing authority. Now, scholars in general can differentiate whether a document is a forgery or not, but we have no real guideline for the Synoptic Gospels, since their purported authors wrote nothing else of note (with the exception of Luke, who wrote the Acts of the Apostles).
And then you have John, possibly the most literary and frankly beautiful of the Gospels. John (or the man claiming to be John) uses Logos in his gospel, an already established concept of the Greek world. Now, according to the sources we have, John the Apostle was a fisherman. Evidently no education of any classical variety, which strains the idea that he wrote the Gospel. Of course, he could have learned to write in his older age, but the writing style and use of certain expressions denotes a highly Hellenistic quality

Secondly, the drastic change in tone between the Old and New Testaments shouldn’t be ignored. For thousands upon thousands of years, Yahweh felt it best to leave almost all of the world in the dark about his existence. Instead, he decides to focus on a small, fairly insignificant tribe of Semites. This begs the question: why on earth would Yahweh have such a sudden change of heart? If the non-Jews lived without knowledge of him for millennia, why was it suddenly important for them to come to Jesus? Not to mention that Moses adamantly insisted that the law would not change. In fact, he told the Israelites that if anyone tried to change the law, he was evil. Now, Jesus certainly said he wouldn’t change the law (not one iota and such), and yet much of the Mosaic Law was changed. Granted, some Christian apologists made a distinction between certain laws (moral, ceremonial, and judicial), but the Hebrews (to my knowledge) never made such a distinction. The law was the law. Any transgression was wrong, and the appropriate punishment or cleansing ceremony followed suit.

Finally, since I don’t want to drag on, there’s the issue of certain traditions which seem to have intensely veered off from the early Christian Church. Most of these apply to Catholicism, so I need to recuse myself as this most likely won’t apply to Protestants. Primarily the cult of Mary (and I use cult in the sense of the Latin “cultus”, not Jim Jones) oversteps the boundary of what could be called proper honor for a saint. Granted, Catholic Christians employ theological doublethink to justify the practices, but it can be quite disconcerting when one sees their ceremonies. For example, there are elaborate processions in some countries where a statue of Mary is put on a palanquin and marched through the streets. The statue is decked in jewels and finery, with people flocking to touch or even kiss it. In some places, there’s even a crowning ceremony where a garland of flowers is placed on the statue. That alone should send off red flags, and yet the average Catholic doesn’t seem fazed. I remember one apologist using the analogy that if a man kisses his mother and then kisses his wife, nobody would think that the kiss was intended the same way. Frankly, for the issue of Mary, it’s improper. This would be equivalent to if a man French kissed his mother, and then scolded witnesses for implying he was being romantic or sexual.

The Catholicucks have it rough. I heard that the previous Pope wprked for the Kikes but stopped doing shit for him and the reason he "resigned" was due to a (((coup))).

Also, OP, the Talmud isn't Abrahamic…

it's illogical to take a hardline stance on something you have no proof of either way. Atheists are just as illogical as theists in this manner.

prove it :^)

Lies and dishonesty should never be used under the guise of "practicality".

But this is all still baseless assertions. It all boils down to the fact that there exists no proof that a divinity does or does not exist. We can theorize all we want, but to assert either way without evidence is illogical and dishonest.

Atheism is merely the belief there is no god. I myself am an "atheist" for all intents and purposes, although I don't pretend I know the truth for sure. The reason most "atheists" end up buying into all that leftist egalitarian nonsense, is because they've merely exchanged one set of religious dogma for another. There really is no more "proof" supporting the leftist worldview than there is supporting a theist's belief in god. I would say the only logical conclusion of "atheism" is the acceptance that natural law rules supreme, which is essentially fascism. Pic related pretty much sums it all up

Agreed. Once you read more of the word you start to put everything together.

I am studying more than ever and the more I learn, it feels like there are oceans more to understand.

I can see where you're coming from. That's why I consider myself an agnostic theist.
I choose to believe in a Divinity, but I have material means for proving said Divinity's existence.
That being said, philosophically speaking, having a primer mover makes sense.

Pick one or go back to reddit/4autism where you came from.

Also

I bet you are a libertarian right? 😉

Other than that, everything seems pretty good.

The biggest issue I have with you atheists is the arrogance. You are convinced you have the scope on some "big secret" that everone is just "too stupid" to realize or accept and that fact makes you better somehow.

Atheists also tend to be hedonists that believe science will one day allow them to.live forever in space with their anime waifu, not seeing the irony in having such irrational faith in jewish science circles.

Go and learn real science like vid related. You retards probably thought science was invented 200 years ago, even though people had all sorts of scientific knowledge long before the (((age of enlightenment))).

While I don't disagree, this blanket statement would easily cover religious people too. In observing heated arguments between humanist atheists and christians I've often marveled at how similar they come off.

This clown is an utter embarrassment.

And I'm not even religious…

Alright you goddamned niggerfaggot.
I already specified I wasn't an atheist.
Specifically,
Here
Here
And here

But no.
Nooooooooooooo no, that isn't convenient for your fucking argument.
In typical shitstain fashion, you just go on and type out "lel you fucken atheists dont know shit" without actually reading what I said about my beliefs.

No argument there, bud. I agree.
You know why?
Here's a hint: I'm not a fucking atheist.

The only reason I'd want to live forever is to research as much as possible and make as much of an impact on the world as possible.
Waifuism is for faggots and degenerates.

Jesus Monkeyballs Lucifer Galilean Christ, learn to fucking read you goddamned pathetic excuse for a mongoloid.

FUCK

Such as? I'm pretty sure even hardline theists accept that no material proof exists for the existence of their deity.

Yes, I completely agree. That's why I think the driving force for the white race should be one based on natural law and fanatical self-improvement. We must become gods ourselves.

I don't believe i ever said atheism was a rational stance. In fact, I said the exact opposite. I said that atheists are just as irrational as theists, in that they claim to know for a fact that god doesn't exist, which is impossible to prove either way.

So valuing truth and honesty makes me a libertarian? If you think so little of such things, what does that say about your ideology? If you must know, I'm a fascist who believes in the supremacy of natural law.

Hold on. I never claimed to be atheist. I said that for all intents and purposes, I'm a "functional" atheist, in that I simply don't accept any of the gods claimed by any man-made religion to be true. I suppose "non-religious" would be a better way of describing me. You seemed to haved missed this part in my original post where I explicitly said that asserting either way is dishonest and illogical.

This is a blatant strawman. If you can't argue without making things up to attack, then don't even try.

Another strawman that I never claimed. I already said that I believe in the iron law of nature and the natural hierarchy of all things.

All you seem to be able to do is make a bunch of strawman, attack them, and then pretend like you made a point. It's kind of embarrassing, actually.

Forgot to quote you.

My apologies, that was a typo, I mean to say "but I have no material means for proving said Divinity's existence."

Fair enough. That makes a little more sense now.

Has your country had a bad politician? Why haven't you fled?

thanks for taking the time to write out your thoughts. I'll write and give you some of my thoughts, I'm definitely not an expert and you seem to know a lot more than me.

This is hard to understand as a layman, but as a historian it's credible. For example, the biographies of Alexander were done two centuries after, I believe, yet are held as credible pieces of history.

Hard question, but I'll try to answer. God created men to have a predilection for God. There is truth in all religion, but christ is the Truth. There is purgatory. so it's not like all men except the jews were sent to hell.

If you know this, then you know that Jesus fulfilled the law. Then you must disagree that he fulfilled it? I can't argue with you about that, way above me.

she is more than a saint, she is the mother of God and does a lot. She helps in salvation as Co-redemptrix and mediatrix.

Sorry I couldn't have more answers that were more in-depth. Come to /christian/ if you're ever curious, there's a lot of people who are smarter and know more than me there.

It warmed my heart to see someone willing to discuss their position. Good night user.

You know, this Pope doesn't really represent the true doctrine of Catholicism. Francis is a degenerate and the Catholic faith will not hesitate to give him a proper Shoah-ing soon enough.

The faith is good, the Pope is bad. I'm getting baptised as soon as this God-awful Pope gets gone.

Thanks for at least responding in a civil manner, user.
I'd unload some more positions, but I'm afraid I wouldn't be able to contain any more autism.

Y-you too

Kill yourself. If my ancestors could weather the storm of violent and societal persecution against them by Protestants then I'll put up with a degenerate Pope.

Make Catholicism Great Again

Christianity built Western civilisation from the ground up. To abandon it because of one degenerate leader (implying we haven't had many of them before and still survived) is the epitome of weakness and cowardice. Christians will weather this wave of degeneracy yet.

Look, I'm not debating Christianity's influence on the West, but holy shit, to claim it built the West "from the ground up" is titanic bullshit.

...

So Jesus is Mossad?

I guess their Q gave him something for the nails.

I'll unload on both of you: no matter what Science! TM brand science says, atheism is non belief, not assurance of nonexistence. What you guys are talking about is Gnostic Atheism.

Atheism and Deism deal with belief - first one doesn't believe in deities and second one believes in them, usually a specific one.

Gnostic and Agnostic deal with knowledge - first knows that a deity exists/doesn't exist and second doesn't know if deities exist and usually doesn't think it's possible to know.

Both of them are related in terms of theme but they deal with different values.
They don't overlap, the answers to "Do you believe in God?" and "Does God exist?" are different.
If you say that you're agnostic or gnostic as an answer to the first question then you haven't answered the question at all, same thing if you say that you're an atheist or deist to the second question.
Just saying that one's agnostic says literally nothing about that person's belief in gods.
A person is always one of each, they know or don't know AND they believe or don't believe. If they say they don't know if they believe then it's because they don't believe.

Agnostic Atheism is the most rational position as a whole since Agnosticism is perfectly rational since it's an admittance of lack of empirical knowledge and Atheism is simply non-belief in the supernatural since believing in a supernatural god is one unfounded step further in the chain of thought, which means it's also one step further away from anything empirical and the supernatural can't be empirical since it can't be proven or disproven through natural means which are the in the realm of empiricism.
Our belief in the existence or non existence of the supernatural is an exercise in futility and that's why not knowing if gods exist and not believing in them (Agnostic Atheism) is the most intellectually honest and rational position to take.

I'll even go out on a limb and say that roman virtue defined and built christianity, with greek philosophy too.

why do Argentinian spics have any credibility?

Thanks for that explanation. I'd say agnostic atheism sums my position up quite well

No problem, lad. And for the record, being racional is not the best thing for everyone imo, being virtuous is. If one needs some belief to be virtuous then I reckon they should be supported.
Christians seem to be easy to uncuck regarding mudslimes. They understand what is at stake the moment you explain to them the dangers mudslimes pose to christian/western/roman values.

...

I see you're at it again SA.

Fedora's are the 2nd worst thing next to SJWs.

I understand that complete rationality isn't necessarily good for the whole population, nor is the majority particularly capable of being such. What I object to is basing our moral system on religious principles that can be easily rejected by those who refuse to believe in a god. What we need is a whole new set of standards based on natural law and love of ones race & people. Something that can't be easily subverted or distorted.

By which definition, Carl? The one you just made up? These scientists should just stay the fuck out of the religion debate. Their grasp of language is so poor that they have little to offer it anyway.

Holy fuck, that delusion. When was the last time catholics punished anybody for shitting up their religion?

"'These actual scientists should just stay the fuck out of the religion debate!!"'

~ Fedora Neckbeard - 2016

I think idiots like you need to stay out of the religious debate tbh.

"Unless they agree with my position, which in case keep 'em coming guys."

~ Fedora Neckberad - 2016

Atheism:
A- = Absent
Theism = belief
Atheism = no belief

Somebody who doesn't know if there is a god, but lives under the assumption there is not, is an "agnostic atheist".
Somebody who claims to know there is no god is a "gnostic atheist".

I shouldn't have to explain English to you, Holla Forums. All atheists are agnostic atheists. The only reason the popular usage of the word has become corrupted to mean "gnostic atheist" is because of retards like Sagan who doesn't understand English.

You can throw 'neckbeard' at me all you want. My only dog in this fight is I don't like to see people piss all over language while acting intellectually superior. It makes me cringe.

One can argue christianity is a hybrid religion. Their values are roman, historic ancestry is kikery, traditions are euro-pagan and its members are mostly white.

Completely agree with you

So SJWs and pop-atheists are the 2 worst things instead of kikes and sandniggers? Get your fucking priorities straight, lad, the first 2 are just idiots manipulated by kikes.

I'm gonna agree, scientists should avoid discussing religion if they're not equiped to do it, it's more in the realm of philosophy than science. Science deals in an with the natural world, doesn't need to clash with the supernatural

I'm a Holla Forumsak, i can deal with kikes and sandniggers. I can't deal with it when my own people are fucking mongoloids.

Fedora Neckbeards are fucking retards worshipping science but will scream to keep scientists out of it when they don't join them in their absurd hatred for [insert religion]. Fedoras are to religion like SJWs are to white people.

How do you interpret the quote? Unless I'm missing some context I think he misused the word atheist. He should have said gnostic atheist or even fedoras imo.

Except no one mentioned 'gnostic' or 'agnostic', you just shat that out yourself.

I hope to God no one ever takes explanations from you. For their own sake.

...

So explain what happens next then, what should we expect to happen?

I fail to see your point, Sagan is wrong in his quote because he's talking about knowledge and then refers to a designatiom regarding belief.
If he had instead said gnostic instead of atheist then it would have made sense since gnosticism deals with knowledge.

This attack seems to be directed at gnostic atheists but he doesn't specify, he just says atheists.

The user you answered doesn't seem to fit the fedora archtype and Sagan is indeed wrong in that quote. At the risk of repeating myself being a scientist doesn't give one equipment to discuss religion, being a philosophers or a theologian does.
Why does everyone think that scientists can be authorities when it comes to religion?

Your white people analogy is faulty but I get the wide strokes.

And typing on the phone is annoying, every post has typos so I'll bookmark this thread and will reply to anything when I get back

How do you not know the Pope is a jew?

just like communism and feminism, in practice, in the real world, you're fucking wrong

It's literally nothing. The US government fights against "terrorism" too. Milliojs of evangelical christcucks supoirt war on "terrorism" too. Your patriarch is simply a globalist shill in the same league as neocon Jews.

No. It is clear from the Bible that ancient Israelites were honorless nomadic criminals, just like Jews today.

no, he's just south american.

source : my jewish ass

That would be a valid statement, until I hear the sheer, never-ending derision that atheists direct at Christians (the people they have a grudge against) and every other form of metaphysics, in spite of having no evidence for or against such beliefs.

This is where the so-called "agnostic atheist" departs from reason.
A person who does not know, and therefore abstains from the choice to believe or not believe based on inconclusive evidence has transcended your petty insistence that everyone "has to take a side".
You can tie yourself in knots trying to convince yourself why "Agnostics don't real", even as you try to claim our numbers for your group in your little war with the Christians, but its just fucking pathetic.

Hello Mr. """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'neutral""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'

PJW made a video on this

Since Catholics are silent on the way this asshole talks they are therefore complacent and agree with what he says

Similar to the Catholic Church, the problems with America and Canada are in the foundation. In the essences of these institutions.

Empiricism is not politics (unless you're a kike).
I'm not some political moderate shuffling around to stay constantly in the center of the overton window. I believe what can be proven, unlike stupid people.

Metaphysics is out of their area of expertise anyway. Theologians discussing biology and vice versa is a doomed race…

This is what happens when knowledge is atomized. We need more understanding, as with great men like Newton, C.S. Lewis, Archimedes or Leonardo da Vinci (perhaps the purest example).

Plato got the scale and magnitude right, even if he got the details wrong. Metaphysics is the attempt to rationalize the reason even categories, concepts or ideas exist. There is no way physics, biology, chemistry or even math can explain it.

Sagan's poor understanding of the concept of atheism is confirmed in another quote of his:

Nobody (with an education) used the word in this context when he said this (early 80s). Nobody (with an education) does now, either. He clearly didn't test this definition with the atheists of renown at the time. He must have fucking hated peer review.

Amusingly, this brain fart then gave christians the perfect ammunition to dismiss atheism as "equally as based on faith as religion". Way to go, Carl.

Not only does he misrepresent atheism, but religion too:

He neglects to mention that Followers of God, Jesus and Mohammed outnumber the followers of Satan by at least a few hundred thousand to one.

I struggle to find even one correct opinion of his on anything but physics. He was just another pretentious sophist going after Christians because he thought they were easy targets.

The people fighting that war that you're talking about are atheists in the same way the current Pope is Christian. Judging any belief or opinion by the worst people who hold it will make you hate everything, wrongly.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of people who follow Christopher Hitchens and the like are not smart enough to fully understand their arguments. Hence the birth of the fedoras, arguing with memorized quotes and resorting to smoke screen mockery when they run out.

heh

Within the framework of your belief system.*
Nobody is immune to this, not even people with ego death, as even they have a limited perspective.

Except, ya know, in the 1960s when they fundamentally changed the church and enshrined heresy as dogma (lumen gentium, dignitatis humanae, etc.).

Russia is ZOG and orthodox church is compromised you stupid cunt

THE JEWISH TERRORIST ORIGINS OF CHRISTIANITY

Jesus and the Zealots: A Study of the Political Factor in Primitive Christianity
amazon.com/Jesus-Zealots-Political-Primitive-Christianity/dp/068413361X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1430154771&sr=1-1&keywords=jesus and the zealots

———————————————————————————————————

Jesus the Terrorist
amazon.com/Jesus-Terrorist-Peter-Cresswell/dp/1846942748

Jesus, Executed Terrorist
patheos.com/blogs/unfundamentalistchristians/2015/04/jesus-executed-terrorist/

Jesus the Terrorist: An Awkward but Obvious Reading of the New Testament
pointofcontention.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/jesus-the-terrorist-an-awkward-but-obvious-reading-of-the-new-testament/

———————————————————————————————————

Essenes, Zealots, and Trouble with Rome
jesusandtheprofessor.com/2010/05/essenes-zealots-and-trouble-with-rome.html

The Problem with Jesus' Arrest and Trial
infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/jesus_trial.html

Trial of Jesus: Rome and Warrior Messiahs
jesusandtheprofessor.com/2010/08/trial-of-jesus-rome-and-warrior-messiahs.html

The Gospel of Peter: from Jesus the Zealot to Jesus Christ
eclectica.org/v7n3/rogers.html

Trial of Jesus: Jews, Maccabees, Zealots, and Judas Iscariot
jesusandtheprofessor.com/2010/08/trial-of-jesus-jews-maccabees-zealots-and-judas-iscariot.html

Russia is a 100% nationalist white superstate and Putin is the Savior of the white race you kike!

Meant in response to this:

The limited perspective is the entire point.
You sit there and talk about "within your belief system" with the implication that this would lead to bad conclusions, but the most hilarious thing about being an ACTUAL agnostic is that there ARE NO CONCLUSIONS BEING MADE, and yet fuckwits will still come out of the woodwork to tell you, "NO, BUT THAT'S TOTALLY WRONG!" (What is? There's no assertion!)

The truth is, my absence of flawed and unsupported assertions simply acts as a mirror by which other people see the flaws in their own worldviews, so they attack what makes them uncomfortable.

Case in point:

...

Oh boy he's going in for the kill!

What are you talking about? You're the only one who keeps bringing up neutrality.

Are you sure you even understand the concepts being discussed? Because this is more inane than my usual conversation with someone like you.

THE SHILL ORIGIN OF IMAGE AND (1) POSTERS

Why Jews fear Christianity
reasonandlogiccoupledwithsense.com/whyjewsfearchristianity

Why shills think that copypasta linkspam and bait images work
shillsareactuallyboredconscripts.org/spurdospärde

Jews are full of shit for not being Christian. Example: this image here is simply a translation of names in Genesis 5.

I'm actually a different person. IDs and all that. Limited perspective means that there is heavy impact made by our premises and axioms, and it can't be dodged. Ignorance is no excuse.
Examples: Save a child from a traffic accident - he grows to be a serial rapist/murderer and a sociopath.

He may also be joking.

Early christianism is totally legit and it is nothing of an hybrid religion. It may be how the protestants see their own religion, but for any Roman Catholic before Vatican 2 the 'judaism' origin of christianism is not a problem at all.

-The jews were a 'vessel', and in old testament, it's clearly written that God is pretty angry at the 'jews' for failing at their duty (of being a 'vessel' of the word of God); God is so angry at them that he destroys Israel, while the kingdom of Judea lives on until Jesus arrived.
-Jesus, born a jew, was the Messiah announced in the old testament, he had all the signs, and his mission was ultimately to eliminate the tribal and racial aspect that constrained the word of God from being known to the pagans.
-The jews couldn't take the loss of the 'monopoly of the word of God', so they killed Jesus their messiah who asked them to dissolve themselves in the pagan world, since the word of God was the only important thing in all this all along.

All this being said, it's easy to understand the historical jewish hatred toward christianism and also how much the concept of Judeo-Christianism is full of shit from a to z.

...

Marrano
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marrano

Converso
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Converso

New Christian
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Christian

Crypto-Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto-Jew

———————————————————————————————————–

Christians of Jewish Descent
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Christians_of_Jewish_descent

Converts to Christianity from Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Converts_to_Christianity_from_Judaism

Modern Converts to Christianity from Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_converts_to_Christianity_from_Judaism

List of Converts to Christianity from Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_converts_to_Christianity_from_Judaism

———————————————————————————————————–

Converts to Mormonism from Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Converts_to_Mormonism_from_Judaism

Converts to Anglicanism from Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Converts_to_Anglicanism_from_Judaism

Converts to Protestantism from Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Converts_to_Protestantism_from_Judaism

Converts to Roman Catholicism from Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Converts_to_Roman_Catholicism_from_Judaism

Converts to Eastern Orthodoxy from Judaism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Converts_to_Eastern_Orthodoxy_from_Judaism

Conversion of Jews to Catholicism During the Holocaust
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_Jews_to_Catholicism_during_the_Holocaust

Actuall i didn't meant the kingdom, i meant the 'people' of juda…

Interesting that you reply to the guy who is obviously fucking with you, yet completely ignore my rational response to your anecdotal evidence for atheists being wrong. Did it not fit your belief system?

;)

Too bad none of that bullshit you just wrote is factual.

All this is in the Old Testament. What were you doing all this time?

The Old Testament is ancient Jewish political propaganda. It's not a history book.

From who? My "case in point"? Uhhhh yes. It would not make much sense to provide example of "a guy being an insecure asshole" and then link you to your own posts.

My premises and axioms are what separate me from other people. I would have no desire to dodge such things.
My premises and axioms do not have to be PERFECT, however, the simple understanding that, "There is a middle ground between believing and not believing called 'uncertainty'" is a neglected idea that leads a lot of people into stupid, rash beliefs.

It is also worth noting that it is a subjective premise of the atheist (self-styled "agnostic atheist") that says, "Both knowledge and belief are binary absolutes", which is the logic that denies my existence.

None of that shit is in the Tanakh. What are you talking about?

...

Jesus was probably real and a good guy but a lot in the Bible is not to be trusted. Paul of Tarsus after all was a full on kike. Not to mention the old testament is full of bastardizations of old old stories. For example Adam and Eve, obtaining knowledge is supposed to be bad? I'm quite certain the god of the old testament is in fact Satan and who they refer to as the devil is someone else ( probably Lucifer ). The whole thing is just backwards and reeks of jewry.

I think the gospel of Thomas is very good. The esoteric truths in Christ kind of got lost through the strict organization of various Christian sects. The Cathars were the last major hold out.

...

Propaganda was invented by Edward Bernays in the 1920s or something. Don,t be too modern when touching old texts and such or you won,t understing anything.

*understand

Nope. The evidence for Jesus' historicity is terrible.

Politics and religion weren't separate in the ancient world, especially for the Jews.

The bible is a collection of writings proclaiming how Jews are the master race who will eventually control the whole world and destroy all the goyim nations.

Except that even the talmud acknowledges Jesus as a historical figure. They also desecrate the name in order to have Him wiped out of history.

Nice try, though.

The Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament, is saturated with racial supremacism and expresses the genocidal Jewish plan to exterminate all non-Jews.

In the Old Testament, the genocidal Jews call themselves the "holy seed" (Ezra 9:2; Isaiah 6:13; 44:2-3; 59:20-21) and the "elect" of their god (Isaiah 42:1; 45:4) who will survive the apocalypse, after which the Jews will have exterminated all non-Jews. (In the Old Testament, see: Deuteronomy 32:43; 33:29; Psalms 2:1-2, 8-9; 18:40-50; 72:1-20; 75:3, 10; 79:6-7; 82:6-8; 83:9-10; 110:6; 137:8-9; Isaiah 11:4; 17:12-13; 33:12; 34:2; 41:11-12; 42:1; 49:26; 60:16; 65; 66; Jeremiah 2:3; 10:10-11, 25; 30:11; 33:15-16; 46:28; Ezekiel 25:14; Amos 9:8-10; Obadiah 1:18; Micah 4:12-13; 5:8; Zephaniah 3:8; Zechariah 2:8-9; 12:2) In the Babylonian Talmud it states that non-Jews and proselytes will have no place in the future world. (See: Tractate Abodah Zarah, folio 3b. Tractate Yebamoth, folio 24b. Tractate Sanhedrin, folio 105a). The hateful Jews plan on sending all non-Jews to Hell forever (Psalms 9:17; Ezekiel 32:17-32).

Pick up a Christian Bible and read the Jewish "Old Testament", or "Hebrew Bible". You will quickly discover that the Jews are a perverse, murderous, and supremacist group and have been from the beginning. Is it just a coincidence that the Jews of today believe that they are a master race chosen by their genocidal Jewish god to be above all others (Exodus 19:5-6; Deuteronomy 7:6; 28:1-13; Zechariah 8:23); have taken over the governments of the world in the name of their genocidal Jewish god (Numbers 24:17-20; Psalms 2:1-12; 18:40-50; 72:8-11; 110:1-7; Isaiah 40:23; 49:7, 23; 60:12; 65; 66; Jeremiah 10:10; Ezekiel 36-39; Micah 7:16-17); are waging war on all non-Jewish religions in the name of their genocidal Jewish god (Exodus 34:11-17; Zechariah 14:9); seek a one world language and one world slave race in the name of their genocidal Jewish god (Zephaniah 3:9; Zechariah 8:23); steal the wealth of Gentiles through usury but grow enraged when Jews practice usury against other Jews (Exodus 22:23-24; Leviticus 25:36-37; Deuteronomy 15:6; 23:20; 28:12-13; Ezekiel 18:13, 17); take non-Jewish women as sex slaves (Numbers 31:15-18); have stolen the land of Palestine and are actively genociding the Palestinians in the name of their genocidal Jewish god (Genesis 15:18-21; 17:8; Exodus 34:11-17; Numbers 33:50-56; Deuteronomy 11:24-28; Joshua 1:3-4; Isaiah 52:1; Ezra 1:5); and view non-Jews as animals (Ezekiel 23:20; 34:31; Ezra 9; Nehemiah 9:2; 13:3, 23-30; Isaiah 61:9); when it is a proven fact that all of these actions are commanded by the Jewish Old Testament and are accomplished in the name of their genocidal Jewish god by Jews today?

The genocidal Jewish "Old Testament" is an incitement to exterminate the human race. Christians and Muslims share in the guilt of the Jews for believing and proselytizing these Jewish myths.

You're thinking of the term "propaganda". Actual propaganda dates back thousands of years. For example, the Roman Empire hiring all of the famous poets of the era to write and speak about how Carthaginians sacrifice their own children to B'aal. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest this is true. It was basically "Assad is killing his own civilians!" to garner popular support to kick off the punic wars.

I didn't ignore you, you smug cunt, but there's little to discuss related to this logic.
If the vast majority of a group is much more rational, then those rational people aren't here, and therefore aren't part of the sample group that the judgement is based on.

This is ultimately the same logic by which people claim that only a very small number of Muslims are terrorists. Its like, "Okay. And?"

Are you blind?

I sure wouldn't deny that politics and religion weren't separated at that time.
Yes, the racial supremacy of the jews is in the old testament, but never forget that they are nothing without the word of God, and that all the jews are left with today is their tribalism, racism and their corrupted kabbal because since Jesus, 'God switched side' sort of.

Leading up to Christ. God even fashions Himself as a gardener, cutting the bad branches.

Guess what the jews became? Christ was the amalgamation of all good they could be. The fact that they killed the Messiah, God, Christ.. It has deeper effects and repercussions than you think.

theguardian.com/science/2014/jan/21/carthaginians-sacrificed-own-children-study (sorry for no archive, can't be arsed to open my Onion t. Finlan).

Semitic polytheism had two major flaws. Polygamy (which led to abundance of single men) and child sacrifice (the peace-time solution for the aforementioned issue). Needless to say, they fell. Solomon and his kingdom fell to paganism and occult due to polygamy as well…

I'd also like to add that the idea that 'nobody sacrificed children' is absurd and falls to the same category as

I don't think the Jews were ever Chosen, not by the God you're referring to. Yahweh is a different entity. They just make shit up and pervert the truth. For example the entire Exodus story is just made up bullshit to hide that they were pillaging mercenaries.

Except that the Talmuds (plural) were written several centuries after Jesus' supposed lifetime, therefore the Talmuds are absolutely worthless as a source for Jesus' historicity.

Nice try though.

The "word of God" is Jewish supremacism and world domination.

This is theology/mythology, not history.

95% of the Christian bible is historical fiction, as even the vast majority of bible scholars admit.

Except you're missing the key difference. You need only read the quran to know that what they're saying is bullshit.
If you however read any major atheist work, you will find that none of them claim to know for sure. They argue against particular religions based on their respective inconsistencies, not the possibility itself. They are all agnostic (atheists), they simply assumed that their readers were smart enough to understand what "atheism" means.

I get what you're saying, it was bound to have happened at some point. But there is no proof to suggest that it was a hallmark of carthaginian culture, no more so than anywhere else, at least. Also
brah…

The sea peoples? Interesting theory

Talmud is the collection of the books, so I don't think it uses plural. I mean, the Bible is 66 books (and has the theological value of 66, 6 being 'man', '666' being man as divine- ie. fulfillment of original sin as opposed to Christ), and it isn't "the bibles", it's The Bible.

The impact obviously happened. The alien ideology of Christianity came from somewhere - and it isn't a stolen collection like Zeitgeist and new-age claim.
The ideas were alien to Rome, and alien to Jews.

are mormons really that bad? worst they've ever done is talk to me on the street about stuff before obviously starting to preach. and at least they bothered to learn my country's language before coming here

RIP headphone users (including me).

This.

I know some sort of 'propaganda' was rampant in ancient time, but if we see it this way we could always say that some sort of 'capitalism' for exemple was rampant in the ancient time too.. thats why I's so sensible on using these kind of words, but I do get your point.

Yahweh, God, all are the names are same, didn't they the jews lose the name of god and Yahweh was already a replacement for it if I remember right? Forget the form, it's the essence that count, or else were did we got our 'God' from?

It's way more than this: it's a divine revelation, its what makes a Holy Book.

Yeah, I know, but they cited archaeologists (=valid in my book, unless they have extreme bias) and I didn't want to dwell too much on the subject. After 'papa kills babies' I have disliked the subject. Video probably related.

But as a hallmark of their civilization? I don't know, I think that it is a rampaging elephant in the room for anybody else even if it was rare.

seriously nigger?

Well the Jews were described as a warlike nation right? And why else would they be in Egypt if not as mercenaries. They were causing trouble when leaving so Pharoah sent his army after them. Changed his mind? Yea right lol.

"The Jew cries out as he strikes you" - forget who

I don't think so but also I don't believe in one God, that's a semitic creation I think. I'm a gnostic/hermeticist. I associate Yahweh/Jehovah with the Demiurge/Satan.

I do believe it went both ways. 30 years of war doesn't lead to small scars. However, Christians can heal from that. Muslims, jews and pagans would still be fighting. "Your people were evil to my people in the past. BLOOD VENGEANCE / FOR HONOR!"

It is a jewish proverb. More of 'jews in poland' in this series (worth a watch).
I recommend downloading the series…

I mean Polish.

"Yahweh" means 'the one who is' or 'the active exister'.

Without Jesus, this is how I'd understand it as well. Hence why "Without the Son, you have no Father". Jesus is Logos, jews are anti-logos. Yet both exist. Nature of God is odd, and not in conflict with this world.

John 1.1, "the Word" is written as Logos. I think that translation takes meaning away from the source material. As the French say, a translation can be accurate or beautiful.

I'd like to remind you that the fruit was not 'of knowledge', but of 'knowledge of good and evil'. Morality caused an issue with mortality. I fail to see how Logos could have anything to do with demiurge or satan.

I'm gnostic, in the etymological sense.

What if the Demiurge is not exterior to men, but it is in principle the will of men, as he accomplish the distinction between good and evil, both being the domain of the Demiurge? There is no Demiurge without the fall of Eden, due to eating the fruit of knowledge, knowledge of good and evil, the first form of dualism, that 'creates' the Demiurge. God is above all this, the Demiurge is nothing compared.

oy vey it,s another shoa

I think we live in an Anglican/Calvinistic world, rather than Lutheran. Luther based his teachings on truth and opposing corruption within the church - he did not intend to tear it apart. Anglican church was born because a king wanted to tear the church apart (in order to have.. a divorce). Ironic.

Calvin, however, is very materialistic and bare.

Early versions of Catholicism (of all creeds) and Lutheranism seem pretty close to the idea of the holy Church.

I seem to have given this post too little attention. First off, this attitude is no different from your average natsoc on Holla Forums.
Christianity is the opposing force to this. Oddly enough, Christians consider themselves to be "the Jews", and der jude as pretenders.

Most of 'jewish supremacy promises' were fulfilled to Christians as well - and Jews can't stand it.
This is fulfilled in both West and places like Namibia. Foreign architects or resources were used. Christian success in wars (100 to tens of thousands in early Reconquista, numerous monastery battles) fill the other parts. The only African nation able to resist colonization was Christian…

Jews hate us for it! They believe in violent and horrible ways. Christianity and history make this very clear - the nature of Jesus is the nature of God. Jesus did not stone the adulterer, He condemned usury and rebellion (ie. jewish supremacy). He even applauded the Roman centurion for his faith. Matthew 23. tells us of the attitude God has for jews.

Jews, though, wanted rebellion. They wanted a violent one and they desire the end of all other humans, as you say. However, Jesus makes it very clear that this is the serpent speaking, and not God. God wanted to make Jews a beacon of glory to show the entire humanity the greatness of God.

This is what Jesus is, the burning bush that did not turn to ash, the dead jew who rise from the grave; the one Jew who managed to slay all of Judaism, paganism and satanism.

I disagree in part, mostly about the idea that a form of protestantism could come close to the idea of the early church, specialy considering the results we have now.
It's 5am, sry for the short reply.

What we have now is exactly what protestantism was not. Valuing scripture =/= liberal interpretation. World wars killed Christianity in Europe.

European colonization was financed by Jewish bankers. Jews were intimately involved in all aspects of European colonialism, including and especially South Africa and Rhodesia.

No. It's an ancient Jewish terrorism handbook. There's nothing "holy" about it, Shlomo.

...

Entirely? For some reason I doubt that. They certainly were in the dutch business and triangle trade.

Jews don't understand the book, hence why they have Talmud. They can't even understand it, despite having access to the old language, and direct reference to Christianity in Genesis.

They understand it perfectly well. The "book" proclaims that Jews are the master race and commands them to enslave or exterminate all non-Jews.

There are two Talmuds, not one.

Jesus has the correct understanding of it. You also ignore Noah and his sons.
Nope. They are the weak amongst the weak, the small amongst the small, to be used by God to show His glory to all mankind.
Jews, however, took this role as 'superiority'. Hence why they believed in themselves and worshiped themselves - and God didn't like that one bit, so He turned to gentiles to show His glory instead.

yeah and benedict was sort of kind of taking the clock back. what he less of a pope?

Your second image is nonsensical, because the Torah is the first five books of the "Holy Bible".

Not really, it's all about who you offend, not 'what category does this actually go to'.

Is that why Jews control all the gentile nations?

Back to the drawing board for your theology, Christard.

THIS BOARD IS COMPROMISED, THE TOP MOD IS A NIGGER THAT BANS WHITE NATIONALISTS

In case you have not noticed yet, this topic is censored all over the internet.

Have you realized yet that you are in a containment board?

One of us got out, and it got viral, 60k subscribers in 2 days, 2million total video views before being shut down. And now they don't even want you to know that our ideas are like oxygen for the brainwashed millenial normie.

SEE THE ARCHIVES, SHILLS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO CENSOR THIS IN THE LAST DAYS AND THE CONTROLLED OPPOSITION MODS ARE IN IT TOO

archive.is/IwIEe

archive.is/SQjGr

archive.is/PEvDX

archive.is/6dyLx

archive.is/IwIEe

archive.is/SQjGr

archive.is/PEvDX

archive.is/6dyLx

499

THIS BOARD IS COMPROMISED, THE TOP MOD IS A NIGGER THAT BANS WHITE NATIONALISTS

In case you have not noticed yet, this topic is censored all over the internet.

Have you realized yet that you are in a containment board?

One of us got out, and it got viral, 60k subscribers in 2 days, 2million total video views before being shut down. And now they don't even want you to know that our ideas are like oxygen for the brainwashed millenial normie.

SEE THE ARCHIVES, SHILLS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO CENSOR THIS IN THE LAST DAYS AND THE CONTROLLED OPPOSITION MODS ARE IN IT TOO

archive.is/IwIEe

archive.is/SQjGr

archive.is/PEvDX

archive.is/6dyLx

archive.is/IwIEe

archive.is/SQjGr

archive.is/PEvDX

archive.is/6dyLx

8888

No. Jews control all nations for a few reasons.
How is this possible?
Now, who do you think Malachi was referring to?
Why is it that the Antichrist will manage to fool the world, and attempt to fool especially the Christians?

Catholicism != Christianity

I want Holla Forums , reddit , jews and Holla Forums jews to leave

Let them come here to be educated. They may think that they are winning, but their arguments end where they start.
Association with jewishness / semitism / modernism is all they have.

Quite frankly, it is also all that Christians have to oppose according to tradition and scriptures.

It has become sickening now. There is at least one thread per day about this. Just like there are at least 3 race mixing threads on cuckchan.

That pope is a satanic kike you idiot, put in place to shit on Christianity. He isnt allowed to be a pope.

I know. I've been here since the second exodus. I've seen smiley, illyrian etc.

Psalm 37.

Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Copticism are the only three acceptable forms of Christianity, fam. Everything else is blatant, ahistorical heresy. The Pope is a heretic, but that's happened so many times before it isn't even notable. Pray harder and do some allowed hermetic sorcery or something.

Holy shit, this sounds so fucking pathetic.

The Gnostics and the Paulines were embroiled in many a theological controversy, in fact, Gnostic Christianity predated Pauline Christianity and Paulines ended up copying huge tracts of doctrine wholesale from the Gnostics. That chart is such shit.

The smartest human in history believed in God, you're not wiser than Tesla.

Nothing in the prophecy states that Peter the Roman will lead the Church astray, only that the Church will have been led astray when he takes the Papacy.

...

Actually, he's preaching Marcionism, a more truer form of Christianity than Pauline shit. Marcionism, Origenism, and Gnosticism are the only forms of Chritianity a Holla Forumslack should delve into.

Who was smarter than Tesla?

I remember JPII back before he was too old to move and talk, he was pretty anti-commie.

John Monash

No. Multiple gods doesn't make sense. There an be only one ultimate source of authority, morality, and truth and that source is the Ineffable Absolute, Brahman, Bythos, God beyond word and form.

Faith doesn't have to make sense.

That's not very smart.

Good faith does.

So now we have good faith and bad faith.

Fuck off.

Might as well hack up a goat and read the future from its entrails.

You've never heard of good faith and bad faith arguments?

Tesla ain't makin the best life choices either.

How the fuck can your people tolerate such fucking
BLASPHEMY
?

This. Catholics aren't Christians

That's only a bad choice for the hrd, not for Tesla himself.

Hitler, too, was a vegetarian and had no children.

Arguing in bad faith doesn't mean the faith is literally bad.

There is no solid evidence Tesla said that, and even if he did it doesn't prove his faith in a 'god' much less your 'god'.

If anything that quote refers to the cosmos and obtaining knowledge from it simply peeling back another layer of fog surrounding it.

And Tesla was not the smartest man who ever lived and in many respects was mentally unstable, however its not like there isn't a fine line between genius and insanity.

Aristotle.

Belief based on bad faith arguments lead to bad theological systems.

It is very much a bad choice for Tesla.
And it was a very poor choice on his part to do the latter, though the former isn't true.

Good thing we are interested in spiritual belief, not theological system.

Organized religion is cancer.

Tesla fags are irritating. Edison rekt that homo

My God is the the Hermetic God, the only God.

Ha, Aristotle couldn't even posit superposition, he's not so smart. Either A or not A my ass.

Cancer usually doesn't act as a central organizing principle and governing institution in those bodies in which it grows.

It was a bad choice for the herd, not a bad chice for Hitler himself. And Hitler was on a vegetarian diet, thats a well-established fact.

Edison was a patent troll, in the same shit-tier as Einstein.

Cancer does act by corrupting something noble and pure (spiritual belief) and turns it into money-making system (materialistic wealth).

Wow, you have a really simplistic, fedora-riffic view of organized religion.

Considering that the rediscovery of his works almost single-handedly lifted Europe out of the dark ages I would beg to differ.

Organized religion is only good if it serves the State i.e. Shinto.

Other things, pure trash. The Catholics church is an international organization and needs to be put down or at least pay heavy tax in every countries it preaches in.

SJWs serve state interests.

They serve the Democrats's interests.

And EUs, which is a superstate, and state interests in having the high officials forever in charge and rich.

EU doesn't serve the national state's interests. It only serves to better itself.

Whoever said that? State interests =/= national interests. In a monarchy the correlation is clear, but in a republic, not so much. In a republic, the state is the enemy of the nation, for the leaders compete over the resources (people) and the best user of the people wins.

I have only said state interests, not national interests.

The definition of nation is too loose to be taken seriously.

Perhaps in the states. In Europe it is quite clear; all classes within ethnicity benefit.

The state is bullshit if you live in a republic. Etatism is cancer. Conscription? Switzerland, Finland, Russia, Ukraine, Israel have it. It's effective in molding dogs out of men, or criminals out of idealists.

But all is worth sacrificing 'for the state'?

Catholicism is an institution. It about wealth and power not faith. The religious part exists only to chain you to the institution forever making you their slave.

Conscription actually does nothing if the populace does not want to fight.

The most effective russian fighters are paid contractors.

And Switzerland as a state goes around the idea of a nation, you can be a german, french or italian swiss.

Depends if the state is good for the people.

Bad states exist.

Societies are based on institutions. Marriage is the base for family, which is the base replicator unit.

Religious institutions exist to create a cohesive moral, ethical world view and traditions in which these units will live in. Lawlessness will increase if religion is not taken seriously - although complete atomization might make the individuals too craven to do harm, as well.

Media has usurped this role nowadays, and use most of their influence to diminish religion, family.. all institutions which create and uphold a society and its traditions. This is the main reason religion is shilled against so hard.

Complex systems of work require management. However, in a system of usury there will always be a loser class/loser classes. Christianity has created a system of work in which usury was unnecessary. In HRE they managed to ditch money largely, and they traded in labor within the community (prior to protestantism).

Pretty much.

Why does no one else care that one of the board moderators/owners is a fucking shit skin?

As said religious institutions are only good if they serve the state. If they don't serve the state, then they only serve to strengthen themselves, to develop theocracy.
Bullshit, they let the jews do usury freely. In fact, that's the only job jews do.
Another bullshit, the Church filled itself with church taxes from the HRE.

Adolf Hitler

Can someone just cremate the pope alive already he's jewish as fuck

He still invented more shit that's used today than Tesla. Tesla seemed like an ok dude and all, but only retarded pretentious homos gloat about him with such high esteem.

Christianity did what it does. It turned European's tradition and philosophies into one big multicultural mess… leading to war and war between the bureaucracies of inbred monarchies - just like Communism today.

Into the trash it goes.

Tesla based his work off the Vedic writings in which he said held all the secrets of the Universe (so did Oppenheimer).
Your dead kike is not NOT God….
God is a Germanic word for G'ODIN

Sorry for taking this long to answer

Definitions shouldn't change because of how stupid people apply them. We use feminism in the correct way because it was a female supremacy movement from the beginning, not for "equality".

The act of not knowing if you believe is a choice in itself that defaults to the most natural choice, which is non belief.

Let me run you through this with a quick example:

Not choosing is a choice in of itself.
This is not a judgement of value, being in the natural state is not good or bad in of itself, it's just that when it comes to something that's being the natural then there's no reason to remove yourself from your natural state.

What do you mean by "totally legit"?
I'm not saying it isn't, I'm just arguing that the christian values are roman ones and the traditions are euro-pagan.
It's normal for religions to have influences from the environment, Judaism is the same, tons of egyptian and ancient mesopotamian influences.

Judaism is forever pissed off at how they were everyone's bitch for millennia so they came up with a higher figure just so they wouldn't feel as miserable. Probably, haven't studied kike ancestry enough, this is just my humorous hypothesis.

Agree completely, he butchered "rational thinking" the same way pop scientists do.

And Hitchens was a contrarian and an argumentative person from the get go, he enjoyed being the devil's advocate too.
In a way, I get the feeling he simply enjoyed having a good discussion with someone.

Then instead of judging the group they pretend they're part of, you can judge them and call them out on their shit instead, using the correct terminology

Just a quick note regarding sandniggers: even if it's a minority that commits the crimes the majority supports or agrees with them and the majority too are against our culture.
And the crux of the matter isn't bombs going off, it's a full blown invasion fueled by people with a political and religious system that wants to destroy us.

"British empire" was Jewish.

hes right faggot

you dont know if there or if there isnt a god

atheism is non-sensical

only agnostic is reasonable

Only catholics care about the pope

Orthodoxy and protestantism is still (relatively) pure

Just in case this isn't bait I'll direct you to these two posts that explain why you're wrong.

so you got me on semantics. nice.

either way, believing a god is not possible is retarded.

Do I need to explain why semantics are the most important thing in a language?
Maybe you shouldn't make retarded claims if you know nothing about what you're talking about.

We Shitskins now

Vril, Shakti, Electric Universe. Things are being revealed.

Also that first pic is hilarious. Stalin is not a saint and the only retards pushing for that are the Communist party. Also nice, you saved a pic from ifunny, you must be 12 years old.

It's the result of free will that killed it in the end. The world wars were only a symptom.

Add some meat to your sentences and maybe I'll think you are a retard instead of simply being a JIDF.

You clearly think that material and financial wealth is a sign of being chosen by God?
Shiiiieet.

Meh.

pretty sure he will be declared as anti-pope in the future when Vatican will be reclaimed, this has happened in the past

THis

twitter.com/Pontifex

This faggot's twitter is too quiet.

I was concerned when I first saw how charismatic the cunt was, but there's no doubt in my mind, now: he's a satanic disciple.

I swear there was some prophecy a few centuries ago that said the temple of christ would fall when a jesuit sits on the throne of heaven
anyone seen the latest x-man film?
jewy wood compares the big bad ethnic cleansing guy to two jewish gods and Ra which is peculiar because Ra wasn't a war god or all powerful

only because the king of France either owed too much money to the bank of Christ to pay back his debts or he wished to sodomize his missus and the stuffy old Italian man called him a heretic

so's the USA, neither started off jewish but they wriggle in like the parasites they are

Fr. Malachi Martin discusses Satan's assault on the papacy and the election of an apostate pope.

Listen to this man pls. He was murdered for speaking out.

kill the pope

An atheist is a retard who was force fed a religion as a child and as an adult decided to not believe.

I'm agnostic, i grew up without being force fed a religion. My parents had endured enough strive to not believe in what the church thought. My father had heard stories of other boys of what they had to endure during their stay in monasteries.

literally a Jew payed by Jews and freemasons

Wait, what?

Now the narrative is that Christianity isn't descended from Judaism at all?

Whatever happened to the whole "ancient Jews were actually white Aryan supermen like Jesus and modern Jews are fake" thing?

Gonna save this pasta, thanks lad.

No, it doesn't.

Christianity is the foundation of Western culture.
The New Testament talks about how evil Jews are. Look at John 8:44
Jews killed Christ, the Talmud displays hatred for Christ.
Christian morals & values are what Jews are destroying.

The Vatican is infiltrated by shills, that's the problem.

This really is Semitic mind poison. Just like the Talmud, every Jewish victory is evidence of Jewish superiority. Ever Jewish defeat is because they wern't Jewing hard enough.

Christians are Israel, the house of God. Jews are mere pretenders, bitter in their hatred, arrogant in their pride. They are a divorced / failed bride, and try everything in their power to prevent Christianity from existing.

They even openly state this.

—

Ancient Jews were white, if we believe OT in describing Isaac's sons, one being a redneck (Esau, who mixed his race, is described to getting red in the sun) and one being Jacob (his twin, less hairy and of nerdish structure). Arabs believe themselves to be the descendants of Ismael, the son of Isaac and an Egyptian slave.

White =/= Aryan, though. They were still semites if we go by Noah's sons, but were more white than modern day Syrians/Palestinians, although they presumably resembled them a lot. Just a lot less Arabic and Turanic/mongol admixture.

Christian loss is just an increase in difficulty and the radiance of victory. To pagans, loss means something intrinsically wrong about them, hence why they adopted Christianity after losing to it. Even Japan asked if USA wanted to have them convert - the same structure of beliefs exists in Shinto.

However, more developed religions, such as Confucianism, Taoism or Buddhism can stand on their feet even after a loss, because they have canonized ways of thinking, not affected by temporary things, such as a loss in the battlefield, school yard, kindergarten.

I think what you say is unbelievably retarded, but I do have to take note of those quads.

Do you have proof?

:^)

What is retarded? The notion that palestinians and Syrians had less mixing with arabs 2-3 Millenia ago, or the notion that the Bible describes Esau as getting red in the sun (as opposed to Jacob working in-doors)?

Noah had three sons, one being the father of Semites and orientals, one being the father of Europeans and one being the father of Africans - who is said to be subordinate to the other two and their descendants (how odd…).
This is the classic understanding of Christianity, up until the latest century or so, when everything has been turned upside down.

Churches have made a 180 from Christianity lately.

Hm, interdasting.

What you're arguing for is obstinatance as a form of social defense?

The problem is that a defeat for Christians and Buddhists actually is the same as a defeat for pagans and anybody else, whether they want to believe it or not. They actually can be eradicated (and have been in numerous areas), and the world keeps on spinning along without them just as it did before.

Yes, but they have also conclaves of survivors, such as Copts, Lebanese/Syrian/Iraqi/Iranian Christians. I'm sure there are plenty of Buddhist enclaves in India - Afganistan had them removed, sadly.

No matter how many times you say it it doesn't mean it's true.
If anything Greek philosophy and Roman values are the foundation of our culture.
Christians had similar "values" as jews until around 100 AD. They were incredibly arrogant, self-righteous and parasitical.
The hispanian legatus referred to the christians in hispania as the christian problem.
They were forced to adapt after serious persecution.

And counter sage

What you said made me think. I've never heard this explained as simply a long time preference. Thinking in terms of the long term. It makes some degree of sense.

I can't shake the feeling that none of it is actually true, though. And that if you program your brain to believe things that actually arn't true, you will fall hard in the extra long term, which is what is happening to these religions now anyway.

That and type-K behavior generally has mechanisms built in with a certain gracefulness in defeat. That is, when you are beaten, you recognize a certain superiority in those that have defeated you.

General shit behavior (like Jews) is to seethe in even more hatred after a defeat, and plot to destroy those who defeated you and subject them to degradation and humiliation as revenge. I can see this with Christians here on Holla Forums, I think they really are full of hatred (evidenced by the constant lashing out and projection of the evil motives onto those they hate, tending to characterize everybody as creatures of evil, eta).

Roman understanding of law, sure, Greek philosophy with Christian morality and understanding.

The Greeks couldn't answer what Logos of man is, or what it is for. Christians could. Romans couldn't either, so they turned to Epicurus, hedonism and cynicism. Philosophy didn't help them, though. Religion kept parts of the empire alive for quite a long time afterwards.

You could also say that Christianity spread Roman culture across Europe, replacing Franks, Nordics, Germanics and Slavics in its path - although the latter was affected by the Greeks more, hence the alphabet.

Atheism always falls off short term. What you're saying describes Islam and Judaism perfectly, but Christianity has plenty of room to grow. All it needs is a big war or chaos, and the wings will spread again.
Just like in atheistic Jugoslavia or USSR.

Religion makes societies unite and rise. Atheism is always associated with fall or 'strong independent ideology who needs no God'.

This is what they did to Europe post ww1 and ww2. This is what they did to monarchies after Napoleonic era… This is what they do to the church all the time.

I do have my struggles with hatred. Mostly in the past, before Holla Forums.

Hm? An example, please. Pagans who burn churches, satanists who sacrifice humans, jews who lie and murder…
They have given plenty of reason to believe that the great (albanian) liberators of Europe aren't exactly kind.

Not with your cuck popes.

I'm gnostic in the etymological sense because, like it or not, humanity spent most of it's time claiming that the 'gnose' was possible and that the goal of every 'civilizations' was to build a society around that goal, either by coming up with a religious form (abrahamic religions) or not (taoism, hinduism, etc).

just google "malachi martin jews". You'll find it discussed also in "the jewish revolutionary spirit"
mauricepinay.blogspot.it/2012/10/the-final-nail-in-malachi-martins-coffin.html

Simply having social interaction and media create values will lead to popularity contest and baboon pack behavior. Enforced values are needed, and they need to have answers to metaphysical issues.

Ah, thanks.

The Romans were terrible in the spiritual domain, but they sure were amazing in the material domain.

Seems like a consequentialist argument… which might be… pagan? Might makes right?

I don't know. It's pretty dark. God doesn't exist and the great religions are factually wrong… but if you admit this, your civilization will collapse. Perhaps civilization had no right to exist in the first place.

Ted Cruz comes to mind, talking shit about Trump when he was guilty as all hell. All the Christians on Holla Forums who think the only reason people might disagree with them is because they're shills who personally hate them, that's what I was talking about.

Realistically, most atheists are white upper-middle class professionals, not scheming Jews trying to destroy you.

What? Humilitas, Iustitia, Pietas, Clementia, Veritas, Virtus and others are rightfully roman. Christians weren't even a thing and these were already some of Rome's basic virtues.

Christians could answer what the reason for Man was because of a tradition of intellectual dishonesty that is arguably not their fault, something greek philosophers always avoided.
Exile and death were some of the punishments greek philosophers would face if they went against the idea of gods but we can see in some texts how they hint at agnostic atheism.

Romans didn't turn to hedonism, it was less prevalent than it is today.
And to be a good roman you had to be pious so cynicism was mostly out of the question.
A good roman would also be a gnostic deist but of course some were simply partaking in the charade, it's a roman tradition to act.
I bet you believe in stories about mass orgies or Caligula fucking his whole family and butchering people for sport.
Caligula's history is mostly BS because he opposed the senate and presented himself more like a hellenic king than a roman princeps so his memory was damned (damnatio memoria). Same with Nero, both were apparently really good leaders, they just didn't partake in the roman charade.

I agree that roman culture spread across some parts of Europe because of christianity (after it adapted and stopped being a parasite) but most of Europe, Asia Minor and Britain was already Roman by 50 AD, at least 5 decades before christians decided to adopt roman virtues and change for the better, something the kikes never did.

Please explain further so I don't misunderstand what you mean.

Not entirely, although it is similar. The idea is that God lets everything live its life and judges it accordingly afterwards. However, He also has His plans untouched, will use enemies of Christians to teach them lessons and so forth. God however, is alive and does desire a relationship with not only the individual, but the nation and the church. If Christian nations replace God in any way, they will be punished.
Now, how do you think a Christian sees modern day horrors from this angle? The rise of atheism, especially the pop culture atheism seems very much like a red flag to summoning such things, not to mention using rainbow as the symbol of fornication and sodomy.
>rainbow symbolizes the pact God made with Noah, stating that He will not flood the Earth with water next time but with fire.

Hypocrites are hypocrites. Given how much Jesus hated them and the numerous teachings revolving around this concept (example: Job, mountain sermon etc.), hypocrisy is something God does not condone. Even then, it is allowed to exist.. for now. Didn't he also believe himself to be some anointed king or something?

I prefer taking my model Christian from Trump - although he is far from perfect.

Yet orgies were a thing.. The standards were obviously different, even though the basis was the same. We all have morality built in, but it is guided and nurtured differently.
Although the Borgias diddled children, Jesus and Christianity have been very much against pedophilia and child abuse. Caligula was nuts because he was raped as a child.

Sins will cost us and our surroundings.
The birthplace of Bread & circus, where appearances mattered more than the content… Decadent civilization, at least near the end of the western half.
How many were interested in being good Romans?

Historical revisionism should be backed with something, else I will only have my grain of salt.

Acts. and the letters have pretty good descriptions of the customs of early Christians. I fail to see parasitism on the scale you speak of.

I find it far more plausible that Jews used their influence to tarnish Christian reputation, lie about Christians (they be cannibals!) and other things - as has been written, too.

Actually, I have to go back and question some of these unqualified universals you're making.

You say that if a nation embraces atheism, it will collapse. I have to challenge this, even though it seems sort of obvious if you look at something like Sweden where every Swede is actually a member of the state church at birth, but I digress or the Soviet Union.

If you look at the places in the US where the most Christians live, it seems that they've already collapsed. High drug use, high poverty, high teen pregnancy, high divorce, low education levels, eta. Even the whites (who mostly engage in self-destruction). Then if you look at the most atheistic places (sometimes even within the same state, like my state of Washington) you find the complete reversal. Here is where you find the low crime, low time preference, stable marriages, high income whites (usually software engineers, doctors, lawyers, etc). Even Christian polling organizations have admitted this, so what's the Christian explanation?

Sweden pagan? No. Italy and France and England are all religious countries and are all very cucked

Well the Romans had at some point the deification of the emperor, which is rather meh; they couldn't resist christianism which is something they should have achieved with more success than this if they were not already somewhat decadent in the spiritual sense; and also, they pretty much took their cults, rituals, gods, even their Emperors, from 'outside', as the Empire was overextended as fuck.

Yes, Rome once had all they needed in the spiritual domain, but alas, they lost it so they had to 'borrow it' from the Greeks, then they tried to filled it up with exotic oriental doctrins, only to later embrace catholicism.

Catholicism officially changed fundamental doctrine with Vatican 2. It's also not the real church the orthodoxy is. MUH eternal church is a fantasy

My explanation is American Christians and their relationship with kikes, starting with circumcision.

Christian interpretation would be something akin to:
We see this, even in OPs post, on the highest order. Swedish members of the church don't really count, as most of them are atheists / Universalists anyway.
In stable decline, with their birthrates. Atheists live carefully crafted and cultivated lives, but have no future. They don't need to build anything beyond their lives. 0-1 child families are normal. However, this means that there is no future, no matter how well evaluated those lives are compared to others. There will be nigerians in 200 years, but perhaps not a single German. I do not like that future, but it is a possibility.

This is, of course, not taking sjw cult into counting, as AIDS seems to cull the homosexual population quite regularly, and the witch hunts they have certainly don't seem too pleasant. I'm sure that many statistics are filled with hatefacts. I've read that the Bible belt has overabundance of crime due to the amount of black people, but there is another factor in place as well.
The quality of people is different. Urban, Bohemian and modern city dwellers tend to have higher iq. They also tend to be atheists, not because of intelligence per se, but because they have adapted to the system. Urbanites 200 years ago weren't atheists, but deists and theists. For the same reasons.

Then we have the classic: "there are no atheists in a fox hole."
Living in peace and abundance distances us from struggles of life, worries, and careful approach to things. We start naturally assuming certain position in relation to our surroundings: "we are in charge" - and this leads to subjectivism gaining traction. "We can create values", "We can be what we want to be" etc.

Humanism will fall, worry not.

When was the last time this was actually the case? There are probably more Muslims than Christians in UK.

We are h'wite Gods. Why limit yourself?

If sweden is a pagan country then england and France are devout Christians

...

He was an Irish Catholic priest. He was in no way a jew.

Orgies have always been a thing, it's not a societal standard and it was less prevalent than today.

Can't say anything about that, there's no proof for either point.

We have no actual reason to believe Caligula was nuts or that he was raped as a child.
What we seem to know is that he was at odds with the senate so they decided to ruin his memory for all eternity, making up tons of shit we hear today. It's similar to how most people barely know anything about the Great Wars, historians lie.

Appearances always matter more in entertainment, I'm not gonna be like Plato and criticize entertainment in such an unfair way. And the end of the western half is centuries after christianity and the first emperor was born, I'm still focused on the first century of the first millennium.

That's something I can turn around too, how many christians actually want to be good for its own sake and not to get a free ride to heaven?
I'd say that romans wanted to look like good romans to exalt their Dignitas for practical or spiritual purposes.

Read their biographies by Suetonius and Plutarch, after you know a bit more about their society you start seeing patterns of the bigger charade that is the Emperor in a Republic.
The short version is: emperor is liked by the senate, senate makes up qualities for said emperor. The contrary also happens.
Also read a little of Civilis Princeps.

Not respecting customs, enforcing their own laws, very secretive and disrespectful towards authority and culture. They were persecuted for that multiple times.

Jews didn't have many issues with the romans until the latter decided to raze one of the biggest temples in the "holy land" as retribution for being parasites. Then everything went to shit. Also, jews were still frowned upon and kicked out.

It was tradition to sometimes deify important people but Caesar was probably one of the first. A proper imperial cult only became known later on after the first century.

This is a big issue, it's hard to compare late roman republic/early roman principate to imperial rome since they are two different beasts. We can't mix them up. Most of the "decadence" and lack of virtue happened centuries after the golden age of rome, right before its collapse. I'd say it's natural for a collapsing nation to become virtueless, society is crumbling so no one plays the charade anymore.

Most pagan =/= pagan. I do think that France has the title of most pagan, though.

Not bumping because I'm answering this late.

(thread summarised)

It's because human nature. Either ideology or faith, some allegiance must be had to something, even if it's skub.

Also, even if atheism is widespread, a moral code should be followed, and questioning of it should be taboo, or else you end up like we are ending. But that's in the social sphere of things, not spiritual.

Tip harder, faggot.

You're right, but you're still being enlightened by your own intellect and not phony gods.

But the final pope was supposed to be black.
Wait, this one's argentinian…

Don't blame the pope, he's infallible cause it's always the church's fault. I'm partially anti-Catholic and I still like the Pope because I know deep down he really gets it.

You plebs just don't understand how bad things are.

No way, Islam is the true faith. Catholicism is the wizards guide to magical correctness. Islam is submitting to Allah and abstaining from deadly sin. I suspect that half of the Catholics are closet satanists or ignorantly satanic. The other half is the hierarchy that leads up to the white wizard of Vatican place who is good people by all decent definitions.

fuck it. fuck it all

...

Not much triggers me, but your retarded comment managed it. Congratz.

Desert fanfic written by semitic stoners 2k+ years ago doesn't automatically transcend the barrier separating fact from fiction.

The only truth is the blood and soil doctrine. No one's managed to prove the existence of an afterlife, and all we can go by (until somebody offers more than blind faith) is what we can experience with our senses and probe with our science. If there is a Creator out there somewhere, and he's behind the rise of this universe, then he most certainly isn't the dogmatic helicopter parent the Church makes him out to be.

You christcucks never learn. Two millenia later, and you're still the best of goys.

Hope not. Christianity belongs to the unwashed sub-100 IQ masses of impressionable retards dwelling in mud huts. It is not the White man's destiny, nor has it ever been. Our race must claim its birthright, and ascend to the stars, not busy itself scraping the bottom of a barrel with the rest of Earth's hyper-primates as they gyrate and bow to a cadre of corrupt old men with far too much wealth and too little sense.

There's that universalism again. Proto-Bolsheviks is what you jew-loving cucks are. You, and your filthy semitic god and his shitty revenge fanfic of a religion.

The way things have been going, 1,000 years from now the last ape will utter a final cry to JEEBUS before finally collapsing on a mound of air nikes… and the Earth will finally breathe a sigh of relief.

sedevacantism is the only truth right now
FUCK THE SO CALLED POPE

fuck off.
the pope isnt christian, neither are any who follow this blasphemer's words

Or maybe, just maybe, the church was never legitimate to begin with and Christianity is a crock of shit.

Yes, the second Vatican council, much of which is now dogma and will never be rescinded. Good that you at least admit you are a traitor who follows a subverted jewish church.

I think that I finally understand what this fag pope is trying to do. He is trying to make people hate christianity and turn away from it so that Irlmaier's prophecy can be fullfilled.

he is a fucking Jesuit that's why, those faggots have been at their liberal idiocity since their order was formed (why are they still not branded as heathens is beyond my comprehension)

Or he's just a typical progressive humanist/atheist who thinks Christianity is a noble lie that can be used to further the humanist/globalist/progressive cause.

Relevant.

The Catholic church has never been Christian. It was founded by a pagan 300 years after Christ, who merely merged paganism with Christianity because while being illegal it was believed by a majority of Romans.

True Christianity has always existed and carried on disconnected from the RCC, and no I don't mean Eastern Orthodox which was part of the RCC when it was first established. The true believers were persecuted by the RCC throughout the centuries.

This isn't to say that there weren't plenty of saved people in the RCC (more so back in the past), but nobody was saved if they believed on sacraments, idols ("icons") and the Pope instead of Christ.

What you call "true Christianity" is even worse. The only thing that kept the Catholic Church from being 100% pozzed was the leftover from paganism. Biblical Christianity is just pure Semitic religion not unlike Islam and Judaism.

Complete and utter heresy, yall need to repent or it's the hellfire for the lot of ya. The fact of the matter is that the Roman Catholic Church is the church established by Jesus Christ himself in 30 A.D. and is the only valid form of Christianity or religion in general.
The second vatican antipopes bar themselves from heaven by trying to destroy Christ's true church with heresy.

These are the only appropriate responses i saw in this entire thread. Seriously Holla Forums, get your shit together, repent, and join the One, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic Church.

lol

he's right you know

mormons and catholics and orthodox were the only relevant christian religions.

protestants never did anything.

Lets be honest here.

Except damn countless souls to hell

Also this

i actually forgot how to sage. it's been a while.