that doesn't make your religion true, though.
Also, a religion can not be subjective to a certain group of people and only be true for them. Religious beliefs must be objective facts, so to allow them to be racially subjective completely negates its validity
and you sound like a LARPagan cultist. Congrats. I'm adhere do neither religion, so stop trying.
what objective fact does any religion demonstrate or stand for?
every religion inserts into the unknown human fantasies that hope to explain, using myth, what cannot be explained at the time.
priests then use this metaphysical system to justify a moral code which forms the basis of society.
reality is objective, correct, however our reactions towards and perceptions of reality are not objective, in the sense that they differ, particularly between races and ethnic groups.
So, you get the different racial religions and their different interpretations of the world and their different moral systems … all of which have grown out of their particular genetic character which forces them to react to the world in different ways.
I mean, above I posted essays about how germans thought that to be holy you needed to be healthy, lucky, whole in body; that to die in defence of your folk was a holy act.
whereas the semitic, or Abrahamic if you prefer, view of chosen-ness stemmed from them being weak, victimized, chosen to suffer. they then derive validation and moral justification from being persecuted. christianity is the same victim psychology extended out from the exclusivity of jews to all gentiles: specifically the slaves of the roman empire.
You don't have to believe in the objectivity of your ancestor's subjective beliefs to honour them, you simply have to recognise the racial character that went into their construction and honour that instead, in yourself. By honouring your ancestors, you honour yourself.
so, if you want to be religious, your choice is a heroic religion that you have inherited from your ancestors, or an imported slave cult made up by hostile foreigners.
Christianity was successful in converting Europeans, yes, but so was liberalism. All this indicates is the seductiveness of a cult of victimhood.
i'm a fedora actually, so wrong may-may newfriend.
I've read a lot of the german philosophers so I have a sympathy for the symbology, values and morals of our ancestors, but I don't actually think it's real.
there is a distinction here between the metaphysical worldview of a religion on one hand and it's moral code on the other.
our race's value system matters. christianity has obscured that. it's important to rediscover, remember it. because it has a future, in us.
sadly paganism was destroyed by stick yid worshippers. i say we make a new religion, with the teachings and myths (or what we have left) of all european pagan religions.
Christianity only seems superior (in that it destroyed paganism in Europe) because it inherited many aspects of Roman civilization into it.
Charlemagne was very romanized and thus had a superior (for economics and warfare) social system with which to back him.
Religion played little part except perhaps to ground people in a society where you need fewer Tribes and more organization.
The claim that Christianity is more of a slave religion may be true, and may have helped develop the Feudal system and the masses of peasants it required.
t. Atheist
What the FUCK is truth?
Truth is whatever is of benefit to a particular group.
For example, a Jew says: "I am the best, my race is the best."
There is no objective way to disprove this.
This is just his subjective view of reality, and the organism believes this because it MUST believe this, it believes whatever is of utility to itself.
If a European says: "I am the best, etc."
There is also no way to disprove this, because valuations of "best" are just whatever aids and benefits the expansion, propagation, and maintenance of group or individual, especially a biological group.
Best varies from group to group,
we may feel Beethoven is the best, because Beethoven is an expression of our own racial heritage, but to a sub-Saharan African Beethoven isn't "the best" – they don't have the ear for it, it doesn't benefit their group, etc.
Values are subjective and are not rooted in anything really objective.
And this is a good thing – we should take advantage of it – it is an acknowledgement that THEIR values are not OUR values, that ours are SPECIFICALLY ours cannot be steamrolled over others, now can others steamroll us. This is the basis of National Socialism, separate biological autonomy and an organic systems whereby values are set in accordance with the degree to which they benefit the group. If you know of some objective values please tell me what they are, tell me more about these "objective" values and I will be more than happy to point out the logical fallacies in them. Objectivity is racial suicide.
christ I join this thread and the first post is some kike trying to turn christians against pagans, the second is trying to turn pagans against christians (I think? how fucking retarded do you have to be to think the Eddas are Jew worship? You just alienated every pagan in the thread)
fuck off with your subjective reality garbage. You sound like a fucking post-modernist who believes truth doesn't exist. Truth is simply facts and reality that exist outside of anyone's opinions or will. Truth exists whether people are willing to accept it or not. Stop trying to justify your idiotic beliefs by denying truth as a valid concept.
actually, there would be an objective way of proving this given a set of standards to compare other races with Jews. I would say that Jews are the best race when it comes to infiltrating and corrupting nations, but this is all relative to other races. If someone claims that they're the fastest, you have to have to ask "relative to what?". They very well may be the fastest human, but their speed is being compared relatively to the speed of other humans.
Then based on this evolutionary standard, should we not assume that Europeans are the best when it comes to expanding and conquering, based on our success as a race throughout history? Again, I'd like to point out how, using this standard, whites are relatively objectively the best.
What do you even mean by this? We aren't talking about "bests" we're talking about truth, which exists outside of individual convictions or opinions.
You sound like a relativist leftist who claims that "standards" are just opinionated and irrelevant things that should be discarded. Beethoven in a musical sense is objectively more advanced than a sub saharan African beating a drum regardless of what that nigger considers "the best". Opinions have no relevance on fact. Stop conflating the two. Reality is reality regardless of what your opinions are.
Stop moving the goal post. We were never talking about values. We were talking about Truth, which exists outside the realm of subjective values.
Jesus Christ, you're a dense motherfucker. If one group asserts to know the absolute truth in the form of gods and religion, then that absolute truth, by definition, cannot be "subjective" to that specific group, or else that "truth" is not a truth at all. Facts are never subjective. Reality is never subjective. Truth is never subjective. All of these things exist outside of humanity - all we do is discover them. There cannot be two equally valid absolute truths depending on which group you ask. Accepting such a thing would be the triumph of irrationality over reason. This would be the death of objectivity
get fucked.
ostarapublications.com
For all the anons who would like some non-kosher books on the h'white man's original religions.