European/White Culture

Jews denied Christ. Europeans do not.

Okay, Newfags lurking here. THIS, is Jewish. Meaningless, arbitrary, forced and completely unfunny. You're welcome.

Imnul legionarilor cazuti

Cries the moon through the branches
The nights are desolate
Cries the moon through the branches
The nights are desolate
Because you are gone forever
And you are never coming back
Because you are gone forever
And you are never coming back
On the paths walked on by us
By us, you are carried
Forgotten you until today, has everything
Even your own have forgotten you
Only the wind still suffers your sweet song
Over the flowers that soothe your sad tomb
Just like a tear of blood
A star has fallen
A way of fire and victory for your guard
Beats the wind over the waters
Time slowly passes
We always mourn you, brother
And you always sleep

...

"In Greek, the word ‘apocatastasis’ means ‘restoration, re-establishment.’ In the language of the Church Fathers it designates the doctrine according to which all beings, the damned and the demons included, will be reestablished ‘one day’ in the Divine Love; Satan will be restored to his initial state of the Heavenly Lucifer. This doctrine has been attributed to Origen and to Saint Gregory of Nyssa, and has been rejected by the Church which, in conformity with Christ’s word, teaches the eternity of the pains of Hell.

But what does ‘eternity’ signify? The word can have two meanings: either nontime, nonduration, Pure Being in contrast to becoming (‘æternitas’ in the proper sense); or indefinite duration, perpetuity (what Saint Thomas Aquinas calls ‘æviternitas’). Now, Hell cannot be eternal in the first sense, since this would involve an attribute of Pure Being, of God: if Hell were eternal (in the first sense), it would no longer be Hell. Therefore it can only be eternal in the second sense, that of an indefinite duration.

How can we understand such a possibility? Guénon provides an answer when he explains that the indefinite is analytically inexhaustible. Hell is perpetual for those (angels or men) who have fixed their wills on analytically exhausting the created. In other words, Hell is perpetual for those who, while rejecting that Eternal Love which incites us toward the Infinite, want to remain within the finiteness of the created and pretend that they can reach their goal by division and fragmentation.

This however leaves us with the paradox of an eternity of Being and a perpetuity of duration. Will this perpetuity come to an end some day? Or else will Divine Love be eternally held in check by the refusal of Satan? It is not easy to answer these questions. We would have to escape the created conditioning of our intellect in order to reply; we would have to recognise that, in reality, there is no co-existence. It is from the creature’s point of view that the Uncreated is outside of the world; from God’s point of view the created is within the Uncreated: God sees the world within himself. For those in Hell, Hell is perpetual. For those in God, Hell is eternally abolished, and here we have the truth of the Apocatastasis. The paradox of the unintelligible coexistence of the eternity of Being and the perpetuity of Hell (the lack of Being) expresses the need we have for a change of state to understand certain things: the plain is only visible from the peak of the mountain; the relative is intelligible only from the viewpoint of the Absolute: ‘Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you’ (Luke 12:31). Let us truly realise that it is not we who understand God, but God who understands us and envelops us on all sides with his infinite Love. What burns in Hell is the fire of Divine Love."

– Jean Borella

...

...

Vercingetorix Submits to Cæsar.

I can't upload more than one image per post, strangely. Apologies if that annoys anyone.

...

European Christianity is more pagan tbh and its just a vessel to unite us. It is becoming obsolete, though. It will die and something will replace it, but the Aryan spirit will not die. Just enjoy it for what it is - niggers, shitskins, chinks could never create such wonders, even though they can be Christians too

...

...

Why did God favour the Jews then? Why are all my ancestors prior to Christianity going to burn in hell?

...

...

...

Christus non respondet, quod non est

The Jews are damned.

As for the timing of Christ etc., that isn't for the ears of angry people such as yourself to hear. It doesn't matter what I say, the mysteries of it, the hidden truths, you are searching for battles and for things to react to. You are restless and will rebel like an animal against any reason thrown your way, much like most of the lost souls who frequent these places.

My most sincere advice to you would be to establish inner harmony, discipline and imperium over your own temple. You cannot have authority over your family or race if you have no authority over yourself.

Christus non respondet, quod non est.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

All Jews? Including (((King David))), (((Moses))) and (((Daniel)))?

...

...

...

...

...

I have to be off now, though I'll return to bump this thread etc. at some point.

I do hope you all have this memorised:

Our Father who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us,
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.

They are damned for the same reasons that many pagans are damned. The Christian God is the apex, the peak, that dominates the Semitic lowlands and the rival pagan hills. He is the synthesis between vertical and horizontal, mortal and immortal; God made Man and Man made God. Perhaps you'll understand one day. I hope you and others who are so lost make sense of things eventually.

...

This is an incredibly comfy thread.

...

...

Thomas Cole is fantastic.

...

...

...

sauce on painting?

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

Burning in hell is a pagan concept. Punishment is refinement of consciousness before it can return to God. Reincarnation is referred to multiple times in the Bible. The idea of eternal punishment is not Biblical.

...

Can anybody recommend good books about Napoleon?

...

Napoleon - Vincent Cronin
Napoleon - Felix Markham
Napoleon Bonaparte: A Life - Alan Schom (critical appraisal)

...

Thanks!

We are affected by the landscape just as much as ours effects on it.

Your word for God did not grow from your Greek teachings, neither your afterlives, the elder nations will always be at war, we are made better in the conflict.

The path is long and hard and there is no end to it.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

Forum slide thread. Reported.

...

You're getting lazy now shill, first post was hours ago.

Into the oven you go.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

why does the line on left have white flags?

...

Those are supposed to be French flags. The color is so light as to be imperceptible, or the painting faded with age.

...

...

...

...

I personally have never cared much for deep learning about history, just basic stuff (eg X invaded Y in 1488) or cultural appreciation in general.

However, I discovered I may have a mild interest in amateur geology and gourmet cheeses. Are either of these "white" hobbies?

...

Sorry for off topic, writing a paper and struggling with a moral conundrum. Is death justified in some circumstances? (from a merciful point of view?) I'm saying yes, there is certainly such a thing. I've approached something I've been griping with in this writing I'm doing. The first example I used was an old dog, and how putting it down could be morally justified. Now, a young dog, it's accidental death I say was not merciful or justified, surely a tragic accident, and I say it was not good nor bad, but just is. Death is a part of life. Could you say it's death is merciful? I don't know, I'm approaching the topic of human nature and morality from the standpoint of it being no better for a gazelle to survive a lion than for the lion to eat the gazelle. I'm scatterbrained, I should probably sleep on the topic but I need to get this paper written and don't want to sound like a retard in front of my professor. Insight?

Sure but "cheese" is more of a hobby if you're making it rather than just indulging in it.

And if you're going to go that far you should probably learn about other cultured, fermented, etc foods and drinks. It would also be knowledge that would make you useful should SHTF

I'm seeing how far the argument can hold. From a crippled old dog, to a young one, to a human being.

Geology is a white man's science, but then that is redundant.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lyell
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hutton
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Smith_(geologist)

Most people are inconsistent on that. Putting down a pet is merciful but if a human being that believes their suffering decides to commits suicide that's "selfish"

Well-made cheeses are one of the finer points in life that ought to be indulged in, but not abused. Europeans and Americans make many excellent cheeses which should be explored.

Yeah, that's something I pointed out too. I feel like saying that when a being can no longer struggle for it's life, and secure it's own existence, than it's death is… err… certain and not wrong. But I feel like killing a puppy is morally wrong. Would it then be morally acceptable to say drown some puppies out of a litter who are weaker? Is that the qualifier I'm looking for? (I can't wait to be called an uber nazi for saying this shit.)

...

...

...

...

...

the idea that the world was once full of virtuous women saddens me.

...

Anyone got the webm of the Swedish girl calling cattle? Thought I had it saved.

...

...

Human nature has always been like this, even in Dante Alighieri's time, and further back. (he just chronicled it really well in his "Divine Comedy") Don't let yourself be blinded. This isn't to say that women weren't more virtuous in the past, I'm sure most of them were, but unless you're a noblemen which you aren't, you're not going to be dealing with the crème de la crème. Women have always been promiscuous.

Aw shit, I've posted Jozef Chelmonski accidentaly. Those paintings were done by Jan Matejko

...

...

...

I've come to a conclusion. The thing that pushes the deaths from moral ambiguity to affirmation is reliant on it being plagued by some physical or mental ailment. I think this will shatter my professors belief system.

GAS THE CRIPPLES

...

Just think of the creative people:

We don't get many books from the islamic countries, but that is just because they are not translated? right? No, they are not written at all. That shit is forbidden. Just think about this: no free books are written or published in the islamic countries.

This is true, and I don't want to sound like I'm making the "cultural construct" argument, but you have to admit, culture can either amplify or suppress a behavior.

Women have a base-level tendency toward promiscuity. Call it slut-level-5.

That base level was determined by evolution. Women that were too slutty failed to secure a provider and starved to death or died in winter. However, women that passed up a "safe" opportunity to fuck a chad missed out on better genes. So evolution says: 5

If you go back in time only a few decades, we had a culture in place that suppressed that behavior even further. Commoner women faced real and serious consequences for promiscuity, beyond those of evolution alone.

And here's the important thing: women were better off for it. Women of past generations got to be respected matriarchs, highly honored and beloved by their grandchildren and great gandchildren. They gave their youth and their prime childbearing years to one man, and in exchange, they were bathed in happiness in their old age. It was a pretty good deal for them.

But in the present day, it's not that women have returned to their naturally evolved slut-level 5. The problem isn't simply that the cultural suppression is gone. Oh no. Today, promiscuity is actually encouraged. It's turned up to 11. Women are told that being whores is empowering. They are literally taught to be this way. It isn't natural.

And as a result, most women today give their youth to a multitude of men, and they get absolutely nothing (at least, nothing positive) in return. When they hit around 30 and the wrinkles start to show, they "decide" to get married, and only then do they realize that none of the men who fucked them is willing to marry them. So, in desperation, they marry an average guy. But because they spent their whole lives fucking top-tier men, they secretly resent the average guy, they treat him like shit, and end up divorced.

Women are set on a path by our culture that leads them to failure. This isn't a "women have always been this way" problem. I WISH we could go back to slut-level 5. That'd be a huge improvement. Our culture pushes them to 11. It ruins them.

This is what I meant in when I said it makes me sad.

Well, women only know their bounds by what men set for them. When the men are weak and bastardized, the women will naturally fall into degeneracy. Calhoun's Rat Experiment is excellent insight into the overcrowded and corrupt world we live in today. Hypothetically all one has to do is instill a sense of moral fiber and virtue back into a society and it's aristocracy/leadership, (by which the men usually take heed) and the genders will sort themselves out. not to say that is the only thing needed to fix society, far from it, but it probably a good start to fixing gender relations.

...

...

I don't disagree on any particular point, I just can't imagine how we even begin to turn it around.

Consider the incredible fact that in just the last decade, it's become unacceptable, socially, to say that fat is a bad thing. I mean, we're so degenerate now that we don't even agree on that, blindingly obvious fact.

If we could somehow turn society around, we'd fix the fat acceptance movement first before we even begin to address promiscuity. And I see no evidence that society is about to wake up and go, "oh yeah, it's bad to be a fat lazy slob!" so therefore, I can't even begin to imagine society saying that current levels of promiscuity are bad.

It's like asking me to imagine FTL space ships in a civilization that has collapsed to the point that it can't even build airplanes. It's just too far gone for me to see it.

I don't agree that it has. Fatness is one of the few things that the majority of people can agree on is bad in every way. Bad in terms of health, bad in terms of ugliness.

The only people you see opposing this are tumblrinas and other fruitless "fat positivity" movements that honestly hold close to zero societal influence and certainly pose no danger.

...

...

...

...

Hey since you bumplocked this I'm going to repost it you fuckingkike

It'll take some time to help them. No matter how long I try the opinion-centered worldview of these people can bring even the mst calm of redpill donors a hard time.