ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Why atheist nationalists need Christianity

I lay out the various reasons - some of them anyway - in tonight's Darkstream. If you've got questions afterward, post them here in the comments.

Labels: , ,

145 Comments:

Blogger tuberman June 17, 2017 7:17 PM  

Well, have enough children, and the Right kind of Patriarchy needs real Christianity. Just all goes together. Posted this before watching the Darkstream.

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 7:25 PM  

I don't believe in God. Never have.

I was raised by parents who didn't believe in God...rejecting Christianity actually. I never understood their animus to Christianity nor did my siblings some of whom have become Christians.

What I know is that we must have something to believe in and Christianity (the old style) helped forge the ties that bind a culture together.

NeoChristianity (or Churchianity if you prefer) is too weak and co-opted by leftist mentalities to serve that function as it stands.

A Christian revival would be great if it can happen, but there is the obvious risk of it quickly regressing to the same leftist NeoChristian mentality that got us here. It seems that inherent within Christianity is the tendency to be a punching bag. Forgiveness and that 'turn the other cheek' nonsense. Great for creating a decent civil society, but not so great when you need to defend that society.

Barring a Christian revival then I suppose some form of ideology may serve for a time as Fascism and Communism did though not well.

That would leave a minor cult/faith (Asatru/Odinism?) springing up to take advantage of the vacuum.

Atheism will never work because people need faith even if they do not personally believe in it themselves.

Blogger The Kurgan June 17, 2017 7:30 PM  

Ask yourself this: if real (or hardcore as some Churchians call it) Christianity worked to ESTABLISH the West, rationally, given the West is the apex of human civilisation, it HAS to have foundational principles based in reality.

If you're a rational being you would begin to ask yourself what those might be. And then you might wish to experiment by testing them.

Anonymous DissidentRight June 17, 2017 7:33 PM  

99.99% of marriagable American women are Christian. What else do you need to know?

Blogger Wanderer June 17, 2017 7:46 PM  

Romans Chapter 1 is what happens when you abandon Christianity. It describes contemporary western society quite accurately.

Anonymous Greg Johonson June 17, 2017 7:52 PM  

Jesus was a Jew. Why would I want to follow a Jewish religion when the very people trying to kill/enslave us are Jews? Why would I follow a religion where 95% of the followers are cucks?

Anonymous Andrew E. June 17, 2017 7:59 PM  

Why would I....

For the best reason of all, because Christianity is true (Jesus lived, was crucified and resurrected from the dead), that's why.

Blogger Shane Sullivan June 17, 2017 8:06 PM  

@6 It's not as if secular Westerners are much better. Undoubtedly many of the native European faiths borrowed concepts and practices from the Orient that were transmitted over the millennia through the various empires that have sprung up, connecting the East and West. Heck, Will Durant's first volume of his monumental History of the West series is "Our Oriental Heritage".

Anonymous Avalanche June 17, 2017 8:32 PM  

Vox (paraphrasing): "If Christianity were not SO fundamental to the creation and continuation of the West, WHY do our enemies spend SO much energy working to destroy Christianity? They hate the West because the West IS Christian."

This is both brilliant and persuasive. It's like seeing through (darkly?) the misdirection of our enemies.


Someone commented in the Dark Stream along the lines of: "Is it to idolize or to follow Christ?"

I need to think about that because "to follow" makes sense to me (ex-military, born K-selected and hierarchical; raised by bunnies, but it never took!). Idolize appears to be a matter of feelings without (taking or requiring) action. FOLLOW means you must DO, you must ACT -- your feelings don't matter.

(Vox's ~"I didn't WANT to be a Christian, I had no choice," really resonates. What might be a couple of search terms to pull up blog entries on Vox's ... awakening?)

You idolize a rock star (well, children do; I don't!) You FOLLOW a leader! You take his example and emulate it; you set your path by his.

Anyone? Is it / should it not be follow?

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable June 17, 2017 8:40 PM  

It seems that inherent within Christianity is the tendency to be a punching bag.

Yeah, this is pretty much true. The key for us is learning to apply the principle of turning the other cheek individually, but never corporately.

You can't turn your neighbour's cheek for him. You just can't. That ain't Christian.

Anonymous crushlimbraw June 17, 2017 8:47 PM  

Jesus started with 12 men - He mentored His disciples - for 3 and a half years - and the rest is history - both good and bad.
In Matthew 28:18-20 he gave the Great Commission - go into the world and make disciples of all nations......
I argue at my website that it isn't being done. Making midwinter trips to warmer climates is not making disciples. That's churchianity!
We start with our own families and build from there.
Anyone interested can read it all by linking from my name.

Blogger Unknown June 17, 2017 8:50 PM  

Do Christians need atheist nationalists?

Blogger Mastermind June 17, 2017 8:57 PM  

"It seems that inherent within Christianity is the tendency to be a punching bag. Forgiveness and that 'turn the other cheek' nonsense."

No, that's just lack of understanding. It's true Christianity is less belligerent than other religions (except maybe some of the eastern ones, which aren't the ones causing problems), but doormatism is a heresy.

"Turn the other cheek" is a perfect example of that misunderstanding, it's a way for someone in a position of weakness to shame someone in a position of power trying to humiliate them, it has nothing to do with physical violence and has little application in general when dealing with highly individualistic societies like those found in the west today.

Blogger Lazarus June 17, 2017 8:58 PM  

Sharrukin wrote:A Christian revival would be great if it can happen, but there is the obvious risk of it quickly regressing to the same leftist NeoChristian mentality that got us here. It seems that inherent within Christianity is the tendency to be a punching bag. Forgiveness and that 'turn the other cheek' nonsense. Great for creating a decent civil society, but not so great when you need to defend that society.


This is the future rule by the Church:

To the Church in Thyatira
…26And to the one who is victorious and continues in My work until the end, I will give authority over the nations. 27He will rule them with an iron scepter and shatter them — like pottery just as I have received authority from My Father.


Does not sound very "turn the other cheek" type of rule, does it?

Blogger Shane Sullivan June 17, 2017 9:02 PM  

@14 One wouldn't be wrong to have assumed those words were meant for the Europeans, but if current trends continue, perhaps they embody the future of China.

Blogger The Kurgan June 17, 2017 9:04 PM  

Vox,
I think I'm not alone in saying your posts on Christianity are the ones I enjoy the most. I also think they are the ones with the most effective impact on the audience.

Blogger Ezekiel June 17, 2017 9:05 PM  

Andrew E. wrote:Why would I....

For the best reason of all, because Christianity is true (Jesus lived, was crucified and resurrected from the dead), that's why.

Kek has given us more evidence of his existance in the last 2 years than Christ saw fit to give in 2000. If Jesus really is still watching, I see no sign whatsoever that he cares.

I'm sorry guys, but if the Southern Baptists can't avoid convergence then it is well and truly over for Christianity. Clinging to the rotting corpse of a deceased loved one does no one any good. Get it out of the house and find another.

Anonymous Tanjil Bren June 17, 2017 9:05 PM  

Although the notion of 'my enemy's enemy...' speaks loudly to the revision of our history with Islam (to the point that for many years I also swallowed the revisionist nonsense that the war with Islam was started with the First Crusade; a nonsense easily collapsed by even the shallowest of personal research), what I have *never* understood is what our revisionist quislings think they're replacing Western culture with if Islam gains the ascendancy they appear to be rooting for?

How well did it work out for the Byzantine Greens?

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) June 17, 2017 9:11 PM  

Do Christians need atheist nationalists?

No

Blogger Matthew Davis June 17, 2017 9:15 PM  

Thank you for doing this stream, Vox. I am an atheist that regularly attends a converged church in the southeast. I have been involved with it my entire life.

I am familiar with the history of western civilization and I understand why Christianity is my ally. My question is this:

How do I avoid appearing to be some kind of snake in the grass when I attempt to constructively criticize my Christian acquaintances on matters that pertain to their religious beliefs?

I have been content with accepting that I should simply sit out, but it seems to me in this stream that you are implying there is the opportunity for both parties to collaborate. I have made no effort to hide my lack of religious belief over the last decade and most of the people in the church I speak to consider me intellectually honest and even seek out my opinion on non-religious matters. However, when any discussion ventures into matters of the church I am typically treated as someone subverting the church or as a potential candidate for conversion.

Do you really feel there is the potential for cooperation between alt-right atheists and Christians before the shit hits the fan?

-Matt

Blogger Stephen June 17, 2017 9:15 PM  

Did the classical Greeks need Christianity to recover from the Bronze age Archaic period and fend off the Persian?

Christianity, the Church, Jesus, and the Bible are four very different things all the best parts of Christianity came from the people of Europe not Jesus or the Bible. Christianity may of been influential in holding Europe together during the Medieval period but ever since the invention of the printing press the subversive protocomunist parts of the Bible have escaped into the wild. So that modern Christians resist Muslims about as well as Roman Christians resisted barbarians

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable June 17, 2017 9:15 PM  

I think I'm not alone in saying your posts on Christianity are the ones I enjoy the most. I also think they are the ones with the most effective impact on the audience.

With the Kurgan. This is powerful stuff.

Blogger Ezekiel June 17, 2017 9:17 PM  

Of course, I more than anyone would love to see it come back. I still remember pastors in the 1990's telling their congregations that women shouldn't work outside the home, and some of the oldest ones I've known still didn't think that women should drive or vote.

Compare to the last time I regularly went to church. Pudgy beta-male pastor quoting MLK and Olsteen when not busy jacking off to the GOP and Israel, preaching love and tolerance to a bunch of neurotic women, sadsack old Boomers and their semi-mutant mulatto grandkids.

(I ain't joking about the "semi-mutant" part. These kids were often so botched that they barely looked human. You will never see so many fat toddlers as you will in a large, modern Baptist church.)

Blogger Weouro June 17, 2017 9:21 PM  

" Why would I want to follow a Jewish religion when the very people trying to kill/enslave us are Jews? "

Are you unfamiliar with the passion of Christ? The Jews hated Jesus so much they tortured and crucified him.

Blogger Lazarus June 17, 2017 9:24 PM  

Ezekiel wrote:I'm sorry guys, but if the Southern Baptists can't avoid convergence then it is well and truly over for Christianity. Clinging to the rotting corpse of a deceased loved one does no one any good. Get it out of the house and find another.

Somebody long ago anticipated this before you:


Revelation 18:4King James Version (KJV)

4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

Anonymous Tanjil Bren June 17, 2017 9:25 PM  

Another thing I've never understood is the use of the word 'atheist'.

I'm not a Christian, but I'd *never* describe myself as an atheist (and have always valued Christianity for its ideals despite my personal inability to experience the epiphany of that religious awakening).

Agnostic, sure, but not atheist. Anti-God (even just the idea of a God)? Surely that position is every bit as faith-based as the religion it purports to decry?

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 9:29 PM  

14. Lazarus

Does not sound very "turn the other cheek" type of rule, does it?

No, it does not.

But this does...

Matthew 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Its been there from the beginning with Cathars, Anabaptists, Quakers, the Amish and others taking it to extremes.

Pacifism, non-resistance, or a far too forgiving attitude to criminals and invaders on the part of Churchianity is widespread.

I don't have any easy answers but I do know its become a suicidal tendency with far too many Christians today.

I know the other Christianity once existed, but where is it now?

Is there any Christian denomination that would support a Crusade, much less expulsions?

Blogger Cail Corishev June 17, 2017 9:29 PM  

It seems that inherent within Christianity is the tendency to be a punching bag.

It can seem that way because the modernists have stripped away the core of it and distorted the rest, but it looks very different if you go back more than 60 years. Punching bags don't start Crusades or Inquisitions. The real thing looks more like this (using Catholic examples because that's what I know):

"Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: 'Have confidence; I have overcome the world.'" -- Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, 1890

"Real love involves real hatred: Whoever has lost the power of moral indignation and the urge to drive the sellers from the temples has also lost a living, fervent love of Truth." – Archbishop Fulton Sheen

"To be able to speak the truth and yet to remain silent, is to draw down the anger of God." -- Justin Martyr

Anonymous karsten June 17, 2017 9:37 PM  

The kindest thing that I can say about Christianity is that it has proven to be insufficient. (Again, that's the kindest thing -- those who posit that it eventually inevitably becomes a cucking force, after it has sanded down a civilization's violent and barbaric tendencies, do have an argument.)

Christianity's best remaining forms do seem to guide whites towards decent personal behavior -- i.e., starting families, not giving in to hedonism, and such things. For a time, it even seems to have slowed down the encroachment of the homo agenda, if no longer. So there is that.

However, as a force for cultural protection, Christianity has proven to be woefully inadequate -- indeed, as weak as conservatism itself. And it has proven to be terribly vulnerable to convergence.

I come back to a point that I made a while ago, which still seems right, for all that it found no favor here: Christianity is downstream of culture. It's a nice seasoning on a healthy culture (i.e., one that is capable of sufficiently extreme actions of self-preservation), but it's not sufficient to be the sole ingredient.

"For the best reason of all, because Christianity is true (Jesus lived, was crucified and resurrected from the dead), that's why."

That's the worst possible reason, even if it were true, which I don't believe to be the case, because it's not credible. (Which is not a strike against Christ, whom I admire for his courage in standing up to the Jews and to Satan, but I repeat myself.)

What matters is not whether it is "true." What matters is, does it work? Of late, Christianity has not been working very well, not at protecting white European culture or the white race. And that's the only metric that matters.

"Vox (paraphrasing): "If Christianity were not SO fundamental to the creation and continuation of the West, WHY do our enemies spend SO much energy working to destroy Christianity? They hate the West because the West IS Christian."

This is both brilliant and persuasive."


Not so much, because the Left spends so much energy converging EVERYTHING, from universities to the media to politics, etc., etc. Are all of those elements therefore fundamental? And if they are, then religion is just one fundamental among many.

And of those fundamentals, I'd say that these days, the media is the most fundamental of all. Which goes back to my point about religion being downstream of culture.

Anonymous Tanjil Bren June 17, 2017 9:37 PM  

"I think I'm not alone in saying your posts on Christianity are the ones I enjoy the most."

And the Darkstream I'd walk on crushed glass to tune into is Vox sharing the awakening that brought him to the faith.

It may be too personal, of course, and I entirely understand if that's the case.

But if one has had direct experience of the Prince of Lies (or an agent thereof), then the sure knowledge that the opposite exists is a total no-brainer.

And perhaps there's more than one awakening in its sharing...

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) June 17, 2017 9:46 PM  

I come back to a point that I made a while ago, which still seems right, for all that it found no favor here: Christianity is downstream of culture. It's a nice seasoning on a healthy culture (i.e., one that is capable of sufficiently extreme actions of self-preservation), but it's not sufficient to be the sole ingredient.

Culture is religion externalized

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable June 17, 2017 9:46 PM  

What matters is not whether it is "true." What matters is, does it work?

Yeah, see this is a metric that doesn't help you any, because the thing is that truth works -- but it works in the long term. You're looking for a short-term solution.

Anyone can declare that something doesn't work when they've given it no real opportunity to do what it does.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) June 17, 2017 9:47 PM  


What matters is not whether it is "true." What matters is, does it work? Of late, Christianity has not been working very well, not at protecting white European culture or the white race. And that's the only metric that matters.


Which is more Christian, Sweden or Poland? Red states or blue states?

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 9:47 PM  

29. karsten

Christianity is downstream of culture.

If that was all it was then it really wouldn't be a problem would it? I mean if the culture can be revitalized then with your argument Christianity would follow suit.

Also wouldn't your point about it being a 'cucking force' be somewhat in contradiction of it being downstream of culture?

I think Christianity is a cultural force and that is both why it was so valuable in the past (and hopefully will be again) and why it is currently a problem.

Blogger Lazarus June 17, 2017 9:48 PM  

Sharrukin wrote:I know the other Christianity once existed, but where is it now?



Seems to be taking shape in the Alt-Right, yes?

Blogger Silent Cal June 17, 2017 9:50 PM  

"I'm a spectacularly bad one"

The confession of a man who has the Holy Spirit.

24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!

Romans 7:24-25

Anonymous karsten June 17, 2017 9:51 PM  

"I know the other Christianity once existed, but where is it now?

Is there any Christian denomination that would support a Crusade, much less expulsions?"


I concur with the above point. I'd be all for Christianity if it were doing these things and were for these things. But it's not. And until it is, then "cultural Christian" is my position -- just as much as is "cultural Olympian" and "cultural Odinist": I respect these faiths for the art that they generated and for being a part of the fabric of the tapestry that is white Western culture. You will find no greater admirer of Gothic cathedrals or the music of Bach than myself.

But I think that we are in more urgent need of the pagan warrior spirit right now than we are of Christianity's civilizing effects. And to the degree that the latter impede the former, it may be a stumbling block, if taken as a guide for our current actions rather than a much-admired museum piece, but one for whom the time is not presently right.

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 9:57 PM  

35. Lazarus


Seems to be taking shape in the Alt-Right, yes?

I certainly hope so, but even here I see people (not just trolls) trying to argue that we can keep the good ones and we just have to get rid of the bad apples.

Anonymous karsten June 17, 2017 10:04 PM  

"Yeah, see this is a metric that doesn't help you any, because the thing is that truth works -- but it works in the long term. You're looking for a short-term solution."

No. Just solution. It's been over a century now during which, with minor blips of (quickly squashed) regeneration, truth has been losing and lie, and (((liars))), have been winning. Truth alone is no guarantee of victory.

Blogger Lazarus June 17, 2017 10:04 PM  

Tanjil Bren wrote:And perhaps there's more than one awakening in its sharing...

Maybe this will suffice:

http://strangenotions.com/wright-conversion/

Blogger Cail Corishev June 17, 2017 10:05 PM  

Its been there from the beginning with Cathars, Anabaptists, Quakers, the Amish and others taking it to extremes.

That's not really close to the beginning, but yes, there have been such groups before. The rest of Christendom always saw them as heretical oddballs; it wasn't until the mid-20th century that their descendants got the upper hand in the organizations. (I'm actually not sure about the Amish, whether they'd really be that pacifist if they didn't live inside a foreign population that shields them.)

What you're talking about will probably always crop up here and there. Jesus came and died on the Cross instead of killing all the bad guys, after all, and we also admire those who are martyred in His name. It's not too hard to see how someone with a bent for pacifism or simple surrender can take that and "turn the other cheek" to extremes by ignoring the rest, the same way people who don't want to be judged turn "Judge not, lest ye be judged" into the First And Only Commandment. That doesn't make those representative of Christianity.

A Christian renewal driven by Churchians is impossible, because they see no need for renewal in the first place, and they would think it rude to push one. When there's a Christian renewal, you can be sure it won't be led by people saying, "Can't we all just get along?"

Anonymous karsten June 17, 2017 10:06 PM  

Seems to be taking shape in the Alt-Right, yes?"

That's due to the Alt-Right influence on it, not the other way around. Like I said, Christianity is downstream.

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 10:06 PM  

28. Cail Corishev

"Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: 'Have confidence; I have overcome the world.'" -- Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, 1890

So you Catholics when from this guy to Frankie the Metrosexual?

That has got to hurt.

I would like to believe a recovery is possible, but the trends within Christianity all seem to be going the other way.

Anonymous Andrew E. June 17, 2017 10:09 PM  

Kek has given us more evidence of his existance in the last 2 years...

Someone is responsible for the events of the past 2 years but it's not kek.

What matters is not whether it is "true." What matters is, does it work?

Of course Truth matters. If Christ was who he said he was then that means the God of the Bible is the one true God, creator of the Universe, the Alpha and the Omega, and Jesus is His only begotten Son through which salvation and eternal glory with God are made possible. Nothing is more important than that.

Blogger SamuraiJack June 17, 2017 10:09 PM  

Meditate on Pascals Wager. I hope it helps

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 10:17 PM  

41. Cail Corishev

When there's a Christian renewal, you can be sure it won't be led by people saying, "Can't we all just get along?"

And when they say you can't be racist what is the scriptural response? Assuming it isn't something like Kinism or the 'Serpent Seed' sort of thing.

I can easily see Christians fighting in self defense when the fur hits the fan, but how do they maintain what has been won?

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky June 17, 2017 10:33 PM  

I made the exact same argument to atheists that Vox is making now 20 years ago. I do hope and wish he has more success than I did. He probably will, he's much more adroit.

Meanwhile I'll just sharpen my blades and keep stocking ammo.

Anonymous Avalanche June 17, 2017 10:34 PM  

@29 Me: "Vox (paraphrasing): "If Christianity were not SO fundamental to the creation and continuation of the West, WHY do our enemies spend SO much energy working to destroy Christianity? They hate the West because the West IS Christian."
This is both brilliant and persuasive."

Karsten: Not so much, because the Left spends so much energy converging EVERYTHING, from universities to the media to politics, etc., etc. Are all of those elements therefore fundamental? And if they are, then religion is just one fundamental among many."

On the contrary, that "everything" that our enemies are converging IS how they are destroying the White Western world which Christianity had such a large hand in creating. All of those elements being sapped and perverted is HOW they are attacking and destroying us!

Blogger Cail Corishev June 17, 2017 10:35 PM  

So you Catholics went from this guy to Frankie the Metrosexual?
That has got to hurt.


Yes it does, but that record will be corrected someday.

I would like to believe a recovery is possible, but the trends within Christianity all seem to be going the other way.

They were, but some have already started back the other way. Demographically, the modernists are the ones not replacing themselves, while the traditionalists are having big families. The Modernist Catholics have been closing churches for the last fifty years, and now the traditionalists are starting to establish new ones. There's a long way to go and it may take generations before it becomes obvious, but it'll happen a lot faster than the Reconquista did. I expect it to accelerate after the Boomers are gone, because they're the ones with a death grip on their 1960s revolution.

Anonymous Just a Man June 17, 2017 10:45 PM  

The decline of the West correlates with the decline of Christianity in the West. The most cucked European nations are the most post-Christian. The least cucked European nations are the most Christian. The most cucked churches are the ones that have deviated most from traditional Christianity. The relationship is obvious.

Blogger Cail Corishev June 17, 2017 10:49 PM  

I can easily see Christians fighting in self defense when the fur hits the fan, but how do they maintain what has been won?

Any victories in this world are temporary, but there are things that can be done to extend the victory period. For instance, expelling the Jews may have helped Spain to avoid the worst of the Enlightenment. Just as with SJWs in other organizations, it will be necessary to drive out many impostors and restore methods of keeping out entryists. But ultimately, it's a struggle that will repeat until the end.

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 10:51 PM  

49. Cail Corishev

There's a long way to go and it may take generations before it becomes obvious

This will all be over one way or the other before any of that becomes relevant.

Even at that the traditionalists haven't shown themselves to be willing to preserve an ethnic state or refuse the flood of refugees/illegals with their heartfelt stories of woe.

A more traditional sort of Christian community, say like the year 1965 had does not really guarantee smart decision making. Or do you see a much more radical shift that might see divorce and alimony/child support laws upended (no small part of the problem)?

Anonymous johnc June 17, 2017 10:51 PM  

That's due to the Alt-Right influence on it, not the other way around. Like I said, Christianity is downstream.

There have been traditionalist movements in Christianity for far longer than anyone here has been alive, but they were pushed into obscurity, or dismissed as loaded with loony bins. What has changed is the state of the world and the state of the Church. Time has proven all of those old traditionalist arguments true, and anybody with a working brain knows it now. All of the garbage of the past century needs to be undone.

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky June 17, 2017 10:55 PM  

Sharrukin wrote:So you Catholics when from this guy to Frankie the Metrosexual?

That has got to hurt.

I would like to believe a recovery is possible, but the trends within Christianity all seem to be going the other way.


True, we were spoiled after two great popes. Now we have a middling Affirmative Action hire who lied to get the nod, we're back to the norm. But this is no matter, popes seem more useful to non-Catholics as a bludgeon than they ever really do to Catholics. The Church will soldier on.

All the time on this blog I see somebody verging quite closely to the Evangelium vitae, JPII's landmark encyclical in the cultural war, and these commenters most often have no idea they're doing it. Because JPII spoke truth, truth that these commenters are independently arriving at. And that really is something. All of Francis' big ideas will die with him, he's not cut from the same cloth. He's a trivial pope.

I'm surprised no good atheist has come up for a counter explanation about how the West rose up. Wasn't it geography? Guns, germs and steel? That was the last stand-in for Christianity that I heard about. What is the current politically correct exegesis of our history?

Anonymous johnc June 17, 2017 10:58 PM  

A more traditional sort of Christian community, say like the year 1965

Is that a typo?

Traditionalists are more thinking 1695, not 1965. By 1965 the train had long jumped the tracks.

Anonymous johnc June 17, 2017 11:01 PM  

I'm surprised no good atheist has come up for a counter explanation about how the West rose up. Wasn't it geography? Guns, germs and steel? That was the last stand-in for Christianity that I heard about. What is the current politically correct exegesis of our history?

The arguments I tend to hear from alt-right pagans in other forums is that Western Civilization was far, far more advanced 2,000 years ago before Christianity.

The explanations given for the greatness of the West are genetics and Westerners being further along on the "evolution" timescale. (Apparently belief in TENS is pretty common.)

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 17, 2017 11:01 PM  

What matters is not whether it is "true." What matters is, does it work? Of late, Christianity has not been working very well, not at protecting white European culture or the white race. And that's the only metric that matters.
Funny thing, when Christianity was in charge, up until 100 years ago, the White race was triumphant, ruling the known world, improving the lives of people across the globe. bringing honesty, law and reason to lands that had never known them in 10,000 years.
Then the White race began abandoning Christianity, and the result has been decline, defeat, and cultural suicide, now verging on genocide.

And you want to blame that decline on Christianity.

Cause and effect are a thing in our world. What's it like on yours?

Blogger Were-Puppy June 17, 2017 11:09 PM  

@12 Unknown
Do Christians need atheist nationalists?
---

Negative.

Blogger Benjamin Kraft June 17, 2017 11:13 PM  

If anything is upstream, it's things that are older. Christianity is old. I'm several times older than the alt-right (by that name).

By any halfway-honest form of logic, if Christianity and the alt right are doing the same thing, Christianity pushed it first, not the alt right.

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 11:15 PM  

54. a deplorable rubberducky

I'm surprised no good atheist has come up for a counter explanation about how the West rose up. Wasn't it geography? Guns, germs and steel?

I can only speak as an agnostic, but I think that Feudalism had a lot to do with it given that kings and nobles and yeomanry had to negotiate rights, duties and obligations. Christianity added its part with the idea that we are all equal before God and the respect given to rationality and an ordered non-arbitrary universe. The constant feudal conflicts militarized society and led with the advent of the modern nation to overseas conflicts as well.

Japan also had a feudal order so perhaps that is why democracy prospered there to a greater degree than it has elsewhere.

I don't discount Christianity or its contribution to the success of Western Civilization.

We may however be faced with a future without it, or its relegation to the third world which is what we are currently seeing and that may drastically alter its nature. Liberation Theology for example.

Blogger Benjamin Kraft June 17, 2017 11:17 PM  

@57. Snidely, he's not even thinking about cause and effect. He just wants to find a way to rationalize Jesus not being the answer, so that he's justified in avoiding/ignoring him.

Rationality does not produce justice. Justice produces that which is rational.

Anonymous Charlie Baud June 17, 2017 11:19 PM  

@21

It was Christianity that elevated the people of Europe, not the other way around. Greek philosophy without the light of Christian theology degraded into a puddle of Eastern mystery cults, and the Germanic tribes were too busy sacrificing each other to trees to get anything productive done.

The Protestant Revolution was the result of Jewish subversion, not of anything inherit in Christianity. Jews have been the driving orce behind all the major heresies.

Anonymous Sharrukin June 17, 2017 11:22 PM  

55. johnc

Is that a typo?

A referance to the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965.

Things had jumped the tracks as you say but 1965 was certainly more traditional in Christian circles than it is today. That didn't stop anything.

I don't see traditionalists winding the clock back to 1695 any time soon. If that was in the works then we should see some Christian denomination backing some more militant stance to Islam and feminism.

Anonymous GK Chesterton June 17, 2017 11:28 PM  

Protestants are basically Jews. Martin Luther was a Jewish agent. It's been proven in many books. The hope for the west is for a revival of the True Church in Rome.

Blogger Shane Sullivan June 17, 2017 11:29 PM  

@62 The Protestant Reformation was in many ways the Christian equivalent of ISIS. Luther was a biblical fundamentalist, like the American evangelicals who'll throw a bible at your face when you turn a corner. He advocated a literal reading of the bible, that the Catholic Church up to that point had never sponsored.

Blogger S1AL June 17, 2017 11:32 PM  

"Protestants are basically Jews. Martin Luther was a Jewish agent. It's been proven in many books. The hope for the west is for a revival of the True Church in Rome."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Oh man, even using the extremely low bar I have set for Catholic Supremacists, that's a new kind of special.

But I await your further explanation of how Wesley, Hus, Zwingli, and Calvin were ALSO all Jewish agents. This should be good.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 17, 2017 11:44 PM  

GK Chesterton wrote:Protestants are basically Jews. Martin Luther was a Jewish agent. It's been proven in many books. The hope for the west is for a revival of the True Church in Rome.
You think you're helping.

You're not helping.
Shane Sullivan wrote:He advocated a literal reading of the bible, that the Catholic Church up to that point had never sponsored.
Time for your meds....

Blogger Eric Steiger June 17, 2017 11:45 PM  

@62 If christianity is such a magical thing that can elevate European savages to the heights of civilization, then why hasn't it been able to repeat that transformation anywhere else?

Blogger Cail Corishev June 17, 2017 11:49 PM  

I don't see traditionalists winding the clock back to 1695 any time soon. If that was in the works then we should see some Christian denomination backing some more militant stance to Islam and feminism.

That's because all the denominations' organizations were converged and taken over, so the traditionalists are a minority out of power in each of them. That pendulum has just started back the other direction, but as I said, there's a long way to go.

This will all be over one way or the other before any of that becomes relevant.

This what? The collapse of the American Empire? Quite likely, but that's beside the point. Christianity doesn't exist to preserve political entities. When we say Western Civilization requires Christianity, we're not saying Western Civ is Christianity's purpose. It's more of a side benefit: with Christianity, you get the hope of eternal salvation, and if you combine it with some other things, you get civilization. But that's not its purpose at all.

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky June 17, 2017 11:54 PM  

Cail Corishev wrote:It's more of a side benefit: with Christianity, you get the hope of eternal salvation, and if you combine it with some other things, you get civilization. But that's not its purpose at all.

Wow. Never realized this before. How dense! Dense! What a shocking thing to realize now.

Anonymous Icicle June 17, 2017 11:57 PM  

Even if you are an atheist secular humanist, you have to admit it is a little strange how Islamic societies end up in one direction and Christian societies in another.

Oh man, even using the extremely low bar I have set for Catholic Supremacists, that's a new kind of special.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjjS47z-65I

The antidote. Lock them in a room with that running.

Anonymous Lord Chimp June 18, 2017 12:00 AM  

Way back in 2009, Sam Francis foresaw this collision between populist American Christians (e.g. Vox Day) and the French New Right inspired atheists/pagans (e.g Richard Spencer). Check it out:

http://www.toqonline.com/blog/the-real-right-part-ii/

"It has to be said that there is a good deal of truth in much of the New Right’s attack on Christianity, especially as Christianity appears today, whether on the political left or the political right, with its support for an egalitarianism and universalism that reject race and nation in general and the historic European (especially pre-Christian) identity in particular. Nevertheless, the New Right’s critique is also somewhat overdrawn, as O’Meara notes in his last chapter, which offers a critique of the New Right itself. Christianity, whatever its origins in the Near East and the deracinated proletariat of the late Roman Empire, was in fact “Germanized,” as Russell argues, assimilated itself to much of the heritage of Europe, and played a major role in creating the European civilization we have known since the early Middle Ages, including its art, music, philosophy, and even science. It is simply vacuous to claim that the actual Christianity of history displays the character Benoist describes. In any case, Christianity has been the religious identity of European man for some two thousand years, and to argue, as the New Right does, for the resuscitation of paganism as the “real” tradition of Europe is simply a posture, even if it is not intended literally."

ALSO - check out this piece from Gregory Hood (featured in his book, Waking Up From The American Dream):

https://www.counter-currents.com/2012/08/no-separate-peacereligious-conservatives-and-the-white-right/

"It doesn’t matter that the first principles of White Na­tionalists and committed Christians have nothing in common. It doesn’t matter that most conservative Christians are anti-white or at best indifferent to ethnicity, except for worshipping Jews. It doesn’t matter that White Nationalists are opposed to almost everything most evangelical Christians stand for. It doesn’t even matter that it is the mission of the European (and North American) New Right to tear out egalitarianism by the roots, even if that eventually means Christianity itself. The survival of the white race and the survival of the church on earth require the same kind of cultural and (eventually) political rebellion against the current System. Both of these forces have no choice but to unite for its overthrow. The survival of any kind of authentic belief, tradition, or humanity requires Revolution. The other debates can come later."

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 18, 2017 12:01 AM  

Eric Steiger wrote:If christianity is such a magical thing that can elevate European savages to the heights of civilization, then why hasn't it been able to repeat that transformation anywhere else?

... AAAAAAnnnd, Eric has never heard the formulation "necessary, but not sufficient."

Is the "morons welcome" sign lit again?

Anonymous Sharrukin June 18, 2017 12:04 AM  

69. Cail Corishev

This what? The collapse of the American Empire? Quite likely, but that's beside the point. Christianity doesn't exist to preserve political entities. When we say Western Civilization requires Christianity, we're not saying Western Civ is Christianity's purpose.

Well the Diversity Cannibals are forming up for a charge hoping to culturally enrich us and you are telling me that this may be of some use a hundred years from now?

OK...well thanks for that!

I don't suppose you have anything that might be helpful a little sooner than that?

Blogger Shane Sullivan June 18, 2017 12:04 AM  

@67 Why? Luther's criticisms against the Catholic Church were about how pagan and humanistic it had become as a result of the Renaissance.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 18, 2017 12:11 AM  

If there is one charge that you can't level against Luther it is biblical hyperliteralism. He was an educated man and a Bible scholar. He's the one who dropped the "apocrypha", AKA "the parts of the bible that disprove Lutheranism" from the bible.
If you're going to attack our comrades in arms, at least LEARN SOME FREAKING HISTORY before you launch your fusillade.
Invalid attacks make you look the fool you are, and tend to discredit your fellow soldiers.

Anonymous Mr. Rational June 18, 2017 12:16 AM  

Cail Corishev wrote:"Real love involves real hatred: Whoever has lost the power of moral indignation and the urge to drive the sellers from the temples has also lost a living, fervent love of Truth." – Archbishop Fulton Sheen
I do this all the time.  XKCD trivialized it here, but the matter is anything but trivial.

I call myself an atheist because I recognized that what was being pushed at me as Christianity had gone completely off the rails in several provable ways, and I saw nothing that got it right.  4 decades later it's just as wrong in the same ways and getting wronger in others.  I can only shake my head.

"You want the truth?  YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"  Post-modernism isn't sui generis, it comes out of a long history of movements of people trying to deny what they should have acknowledged and dealt with.  That's poisonous.

Cail Corishev wrote:"To be able to speak the truth and yet to remain silent, is to draw down the anger of God." -- Justin Martyr
And that is why I speak up HERE (though it's the wrath of posterity I fear).  Trolling it is not.

I see ideas I've been pushing for 2, 3, 4 years suddenly "click" with people who seemed unreachable.  It was the truth that finally got them.  I do it mostly with facts and figures, and targeted ridicule for the claims of vaporware-mongers.  It adds up.

Just a Man wrote:The least cucked European nations are the most Christian. The most cucked churches are the ones that have deviated most from traditional Christianity.
If only Darwin's discoveries about races hadn't been anathematized by Christians, the equalist Cathedral would not have been able to cuck us.  Denial of truth has consequences.

a deplorable rubberducky wrote:I'm surprised no good atheist has come up for a counter explanation about how the West rose up. Wasn't it geography? Guns, germs and steel?
It was the search for the truth by reason and experiment, without fear of where it might lead.  That only lasted so long.  When Christians recoiled in horror from the book titled
"On the Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection
Or, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"
they created the schism that has put us in the trap we're in now.

That is the biggest, but far from the only, way they went wrong.

Blogger Shane Sullivan June 18, 2017 12:16 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Tanjil Bren June 18, 2017 12:19 AM  

"Guns, germs and steel..."

A truly crappy book, written by an anti-Western bigot, lauded because 'narrative'.

So riddled with contradiction and COGDIS (sometimes within mere paragraphs), by page 80 (or so) I just had to put it down.

My brother has more stamina.

Apparently it got worse.

Anonymous Tanjil Bren June 18, 2017 12:31 AM  

Lazarus wrote: "Maybe this will suffice:"

Many thanks. An interesting read, although from the opposite angle.

But as I recall (dimly), Vox's revelation did not stem from a glimpse of heavenly choirs (as one most often reads about); quite the opposite.

Again, I think it will make for a fascinating session and for that very reason.

Blogger Shane Sullivan June 18, 2017 12:37 AM  

@76 Interesting. I'll look into it.

Anonymous God hates cucks June 18, 2017 12:39 AM  

The globalists hate Christianity because the Bible clearly calls out earthly globalists for who they are, the servants of Satan.

The history of human empires, globalism, and attempts to rule the world can be summed up as Satan providentially using human political institutions to rebuild his tower at Babel.

Revelation 13:
"And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority."

The various animals that make up the beast are symbolically significant. They are clear references to Daniel's prophetic visions, in which he saw a lion, a bear, and a leopard, representing the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek empires respectively. But in John's prophecy they are conglomerated into one beast - suggesting that he is not referring to a specific global government - but globalistic empires in general. And he also mentions something significant: These empires derive their power from "the dragon". But who is this dragon?

Revelation 12:
"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."

So the scriptures clearly tells us that Satan uses globalism to work his purposes. Scripture also tells us what those purposes might be:

Genesis 11:
"And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.

And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city."

Globalism is clearly an attempt to undo Gods division of mankind at Babel. That is why we see so much occultism and Babylonian/Egyptian mystery religion in the upper levels of government. Once they have succeeded in forming the neo-babel one government, the "man of sin" spoken of in 2 Thessalonians ch. 2 will seize control and reveal the mystery occult religion to the masses. This may or may not be accompanied by false 'alien' messiahs promising eternal life in exchange for receiving the "mark of the beast". This is why it is essential for them to destroy Christianity.

Their efforts are focused on the west because the west is the strongest. Once the west falls, taking the rest of the world will be a piece of cake.




Anonymous Mr. Rational June 18, 2017 12:41 AM  

@68  You have to be both able to examine evidence and use reason dispassionately, and free to speak your conclusions.  The rest of society has to be dispassionate enough to examine the evidence for and against and test the logic, not merely examine it for conformity to dogma (e.g. Ptolemaic cosmology).

Needless to say, most human societies have been actively hostile to this (as the left is making the current one).  But something was right starting in 17th-century England and elsewhere in Europe, so the advances which were technically possible in earlier Chinese or Indian culture actually happened under the aegis of the Enlightenment.

Tanjil Bren wrote:Apparently it got worse.
Yes, it did.  I read it cover to cover, but after a while I realized that Diamond had dog-whistled his path of deceit in the preface.  The man is scum.  But worse, far from everything he writes is false.  Most of what he writes is 100% true.  It's the non-sequiturs you have to watch out for, and you have to know the facts he's mis-using to catch them.

Anonymous End Timer June 18, 2017 12:49 AM  

"This may or may not be accompanied by false 'alien' messiahs promising eternal life in exchange for receiving the "mark of the beast". This is why it is essential for them to destroy Christianity."

I can envision the 3rd Temple being built in
Jerusalem and the Beast or Anti-Christ being a Jew homo/trannie, or a negro golden dindu. I bet 95% of American Christians will worship him too. Both the John Pipers and the John C. Wrights.

I can also see a miraculous mass conversion of Shia Muslims converting to Jesus Christ, followed by Israel nuking Iran. I can see 95% of American Christians cheering this on.

Blogger S1AL June 18, 2017 12:52 AM  

"If there is one charge that you can't level against Luther it is biblical hyperliteralism."

The other one would be "friendly to the Jews". I don't think you could find a contemporary of his who was more openly hostile towards them.

---

As regards "necessary, but not sufficient":

Ethiopia vs. every surrounding country (keeping in mind that the Ethiopian church has been holding out against Islam for 1300 years)

South and Central America before Christianity and afterwards

South Korea vs. North Korea

If you're interested enough to dig into subsections of countries, you can compare the Christian regions of Uganda and Nigeria to those that aren't

Truthfully, I'm not convinced that it's not sufficient. All of the evidence indicates that Christianity (actually practiced, not merely the trappings) produces civilization by itself.

Anonymous SciVo de Plorable June 18, 2017 12:55 AM  

Sharrukin wrote:I don't see traditionalists winding the clock back to 1695 any time soon. If that was in the works then we should see some Christian denomination backing some more militant stance to Islam and feminism.

I don't think it works like that. There is a long cycle of worldly corruption of the institutions and their inevitable decline, followed by a grassroots spiritual revival by those thirsty for Truth, rinse and repeat.

My mental model here would be that of a crystallization phase change, where "seeds" can be slowly added to a solution until it's supersaturated, then a ringing strike on the glass container and the solution goes straight from fluid to solid all at once.

I try to respect our dread host's request that we not make this about ourselves, but in this case I don't know how else to testify that there is an underground phenomenon. With a friend, I actually started a Beer & Bible Study at a local brew pub. I already knew from our discussions of politics (which you're also not supposed to talk about at a bar) that we could have fierce arguments, not take it personally, and let it go as soon as it was over. And between the two of us, we have two versions of the Bible (that we bring), two versions of Strong's Concordance (including a full-size hardcover), a dictionary of some kind, a Harmony of the Gospels, and a New Testament in four versions. At least.

So if I know for a fact that there are two long-unchurched guys having very serious theological discussions every Sunday, what's the likelihood that there are at least 12 in America? And what's the likelihood that it could spread to the point that all it would take would be a shock of some kind to crystallize those independent activities into a coherent movement of some kind?

Anonymous Icicle June 18, 2017 12:56 AM  

The Catholic Church and how pagan and humanistic it is due to the Renaissance is very complicated.

It's a very deep question (even deeper than you Christians realize).

Compare Islamic art vs. Christian art. Both absorbed the Greeks.

Islamic art is strongly anticonic due to the prohibition against shirk. So you end up with endless Arabic calligraphy, arabesques, muqarnas, and girih patterns on the walls.

We end up with the David statue and chapel murals.

That's why you always see bands of Muslims running around smashing things (iconoclasm). You had some of that during the Protestant Reformation, but not to the same extent.

And depending on which madh'hab of the fiqh you are using (Hanbali revolving around Saudi Arabia and Qatar being the worst), the smashing shall continue.

"Beware of newly invented matters, for every invented matter is an innovation (bid'ah) and every innovation is a going astray, and every going astray is in Hell-fire." - Muhammed hadith

Anonymous badhairday June 18, 2017 1:05 AM  

Do you really feel there is the potential for cooperation between alt-right atheists and Christians before the shit hits the fan?

I'd be surprised if you'll even be able to get the various Christian groups to work together. ;-)

Blogger Shane Sullivan June 18, 2017 1:06 AM  

@87 I'm actually agnostic, but I'd be really interested in learning more.

Blogger Eric Steiger June 18, 2017 1:13 AM  

@73 "Necessary but not sufficient," was neither stated nor even implied in the comment I was responding to. You might have noticed that if you weren't so preoccupied with looking for opportunities to act like a smug little bitch.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 18, 2017 1:27 AM  

It's assumed an intelligent person would understand the concept. So obviously it wasn't aimed at you.

Anonymous Tanjil Bren June 18, 2017 1:47 AM  

Mr. Rational wrote: It's the non-sequiturs you have to watch out for..."

My apologies, I think that's actually what I meant (and should have written).

It was a while ago.

(And I agree with your description of Diamond, though 'scum' is perhaps a little too kind.)

Anonymous Mr. Rational June 18, 2017 2:02 AM  

@92  Thank you for the kind words.

If anyone's seriously interested, I have "GG&S" on my bookshelf and I will provide chapter and verse on Diamond's dog-whistle if asked.

Anonymous Siobhan June 18, 2017 2:08 AM  

Mr Rational: I am interested, I have family who cite GG&S, and having its flaws revealed would be very interesting to me.

Blogger Shane Sullivan June 18, 2017 2:41 AM  

@93 I've never read the whole book, but I remember going to a local book store and skimming through it, inadvertently stumbling on the chapter dealing with race, only to find that it utilized the usual left-wing denunciations of racial science; I immediately put it back on the shelf, feeling glad I didn't waste my money.

Blogger ZhukovG June 18, 2017 2:46 AM  

The West is Christendom, Christendom is the West. If you do not fight for Christendom, you do not fight for the West.

And even if you are victorious, you will only replace one odious pile of rubbish with another that may look a little different but smells just as bad.

Blogger Evil Genius June 18, 2017 2:46 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Resident Moron™ June 18, 2017 3:30 AM  

Stephen,

The jews were unable to resist Rome, but. a childless Jewish street preacher christianised the empire. The Christian romans were unable to resist the barbarians but thise barbarians became Christians and conquered the world. That world is now (as you note) unable to resist militant crusading islam, but ask yourself;

What comes next?

Every prediction of Christianity becoming extinct or irrelevant has proven horrendously wrong; why would you make another one?

Anonymous Tanjil Bren June 18, 2017 3:31 AM  

Shane Sullivan wrote: "...only to find that it utilized the usual left-wing denunciations of racial science."

Which Scum no doubt then proceeded to use to justify a denigration of white people (which, as I dimly recall, is what his prick-piece generally did).

Anonymous LurkingPuppy June 18, 2017 3:37 AM  

Sharrukin wrote:It seems that inherent within Christianity is the tendency to be a punching bag. Forgiveness and that 'turn the other cheek' nonsense.
See https://infogalactic.com/info/Turning_the_other_cheek , and specifically the ‘Nonviolent resistance interpretation’ subsection. The version in Matthew was an implementation of Alinsky's Rule 4.

Blogger VD June 18, 2017 3:50 AM  

The arguments I tend to hear from alt-right pagans in other forums is that Western Civilization was far, far more advanced 2,000 years ago before Christianity.

And that is why they're totally unfit for leadership. They're hopelessly clueless. Before Christianity, Germans were running around naked in the forest and Brits were painting their butts blue.

Blogger VD June 18, 2017 3:50 AM  

I read it cover to cover, but after a while I realized that Diamond had dog-whistled his path of deceit in the preface. The man is scum. But worse, far from everything he writes is false. Most of what he writes is 100% true. It's the non-sequiturs you have to watch out for, and you have to know the facts he's mis-using to catch them.

(nods)

Anonymous JAG June 18, 2017 4:38 AM  

VD wrote:The arguments I tend to hear from alt-right pagans in other forums is that Western Civilization was far, far more advanced 2,000 years ago before Christianity.

And that is why they're totally unfit for leadership. They're hopelessly clueless. Before Christianity, Germans were running around naked in the forest and Brits were painting their butts blue.


It's a Scottish thing. I still paint my butt blue. Can't help it. It's in our DNA.

Anonymous Icicle June 18, 2017 5:04 AM  

Just like Christianity absorbed some paganism, it went the other way too.

Just like asking "Is the Pope Catholic?" you can ask "How pagan is paganism?"

Obviously the Muslims went absolutely ape-sh*t over the mere suggestion of paganism in Islam (cf. Salman Rushdie and his 1988 book the The Satanic Verses) Remember, the Muslims think you are practicing shirk just by believing in the Trinity.

Anonymous MawBTS June 18, 2017 5:10 AM  

Mr Rational: I am interested, I have family who cite GG&S, and having its flaws revealed would be very interesting to me.

I'm not him, but I can answer.

The book's argument is that the divergent outcomes of human civilization are explained, not by genetics, but by hundreds of years of environmental feedback cycles. Eg, if Tribe A has 1 more cow than Tribe B, this advantage will snowball and after ten thousand years Tribe A will be building cities and Tribe B will be robbing hooch stores and listening to rap music.

It's a plausible idea - and might even have a some truth to it. Anyone who's played Monopoly knows that small advantages at the start turn into massive advantages at the end.

But proposing a hypothesis is different to proving a hypothesis, and Diamond doesn't ever do that. The book's analysis is just drawing a target around an arrow: it's easy to make up a bullshit explanation that sounds superficially plausible. This is what GG&S is like: "The 2009 film Avatar earned $2.7bn at the box office. To explain its success, we look to the fact that it contains blue characters, and audiences respond positively to blue characters. This is evidenced by the fact that other films with blue characters (Finding Nemo, Aladdin) have also been successful at the box office. Additionally, director James Cameron's previous film Titanic involves the blue Atlantic ocean, so audiences may have been subconsciously primed to expect a quality film from the combination of blue and James Cameron."

Is this right? Is this wrong? Who knows. This theory's truth is impossible to evaluate, and so to for Jared Diamond's "environment uber alles" explanation of human history.

For example, he says that Eurasia was dealt a better hand as far as animals go. Eurasia has cattle, docile and hardworking, while America has bison, violent and temperamental. But Eurasia didn't just magically receive cattle, we had to breed them from wild aurochs, which was apparently even bigger and scarier than modern day bison. Why did Eurasians domesticate the aurochs but Native Americans fail with the bison? For that matter, why did Eurasians learn to ride horses while the NAs hunted theirs to extinction? Diamond doesn't think about these things, because they imply Eurasians might have had some qualities NAs didn't.

He completely ignores genes (which might be the biggest feedback mechanism of all). Or he sort of ignores them - it's complicated. At times he seems to be arguing with himself. On page 19 he says "Evidence for the existence of human differences in intelligence [..]
is lacking" but on page 21 he bizarrely claims that genes for intelligence are more selected for in primitive cultures ("natural selection promoting genes for intelligence has probably been far more ruthless in New Guinea than in more densely populated, politically complex societies"). I don't know what his true views are on the subject. Maybe he doesn't have any.

If you look at history you might see some events that cast doubts on the idea that environmental advantages = destiny. Starting in 2010, Jews started showing up on Ellis Island with cardboard suitcases. A century later, they comprise 48% of the country's billionaires. Illiterate Chinese tin miners were imported to Malaysia - in a few decades, they were owning and running most of the industry in the country, along with the Communist Party. Japanese immigrated to Brazil to pick java beans. They're now one of the most high performing ethnic groups in the country. As far as I can tell, Diamond's view on this is "¯_(ツ)_/¯". Just a big mystery we'll never understand. I'm surprised he didn't improvise new "theories" to explain these things also - maybe java beans magically confer intelligence, or something.

Anonymous MawBTS June 18, 2017 5:18 AM  

^ 2010 should be 1910. Lapsus keyboardi.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable June 18, 2017 5:38 AM  

I'd be surprised if you'll even be able to get the various Christian groups to work together.

They don't need to work with us. They just need to not work against us. Mostly for their own sakes.

Anonymous Zerberus June 18, 2017 5:53 AM  

Isn’t the main problem of the West the secularized slave morality on steroids which root is Christianity/Judaism?
What role played Christianity in the death of the Roman Empire? Wasn’t Christianity a root cause for the bundle of problems which gave the Western Roman Empire the death blow?
I am thankful for the crusades and the war against incest (on the other hand celibacy was definitely dysgenic) but what does Christianity today for our civilization?
And could it be that your argument for Christianity is correct in the US and some Catholic countries but not for the (historic) dominantly protestant countries of Western Europe? At least I can’t see how anything good can come out of this Churches and I would like to see the next round of Kulturkampf starting today of course with focus on Islam but why not break some privileges of the Churches in the process and put the pulpit law back in place where it belongs.

Anonymous I'm Not a Fascist. But My Sons Are. June 18, 2017 6:31 AM  

For many of us religion is simply not an issue. We don't need it to see what's happening and want to do something about it. In Group/Out Group bias, ethnocentrism (and perhaps even racism) are perfectly organic, innate phenomena that function at a visceral level in most people; even Chimps present analog behavior.

So Jesus, the Bible, Christian Historiography (etc) -- while important for understanding from whence the West comes -- is not so much primordial as it is a potential binding force for those requiring an impetus greater than their own gut.

Things evolve, things change. Even Christianity. The idea that Christianity can regress ("return", if you prefer) to the atavism that passes 'round here, while interesting, is unfortunately weighted down by perhaps the only thing the disparate forms of Christianity have and have had in common over time, which is the safety and security of the No True Scotsman.

...Anyway.

Blogger szopen June 18, 2017 6:40 AM  

Re Diamond's book - I have read it in Polish version and I have written down some quotes, but they are all in Polish; however, there are a lot of things there which are so absurd that's it's funny. FOr example, Diamond says that people who have earlier access to agriculture, had been given an advantage and that explains why Europe is more advanced than Africa (because agriculture reached Europe earlier than Africa). However he convieniently forgets about the simple fact that agriculture reached New Guinea earlier than Europe, and that according to his reasoning, today Egypt, north africa, India, Persia should all be more advanced than Europe. Also, IIRC agriculture reached America in about the same time when it reached Africa.

Or he uses argument like "we know only few plants which were domesticated and they all were domesticated a long time ago, and since that time no one domesticated new plants, and there were more of those plants in Eurasia" Isn't is beautiful? Because since a log time no one cared to domesticate new plants, therefore there are no new plants possible to domesticate. On another page he writes something like "if any of animals there could be domesticated, local tribes surely would domesticate them". Facepalm.

He also first writes about how difficult in Africa it is to transfer animals and plants in north-south axis, and then, several pages later, he writes about migrations of Bantu farmers.

Also, he draws false comparison: first he explains why it was impossible for New guinea to develop, nad instead of comparing it with Mesoamerica, he compares it to Egypt.

Anonymous Eric the Red June 18, 2017 6:50 AM  

There are primary core values, without which Western Civilization cannot survive. Like it or not, admit it or not, those values either originate with Christianity or have been reinforced by it. This is also an issue of natural order, i.e., an inherent hierarchy of values. I'll be accused of sounding simplistic, but so be it: you don't build a house by making the roof first, nor do you maintain it by letting the foundations and primary structural beams go to rot. So too with a society; recognize what the primary foundation of values is, and maintain it with both laws and customs. Meanwhile you can always knock out walls and redecorate the bathroom as many times as you want.

Blogger Roger Hill June 18, 2017 8:47 AM  

There has been some discussion here about Christianity having the tendency of turning those who truly believe it into passive punching bags, and not without reason. The admonitions to 'turn the other cheek' and to submit to authority are right there in black, white and sometimes red. And yet other critics of Christianity will decry it for turning its followers into aggressive crusaders. It seems to them that Christianity is the Mother of wars and deluged the world with blood.

I have found that understanding such apparent contradictions is only possible when one understands that Christianity is, as G.K. Chesterton wrote, "a super human paradox". It is the faith where two good things that seem inconsistent with one another can nevertheless blaze side by side. Christianity tends to exaggerate virtues and then sets them within their proper place, serving their proper function. This confuses the unbeliever at times, making their charges against the faith seem contradictory.

I will give an example of one paradox that Chesterton mentions. He talks about the anti-Christian's complaint that the faith makes it impossible for people to find happiness and wonder in nature. It threatens people with eternal torment and hell, making existence itself seem a very dangerous affair, with uncertainty and dark foreboding. Yet at the same time Christianity is attacked for treating humanity like sheep or children who need protection, comfort and hiding the ugly realities of a harsh world. The charges seem inconsistent. As Chesterton wrote, "Christianity can not be both the white mask on a black world and black mask on a white world. It can not wear both green and rose colored spectacles."

Chesterton points out the complaints are not without reason. The problem is the critic doesn't understand the faith enough to realize that the believer comes (over time) to understand existence in a completely new way. Thus the true believer will become more and more a realist about the world we live in, and yet will become joyful and expectant about existence itself. He will be a brutal pessimist about the world and a flaming optimist about the universe.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 18, 2017 8:53 AM  

Your churches are feminized and the white deltas have been turned into foot washers.

You very bright and intellectual gentlemen can write 5000 word essays and all, but you will go to your churches and be bossed about by scolds who speak less of Jesus than use the language of the cultural marxists as in the words of ists, isms and phobias.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 18, 2017 8:55 AM  

You want an example take that Promise Keepers scam, it filled stadiums with white men and this alarmed the establishment, the establishment uttered the dread word "racist" and within two weeks the head clown was literally washing the feet of a black man. Needless to say the deltas abandoned that clown show.

Anonymous Mr. Rational June 18, 2017 9:58 AM  

@94  You asked for it, you got it.

I have the 1999 paperback edition of GG&S.  In the prologue on p. I 4, Diamond gives an account of his walk and conversation with a New Guinean politician named Yali.  I pick up in the middle of a paragraph about mid-page:

Two centuries ago, all New Guineans were still "living in the Stone Age."  That is, they sill used stone tools similar to those superseded in Europe by metal tools thousands of years ago, and they dwelt in villages not organized under any centralized political authority.  Whites had arrived, imposed centralized government, and brought material goods whose value New Guineans instantly recognized, ranging from steel axes, matches and medicines to clothing, soft drinks and umbrellas.  In New Guinea all those goods were referred to collectively as "cargo."

Many of the white colonialists openly despised New Guineans as "primitives."  Even the least able of New Guinea's white "masters," as they were still called in 1972, enjoyed a far higher standard of living than New Guineans, higher even than charismatic politicians like Yali.  Yet Yali had quizzed lots of whites as he was then quizzing me, and I had quizzed lots of New Guineans.  He and I both knew that New Guineans are on the average at least as smart as Europeans.   All those things must have been on Yali's mind when, with yet another penetrating glance of his flashing eyes, he asked me "Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?"

First dog-whistle:  the average IQ of Papuan-New Guineans is 83.  This may not have been so widely known 20 years ago when GG&S was published, but the second dog-whistle is the term "cargo".  Even a high-school education such as received by Yali should include some information about the broader world, like units on industry.  To continue using "cargo" when "industry" is the sort of language required for clear thinking on the subject shows a mental deficiency.  Yali was obviously on the level of Hank Johnson, Maxine Waters and Sheila Jackson Lee, a literal cargo cultist.

Diamond is dog-whistling here to his insiders:  "This book is propaganda.  It's to fool the goyim and make them feel guilty for their virtues and accomplishments.  Take and exploit."

My only regret is that I didn't get my copy from the remainder table, just discounted.

@105  That too.  @110  And also that.

If you are not the kind to reject all notion of human evolution out of hand, one highly under-rated book is "The 10000 Year Explosion".  It boldly goes where Diamond shrieks and virtue-signals never to tread.

Blogger OGRE June 18, 2017 10:32 AM  

"What role played Christianity in the death of the Roman Empire? Wasn’t Christianity a root cause for the bundle of problems which gave the Western Roman Empire the death blow?"

If anything Christianity extended the life of the Roman Empire. The Byzantines lasted for another thousand years and called themselves Romans throughout. Western Rome fell due to a variety of factors but the spread of Christianity would be at most a minor contributing factor and most likely it had little net impact on the longevity of the western Roman political structure. The most significant factors leading to the fall of Rome were the numerous and continual civil wars (on average one every 20 years from the time of Commodus onward), bloated bureaucracy, money debasement, and constant barbarian infiltration along wide borders. Obviously there are many more contributing factors and we could debate these until judgment day, but Gibbons once dominant theory that Christianity was a major contributing factor to the fall of Rome has been thoroughly discredited. If anything one could argue that Christianity offered a form of cultural stability to the people of the Western Empire during the transition from the late Roman period into the early middle ages.

Blogger DeploraBard June 18, 2017 10:37 AM  

Christianity first has to redeem your humanity. It is a personal change in relationship to the creator. It is the path to optimize blessings. Being declared righteous and conducting yourself righteously are 2 different things. Waiting for "Christianity" to save civilization is like waiting for someone else to make you rich. You are going to have to be involved and ultimately prepared to sacrifice much, if not all. This is a war for souls and civilizations. True, the church is cucked now, but pressure will continue to splinter it and the crucible will refine it. We are not there yet. Cucked christians want a rapture, want christ to do it all, wait for someone else to lead them if even into error (current pope). Rise up and take the authority you have and do something. It is the truth. The end was declared from the beginning, but that is no reason to sit passively and wait while evil consumes the world. It is precisely why it will.

Blogger DeploraBard June 18, 2017 10:41 AM  

Revelations is a book of victory, not inevitability that should lead to inaction and despair. It does not absolve us of our responsibilities. When he returns, be found faithful.

Blogger DeploraBard June 18, 2017 10:43 AM  

Be strong and courageous. Perfect love casts out fear. Happy Fathers Day men.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 18, 2017 11:27 AM  

Isn’t the main problem of the West the secularized slave morality on steroids which root is Christianity/Judaism?
No, Neitzsche was wrong. First, there is not commonality in values between Judaism and Christianity. Second, the main problem of the West is the abandonment of Christianity. As Lewis says, each age is most on guard against the sin to which they feel the least temptation.

What role played Christianity in the death of the Roman Empire? Wasn’t Christianity a root cause for the bundle of problems which gave the Western Roman Empire the death blow?
Almost none. c.f. Byzantium. Byzantium was far more Christian than the West, and survived a millennium after the collapse of the Western Empire. The collapse of the Western Empire was a political collapse, triggered by endless civil war and barbarian invasion. When the Legions left Britain, they did not leave to go home and give up, they went to Italy, to defend Rome itself from the Visigoths.

Blogger Cail Corishev June 18, 2017 11:51 AM  

I don't suppose you have anything that might be helpful a little sooner than that?

Sure, the Alt-Right. Have kids, teach them the truth as best you know it. Form communities with others doing the same thing. Ally with others who have the same goal of saving/preserving civilization, regardless of their religion. Most of them will be Christians, and their Christianity will certainly inform the way they see the goal and the way they fight for it. Without that, the goal is unattainable.

But you're not allying with them because Christianity is "useful" for fixing political disasters. I'm not telling you it's ever going to be "of use" for that sort of thing in the way you're asking, because that's not what it's for, any more than it's for fixing broken lawnmowers. Christianity is for the saving of souls, full stop.

Sure, if we could somehow put serious, traditional Christians in charge of everything next year, civilization would be much restored and improved, but if that were possible in the short term (short of a miracle), we wouldn't be where we are in the first place.

Blogger Elder Son June 18, 2017 12:24 PM  

@6 Says: Jesus was a Jew. Why would I want to follow a Jewish religion when the very people trying to kill/enslave us are Jews? Why would I follow a religion where 95% of the followers are cucks?

The Jew said to the Jews:

But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. Woe to you Pharisees! For you love the best seat in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without knowing it.

And:

Woe to you lawyers also! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers. Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets whom your fathers killed. So you are witnesses and you consent to the deeds of your fathers, for they killed them, and you build their tombs. Therefore also the Wisdom of God said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and persecute,’ so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary.

Blogger Jon D. June 18, 2017 12:33 PM  

Beautifully done and powerful.

Blogger Elder Son June 18, 2017 12:50 PM  

@17 I'm sorry guys, but if the Southern Baptists can't avoid convergence...

Jesus was not, and is not a Baptist.

Now was/is Jesus any other denomination. Nor are any of the denominations, The Church.

And Jesus answered and said unto them, ‘Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

And:

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

I could go on, but surely you have a Bible, and can read.

Blogger Elder Son June 18, 2017 1:29 PM  

LMAO.

I call myself an atheist because I recognized that what was being pushed at me as Christianity had gone completely off the rails in several provable ways, and I saw nothing that got it right. 4 decades later it's just as wrong in the same ways and getting wronger in others. I can only shake my head.

So then, you KNOW what true Christianity is, but then you reject it, and Christ, and shake your head, because everyone else can't get it right.

You are infatuated and in lust with yourself.

Anonymous Mr. Rational June 18, 2017 2:20 PM  

When the self-absorbed project like an IMAX:
Elder Son wrote:So then, you KNOW what true Christianity is
Never said that.  Just because you know that essential parts of what's being pushed at you are false-to-fact doesn't tell you what is true.  It only tells you to move on if truth matters to you.

then you reject it, and Christ, and shake your head, because everyone else can't get it right.
If they can't get stuff right that they ought to have been 100% consistent with, because they claim their god created the universe and everything in it so they ought to know or at least accept how it works instead of denying crucial facts about it because it hurtz their feelz, they are not legitimate authorities.  Such people may have nuggets of truth but they have to be sifted out of the detritus that they should have shorn themselves of on their own.  They have not gone through "the ruthless flensing of untruths".

You are infatuated and in lust with yourself.
<taps Elder Son on the shoulder>

That's a mirror.  I'm over here.

Anonymous Jack Amok June 18, 2017 3:40 PM  

The existence of Churchianity, the recent SBC resolution, and various nomially Christian organizations making a financial profit importing rapefugees to America all make it clear that as a label, "Christian" is insufficient to identify what any of us are dealing with.

It's disingenous for the pro-pagan side to focus just on the Pope Frannies and ignore the JPIIs, but it doesn't help when the pro-Christian side hand-waves away their many converged institutions.

The vast majority of people are going to believe in something. I think the consensus is probably that the alt-right would like that something to be compatible with producing a pre-65 culture at the very least.

Churchianity and following Judeo-Christ clearly won't do that. Neither will the Cult of Globalism or the hedonistic nhilism practiced by people too self absorbed to be parents.

So what will? As a 'cultural Christian' I think traditional Christianity is the foundation, but since we had that once and it failed, there must be something else as well. What are the set of beliefs that will transcend imperfect institutions and avoid devolving into Churchianity or hedonism. Then we'll be getting somewhere.

Blogger RobertT June 18, 2017 3:59 PM  

The Christian religion has been flawed since it's beginning. It will always be flawed. The truth of Christianity is absolute perfection, then people got involved. Don't make the mistake of equating Christ with his followers.

Blogger tz June 18, 2017 4:25 PM  

Christian's have an eternal time preference. Even Molyneux admitted his daughter changed his vision, but although he often says "forever", I doubt his youtube vids will be still there in a few decades, much less if someone goes through them and he gets 3 strikes and his account deleted (Christopher Cantwell just got his second).

If you want a revival, or the 3rd great awakening, fast and pray for it. With God, nothing is impossible. For Saul of Tarsus or Stefan of Calgary.

Paganism is the original Gods that failed. Pontius Pilate should have let Jesus Go ("I find no fault in him"). Secularism cannot do better because they don't even have Gods - the Furies, or even Karma to enforce absolute Justice.

If there is a problem with Atheist Nationalists, it is many have socialist instead of libertarian tendencies. While some socialism works in a homogeneous society as a codification of a 95% majority custom, it doesn't when there is ANY difference, and the village-tribe may be homogeneous, but the "Nation" will have sufficient differences. Prussia is not Bavaria.

@20 simply be honest - that is a high virtue. But realize those given to the devil or world will hate you for it.

@23 It is not that women shouldn't drive or "work outside the home", but that Motherhood is the glorious crown (or consecrated virgins) for women. AFTER the brood is grown and independent, women can then find careers. Driving is a matter of practicality. Before cars, I think they would have rode horses - mostly side-saddle.

(general) Another error is to think Christianity is possible without Christ and the Holy Spirit. One of the fundamental teachings is that fallen man is defacto in the Devil's control, and even when converted and baptized, it is a constant struggle not to fall again and betray Christ though this is most commonly through seduction.

@68 Christianity baptizes and redeems cultures, removing the devilish parts. It doesn't change them at their root. Polish, Irish, French, and Italian Catholics are still different today, they were separate nations when they had identical Tridentine masses, and it is likely worse now. That kingdom, including its laws and even nature, science, and physics, is not of this world. An African church will be redeemed but still African, and thrive in its OWN way for obeying the commandments, as will an Asian church. The Graeco-Roman philosophy and law was baptized. African and Asia have different roots that when baptized will produce good but different fruits.



Anonymous A.B. Prosper June 18, 2017 4:42 PM  

There are more models for Pagan civilizations than the pre literate barbarian tribes.
'
Pagan Rome, Greece and Egypt were highly civilized and advanced and the models they had worked for a long long time. Egypt was so stable it was thought the it as the only major civilization to survive the bronze dark age intact

Still unless we somehow reform the Roman civic religion or start on the whole Pharoh thing again, the only religion we have that works and as an added benefit makes things better wherever it lands is functioning Christianity.

Even its mutant strands of functioning Christianity like the errant LDS are made better by it.

As for atheism, I don't know any complex societies that can last long without religion. Regardless of its truth. religion as a meme allows social scaling for the masses (the elite can function without it) Without it, complex societies won't hold together period.


Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 18, 2017 5:21 PM  

A.B. Prosper wrote:There are more models for Pagan civilizations than the pre literate barbarian tribes.
Think of a large, complex Pagan society that did not wind up worshipping the leader as a god or demi-god. The North Koreans do it to this day. As do the Japanese, even the most pragmatic, least sentimental society of the classical world, the Romans, worshipped the Emperor.
That is what an advanced Pagan civilization does, and that's why nobody wants one.

Blogger Jose June 18, 2017 6:26 PM  

Civilization... where have I seen that before?

Niall Ferguson wrote a book about Western Civilization, "Civilization: the West and the Rest," tracing its success to six characteristics he called "killer apps":

- Competition
- Science
- Property [rights]
- Modern medicine
- Consumerism
- Work ethic

Unless there's a reason why the Harvard (at the time, now Stanford) professor / best-selling author / frequent television guest / BBC and PBS documentarian would avoid mentioning Christianity and Nationalism, on purpose, I think that raises some questions about the validity of the argument in the Darkstream.

Killer apps source: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/civilization-west-and-rest/killer-apps/

Blogger IreneAthena June 18, 2017 8:20 PM  

I can see how "this" might have disillusioned comment @77 author regarding the prospects of finding people of like mind amongst Christian churchfolk, but it doesn't look anything like a reason to call oneself an atheist.

["This" = "Christianity off the rails...nothing getting it right"...for 40 long years he's put up with it now: gotta keep us from Christians becoming, but HOW?...he's shaking his head...

"This" would not have and could not have (even with a time warp) convinced Plato or Gregor Mendel to call themselves atheists. It wouldn't have even caused Charles Darwin(*1) himself to adopt atheism, and he would've had reason to take believers' reluctance to accept evolutionary theory very personally indeed.

A: Christians don't see eye to eye with me regarding the evolution of the races of humanity
B. There is no God.
A --> B looks like a non sequitur.

(*1)"In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.— I think that generally (& more and more so as I grow older) but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind." Letter 12041 – Darwin, Charles. R. to Fordyce, John, 7 May 1879". Darwin Correspondence Project. Darwin died about three years later.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 18, 2017 9:15 PM  

Jose wrote:Unless there's a reason why the Harvard (at the time, now Stanford) professor / best-selling author / frequent television guest / BBC and PBS documentarian would avoid mentioning Christianity and Nationalism, on purpose,
You even need to ask why an establishment sociologist, teaching at Stanford, with frequent appearances on TV, might want to downplay Christianity? What would happen to his career if he said "Yep, it's Christianity that responsible for the "Killer apps I listed. Get rid of Christianity and the whole thing will go up in flames."

Blogger Cail Corishev June 18, 2017 9:19 PM  

Unless there's a reason why the Harvard (at the time, now Stanford) professor / best-selling author / frequent television guest / BBC and PBS documentarian would avoid mentioning Christianity and Nationalism, on purpose,

I hope that's sarcasm.

For a better look at what made Western Civilization, watch the BBC documentary Civilisation by Sir Kenneth Clark, filmed 50 years ago when it was still possible to give credit where it's due.

Anonymous Charlie Baud June 18, 2017 10:38 PM  

@121

Traditionalist Christianity didn't fail, "enlightened" parasites like you tried to undermine in and water it down because you found it's morals too demanding.

Anonymous Charlie Baud June 18, 2017 10:42 PM  

@68

Mostly because of Freemason and Protestant attempts to undermine the spread of the Church.

Blogger Jose June 18, 2017 11:01 PM  

@134:

Historian and economic historian, not sociologist.

You certainly aren't insinuating that minor considerations like university appointments, being in the good graces of mainstream publishing houses, the ability to charge $100k-250k for a 1h talk at corporate events, guest appearances on TV, and production opportunities for his documentaries would have any influence on how Niall chooses to frame his research.

Perish the thought.



@135:

Sarcasm, me? Why I never!

I watched Sir Ken's Civilisation in the early 1970s, made enough of an impression that I referenced it (and linked to the videos on YouTube) on my review (*) of VD's "The Irrational Atheist":

http://sitacuisses.blogspot.com/2016/08/thoughts-about-irrational-atheist-by.html

I'll save you the trouble of reading the review, this is Sir Kenneth's Civilisation on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6qYjisp51M


Here's a more modern piece, and more germane to the topic: libertarian (but don't take that against him) Tom Woods on the relationship between the Church and the quest and diffusion of knowledge, particularly scientific knowledge:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03KXFMyru8E&list=PLt3Pke412qVfVU3IEaDAWZcd5hO7CuVzl



(*) I now think VD's "The Irrational Atheist" is incorrect regarding the three stoog... main characters: Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens were not irrational, rather they very rationally pursued a goal of monetizing their echo chamber caring nothing for how much they damaged atheism, skepticism, public perception of science, societal stability, the reputations of various institutions and groups they associate with, etc...

Blogger Nathan June 19, 2017 3:59 AM  

@4 Brings up an interesting question, what if an atheist attending a churchian church wants to marry a devoted christian lady?

(This question is not entirely hypothetical!)

Blogger SirHamster June 19, 2017 2:48 PM  

Jose wrote:(*) I now think VD's "The Irrational Atheist" is incorrect regarding the three stoog... main characters: Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens were not irrational, rather they very rationally pursued a goal of monetizing their echo chamber caring nothing for how much they damaged atheism, skepticism, public perception of science, societal stability, the reputations of various institutions and groups they associate with, etc...

You are incorrect. Amazon description of the book:

"The arguments of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and Michel Onfray are all methodically exposed and discredited as Day provides extensive evidence proving ..."

Vox Day attacked rationality of the arguments, not the persons.
The service of self-interest by irrational arguments does not make the arguments rational. The behavior may be considered rational, but that does not diminish the irrationality of the content propagated by the behavior.

Where the behavior is unintentional, it is foolish for self-claimed rational atheists to push falsehood. Where intentional, it is malicious to push lies and deceive others on the very nature of reality.

Blogger SirHamster June 19, 2017 2:55 PM  

Nathan wrote:@4 Brings up an interesting question, what if an atheist attending a churchian church wants to marry a devoted christian lady?

(This question is not entirely hypothetical!)


Believers should not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. Not that it would stop a Good Christian girl with the tingles from doing the wrong thing, perhaps with churchian cheering disobedience sanctified by romance. (h/t Dalrock)

Christians should not support it. Her father should step in if/when her tingles overwhelm her upbringing.

But all that said, God can still use her to change him.

Blogger Jose June 19, 2017 3:25 PM  

SirHamster wrote:You are incorrect. Amazon description of the book:

Ok, you read the description of the book; now, here are the missing steps:

1. BUY the book (like I did)
2. READ the book (like I did)
3. UNDERSTAND the book (like I did)
4. UNDERSTAND my point
5. Comment

But since I don't expect you to do that, here's a simple parallel using politics, which many here seem to prefer:

In VD's book, Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris are Jeb Bushes;
My view is that Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris are Quislings.

Blogger SirHamster June 19, 2017 4:32 PM  

I understood your point just fine.

Jose wrote:Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens were not irrational, rather they very rationally pursued a goal of monetizing their echo chamber caring nothing for how much they damaged atheism, skepticism, public perception of science, societal stability, the reputations of various institutions and groups they associate with, etc...

SirHamster wrote:The service of self-interest by irrational arguments does not make the arguments rational. The behavior may be considered rational, but that does not diminish the irrationality of the content propagated by the behavior.


Atheists using irrational arguments for rational self interest can still be called irrational atheists. The term only needs to be true in one sense to be used legitimately.

More importantly, the concept of Irrational Atheist is not limited to those 3 atheists. Plenty of irrational atheists who parrot the irrational arguments of those 3 while claiming to be rational.

Which is a hilarious claim once it becomes clear how gullible and emotional they are.

Jose wrote:In VD's book, Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris are Jeb Bushes;

My view is that Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris are Quislings.


Jeb Bush is a quisling cuckservative. The terms are not exclusive. Your failed analogy does illustrate the logic gap here.

Blogger Tuatha June 19, 2017 11:38 PM  

"duh Germanic tribes were too busy sacrificing each other to trees to get anything productive done"

You deserve to be raped to death.

Blogger Tuatha June 19, 2017 11:43 PM  

"That is what an advanced Pagan civilization does, and that's why nobody wants one."

I would like you to debate that to the esoteric hitlerists like Serrano and Savitri.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts