Christianity is one of the 3 pillars of Western civilization. The other two are Greco/Roman legal tradition, and White peoples of European descent.
Do NOT be fooled into thinking modern zionist evangelical Christianity is in any way, shape or form biblical, or even Christian. It is perverted heresy created out of whole cloth by Jews.
Germanic legal tradition was far more important in the United States, the British Isles, and Iceland. Main things that were taken from Roman tradition is just giving things Latin names to describe the Germanic concepts, but they did that for nearly all scholarship in medieval times.
The ancient greek and roman way of thinking is the cure to this sick modernity that was brought about first by Christianity. It's more than just "legal thought". Look to Homer, look to their history.
Making "lesser people equal to noblility before the eyes of God" eventually leads to "everyone must be equal" communism.
Adoption of Christian thinking brought down the Roman Empire. A northstar goal of peace for all mankind is a goal of stillness and death. It is only through conflict that men temper and improve themselves to become better.
The best should be ruler and the lesser shouldn't have a say. Giving the lesser power has dysgenically destroyed humanity. Its a denial of nature and that leads to our demise.
Christianity preaches denial of nature by having you beg to a God that created the logic and laws of nature and asking Him to bend the rules of the whole universe just for you. Extremely selfish, narcissistic, and dishonorable in my view even if He actually allowed it.
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity, but rather than get in an hours long back and forth of comments like I normally do, I'm going to advise you to voice your take to a Catholic/Orthodox priest or other traditional Christian apologist. Or at least look into apologetics. Suffice it to say Christianity absolutely works within human hierarchical frameworks. Given the current state of the faith though (infinite Protestant factions + LDS and whatnot), and given that it's a common gripe of mine, I can also see how you've come to your conclusion.
I can't remember off-hand if it follows that specific verse or one of the parallels in Corinthians or Thessalonians, but the next part is essentially "Because woman was deceived first, then man." It totally kills any arguments that they just needed women to quit talking during the sermon.
Rabbi Jonathan Cahn admits: Christianity was created by the Jews as a "Spiritual Weapon against Rome".
One could say that Christianity represents one of the earliest psyops and at the same time one of the most successful and sustainable ones.
Like a Trojan horse, the faith spread throughout the entire Roman Empire, until it eventually became one of the most powerful and influential religions in the world. Over the centuries, it shaped the mindsets, cultures, and social structures of billions of people.
The pagans represented the greatest danger to the Jews, militarily superior, politically dominant, and uncontrollable. So the Jews made them controllable through theological warfare. By accepting Christianity, the pagans automatically adopted the entire Jewish framing and the Abrahamic worldview. The once uncontrollable enemy suddenly thought in the same categories as his former enemies. It's no coincidence that it's called Judeo-Christian, meaning Jewish-Christian.
Thus, the Jews succeeded through theological-psychological warfare in converting large parts of the pagan world to a belief system whose roots lie deep in the Jewish context. They ultimately managed to get the Romans, who were their greatest enemies and pagans, to convert to a faith that served them and their agenda. The control was not achieved through weapons, but through the adoption of the Jewish worldview, and precisely because of this, the pagans, who once represented the greatest threat, became predictable, malleable, and controllable.
Conflating ancient judeans with modern mystery meat khazarians is exactly what the oven-dodging shapeshifters want you to do. Also, the Apostle Luke was a Greek doctor from Syria and he wrote both a Gospel and the book of Acts.
If this was even just a tiny bit remotely true, then Christianity would be taught everywhere and never questioned or allowed to be questioned (just like a certain event, for instance). Islam would have been destroyed hundreds of years ago as well, to make sure all their neighbours behave and protects the country of Israel under any circumstance.
Rabbi Jonathan Cahn admits:
The most likely reason behind this, is that he's a little smarter than the others, and just doing some reverse psychological trick. "Those antisemite guys always do the opposite of what we want, so I'll tell them to become Christian, so that they stray away from Jesus"
Jews have an outright phobia of Christianity, to the point where they invented their own plus sign in mathematics and sign paperwork with a circle (a kikel, you might say) instead of an X.
Even the likes of Adam Green do not seem to argue that Christianity can be explained from a functionalist perspective all the way down to the present day. Rather, they claim that Christianity was designed to defeat the Roman Empire, implying that its intended function expired long ago. They simply saw no reason (or found it too difficult) to remove it afterward, but it does not necessarily mean that it is still fulfilling some kind of function for them.
Consequently, if I was a follower of Adam Green, I would respond: 'Your argument is prima facie compelling, but it misses the possibility that Christianity has outlived its purpose. Thus, the yids created Christianity because it served them a function, but today they attack it because they have a different belief system(s) to which they wish to move people towards. Furthermore, for all we know, perhaps the yids also attack it because today's yids are by and large unaware that it is a product of their ancestors' own scheming long ago against the Roman Empire, a history either forgotten or suppressed, and thus mistake it for something authentically of the goyim.'
This preserves your fair observation without necessarily leading to your conclusion, i.e. that Christianity being relentlessly attacked is proof that it is not a sort of 'false opposition'.
One might throw Marxism in as an example of another such 'thick' subversive belief system - a grand narrative of all history that deeply affects economics, politics, and society - that is indubitably 'Jewy' and yiddish (Marx, Bernstein, Kautsky, Trotsky, Lukacs, etc.) to the core, but was abandoned by them because of Stalin's turn towards 'anti-semitism'. Thus countless Marxist yids like Daniel Bell, Louis Samuel Feuer, Nathan Glaser, and Seymour Martin Lipset all switched from Marxism to become the 'neo-conservatives'.
The 'Holocaustianity' you allude to is of course a 'thin' version of such subversive belief systems, thin in the sense that it is modular and could be bolted on to almost any political culture, ideology, or system. It can clearly be viewed from a functionalist perspective as serving an anti-nationalist, globalizing function for the yids. What does 'Never Again' mean? It is to never again turn against the yids, to view the yids as a permanent feature of life that must never be excluded or eradicated. Holocaustianity does to the atheist what Pentecostal, dispensationalist Christianity does to the Christian: it makes him feel it is somehow 'wrong' to oppose the yids on anything at all.
Consequently, if I was a follower of Adam Green, I would respond:
And you would be wrong. Adam argues that the Jews who attack Christianity are doing it to drive (anti-semitic) people back to Christianity as it is essentially Judaism for gentiles. Also the attacks on Christianity serve as a humiliation ritual.
That's even more bizarre and conspiratorial than I thought he would believe.
If yids attack Christianity to drive the small number of 'anti-semites' back to this 'Judaism for gentiles', how do they ensure that they do not drive far larger numbers of Christians away from this Judaism for gentiles altogether by means of the same arguments? 'Christianity bad' isn't an argument that only works on anti-semites.
The maths don't add up to me. Yes, you contain and neuter anti-semites by shunting them into a false oppositional belief system, but they're so miniscule in number as to be irrelevant. By contrast, if you peddle narratives like 'Christianity is bad' or 'Christianity is anti-Semitic' in order to get anti-semites to greater support it, you also risk losing the much larger number of people who also accept your arguments for why it is bad without being anti-semites, or who find anti-semitism repellant, respectively, who will drift from this Judaism for gentiles to other non-controlled opposition belief systems or atheism.
Furthermore, if the goal really was to simply corral and neuter anti-semites, why not simply argue 'Christianity is based and anti-semitic, so you should support it to oppose yids' rather than 'Christianity is bad, so you should support it because the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. Seems like an inferior, weaker strategy to me. Associating Christianity with the Nazis is a much better way of getting anti-semites on board than simply arguing 'Christianity bad, and don't you know that what we say is bad is what you should say is good?'
Moreover, how does one explain yids like Johnathan Cahn who clearly promote certain types of Christianity whilst the others are attacking it? So some yids attack Christianity to drive anti-semites to it whilst other yids simultaneously promote Christianity (Pentecostal, dispensationalist versions of it) to create philo-semites? Seems schizophrenic to me, since one side is doing something counter-productive to the other: the likes of Johnathan Cahn are obviously grossly repellant to anti-semites.
I should add that I haven't paid much attention to Adam Green outside of his interviews with the intriguing David Skrbina. (This kind of thing is probably part of why.) Consequently, I apologize if this argument is not of the kind that Green or his supporters would make (although it makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than the claim that some yids attack Christianity to corral and neuter anti-semites whilst others like Johnathan Cahn simultaneously [and counter-productively, insofar as this specific goal is concerned] promote Christianity in a way that will drive anti-semites far, far away from Christianity).
If yids attack Christianity to drive the small number of 'anti-semites' back to this 'Judaism for gentiles', how do they ensure that they do not drive far larger numbers of Christians away from this Judaism for gentiles altogether by means of the same arguments?
Why would Christians be driven away from Christianity because of ridicule? Jehoves Witnesses and Mormons are being ridiculed in a far more extreme manner for ages now and their numbers aren't dwindling.
Yes, you contain and neuter anti-semites by shunting them into a false oppositional belief system, but they're so miniscule in number as to be irrelevant.
If actual anti-semites were irrelevant they wouldn't be fighting them so fanatically to neutralize their influence.
So some yids attack Christianity to drive anti-semites to it whilst other yids simultaneously promote Christianity (Pentecostal, dispensationalist versions of it) to create philo-semites?
Why do some Jews promote forever wars on behalf of Israel while others attack Israel fanatically because of it?
Because right-wing Jews drag European civilization into the war with the Arab world while left-wing Jews import the Arab "refugees" into European civilization by the millions.
Look at Norman Finkelstein. He has been fanatically rallying against Israel for decades. You might believe he is on the side of European civilization. And then he drops his mask and suddenly laments the fact that the right becomes "obsessed" with Israel.
Jews need antisemitism to force racial cohesion. Without racial cohesion Jews will truly assimilate into their host nations and disappear as a people. Antisemitism is the very foundation of Judaism. Without it it can't survive.
whilst others like Johnathan Cahn simultaneously [and counter-productively, insofar as this specific goal is concerned] promote Christianity in a way that will drive anti-semites far, far away from Christianity).
You have plenty of anti-semites on this very board who believe Christianity is the answer to the Jewish question. Despite the fact that Christianity has been the dominant religion in the European world for almost two millennia.
Jews aren't a hivemind. There's only one issue that they universally agree on and that is destroying (Amalek) European civilization.
If it was even just a tiny bit remotely true that there is a world wide Jewish conspiracy then Jews would simply remain in the shadows and use their influence to keep control and prosper instead of openly and gleefully antagonizing everyone.
Islam would have been destroyed hundreds of years ago
Islam is Christianity for Arabs. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all part of the same.
their neighbours behave and protects the country of Israel under any circumstance.
All of them do. The only exception is Hezbollah. Obviously Iran and the Houthis too but you can't really call them Israels neighbors. And their opposition to Israel isn't actually religious in nature.
The most likely reason behind this, is that he's a little smarter than the others, and just doing some reverse psychological trick. "Those antisemite guys always do the opposite of what we want, so I'll tell them to become Christian, so that they stray away from Jesus"
When Europe was staunchly Christian Judaism still wasn't persecuted like Pagans or heretical Christians were. The Church never tried to wipe out Judaism.
Islam is Christianity for Arabs. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all part of the same.
Why would there have a need to make 2 different religions? Haivng one is easier to control. Furthermore, Islam teaches that all non-Islam (including jews) are enemies who should be destroyed. If the goal of jews is to use religions to make themselves above all others, that seems highly counter-productive.
All of them do.
Come on lol, country of Israel is constantly at wars with everyone around them.
When Europe was staunchly Christian Judaism still wasn't persecuted like Pagans or heretical Christians were. The Church never tried to wipe out Judaism.
What's the most likely scenario?
Jews modified our history, because they have control over most if not all big institutions, to hide what our ancestors did to them.
Jews developed out of nowhere Christianism, creating a big division among themselves, with people up in arms because they made profits out of everything, and knowing they would have to, simultaneously, make it world-wide, but also always try to keep it under control
Why would there have a need to make 2 different religions?
Because racial differences are real and the driving factor behind everything. Christianity is tailored to Europeans. Islam to Arabs.
Furthermore, Islam teaches that all non-Islam (including jews) are enemies who should be destroyed.
Islam wants to convert the entire world just as Christianity does.
If the goal of jews is to use religions to make themselves above all others, that seems highly counter-productive.
No. Homogeneity is dangerous to Jews. That's why the promote diversity.
Come on lol, country of Israel is constantly at wars with everyone around them.
Who? Hezbollah? Hezbollah isn't a country. Hamas? Hamas isn't a country either and is part of their territory.
Syria hasn't fired a shot at Israel for half an entirety and now is controlled by an ISIS guy who bends over backwards for Israel. Neither Egypt nor Jordan have been hostile to Israel for ages. Lebanon is on the brink of a civil war because their government is more concerned with trying to neutralize Hezbollah on behalf of Israel than defending their people against Israel slaughtering them.
Saudi Arabia does Israels bidding, so does Qatar. UAE is doing everything in its power to please Israel. Yemen for the most part is controlled by Saudi Arabia. Turkey is one of Israels most important trade partners. Kuwait and Oman are pretty much irrelevant and both controlled by the US. Iraq is still pretty much incapable of doing shit.
So who is left? Iran. Literally the only nation that takes a stand against Israel.
What's the most likely scenario?
Christianity was developed as a theological weapon against the Roman empire.
Jews modified our history, because they have control over most if not all big institutions, to hide what our ancestors did to them.
The same Jews who came up with the holocaust? They would "hide" atrocities against them despite the fact that they're still whining about Rome kicking their asses two millennia ago?
You can't be serious.
Jews developed out of nowhere Christianism, creating a big division among themselves, with people up in arms because they made profits out of everything, and knowing they would have to, simultaneously, make it world-wide, but also always try to keep it under control
then Christianity would be taught everywhere and never questioned or allowed to be questioned
That was literally the law of all Christian nations for centuries. It only changed after the new psyop that cannot be questioned stared after WWII. So your attempted rebuttal actually reinforces the argument you were trying to counter.
I'm talking taught by jews themselves. Where did jews (the ones who reject Jesus, otherwise the others would be Christians) try to enforce Christianity? Nowhere. Did jews go out of their way to make Asian countries Christians? Or Africa? Or even Europe? No they didn't. So claiming this is a jew psyop, when jews did nothing at all to popularize Christianity, and in fact, do everything to suppress it, is just plain stupid.
That was literally the law of all Christian nations for centuries.
The law was for Catholicism, not Christianism. There's a difference, and it's an important one. Protestants were originally excluded, because they didn't abide to the Catholics' laws (where most are completely non-Biblical).
It only changed after the new psyop
You think Christianty was enforced up until WW2? What about the rise of atheism in the 19th Century?
Yea, we all understood your position already. You're just going to repeat it when challenged? No wonder you have difficulty approaching faith. You can't even be honest with yourself.
the pagans, who once represented the greatest threat, became predictable, malleable, and controllable.
People who revel in the stagnating realm of moral relativity were never a threat to begin with; they have never been able to develop and maintain any kind of cohesive civilisation to push humanity forward.
I can see the idea here, i'm just not completely sold on it. I've seen an opinion that original christianity that was pushed on the romans was quite jewish and subversive and then things got out of hand for the heebs because europeans started merging christianity and paganism. The protestant movement then was used as a wedge to split the christians further and then 20th century was the final nail in the coffin. I don't really see the logic here because if christianity was a subversive tool from the start, then why bother eradicating it? And if it was a failed experiment then what about islam?
My old username was RaceCreatesCulture for a reason. Jews created Christianity and used it to subvert Rome but Whites made it their own. Which meant for centuries, the way Christianity became shaped came from White people not jews because Whites took control of it. The Romans handled the subversion as best they could. They created the Catholic Church to take control of Christianity then allowed it to finish it's subversion but entirely under Rome's control. For centuries, Whites kept the true understanding of Christianity under check which is why only priests could teach it and read it while the peasants couldn't. We're taught religion was used by the establishment to control us because of this lack of understanding and segment between priests and peasantry but actually, originally, it was done to protect the peasants from Christianity. For centuries, White people shaped Christianity to suit their genetics, hence the RCC. Protestants removed this shaping by ignoring all Catholic interpretation to literally interpret the Bible (and a Bible where the old testament is entirely judaised). Jews love evangelicals and all the Christians that fully interpret the Bible exactly/literally. The "old Christianity" that everyone here clings onto is a Christianity shaped for White people's interests without literally interpretating the Bible. It's never coming back because it was just an eventually delay of where we're at now. Any new religion for White people must not be Christian anymore.
That first opinion is an interesting one. It isn't implausible because Western Christianity by the time of Descartes was essentially Aristotelianized Catholicism whilst Eastern Christianity was essentially Platonized Orthodoxy. Any kind of pure Christianity was already long gone by that time.
Thus the yid looks at these syntheses of Christianity with pre-Christian Greco-Roman philosophy and starts panicking because it no longer performs the full functionality that it once performed anymore.
That is certainly one way to reconcile the problem, raised further up in this comment section, of why Christianity is no longer a state religion if it serves a function for the yids. If it serves a function for them, why don't they continue to push it as a state religion? The answer in this scenario would be: 'It served a function for the yids, but all of these accretions from the goyim have transformed it into something that no longer serves them. Thus, they pushed it at its start but want to eradicate it - that is, the versions that they view as hopelessly corrupted by accretions - now.'
Islam
Theologically, Islam makes more sense where it differs from Christianity - no God-man; no binary or trinity; and has a scripture that reads as though it contains far less contradictions and general oddities, one which should be read as correcting rather than replacing the presumably erroneous Old and New Testaments (hence some Muslims referring to the Qu'ran as the Final Testament).
Just to take the first two examples that come to mind: Firstly, in the Bible, where did Aaron die? At the top of a mountain (Numbers) or in a village (Deuteronomy)?
Secondly, if Moses wrote Deuteronomy, as is traditionally believed, who wrote in it that Moses died at the age of 120? Unless he foresaw his own death, he obviously didn't write that. And who wrote earlier in Deuteronomy that, since the time of Moses, 'no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses'? Unless Moses could see the future, this is either a piece of self-aggrandizement or somebody else wrote it, ergo, again, the claim that Moses wrote Deuteronomy suffers from two problems.
Islam also lacks those arguably subversive statements that anti-Christian White nationalists like to copy and paste whenever they argue with Christian White nationalists. Just yesterday I saw someone post:
[Matthew 5:44] But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.
It is easy to see why master moralists see words like 'love your enemies' and 'pray for those who persecute you' as subversive content. Indeed, if such words truly do not reflect the way that God has intended man to live, then all of the allure behind these words immediately dissipates: they are simply wicked, self-destructive, pathological lies, part of the most successful subversion of all time, appealing most of all to the most cowardly, most weak degenerates by passing off their cowardly weakness as the true Will of God.
The conclusion I have held these past few years since beginning to verse myself on religion is that, whether or not Adam Green and friends are right about Christianity, Islam lacks the same roots; that is, it serves no real function to the yids, despite the odd rabbi here and there casting upon it the same aspersions they do Christianity. Intriguingly, Islam has no counterpart to the Pentecostal, dispensationalist Christianity that is egregiously suspicious when viewed from a functionalist perspective: the yids are, very obviously, the greatest beneficiaries of this religion spreading rapidly across Africa and Latin America, since it transforms anyone who wants Jesus to return into a defender of the State of Israel.
Personally, I don't think these internet rabbis that Adam Green and friends like to post know much about the subject matter - they simply act as though they do because that's their profession - we need more proof that Christianity and Islam are simply yiddish 'psychological operations' than some smug rabbi saying the quiet part out loud because he believes that his audience is comprised only of yids who will be in awe of his supposed 'knowledge'.
One might say, for instance, that if Christianity was already successfully fulfilling a subversive function for the yids, what even would be the point in coming up with additional false religions? They would be effectively redundant. An obvious response might be that they need the goyim divided into multiple false opposition belief systems so that they will fight each other, but history shows that Christians have fought Christians and Muslims have fought Muslims much more than Christians have fought Muslims, ergo, only one system is actually needed to keep the goyim fighting amongst themselves.
Indeed, why not dismiss the obscure Sabianism/Mandaeism as another yiddish 'psychological operation' predating Islam, especially when, in line with Judaism, it declares Jesus a false prophet? Wouldn't that make more sense for yids to promote than Islam? If the yids have the power to propagate such false religions, why not push Sabianism on the goyim? Indeed, wouldn't that make more sense to promote even than Christianity, so that the goyim are all hating Jesus as a false prophet like they do, unlike the Christians and Muslims that revere him to this day?
IMO, White people will only survive when we throw Christianity and all Hebrew religions in the trash where they belong. We can do so much better without being weighed down by subversive jewish religions.
Any religion going forward must be grounded in the material world not just spiritual and must promote master morality not slave morality while promoting glory in this life as the greatest of all accomplishments and glory is derived entirely based upon one's actions in the material world.
I unite among noble lines which is highly tied to ethnicity. Only about 20% of White people are worthwhile, the rest are goyim as the Jews describe. I'll support them but they are peasants and will never be anything more.
Every White nation being subverted by Jeets, groids, and Muslims are doing exactly what you say, and it has resulted in the ensuing erasure of Whites (i.e., Sweden, Germany, France, U.K., etc.).
By throwing away Christian values, it invites in the moral degradation of rootless materialism and hedonism.
Any religion going forward must be grounded in the material world not just spiritual and must promote master morality not slave morality
China is doing this right now, and is imploding at a rapid rate because rootless morality anchored onto materialism means you have no reason to sacrifice, no reason to lay roots, and no reason to build outside of what you can gain for yourself. So marriage is collapsing, middle class is collapsing, and it's having a cascading effect on their broader society. That is what life without spiritual ascension looks like -- a race to the bottom of material gain.
China is collapsing because their government is retarded. There is a huge surplus of men due to they one child policy. It has created similar hypergamy as seen in the West. Additionally they don't know how to write effective economic policy. Their young adults have to work harder to get less than what their parents had and they see that is a shit deal.
It all boils down to economics. Machines have been replacing us for decades and causing jobs, real jobs, to dwindle.
I think you're missing an interesting comparison point. Western countries essentially had "one child policy" (and in more recent decades "no child policy") for so long that we're dying out and being replaced and the only reason china hasn't suffered that was (maybe) because they went with maoism instead of pure judaism (meaning they got western shekels, western factories and tech but decided against immigration. at least i think so, i haven't researched this in depth) and in recent times their policies became unsustainable/untenable to the world order so they are finally pushing to get rid of their population (perhaps after MJ12 discovered poo golems?). Chinese men and western men i think have essentially the same problem. Access to women is gated and the government works against them at every opportunity. Details are different but the overall problem is the same.
I'm glad you brought this up because it actually reinforces my point about rootlessness.
The CCP isn't beholden to anyone but the CCP; it is an amoral coalition of people thinking only about what's best for them within their own lifetimes. This resulted in them adhering to immoral policies (i.e., the one-child policy) to fix something that wasn't a problem to begin with.
They didn't mind killing off one of half the entire future generation of their nation, something that would have been a reprehensible act under a religious nation that adhered to its principles.
The knockon effect of this immoral decision has now had economical implications that has enforced social implications (videlicet of double the male population for the current generation, not enough job growth, shrinking marriage rates, women only seeking top-performing men, top-performing men selectively using women for sex but not marriage or creating families, etc.).
Now the CCP is trying to rapidly course-correct with government-sponsored marriage incentives, state-sponsored programs to encourage child-rearing. But it's all for nought because it's too late. Why?
Because in their lack of foresight they adopted the worst economic traits of feminist-captured Western societies: encouraging women to compete with men, abandon household duties, and pursue lifelong careers in competitive white-collar systems.
You're also correct that a lot of those pointless administrative jobs will be replaced by automotons and AI, making the female-focused workforce redundant.
Basically, the short-term solution to perceived resource shortages was to kill off one-half of their FUTURE population, which backfired immensely. They didn't account for marriage rates rapidly declining, top percentile men becoming philanderers, women becoming even more hypergamous, jobs shrinking, their main population aging out without financial recourse, and AI becoming a main replacement for useless corporate jobs.
Their economic downfall was because they had no moral foundations
Had they instead focused on cultivating jobs for their lower and middle class men -- exponentially reinvesting in farming and agriculture, and prioritising hiring young males for work -- they would have automatically created a sustainable ecosystem for women to WANT to marry young lads. They would have had a balanced population with enough excess women for the average bloke, and they wouldn't have had women competing with the men they sought to marry.
In many ways, the CCP is a prime example of what grounding your economic and social policies around short-term materialistic precepts looks like, and a nice counter-example as to why athiestic foundations cannot build nor sustain a growing, stable civilisaiton.
Christian values are what got us into this mess. Christian values are absolutely terrible. Christian values are THE PROBLEM. All the old Christianity people think was based was people with pagan values stressing them up as Christian. Christianity is the root of all our problems.
Christian values is what allowed you to have a safe enough civilisation to be built up so you could have the modern amenities to type the comment you did. Without those values this technology would not exist.
Furthermore, what got us into this mess is hedonistic pursuits from rootless people. Had those "Old Christian" people maintained Bibilical values we wouldn't even have a need for a forum like this because Liberal Progressivism would not exist in Occidental nations -- it would have been stomped because it represents the satanic principles and morally relative measures fostered by the people who now control the West.
Nonsense. White children require a safe environment for growing up. They need strife, but not death left and right. In germany in 20s and 30s college kids would spar each other with rapiers without wearing masks. And they considered it fun. I don't think being thrown into a meatgrinder in that age will make stronger generations. Stronger individuals perhaps but generationally it's a catastrophy for the nation.
And how's it working for you now that you're 79 and almost dead? Sounds great because now your life has meaning when everything you did before dooming on the internet didn't? News flash, you're still just as meaningless as when you were 14.
You aren't going to get anywhere just pulling a new religion out of your ass. Ask the French.
Christianity is a 2000 year tradition that has guided all the greatest White nations throughout history. And you're going to, what, figure out a better way from your armchair?
The problem with the Churches is that they've become so used to being the orthodox morality of society that they take it for granted. Now we are in a pluralistic society and they try, in vain, to hop on fads like Pride and general materialism. They've abandoned every belief in favour of cynical seat filling.
The original church operated out of people's homes, or even caves, while being persecuted. That was a Church worth following.
Those "old ways" are literally what laid the ground work for us to get here. Doubling down on an ideology of submission and weakness will not make us strong.
Christianity is one of the 3 pillars of Western civilization. The other two are Greco/Roman legal tradition, and White peoples of European descent.
Do NOT be fooled into thinking modern zionist evangelical Christianity is in any way, shape or form biblical, or even Christian. It is perverted heresy created out of whole cloth by Jews.
Germanic legal tradition was far more important in the United States, the British Isles, and Iceland. Main things that were taken from Roman tradition is just giving things Latin names to describe the Germanic concepts, but they did that for nearly all scholarship in medieval times.
The ancient greek and roman way of thinking is the cure to this sick modernity that was brought about first by Christianity. It's more than just "legal thought". Look to Homer, look to their history.
Making "lesser people equal to noblility before the eyes of God" eventually leads to "everyone must be equal" communism.
Adoption of Christian thinking brought down the Roman Empire. A northstar goal of peace for all mankind is a goal of stillness and death. It is only through conflict that men temper and improve themselves to become better.
The best should be ruler and the lesser shouldn't have a say. Giving the lesser power has dysgenically destroyed humanity. Its a denial of nature and that leads to our demise.
Christianity preaches denial of nature by having you beg to a God that created the logic and laws of nature and asking Him to bend the rules of the whole universe just for you. Extremely selfish, narcissistic, and dishonorable in my view even if He actually allowed it.
This is what I'm coming to believe now.
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity, but rather than get in an hours long back and forth of comments like I normally do, I'm going to advise you to voice your take to a Catholic/Orthodox priest or other traditional Christian apologist. Or at least look into apologetics. Suffice it to say Christianity absolutely works within human hierarchical frameworks. Given the current state of the faith though (infinite Protestant factions + LDS and whatnot), and given that it's a common gripe of mine, I can also see how you've come to your conclusion.
Assemblywomen: Aristophanes - 391 BCE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assemblywomen
I can't remember off-hand if it follows that specific verse or one of the parallels in Corinthians or Thessalonians, but the next part is essentially "Because woman was deceived first, then man." It totally kills any arguments that they just needed women to quit talking during the sermon.
Woman's sin was placing herself in moral authority (muh feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings).
Man's sin was following woman.
Rabbi Jonathan Cahn admits: Christianity was created by the Jews as a "Spiritual Weapon against Rome".
One could say that Christianity represents one of the earliest psyops and at the same time one of the most successful and sustainable ones.
Like a Trojan horse, the faith spread throughout the entire Roman Empire, until it eventually became one of the most powerful and influential religions in the world. Over the centuries, it shaped the mindsets, cultures, and social structures of billions of people.
The pagans represented the greatest danger to the Jews, militarily superior, politically dominant, and uncontrollable. So the Jews made them controllable through theological warfare. By accepting Christianity, the pagans automatically adopted the entire Jewish framing and the Abrahamic worldview. The once uncontrollable enemy suddenly thought in the same categories as his former enemies. It's no coincidence that it's called Judeo-Christian, meaning Jewish-Christian.
Thus, the Jews succeeded through theological-psychological warfare in converting large parts of the pagan world to a belief system whose roots lie deep in the Jewish context. They ultimately managed to get the Romans, who were their greatest enemies and pagans, to convert to a faith that served them and their agenda. The control was not achieved through weapons, but through the adoption of the Jewish worldview, and precisely because of this, the pagans, who once represented the greatest threat, became predictable, malleable, and controllable.
LOL, imagine being gullible enough to believe anything anyone like that has to say.
So you believe what a bunch of jews wrote in a book instead? LMFAO.
Conflating ancient judeans with modern mystery meat khazarians is exactly what the oven-dodging shapeshifters want you to do. Also, the Apostle Luke was a Greek doctor from Syria and he wrote both a Gospel and the book of Acts.
If this was even just a tiny bit remotely true, then Christianity would be taught everywhere and never questioned or allowed to be questioned (just like a certain event, for instance). Islam would have been destroyed hundreds of years ago as well, to make sure all their neighbours behave and protects the country of Israel under any circumstance.
The most likely reason behind this, is that he's a little smarter than the others, and just doing some reverse psychological trick. "Those antisemite guys always do the opposite of what we want, so I'll tell them to become Christian, so that they stray away from Jesus"
Jews have an outright phobia of Christianity, to the point where they invented their own plus sign in mathematics and sign paperwork with a circle (a kikel, you might say) instead of an X.
Even the likes of Adam Green do not seem to argue that Christianity can be explained from a functionalist perspective all the way down to the present day. Rather, they claim that Christianity was designed to defeat the Roman Empire, implying that its intended function expired long ago. They simply saw no reason (or found it too difficult) to remove it afterward, but it does not necessarily mean that it is still fulfilling some kind of function for them.
Consequently, if I was a follower of Adam Green, I would respond: 'Your argument is prima facie compelling, but it misses the possibility that Christianity has outlived its purpose. Thus, the yids created Christianity because it served them a function, but today they attack it because they have a different belief system(s) to which they wish to move people towards. Furthermore, for all we know, perhaps the yids also attack it because today's yids are by and large unaware that it is a product of their ancestors' own scheming long ago against the Roman Empire, a history either forgotten or suppressed, and thus mistake it for something authentically of the goyim.'
This preserves your fair observation without necessarily leading to your conclusion, i.e. that Christianity being relentlessly attacked is proof that it is not a sort of 'false opposition'.
One might throw Marxism in as an example of another such 'thick' subversive belief system - a grand narrative of all history that deeply affects economics, politics, and society - that is indubitably 'Jewy' and yiddish (Marx, Bernstein, Kautsky, Trotsky, Lukacs, etc.) to the core, but was abandoned by them because of Stalin's turn towards 'anti-semitism'. Thus countless Marxist yids like Daniel Bell, Louis Samuel Feuer, Nathan Glaser, and Seymour Martin Lipset all switched from Marxism to become the 'neo-conservatives'.
The 'Holocaustianity' you allude to is of course a 'thin' version of such subversive belief systems, thin in the sense that it is modular and could be bolted on to almost any political culture, ideology, or system. It can clearly be viewed from a functionalist perspective as serving an anti-nationalist, globalizing function for the yids. What does 'Never Again' mean? It is to never again turn against the yids, to view the yids as a permanent feature of life that must never be excluded or eradicated. Holocaustianity does to the atheist what Pentecostal, dispensationalist Christianity does to the Christian: it makes him feel it is somehow 'wrong' to oppose the yids on anything at all.
And you would be wrong. Adam argues that the Jews who attack Christianity are doing it to drive (anti-semitic) people back to Christianity as it is essentially Judaism for gentiles. Also the attacks on Christianity serve as a humiliation ritual.
That's even more bizarre and conspiratorial than I thought he would believe.
If yids attack Christianity to drive the small number of 'anti-semites' back to this 'Judaism for gentiles', how do they ensure that they do not drive far larger numbers of Christians away from this Judaism for gentiles altogether by means of the same arguments? 'Christianity bad' isn't an argument that only works on anti-semites.
The maths don't add up to me. Yes, you contain and neuter anti-semites by shunting them into a false oppositional belief system, but they're so miniscule in number as to be irrelevant. By contrast, if you peddle narratives like 'Christianity is bad' or 'Christianity is anti-Semitic' in order to get anti-semites to greater support it, you also risk losing the much larger number of people who also accept your arguments for why it is bad without being anti-semites, or who find anti-semitism repellant, respectively, who will drift from this Judaism for gentiles to other non-controlled opposition belief systems or atheism.
Furthermore, if the goal really was to simply corral and neuter anti-semites, why not simply argue 'Christianity is based and anti-semitic, so you should support it to oppose yids' rather than 'Christianity is bad, so you should support it because the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. Seems like an inferior, weaker strategy to me. Associating Christianity with the Nazis is a much better way of getting anti-semites on board than simply arguing 'Christianity bad, and don't you know that what we say is bad is what you should say is good?'
Moreover, how does one explain yids like Johnathan Cahn who clearly promote certain types of Christianity whilst the others are attacking it? So some yids attack Christianity to drive anti-semites to it whilst other yids simultaneously promote Christianity (Pentecostal, dispensationalist versions of it) to create philo-semites? Seems schizophrenic to me, since one side is doing something counter-productive to the other: the likes of Johnathan Cahn are obviously grossly repellant to anti-semites.
I should add that I haven't paid much attention to Adam Green outside of his interviews with the intriguing David Skrbina. (This kind of thing is probably part of why.) Consequently, I apologize if this argument is not of the kind that Green or his supporters would make (although it makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than the claim that some yids attack Christianity to corral and neuter anti-semites whilst others like Johnathan Cahn simultaneously [and counter-productively, insofar as this specific goal is concerned] promote Christianity in a way that will drive anti-semites far, far away from Christianity).
Why would Christians be driven away from Christianity because of ridicule? Jehoves Witnesses and Mormons are being ridiculed in a far more extreme manner for ages now and their numbers aren't dwindling.
If actual anti-semites were irrelevant they wouldn't be fighting them so fanatically to neutralize their influence.
Why do some Jews promote forever wars on behalf of Israel while others attack Israel fanatically because of it?
Because right-wing Jews drag European civilization into the war with the Arab world while left-wing Jews import the Arab "refugees" into European civilization by the millions.
Look at Norman Finkelstein. He has been fanatically rallying against Israel for decades. You might believe he is on the side of European civilization. And then he drops his mask and suddenly laments the fact that the right becomes "obsessed" with Israel.
https://x.com/KeithWoodsYT/status/2059026262539006088
Jews are quite literally schizophrenic.
Jews need antisemitism to force racial cohesion. Without racial cohesion Jews will truly assimilate into their host nations and disappear as a people. Antisemitism is the very foundation of Judaism. Without it it can't survive.
You have plenty of anti-semites on this very board who believe Christianity is the answer to the Jewish question. Despite the fact that Christianity has been the dominant religion in the European world for almost two millennia.
Jews aren't a hivemind. There's only one issue that they universally agree on and that is destroying (Amalek) European civilization.
Totally ignoring the fact that Rome existed as a Christian empire from 306AD to 1453.
If it was even just a tiny bit remotely true that there is a world wide Jewish conspiracy then Jews would simply remain in the shadows and use their influence to keep control and prosper instead of openly and gleefully antagonizing everyone.
Islam is Christianity for Arabs. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all part of the same.
All of them do. The only exception is Hezbollah. Obviously Iran and the Houthis too but you can't really call them Israels neighbors. And their opposition to Israel isn't actually religious in nature.
When Europe was staunchly Christian Judaism still wasn't persecuted like Pagans or heretical Christians were. The Church never tried to wipe out Judaism.
Why would there have a need to make 2 different religions? Haivng one is easier to control. Furthermore, Islam teaches that all non-Islam (including jews) are enemies who should be destroyed. If the goal of jews is to use religions to make themselves above all others, that seems highly counter-productive.
Come on lol, country of Israel is constantly at wars with everyone around them.
What's the most likely scenario?
Jews modified our history, because they have control over most if not all big institutions, to hide what our ancestors did to them.
Jews developed out of nowhere Christianism, creating a big division among themselves, with people up in arms because they made profits out of everything, and knowing they would have to, simultaneously, make it world-wide, but also always try to keep it under control
Because racial differences are real and the driving factor behind everything. Christianity is tailored to Europeans. Islam to Arabs.
Islam wants to convert the entire world just as Christianity does.
No. Homogeneity is dangerous to Jews. That's why the promote diversity.
Who? Hezbollah? Hezbollah isn't a country. Hamas? Hamas isn't a country either and is part of their territory.
Syria hasn't fired a shot at Israel for half an entirety and now is controlled by an ISIS guy who bends over backwards for Israel. Neither Egypt nor Jordan have been hostile to Israel for ages. Lebanon is on the brink of a civil war because their government is more concerned with trying to neutralize Hezbollah on behalf of Israel than defending their people against Israel slaughtering them.
Saudi Arabia does Israels bidding, so does Qatar. UAE is doing everything in its power to please Israel. Yemen for the most part is controlled by Saudi Arabia. Turkey is one of Israels most important trade partners. Kuwait and Oman are pretty much irrelevant and both controlled by the US. Iraq is still pretty much incapable of doing shit.
So who is left? Iran. Literally the only nation that takes a stand against Israel.
Christianity was developed as a theological weapon against the Roman empire.
The same Jews who came up with the holocaust? They would "hide" atrocities against them despite the fact that they're still whining about Rome kicking their asses two millennia ago?
You can't be serious.
what
Never underestimate the retarding influence of chutzpah.
That was literally the law of all Christian nations for centuries. It only changed after the new psyop that cannot be questioned stared after WWII. So your attempted rebuttal actually reinforces the argument you were trying to counter.
I'm talking taught by jews themselves. Where did jews (the ones who reject Jesus, otherwise the others would be Christians) try to enforce Christianity? Nowhere. Did jews go out of their way to make Asian countries Christians? Or Africa? Or even Europe? No they didn't. So claiming this is a jew psyop, when jews did nothing at all to popularize Christianity, and in fact, do everything to suppress it, is just plain stupid.
The law was for Catholicism, not Christianism. There's a difference, and it's an important one. Protestants were originally excluded, because they didn't abide to the Catholics' laws (where most are completely non-Biblical).
You think Christianty was enforced up until WW2? What about the rise of atheism in the 19th Century?
All of the first Christians were racial Jews. Jesus was a racial Jew. Paul was a racial Jew. Christianity was exported to Europe by these very Jews.
kek. they got them with slaves and usury.
fucking fantasy lore.
you're doing jew work for them.
Nah, if you promote Christianity, you're doing jews work for them.
Yea, we all understood your position already. You're just going to repeat it when challenged? No wonder you have difficulty approaching faith. You can't even be honest with yourself.
I just repeated what you said brah. Do you have a problem with yourself?
People who revel in the stagnating realm of moral relativity were never a threat to begin with; they have never been able to develop and maintain any kind of cohesive civilisation to push humanity forward.
I can see the idea here, i'm just not completely sold on it. I've seen an opinion that original christianity that was pushed on the romans was quite jewish and subversive and then things got out of hand for the heebs because europeans started merging christianity and paganism. The protestant movement then was used as a wedge to split the christians further and then 20th century was the final nail in the coffin. I don't really see the logic here because if christianity was a subversive tool from the start, then why bother eradicating it? And if it was a failed experiment then what about islam?
My old username was RaceCreatesCulture for a reason. Jews created Christianity and used it to subvert Rome but Whites made it their own. Which meant for centuries, the way Christianity became shaped came from White people not jews because Whites took control of it. The Romans handled the subversion as best they could. They created the Catholic Church to take control of Christianity then allowed it to finish it's subversion but entirely under Rome's control. For centuries, Whites kept the true understanding of Christianity under check which is why only priests could teach it and read it while the peasants couldn't. We're taught religion was used by the establishment to control us because of this lack of understanding and segment between priests and peasantry but actually, originally, it was done to protect the peasants from Christianity. For centuries, White people shaped Christianity to suit their genetics, hence the RCC. Protestants removed this shaping by ignoring all Catholic interpretation to literally interpret the Bible (and a Bible where the old testament is entirely judaised). Jews love evangelicals and all the Christians that fully interpret the Bible exactly/literally. The "old Christianity" that everyone here clings onto is a Christianity shaped for White people's interests without literally interpretating the Bible. It's never coming back because it was just an eventually delay of where we're at now. Any new religion for White people must not be Christian anymore.
That first opinion is an interesting one. It isn't implausible because Western Christianity by the time of Descartes was essentially Aristotelianized Catholicism whilst Eastern Christianity was essentially Platonized Orthodoxy. Any kind of pure Christianity was already long gone by that time.
Thus the yid looks at these syntheses of Christianity with pre-Christian Greco-Roman philosophy and starts panicking because it no longer performs the full functionality that it once performed anymore.
That is certainly one way to reconcile the problem, raised further up in this comment section, of why Christianity is no longer a state religion if it serves a function for the yids. If it serves a function for them, why don't they continue to push it as a state religion? The answer in this scenario would be: 'It served a function for the yids, but all of these accretions from the goyim have transformed it into something that no longer serves them. Thus, they pushed it at its start but want to eradicate it - that is, the versions that they view as hopelessly corrupted by accretions - now.'
Theologically, Islam makes more sense where it differs from Christianity - no God-man; no binary or trinity; and has a scripture that reads as though it contains far less contradictions and general oddities, one which should be read as correcting rather than replacing the presumably erroneous Old and New Testaments (hence some Muslims referring to the Qu'ran as the Final Testament).
Just to take the first two examples that come to mind: Firstly, in the Bible, where did Aaron die? At the top of a mountain (Numbers) or in a village (Deuteronomy)?
Secondly, if Moses wrote Deuteronomy, as is traditionally believed, who wrote in it that Moses died at the age of 120? Unless he foresaw his own death, he obviously didn't write that. And who wrote earlier in Deuteronomy that, since the time of Moses, 'no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses'? Unless Moses could see the future, this is either a piece of self-aggrandizement or somebody else wrote it, ergo, again, the claim that Moses wrote Deuteronomy suffers from two problems.
Islam also lacks those arguably subversive statements that anti-Christian White nationalists like to copy and paste whenever they argue with Christian White nationalists. Just yesterday I saw someone post:
[Matthew 5:44] But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.
It is easy to see why master moralists see words like 'love your enemies' and 'pray for those who persecute you' as subversive content. Indeed, if such words truly do not reflect the way that God has intended man to live, then all of the allure behind these words immediately dissipates: they are simply wicked, self-destructive, pathological lies, part of the most successful subversion of all time, appealing most of all to the most cowardly, most weak degenerates by passing off their cowardly weakness as the true Will of God.
The conclusion I have held these past few years since beginning to verse myself on religion is that, whether or not Adam Green and friends are right about Christianity, Islam lacks the same roots; that is, it serves no real function to the yids, despite the odd rabbi here and there casting upon it the same aspersions they do Christianity. Intriguingly, Islam has no counterpart to the Pentecostal, dispensationalist Christianity that is egregiously suspicious when viewed from a functionalist perspective: the yids are, very obviously, the greatest beneficiaries of this religion spreading rapidly across Africa and Latin America, since it transforms anyone who wants Jesus to return into a defender of the State of Israel.
Personally, I don't think these internet rabbis that Adam Green and friends like to post know much about the subject matter - they simply act as though they do because that's their profession - we need more proof that Christianity and Islam are simply yiddish 'psychological operations' than some smug rabbi saying the quiet part out loud because he believes that his audience is comprised only of yids who will be in awe of his supposed 'knowledge'.
One might say, for instance, that if Christianity was already successfully fulfilling a subversive function for the yids, what even would be the point in coming up with additional false religions? They would be effectively redundant. An obvious response might be that they need the goyim divided into multiple false opposition belief systems so that they will fight each other, but history shows that Christians have fought Christians and Muslims have fought Muslims much more than Christians have fought Muslims, ergo, only one system is actually needed to keep the goyim fighting amongst themselves.
Indeed, why not dismiss the obscure Sabianism/Mandaeism as another yiddish 'psychological operation' predating Islam, especially when, in line with Judaism, it declares Jesus a false prophet? Wouldn't that make more sense for yids to promote than Islam? If the yids have the power to propagate such false religions, why not push Sabianism on the goyim? Indeed, wouldn't that make more sense to promote even than Christianity, so that the goyim are all hating Jesus as a false prophet like they do, unlike the Christians and Muslims that revere him to this day?
IMO, White people will only survive when we throw Christianity and all Hebrew religions in the trash where they belong. We can do so much better without being weighed down by subversive jewish religions.
Any religion going forward must be grounded in the material world not just spiritual and must promote master morality not slave morality while promoting glory in this life as the greatest of all accomplishments and glory is derived entirely based upon one's actions in the material world.
Literally all "pagan" X spammer accounts are jeets.
Why the quotes? They are pagan.
India, Japan, the Himalayan states and random African countries are the only majority pagan countries I can think of.
Literally all Christian spammer accounts are low class Whites that should just get a garden and stop partaking in society already.
So you don't unite along religious lines, or ethnic lines, how are you going to be useful, again?
Or are you one of the badass Citizen Vigilantes who's going to murder judges and drive BMWs?
I unite among noble lines which is highly tied to ethnicity. Only about 20% of White people are worthwhile, the rest are goyim as the Jews describe. I'll support them but they are peasants and will never be anything more.
He's just here to drive wedges between different groups of Whites like a good little golem.
Every White nation being subverted by Jeets, groids, and Muslims are doing exactly what you say, and it has resulted in the ensuing erasure of Whites (i.e., Sweden, Germany, France, U.K., etc.).
By throwing away Christian values, it invites in the moral degradation of rootless materialism and hedonism.
China is doing this right now, and is imploding at a rapid rate because rootless morality anchored onto materialism means you have no reason to sacrifice, no reason to lay roots, and no reason to build outside of what you can gain for yourself. So marriage is collapsing, middle class is collapsing, and it's having a cascading effect on their broader society. That is what life without spiritual ascension looks like -- a race to the bottom of material gain.
China is collapsing because their government is retarded. There is a huge surplus of men due to they one child policy. It has created similar hypergamy as seen in the West. Additionally they don't know how to write effective economic policy. Their young adults have to work harder to get less than what their parents had and they see that is a shit deal.
It all boils down to economics. Machines have been replacing us for decades and causing jobs, real jobs, to dwindle.
I think you're missing an interesting comparison point. Western countries essentially had "one child policy" (and in more recent decades "no child policy") for so long that we're dying out and being replaced and the only reason china hasn't suffered that was (maybe) because they went with maoism instead of pure judaism (meaning they got western shekels, western factories and tech but decided against immigration. at least i think so, i haven't researched this in depth) and in recent times their policies became unsustainable/untenable to the world order so they are finally pushing to get rid of their population (perhaps after MJ12 discovered poo golems?). Chinese men and western men i think have essentially the same problem. Access to women is gated and the government works against them at every opportunity. Details are different but the overall problem is the same.
I'm glad you brought this up because it actually reinforces my point about rootlessness.
The CCP isn't beholden to anyone but the CCP; it is an amoral coalition of people thinking only about what's best for them within their own lifetimes. This resulted in them adhering to immoral policies (i.e., the one-child policy) to fix something that wasn't a problem to begin with.
They didn't mind killing off one of half the entire future generation of their nation, something that would have been a reprehensible act under a religious nation that adhered to its principles.
The knockon effect of this immoral decision has now had economical implications that has enforced social implications (videlicet of double the male population for the current generation, not enough job growth, shrinking marriage rates, women only seeking top-performing men, top-performing men selectively using women for sex but not marriage or creating families, etc.).
Now the CCP is trying to rapidly course-correct with government-sponsored marriage incentives, state-sponsored programs to encourage child-rearing. But it's all for nought because it's too late. Why?
Because in their lack of foresight they adopted the worst economic traits of feminist-captured Western societies: encouraging women to compete with men, abandon household duties, and pursue lifelong careers in competitive white-collar systems.
You're also correct that a lot of those pointless administrative jobs will be replaced by automotons and AI, making the female-focused workforce redundant.
Basically, the short-term solution to perceived resource shortages was to kill off one-half of their FUTURE population, which backfired immensely. They didn't account for marriage rates rapidly declining, top percentile men becoming philanderers, women becoming even more hypergamous, jobs shrinking, their main population aging out without financial recourse, and AI becoming a main replacement for useless corporate jobs.
Their economic downfall was because they had no moral foundations
Had they instead focused on cultivating jobs for their lower and middle class men -- exponentially reinvesting in farming and agriculture, and prioritising hiring young males for work -- they would have automatically created a sustainable ecosystem for women to WANT to marry young lads. They would have had a balanced population with enough excess women for the average bloke, and they wouldn't have had women competing with the men they sought to marry.
In many ways, the CCP is a prime example of what grounding your economic and social policies around short-term materialistic precepts looks like, and a nice counter-example as to why athiestic foundations cannot build nor sustain a growing, stable civilisaiton.
Christian values are what got us into this mess. Christian values are absolutely terrible. Christian values are THE PROBLEM. All the old Christianity people think was based was people with pagan values stressing them up as Christian. Christianity is the root of all our problems.
Christian values is what allowed you to have a safe enough civilisation to be built up so you could have the modern amenities to type the comment you did. Without those values this technology would not exist.
Furthermore, what got us into this mess is hedonistic pursuits from rootless people. Had those "Old Christian" people maintained Bibilical values we wouldn't even have a need for a forum like this because Liberal Progressivism would not exist in Occidental nations -- it would have been stomped because it represents the satanic principles and morally relative measures fostered by the people who now control the West.
The safety was not a good thing. It made us weak and pathetic.
Nonsense. White children require a safe environment for growing up. They need strife, but not death left and right. In germany in 20s and 30s college kids would spar each other with rapiers without wearing masks. And they considered it fun. I don't think being thrown into a meatgrinder in that age will make stronger generations. Stronger individuals perhaps but generationally it's a catastrophy for the nation.
This sounded good when I was 14, but it's pretty cringe now.
And how's it working for you now that you're 79 and almost dead? Sounds great because now your life has meaning when everything you did before dooming on the internet didn't? News flash, you're still just as meaningless as when you were 14.
You aren't going to get anywhere just pulling a new religion out of your ass. Ask the French.
Christianity is a 2000 year tradition that has guided all the greatest White nations throughout history. And you're going to, what, figure out a better way from your armchair?
read the parts where Christ is speaking.
skip all the succeeding dipshit philosophy in the book.
the same idiots couldn't understand half the parables when delivered to them by the Master Himself.
I don't give a shit about Christ. He's not a good person. He's an idiot.
Says the stranger on the internet with no deeds to his name.
Okay.
You seem really eager to broadcast this about yourself. Have you taken the time to think about why?
Why would I need to justify hating on some dude who never did any good for White people?
For what purpose? So it can just get subverted again in 50 years? lol
The problem with the Churches is that they've become so used to being the orthodox morality of society that they take it for granted. Now we are in a pluralistic society and they try, in vain, to hop on fads like Pride and general materialism. They've abandoned every belief in favour of cynical seat filling.
The original church operated out of people's homes, or even caves, while being persecuted. That was a Church worth following.
Those "old ways" are literally what laid the ground work for us to get here. Doubling down on an ideology of submission and weakness will not make us strong.
There's way more in there than that. Careful when you start quoting religious texts. You'll be putting lots of folks to death.
Lots of folks deserve worse.
Counterpoint: faithful Christian women should exercise authority over woke male beta males.
Vaginotheocracy.