if you believe in free will
This is a complicated question. One that many smart people still haven't fully solved. Do I believe we have complete autonomy outside of God such that we can act in a manner God does not want us to or doesn't already know we will do? No, I do not. When it comes to God, we do not have free will. We cannot do something unexpected from God's point of view. God already knows exactly what we will do before we do it and he knows exactly how the story of humanity will unfold before it does.
Do we have free will in relation to God? No.
Do we have free will in relation to us? Yes. From our perspective we have choice but only because we aren't God so we don't know what we're going to do before we decide to do it and therefore we believe we have choice; however, this choice is ultimately an illusion from the perspective of God. We evaluate the actions we're going to take by envisioning multiple different actions and then decide on one. We have free will in the sense that we could pick absolutely any option and nothing is stopping us from doing so but God already knows exactly what we're going to pick before we've picked it and God knows the formula to change reality such that we would pick something different if that is what God wanted.
I think many people have the wrong idea about God. God isn't testing you to see if you will be good or evil. Imagine you were an all powerful God that knows everything. Omnipotent. Supreme. Etc... What's the one thing that you would truly be concerned with? It wouldn't be whether some humans you created were good or evil. Good and evil are trivial concepts to you that don't matter. What does matter is NOT KNOWING. The one thing God doesn't have is the ability to not know. God created humanity to try to not know. He gave us "free will" in hopes of us doing something he didn't know we would do. He's not trying to get us to be good or evil, he's trying to get us to surprise him but we can't. God still loves his creations but unfortunately, we are actually incapable of fulfilling our purpose in relation to God. God keeps the world going and changes the parameters all the time in hopes of being surprised though he gave up that hope long ago and now entertains himself with repetitive stories he already has seen a trillion times before. The evil person redeems himself to be good is a redemption story God has done infinite number of times or the good person who is corrupted. We believe we have choice in the matter but we were always going to be that part of the story if that is what we were destined to be.
You may say something like well if you believe that why don't you just go full evil and start killing everyone for sport and raping whomever you want? Why don't I indeed. I'm not doing it. Why aren't I? Shouldn't I? But I don't. Interesting... isn't it. Because I wasn't meant to or I would be.
The concepts of heaven and hell do exist though which is basically God just placing "evil" people/souls with other "evil" people/souls because he knows these evil aligned people are better suited to be with other people like them and "good" aligned people/souls are better suited to be with people like them. God already knows where you're going before you do and when you get there it will be where you were meant to be.
I do believe I am good aligned but maybe I'm wrong. I'm not God so I can't say for certain. Just based on my observation and evaluation of people, that's where I believe I am. From what I know of Mao, Stalin and Hitler? Mao = Evil, Stalin = Unsure, Hitler = Good. But my answer is biased and truthfully, we really don't know enough to pass judgement because what we know about these people is pretty warped given their significance. There's a reason the bible says not to pass judgement and to leave that for God because most people are probably going to get things wrong but we can make a good guess anyhow. Mao was objectively making his people's lives worst and killed a lot of good people to achieve his aims which were not good aims from the perspective of enhancing the people he represented. Stalin to me seems like he may have had good intentions and managed as best he could given the situation he was in. I can't say for certain he was evil. Many of the evil things attributed to Stalin are actually pet projects of other powerful men within the USSR regime not necessarily Stalin himself and I think people overexaggerate his power over the entire USSR, hence why Stalin was such a paranoid man also. Hitler clearly was trying to do what was best for his people and came across resistance from not-so-good of people. Did he make all the best decisions? No, but he wasn't meant to either. Of course everyone's understand of Mao, Stalin and Hitler is pretty biased. You might be better off asking me about less significant and controversial figures that each have billions of pages of writing on them.
Good and evil is another really complicated subject. It is not easily understood. Good and evil exists within everything. The same action can be both good and evil depending on circumstance, which is what makes good and evil so complicated. If I had to reduce good and evil down to anything, I think good people promote equity and bad people promote inequity. I don't mean a modern leftist take on equity either. Equity just means getting what you deserve (fairness). Much of what people say equity today is actually inequity. That is one aspect, furthermore I think good people understand and accept their nature and promote values/beliefs that are inline with their nature while evil people either don't know their nature or accept their nature so they promote values/beliefs that are in conflict with their nature. At a high-level, if you were a vacuum cleaner then an evil vacuum cleaner would be one that blows dust everywhere and then demands to be paid half your income. A good vacuum cleaner would be one that sucks up dust everywhere and then demands to be paid a price you both agree to be fair given the supply/demand for the work of a vacuum cleaner.
In my opinion it is wrong to suggest power corrupts but rather it's just that the people currently with power are corrupt. If power corrupts then God is the most corrupt force in existence. Those who wield power can be good or evil, like all things. It's just currently evil wields more power than good which doesn't always have to be the case. I think historically, this has changes from time-to-time from era-to-era. It is true to say that good people in power won't last forever even if those good people never become corrupted themselves, they eventually die and things change.
Your Blood Meridian looks like a good suggestion. I'll probably actually read this, thanks.
How do you propose I live like a warlord? I'm not stupid, as you've pointed out. You haven't "got me" just because I'm not living the way I want to live. Imagine you asked a Lion who was caged at the zoo why he wasn't living like a Lion in wild and then you accused that Lion of not walking the talk. Of course he isn't living like a wild Lion because he's in a cage in a zoo not out in the wild. I am forced to adapt to my circumstances and these circumstances do not allow me to live like a warlord. Only one man has lived exactly like Genghis Khan in the history of humanity, so to suggest I can just go out and become more Genghis Khan than Genghis Khan himself is absurd and it is also absurd to then suggest I am somehow inconsistent in my overall being ("but I feel that it's a big tell if you aren't actually living as if what you believe is true") simply because I am not living that way when it doesn't make sense to live that way given the current situation I find myself in.
Obviously, much of what I've spoken too is idealistic not realistic. I've said as much: " An ideal civilization for me would..."
Keep in mind that what I say I am fine with isn't necessarily what I would do myself. You are correct in that assertion. I do not believe I must solidify a set of morals for myself that everyone else must also follow. Each person is different. One man may in fact go around and enslave children, while another man wouldn't. I don't have to take a position that because I wouldn't do it that all other men should also not do it and it's wrong for them to do it simply because I don't want them to do it because I would never do it myself. I just don't subscribe to these sorts of moral restrictions on the actions I may or may not take. It's all circumstantial but I don't believe any action I did take would be evil but rather would be good because I know myself and I know I am a good person. Though, my actions may in fact significantly differ from what others think is good or evil.
If I had total freedom to be Genghis Khan, I wouldn't just murder people for sport and I wouldn't treat women with 0 humanity. Do you think Genghis Khan was also devoid of any emotion and total evil psychopath? Hardly. That has never been the case of our reality since the dawn of time.
Since your seem fascinated by how am I, let me say that I guarantee if I ran society, the outcome for you and your people would be better than it is now and you would like a society run by me more than you like the current society if you had an open mind to it and weren't stuck on keeping to how things were before I took over. You can gauge whether something is good or bad based on the outcome. You can measure the results. Right now in society, we have results. You can measure things like happiness, loneliness, quality of life, economic prosperity, freedom, feelings of accomplishment, feelings of being needed, love, passion, alienation, breakups, tiredness, frustration and everything that one measures of a society and its people that is tangible. If there are objectively good things, I believe that at the core we both would agree on what those things are. Not a value like good means women have equality to men, that's not what I mean but rather good in how people feel about the lives they're living at the core. A value like the aforementioned is supposed to exist to then provide value to people because without it things are supposed to be worse than with it and this measure of better or worse has nothing to do with the value in itself but how such a value impacts everyone else in the society. I would propose that a society run the way I wanted to run things would be better for you and I than the current society or even a society run by you. Lastly, I could make my society adhere exactly to Christianity also if I wanted to. That's the beauty of Christianity and the ugly of it.
Answering your last question is actually more difficult than you think because how would I know for certain Christianity was in fact true? The answer to that changes absolutely everything. What about Christianity is in fact true that isn't already true now? Presuming it's all true then nothing changes. It isn't the truth of Christianity that matters to me but the result of Christianity. I would change nothing about the way I am living now regardless of the truth of Christianity. It isn't truth that concerns me but results. If one wants me to live "like a Christian" in the way in which you or another Christian defines it then provide for me value to live that way. If not living like a Christian provides more value to me than living like a Christian why would I live like a Christian? What am I sacrifice for? To go to heaven? I don't care. You say I care. Make me care. Words will never convince me of anything. The only thing that will convince me is tangible results and/or feelings. The thing about Christianity is that many of its adherents are people I would never want to be like. I don't like the way they act nor do I enjoy their company. Want me to be Christian then show me that Christians are people that I do like and want to act like. They aren't and until then I wouldn't want to live in such a Christian society.
Keep in mind that your idea of a Christian has differed in different periods of time. The Holy Roman Empire and the Knights Templar were much different Christians than modern evangelicals.
At the end of the day, I do not care about the lore of any worldview. Flat Earth, Christianity, Islam, Greek Gods/Goddesses, Evil Jews, this that or the other thing. I only care about how the values/beliefs of these things impact me directly in a tangible and concrete manner. Christianity can be useful if the words of the religion have strength enough to change people in a manner that would benefit me but the way in which Christianity often changes modern people is in a manner I happen to dislike not like. I find the men in Christianity and Christians overall to be a little too weak/soft for me and I find the women to be too unattractive to me (in personality not looks). In this sense, I don't believe Christianity holds any value for me because I wouldn't want to be Christian based on what I've observed of Christians nor do I want other people to be Christian based on what I've observed the people who are Christians in being.
I definitely believe in God though but I don't believe that means going to church and living my life the way another human wants me to. I am already living exactly how God wants me to live. I am me, the way God intended and I don't need to change me at all. My purpose is to serve God's will and that is what I am doing by living like me. If God wanted me to be a warlord, then I'd be one. Do I enjoy my life now? Not particularly but most people in life have never liked their life because my life isn't my own. I am living out the life God chose for me. I have no real say in how I am to live. The life I want is unattainable so I just live until I die and in that sense my life is already over so I'm just playing the game in the credits now. I can hypothesize how things could be better, discuss things, fantasize, imagine, care and not care about happenings to maybe hope or despair but I can't truly change anything for the better for me because anything I want is entirely unattainable even if I fully embraced your Christianity, it still wouldn't provide for me what I wanted, it would just be another iteration of some form of coping while I wait until I die.
If you want me to accept different views than my own or different ways of life than my own, the formula is simple. Provide something tangible to me in exchange for me changing my beliefs and/or way of life. That is all.
I never took my ideas from any one source and none of the ones you listed. My ideas are my own through my own experience and a multitude of other people's ideas but even without their ideas, my thoughts are based on my nature. This is who I am.
I have read the Bible. I have several copies. A NASB for casual reading, a KJV for a Protestant lean, an e-text of an original DR so I can get a solid Catholic lean and an Orthodox for the other books as well as a direct Septuagint translation. The Bible is not a very good book. The Qur'an is actually of higher quality, which I have also read. I've also read the main texts surrounding Hinduism (Upanishads/Bhagavad Gita). At one point I gave modern religions a chance but none of them did anything for me. The OT and NT clearly don't jive very well and many people try to find their own way to make it work. Even the parts about Jesus aren't very consistent. Paul sounds like he took a bunch of mushrooms before he wrote some of his parts. Absolutely nothing in the Bible is useful to me. You can get a glimpse of how terrible the Bible is in the fact that there's thousands of different takes on it made into sects and even among people of the same sect, everyone has their own take. When you have to read between the lines on absolutely everything written, that's not a good thing. Good to have read it though to understand where men like yourself and others are coming from. There's a lot of cultural nuances in our society from the Bible. Did you know the reason bankruptcies only last on your credit for 7 years is because that's what God commanded in the Bible? Lots of cool little things like that which make the bible worth reading. As for teaching one how to live? It's a worthless book.
Yes, I did try to be Christian one time and found it worthless. Christianity cannot get me what I want out of life. Very good job on zeroing in on exactly what I want. If I were a better Genghis Khan than Genghis Khan himself then my life would be complete. I would be happy and I would die happy and that's all that would matter. There is no purpose to life except to live until you die.
I'm quite empathetic. I am doing what's best for men, women and society. You need to check your head if you think the current situation is good because if you think that then you are sick in the head and are a perfect example of why Christians are not a good people.
We have opposing views and that's fine. You're a X and I'm a Y. What you think works for you does not work for me. No amount of thinking will change my views. The more I've thought the more my views have become this. The only thing that will change my views is a different environment which I can then evaluate my views through to consider them wrong. The more knowledge I gain and wisdom I gain of society, the more my views cement this way not less. Obviously if I had kids I wouldn't want a foreigner raping them so I would defend myself. If I lose I lose but I wouldn't want to lose but just because I don't want to lose doesn't mean I don't agree with the action. That is competition and it is good. Do you think if I had the view that raping kids was bad that it would stop a foreigner from raping my children because I was logically consistent and universal in my beliefs with 0 in group preference? Ask how that worked out for the British people and the Muslims raping their kids there. What I think doesn't change others. Why would I willingly restrict myself for no gain? My enemies don't care that I am nice and empathetic. These beliefs of yours mean nothing.
Nothing will likely change my views because they are objectively right for the outcome I desire in life. I can accept your views if I am bought off with a good enough reality to advocate your views. Since my reality currently is not good enough for me and we live in a society that more closely resembles your views I have 0 choice but to reject them since your views haven't worked enough for me.
If you want me to reject my views then you need to show me how your views are better than mine with tangible results not words. I say the result of your society isn't good enough for me so why would I accept your views? Give me what I want in a society that adheres to your views and then I will accept them.
Well, the idea that women should have autonomy such that they could be raped is not a sound concept for me. An ideal civilization for me would recognize male supremacy such that all women are merely properly of a man or free game for any man. If she has no owner, then she has every right to prevent a man from forcing himself on her but if she can't stop the man, it's not rape. If a man violates a woman who belongs to another man then that's essentially vandalism and punishable but not rape because the woman has no right to consent in an ideal civilization.
When it comes to people of a different group, I don't care what happens to them. I would think it would be decent incentive to conquer foreign lands if one were to allow men to take the women of foreigners and do whatever they want with them. Sounds good to me.
As for raping kids. Personally, I am quite against it. Kids likely belong to their father or guardian and violating them is violating another man's property. Kids in foreign lands of foreign people? I don't care. That's up to the individual in question. Personally, I wouldn't force myself sexually on kids so young but I would take kids for slaves including sex slaves to train for when they're older.
Hate speech is whatever anyone wants it to be.
Handshake accounts get discriminated by mods forcing the necessity to premake.
Humans are good and evil aligned even if God is not. And if we don't use good and evil because everyone wants to be good rather than evil we can say humans essentially have two alignments, A and B.
From the perspective of clown world they are doing everything in their interests. There are no problems. Call them alignment A. I am aligned B. Of course all individuals have a spectrum and aren't wholly A or B. From my perspective, I wouldn't want to promote A if I had the power to promote anything but I have to adapt as a B to an A world. What the hypothetical ideal for me is, will be different than the hypothetical ideal is of any other individual.
I am fine with rape depending on the context. I don't think rape is always bad. I don't even think most instances we may consider to be rape today to be in fact rape. Things aren't so objective to me. Most of what people consider to be civilization is just chains to me.
Imagine being the officials who sign off on this kind of stuff. Forget just Justin, there's compliant minions below him that need to be dealt with as well.
New accounts are discriminated against by mods because of all the prajeet spammers so my mistake is I made a new account then immediately made a topic to discuss the merits of Paganism vs. Christianity and the ConPro mods figured I was just a forum slider trying to cause division in the community when I really just wanted to have the discussion for my own sake. Back then I was a little more on the fence and still trying to figure out what I thought was best.
I'm not against sacrifice but I reject false sacrifices. Many wars are in fact examples of false sacrifices. Some men convince other men of a duty toward their civilization so these men throw their lives away in sacrifice while the men who took no significant risk benefit from it. A sacrifice to risk your life away should be rooted in some sort of gain. For example, say you join the military but raping and pillaging the enemy is allowed as well as taking on slaves and war brides. You may risk your life and sacrifice for your community but you're also doing so for your own benefit as well as the benefit of others. This is fair. To ask for pure altruistic sacrifice is often a game of manipulation. Those who take no risk manipulate others using the value of altruism for their own benefit. It's not a good thing. If it is truly good then the risk will have appropriate potential payouts in the end.
When it's not your life you're risking, you may sacrifice your time and effort to help a friend move. You expect nothing in return directly but you still expect to enhance your friendship such that perhaps another time you need a favor your friend will be there even if it's not expected. It's still not purely altruistic. I am all for paying things forward and expecting nothing in return to build good karma for example but that ultimately is a choice up to the individual and there's no wrong or right choice. If someone doesn't want to act in that regard then so be it. There isn't necessarily a right or wrong choice here but when people try to manipulate others for their own gain by asking others to sacrifice while they themselves sacrifice nothing then that's a negative, always and people should be cognizant of falling into other people's games. What did the American soldier who fought against the Germans in WWII gain? They were misled and risked everything to benefit their enemies. Don't fall for "duty" or altruism to the benefit of others rather than to your own benefit.
Lastly, I believe in God but I don't think God is inherently good or evil. I think God is True Neutral and our perceptions of what is good or bad don't pertain to God. People dying is not something God cares about at all.
Canada is still filthy rich for the work they do. When you look at actual hours spent doing actual work to income, Canada is one of the laziest people given the earnings they earn. Guys in Fort McMurray literally play candy crush all day and make $150k/yr. We could axe half the public sector and not even notice, most people do absolutely nothing. Americans actually do work much harder than Canadians for their earnings. Ironically, the reason everything is so expensive in Canada is because no one does real work here and expects to get paid.
Outside of the highly radicalized Whites, most White people would find far more in common with their fellow Whites than most other groups.
I actually hate a lot of the WNs that seem to reject and hate all Whites that don't adhere to their theory and then the WNs go off and play gardener with their wife while not partaking in the community at all.
White people need to get out in their own communities and start practicing in-group bias and favoritism. Only hang out and hire other White people. Reject all non-Whites.
Yeah, I posted a slightly neutral sounding comment and I got attacked for not being right wing enough. I'm like uhhhh what the fuck happened to Reddit. Canada broke it.
As for your short piece. It's a story. In the end believing it or not is irrelevant.
I don't reject spiritualism at all, I just reject ideas that use the spiritual to justify manipulation of the material. I think the spiritual and material are linked. One affects the other so to speak so if you act a slave in the material, you've enslaved yourself spiritually also.
I reject notions where people use a spiritual framework that none of us truly understand to justify taking actions that are not beneficial to one in the material but beneficial to others and justify it because the spiritual will be better in a manner you can't perceive.
I will give you an example. A man with a gun comes to your house and points it at you. He says give me all your stuff or I'll kill you. You have 1 hour to comply. You ask the internet for advice. Someone on the internet says you should give him what he asks for because material possessions don't matter, all that matters is the spiritual and if you try to defend yourself you could cause harm to the person but you should love your enemies because if you harm the guy, you could harm your spirit. Another guy says take your gun and defend your property by killing the guy. Assuming there's no other risks involved and you will kill the guy and successfully defend your property that to me is the correct choice. Your spirit will be better off for you taking this route also. The first choice is manipulation. It's something the guy who pointed the gun at you would tell you so he faces no challenge in the material world himself. Any ideas that are similar to the first choice are bad ideas that I reject. All good ideas for your spirit will benefit you in the material as well.
I could be the same guy or not. I've been around since the beginning of the .win network on many different accounts.
The bans happen because mods change over time. What was allowed on TheDonald 5 years ago, isn't allowed today. What was allowed on ConPro isn't allowed today. Overtime, it seems mods on all communities are trying to keep discussion and exchange of ideas to a minimum.
I am not concerned about what is and isn't the truth because all ideas can be analyzed based on concrete outcomes of those ideas and I stick to what is concrete. I reject all ideas where the realization of the idea (positive outcome) is something intangible (spiritual, heaven, after death, future generations, etc...). The reward has to be now. Anything that is promised that can't be tangibly realized is done to lead people astray, that is the truth. It's pure manipulation. Any truth that sticks to this premise can be evaluated. If White people are the real Israelites, what does that do for you or I that is tangible? So what good is the idea? Can you convince people to follow you in order to create a better outcome using that idea? Then maybe the idea has value. If the only value in the idea is that because Whites are the real Israelites, you should just pray to God and God will fix everything eventually but not in your lifetime. That's an idea being used to enslave and manipulate you so it's a bad idea regardless of truth. The truth is that the actual truth behind any idea will benefit me and if it doesn't then it's in my interest to reject the truth anyway so that is what I will do. Ideas are there to serve my interests otherwise, I will reject them regardless of truth.
No, I think our leaders have aptly proven that truth is irrelevant and stands 0 chance at winning on its own. Power is what wins and with enough power you can craft any truth you want. Ideas can be used to manipulate others in order to increase one's power but any idea works for that regardless of the truth of the idea or not and that's ultimately all that matters is how useful then the idea is in providing power to your aims. When you're evaluating whether to believe an idea or not you shouldn't ask if the idea is true or not, you should ask how will the idea benefit me? If the idea can benefit you then it being true is irrelevant. If you ask whether the idea is true or not then you may believe a "true" idea that doesn't benefit you. If the idea doesn't benefit you why would you believe it regardless of truth? What good does believing a true idea do for you if the idea doesn't benefit you, so why believe it whether it's true or not?
It is truly that simple.
Irrelevant theory. Ideas like these are weapons. My thoughts are if the theory serves a purpose to the interest of White people then great if not then scrap it. The actual truth is entirely irrelevant. Just make up whatever theory you want to convince people to promote a good outcome for you and your people. All that matters is how useful the theory is and frankly it doesn't seem all that useful to me. Just controversial and requires a lot of history revision. We'd be better off to drop Christianity entirely and start fresh imo.
As for pro natalism. I think quality of offspring is more important than quantity of offspring. There's not much more to say than that. I can't stand White people who promote White Women worship by subjugating men to outright slavery at the behest of the State and/or women for the sake of having children for the sake of children themselves with no thought out into the quality of these children. However, I think people outright against children in any regard are equally as out to lunch. Have children but make sure the circumstances for children are such that any children you have will lead to a future positive impact on society as a whole not a detrimental one. I think at a civilization level resources should not be diverted toward people who have children. We should lower taxes to as close to 0% as possible, abolish all social programs, abolish child support, abolish alimony, make asset separation equal to what you bring in you get out and give men 100% default custody in separations. Ironically this would lead to an increase in quality children which is all that matters. Immigration should be put to 0 and outright banned.
I have like 50+ accounts. Generally, because I get banned in one of the 4 forums that I use. This account got banned on TheDonald for "trolling". I can't remember what I posted but I find it funny TheDonald bans for trolling when that was literally their whole thing in 2015-2016: trolling leftists with memes. Wait no that was another account. This one got banned on ConPro for suggesting Christianity wasn't a good religion for White people.
It's like you don't know why KIA2 was made in the first place lmfao.
I feel Western culture is too "celebrity worship" for it to truly take off. Maybe in like 50 years.
This is why government funded social programs are terrible.
Anyone who has eyes on the finances of these social programs knows that none of the people supposedly trying to help everyone want solutions. They just keep finding and creating more problems out of thin air so they can argue for more money from the government.
Agreed. I am for abortions for these exact reasons.
Good people don't get abortions anyway so who cares what the others do? What's that saying... Never interfere with an enemy when he's in the process of destroying himself? Have an abortion. Great. Good for you. Don't procreate! Awesome!