Worshipping a sand god is the ultimate cuck - No white person on the planet can possibly justify being a christcuck

Christ's "sacrifice" is some stupid, dumb sob story and it means absolutely nothing, Christianity is founded on emotional manipulation, we are not better because some stupid carpenter died on a cross like thousands before and after him, the idea that a god would have to allow this to happen damning to Hell all generations born before this "sacrifice", no matter how faithful, is pure retardation. This is my beef with it, Jew god or not.

Said this, if the religion can still piss off the right people, it must have some merit somewhere. Religion in general must have some merit.
But, among religions, few are as retarded and lowly as the stupid cross worship, I'm keeping standards low on purpose here, because atheism is always and every time worse than this.
 
Christ's "sacrifice" is some stupid, dumb sob story and it means absolutely nothing, Christianity is founded on emotional manipulation, we are not better because some stupid carpenter died on a cross like thousands before and after him, the idea that a god would have to allow this to happen damning to Hell all generations born before this "sacrifice", no matter how faithful, is pure retardation. This is my beef with it, Jew god or not.
Actually, those who were faithful before the time of Jesus went to Sheol first, and then to Heaven after Jesus died as I understand it. There are a number of verses that imply the righteous not being sent to Hell before Jesus came: King Saul seeing Samuel's ghost in I Samuel 28 and some of the righteous in the tombs being resurrected in Matthew 27. Paul outright states that Abraham's faith was counted to him as righteousness:

Romans 4:16-25
16That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring—not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. 18In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations, as he had been told, “So shall your offspring be.” 19He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead (since he was about a hundred years old), or when he considered the barrenness of Sarah’s womb. 20No unbelief made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, 21fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. 22That is why his faith was “counted to him as righteousness.” 23But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, 24but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, 25who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.

Faith is the key.
 
Christ's "sacrifice" is some stupid, dumb sob story and it means absolutely nothing, Christianity is founded on emotional manipulation, we are not better because some stupid carpenter died on a cross like thousands before and after him, the idea that a god would have to allow this to happen damning to Hell all generations born before this "sacrifice", no matter how faithful, is pure retardation. This is my beef with it, Jew god or not.

Said this, if the religion can still piss off the right people, it must have some merit somewhere. Religion in general must have some merit.
But, among religions, few are as retarded and lowly as the stupid cross worship, I'm keeping standards low on purpose here, because atheism is always and every time worse than this.
All occutlism and traidtional religions, including paganism, works on blood sacrifice. This is why Satanists to this very day still kill stuff as part of their rituals. The idea that Chrsitanity is based on the blood sacrifice of God in human form to forgive the sins of humanity in a new convenant makes perfect logical sense, and you'd have to be an absolute midwit to not understand it.
 
All occutlism and traidtional religions, including paganism, works on blood sacrifice. This is why Satanists to this very day still kill stuff as part of their rituals. The idea that Chrsitanity is based on the blood sacrifice of God in human form to forgive the sins of humanity in a new convenant makes perfect logical sense, and you'd have to be an absolute midwit to not understand it.
Blood sacrifice is retarded.
 
Blood sacrifice is retarded.
Great argument. I'm not going to take the bait and get into a debate on this, but if you have any understanding of how the spirit world works you should know blood sacrifice is very powerful. This is why most religions in the world practiced it in antiquity and many folk religions still do despite the taboo from PETA types, etc. Jews would also still be doing blood sacrifice if the Romans didn't destroy the Second Temple.
 
Great argument. I'm not going to take the bait and get into a debate on this, but if you have any understanding of how the spirit world works you should know blood sacrifice is very powerful. This is why most religions in the world practiced it in antiquity and many folk religions still do despite the taboo from PETA types, etc. Jews would also still be doing blood sacrifice if the Romans didn't destroy the Second Temple.
What system of belief do you follow?
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: secret watcher
HEY [guys and gals] IT'S ME, YOUR OLD [chum, buddy pal-o-reno] SPAMTON, SPAMTON G. SPAMTON HERE!

I can only say this with sincerity and charitably, but please, repent for all your wrong doings and believe in the Gospels. Your race and nationality are blessings from God Almighty, who gave you a people to love and look after. However, if we fall into the trap of worshiping creation and not creator, we will find ourselves lost. If we aren't searching for Truth (that is, The Truth), then what's the real point of doing anything? Our lives will have no real sense of direction.

Looking for answers in creation alone will not lead us to Truth, but only pieces of it. Christ came as man born of the line of King David, which is true. However, Christ, being God incarnate as man, is more than just a mere mortal of Davidian blood. He could appear to any one of us as a Celtic Warrior, or a Japanese Noble. He is God, and is above typical notions of race and clan. He is the universal man, who was born to save all peoples and races from their self destruction, because He loves us.

The worship of Christ as God is not the destruction or the tampering of any one race, but the uplifting of them. The idols of ancient past are dead stone statues of crude ideas, being worshiped for power, politics and tradition alone. But Christ is more than these things because we know he truly walked the Earth and performed true miracles. The fact His Church still stands today, 2000 years later, is a miracle in and out of itself. If you want what's best for your people, as I do as well, you will learn to love the one who made your people to begin with.

That being said, you are not beyond redemption nor salvation. The words which you have typed are not a death warrant which demand the destruction of your immortal soul. It's never too late to repent. God loved us so much that he willingly suffered for us as a man, and was killed by people who claimed to be His own. No, it was not the Romans who killed Jesus, nor was it the Jews of the Sanhedrin. It was us, all of us, who killed Him, because of the gravity of our sins.

Jesus loves you man, and even if you don't think or feel the same way, that won't change how He feels. You will be in my prayers. God love you.
 
All occutlism and traidtional religions, including paganism, works on blood sacrifice. This is why Satanists to this very day still kill stuff as part of their rituals. The idea that Chrsitanity is based on the blood sacrifice of God in human form to forgive the sins of humanity in a new convenant makes perfect logical sense, and you'd have to be an absolute midwit to not understand it.

Give me a couple of examples for pagan blood sacrifice. Not that I don't believe they were a thing, as far as I know there was a component of human sacrifice (self-immolating gods, otoh? Will have to look that up), I just want to follow through with the comparative religions and see which one "narratively" and "functionally" makes the most sense, because a guy being killed the same way as everyone else has in order to "forgive" sins that, realistically, could have been forgiven even before his sacrifice, makes no sense.
Actually, the whole inclusion of gentiles within a Biblical framework makes no sense, Abraham as the "father of nations" might not mean what too many people think it means. I'm Italian, which means that, from a Biblical standpoint, I'm from Japhet and only God knows which one of his sons, not from Abraham. He fathered many children, not just Isaac, and his children became the neighbours of the Israelites like Edomites, Midianites, North Arabians and so on, this is what being a Father of Nations means. In order to come from Abraham, I would have to be Semitic and a certain kind, which I'm not. There isn't even evidence that a messiah is supposed to be anything else than a Jewish worldly king, none of that kingdom of heaven stuff and I wouldn't follow one either.
"He died for your sins", I never understood that, and I heard this from plenty of midwits as well. Maybe I'm a retard.
 
That would make Christ's crucifixion even more meaningless.
No, it's still necessary. They went to Sheol because Christ hadn't died yet and paid for their sins yet; without the eventual sacrifice of Jesus, they would have been sent to hell. Jesus takes the punishment we would otherwise receive for our sin for us; that is why He had to suffer and die.
 
Other religions aren't necessarily primitive, but they're definitely demonstrably false. Globalism is evil because it's run by weirdos who dance around owls and rape kids
Please demonstrate. I’ll apply the same logic you use to demonstrate the other religions are false to yours too.
 
Please demonstrate. I’ll apply the same logic you use to demonstrate the other religions are false to yours too.
I'd like to see you try.

Their epistemologies don't hold water. To start with, the statement "I know that I can't know anything" is a contradiction. This means that knowledge must be possible.

Only a fully benevolent personal God who creates by choice rather than necessity can justify our own faith in our knowledge faculties. As the history of Western philosophy has shown us, trying to base our epistemology in autonomous reasoning is impossible and has led to the collapse of Western philosophy altogether. This is because we make judgements about what's true based on our logical faculties, senses, awareness etc without first having a justification for why we can trust that those senses aren't lying to us. How do we know that we're not turtles dreaming at the bottom of the ocean (the "I think therefore I am" argument is bad for reasons covered in the paper linked).

The God needs to be a free creator of everything because one of our categories of knowledge is bias/attention, which is organized according to our sense of the relative purpose of things in relation to us. Purpose can only be assigned by a voluntarily creative agent. We also need to know what context we exist in (the "relation to us"). This means that history and where we are at least in some sense must be knowable, and it means that we can also make use of historical evidences.

Most pagan traditions don't even claim to have anything like this, and some don't even think that objective truth even exists at all. Buddhism in particular can get pretty crazy in some schools as far as this goes. The other "monotheistic" faiths rely on Hellenic arguments about absolute divine simplicity which make God's creation necessary rather than voluntary (removing purpose). Early Christianity (and contemporary Orthodoxy) have the essence-energies distinction, which avoids this problem.

The other "Abrahamic" traditions also are very obviously not in continuity with the tradition of ancient Israel, which they would need to be. Only Christianity has any remaining connection to the first temple, since early Churches were/are just the temples but updated in their new fulfilled form. There was a direct continuity before, during, and after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. Rabbinical Judaism didn't take the form we know until after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD (no temple nor connection to the temple), and contemporary Hasidic Judaism takes after the sorceries of guys like Isaac Luria and his interpretation of the Neoplatonism-inspired Kabbalah. It's medieval occultism, not the old tradition. Islam isn't even worth mentioning, being 8th century fanfiction.

Christianity is the only religion which meets all of these criteria. It has all of the necessary metaphysics and epistemology, and also exists as an entity in history.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to see you try.

Their epistemologies don't hold water. To start with, the statement "I know that I can't know anything" is a contradiction. This means that knowledge must be possible.

Only a fully benevolent personal God who creates by choice rather than necessity can justify our own faith in our knowledge faculties. As the history of Western philosophy has shown us, trying to base our epistemology in autonomous reasoning is impossible and has led to the collapse of Western philosophy altogether. This is because we make judgements about what's true based on our logical faculties, senses, awareness etc without first having a justification for why we can trust that those senses aren't lying to us. How do we know that we're not turtles dreaming at the bottom of the ocean (the "I think therefore I am" argument is bad for reasons covered in the paper linked).

The God needs to be a free creator of everything because one of our categories of knowledge is bias/attention, which is organized according to our sense of the relative purpose of things in relation to us. Purpose can only be assigned by a voluntarily creative agent. We also need to know what context we exist in (the "relation to us"). This means that history and where we are at least in some sense must be knowable, and it means that we can also make use of historical evidences.

Most pagan traditions don't even claim to have anything like this, and some don't even think that objective truth even exists at all. Buddhism in particular can get pretty crazy in some schools as far as this goes. The other "monotheistic" faiths rely on Hellenic arguments about absolute divine simplicity which make God's creation necessary rather than voluntary (removing purpose). Early Christianity (and contemporary Orthodoxy) have the essence-energies distinction, which avoids this problem.

The other "Abrahamic" traditions also are very obviously not in continuity with the tradition of ancient Israel, which they would need to be. Only Christianity has any remaining connection to the first temple, since early Churches were/are just the temples but updated in their new fulfilled form. There was a direct continuity before, during, and after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. Rabbinical Judaism didn't take the form we know until after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD (no temple nor connection to the temple), and contemporary Hasidic Judaism takes after the sorceries of guys like Isaac Luria and his interpretation of the Neoplatonism-inspired Kabbalah. It's medieval occultism, not the old tradition. Islam isn't even worth mentioning, being 8th century fanfiction.

Christianity is the only religion which meets all of these criteria. It has all of the necessary metaphysics and epistemology, and also exists as an entity in history.
You're arguing against paganism to an agnostic-atheist to start with. I did read your post but you fail to prove any other religion false outside of your own opinion. Your argument basically boils down to saying the religion you follow agrees with your philosophy, which proves nothing.

Purpose can only be assigned by a voluntarily creative agent. We also need to know what context we exist in (the "relation to us"). This means that history and where we are at least in some sense must be knowable, and it means that we can also make use of historical evidences.
Purpose comes from within. I actually agree with you on this statement because we are the voluntary agents, where I disagree is that any purpose needs to come from external forces such as god.

The other "monotheistic" faiths rely on Hellenic arguments about absolute divine simplicity which make God's creation necessary rather than voluntary (removing purpose). Early Christianity (and contemporary Orthodoxy) have the essence-energies distinction, which avoids this problem.
I just don't understand splitting hairs over the nature of reality when you can't even prove god exists. Show me proof he exists outside of religious texts.

:neckbeard:
 
Back