Christianity is mutually exclusive with ethno nationalism.
This applies even if you are one of those WE WUZ THE TRIBE OF ISRAEL types.
In their dogma, emphasis is placed on the primacy of the soul which is separate from and superior to the body. Your soul is 'you' so to speak.
Through the "salvation of soul", the Christian will always allow a racial stranger to bypass conventional and instinctive racial tribal collectivism.
Even Christians who assert the Bible forbids race mixing (it doesn't lol) to remain relevant in an environment where the HBD debate is already won by the evil Nazis will still assert a member of another race who throws their faith in God is their equal on a spiritual level.
This always leads to people forgoing the genetic boundaries in practice.
The body is where the objective evidence of genetic superiority resides and that is why Christians wish to distance themselves from it.
Christianity is mutually exclusive with ethno nationalism
Christianity has a history of 2000 years. During this time it has represented and opposed every ideology that existed during this time. Anyone who thinks Christianity is an unitary piece of ideology is unironically a retard.
Basically, you can find two basic schools of thought inside it: the life hating cucks, and the vindicative vitalistics. One hates life and opposes instincts, the other recognize it as a perfect creation of god and justifies the world and its crude reality with joviality.
Instead you should be asking: why is Christianity the most hated religion by the pozzed left?
I wonder if these anti-Christian threads can get even more pathetic than this.
I hate Christianity and Christians.
Why are people getting polar opposite messages from the same exact book?
It's hated because white people molded it to reflect the values their biology imposes on them so it has become a symbol for white morality that originates in the body.
Morality comes from biology.
This is why largely Christian africa is still a shithole.
I dont hate them, I see them as victims of the inertia of history and, frankly, trauma based mind control
You don't hate Christians. You merely look down on them. Got it.
Get your head out of your ass, kid.
No? Not what I said at all. Work on your reading comprehension, it's rather poor.
And yes even an exalted philosopher like Nietzsche would recognize it. His hatred for Christianity was basically hate for protestantism ethics and Counter-Reformation catholicism. He acknowledged the Christianity that produced the protestant reformation as ubermensch ideology (On the genealogy of morality)
Current catholicism has been subverted though, listed to what archbishop Viganò has to say about this
religious bait, yawn
news
>'Pleasure based sexual relations' part of proposed sex ed program for grades 6 through 12 in Rhode Island — and parents, politicians sound off
polnewscentral.com
archive.md
>‘Disturbing’ state of high-traffic American bridges revealed
polnewscentral.com
archive.md
>Covid-19: South Africa creates copy of Moderna vaccine
polnewscentral.com
archive.md
>As Russia menaces Ukraine, Crimea's Tatars turn to Turkey
polnewscentral.com
archive.is
Why does Christianity always seem to get "subverted"?
Why can't anybody "subvert" Judaism?
The answer is one is a racial religion and one is universalist.
It's hated because white people molded it to reflect the values their biology imposes on them so it has become a symbol for white morality that originates in the body.
You're right. Just compare medieval Christianism to what it's today. I can recommend to read the 'The Song of my Cid.'
It's not coincidence that propaganda promotes weakness in all its forms, and sanctificate the means to obtain it: veganism, obesity, antiableism. They want us docile and weak
What other conclusion can be drawn from you thinking that Christians are somehow incapable of reaching their own fundamental philosophical and theological conclusions about the nature of human reality? You excuse it all with embarrassing psychologising language like "trauma based mind control", which I am absolutely certain that you are even incapable of defining. Likewise, how are you not a "victim" of modernity? Do you care to explain this?
I'm not sure what is so exalted about Nietzsche. Or even how the Counter-Reformation was so bad for the Church, Viganò certainly wouldn't share this opinion with you. Nietzsche's entire thesis is that there is no such thing as objective value, and God does not work within such a system.
>Even Christians who assert the Bible forbids race mixing (it doesn't lol)
It does. The laws given to Israel were to be a model for all nations. Didn't read the rest of your retarded shit.
The concept of (white) man being inherently flawed and doomed to do evil without the guidance of an exterior guiding philosophy (written by Jews) is a trauma.
Same with teaching small children they are responsible for the Holohoax or niggers living in squalor.
I too am a victim but I have been able to rationalize my way out of the scarcity mindset (scarcity of moral certainty) imposed by Christian thinking.
Maybe a more correct word is 'degeneration', instead of subversion.
But yes I agree with you with the need to ditch universalism for our own good. Anyway that's also the reason way Christianity (=Europe back then) dominated the entire world for centuries while Jews didn't own a land (their more fervent wish) for two millennia
99.9999% of Christians disagree with you and since there is no objective truth in a million word long book of selectively edited subjective metaphors, this is the truth of Christianity.
The fuck is this about "white" or "Jews"? Man is flawed. God picked flawed men to participate in His divine plan of salvation. Are you pretending to be obtuse or are you just genuinely ignorant or irrationally angry about something that clearly you do not understand?
literally pic rel.
Learn how a real debate works.
And yet Christians score higher in ethnocentrism than non-christians.
It's almost like Christianity isn't the cause of your woes, but rather the widespread abandoning of it.
Perhaps read the literature available on a subject before doing your best DK impression.
>I'm not sure what is so exalted about Nietzsche. Or even how the Counter-Reformation was so bad for the Church, Viganò certainly wouldn't share this opinion with you. Nietzsche's entire thesis is that there is no such thing as objective value, and God does not work within such a system.
Nietzsche was exalted in its hate against Christianism. He indeed considered the Borgias as examples of ubermensch, and their particular use of Christianity as ubermensch ethos (you can find it in the book On the genealogy of morality)
Viganò publishes materials about his opinions about the current Pope and the current political positions of the church.
>But yes I agree with you with the need to ditch universalism for our own good.
So morality is uncertain? God's properties can be whatever? Is there no objective value to virtue or what have you? Explain to me what you mean by universalism, because maybe I'm reading this wrong. I have no idea what you mean by this given the fact that Christianity by definition demands universality.
Pretending you are the body is delusional.
Rejecting the soul is rejecting history.
Rejecting the idea that the humble pursuit of truth is above any specific petty temporal issue means your petty issues will frame your attempts to approach truth and lead you away from it.
Please point the page where nieztsche exalts protestantism. As far as I know Christianity in general was just a psyop made up by paul to destroy the roman empire with slave morality, and christ himself was a slave for letting himself to get killed.
>And yet Christians score higher in ethnocentrism than non-christians.
This is the inertia of history. Correlation isn't causation.
Jews are the cause of my woes and Christianity is a barrier to resisting Jewish onslaught.
IDK who "DK" is.
Truth can be proven. Biology dictating morality can be proven.
No, they don't. Most Christians don't even know what ethnocentrism is. The only thing they score higher is low iq boomer cuckservatism.
Brown teenagers on Pol are the ones always making religion threads though
>He indeed considered the Borgias as examples of ubermensch
How unfortunate.
>Viganò publishes materials about his opinions about the current Pope and the current political positions of the church.
I know Viganò and I have conflicted feelings about him. But I do know that he cherishes the Counter-Reformation as a golden age in the Church. And that he repudiates the shallowness of subjectivism über alles philosophers like Nietzsche. As for the current Pope not being a great political actor, it is what it is. It doesn't debunk the dogmas or the institutional legitimacy of the Church. Not all Popes can be John Paul II, only a very tiny minority of them. Even Benedict XVI supremely failed to demonstrate ethnic solidarity for the peoples of Germany.
Wtf I'm a Christian now
Jk you have no argument