First of all, “Thank you” to the many readers who have shared this series. It is by far the most read material I have produced and I’ve had some really interesting feedback.
It’s been a long series and I want to wrap this up. Not once and for all, but just for a while, as there is still plenty I would like to share regarding this topic — we still have to discuss the anti-christ, the mark of the beast, etc. — but I am hoping to come back to it after a month or so. There are a lot of things emerging in the world that we need to keep an eye on. For one, it would be remiss of me to not do a piece on sodomites during sodomite awareness month.
Here is a list of links to the posts in this series:
Part I — Introduction / Brief Sketch of Personal History
Part II — Wandering into and out of Judaism
Part III — Reflections on Jews / Judaism and Their Relationship with the Rest of the World
Part IV — Bloody Jewish Anti-Christianism
Part V — Jewry / Judaism as the Great Harlot of the Apocalypse
At the beginning of Part I, I said that I would address some of the primary concerns and objections that many thoughtful people from nationalist/identitarian backgrounds have regarding Christianity. I confess that so far I have done little to address these concerns head-on. Instead, I have begun to address them in a round-about way. I have labored to show that, regardless of what the mainstream contemporary churches believe in, Christianity and Judaism, strictly as religions, are irreconcilable foes. The fact that the hatchet seems to have been buried and these two old foes seem to be newly made friends testifies to nothing other than the salesmanship of the Jews and the gullibility of the goyim. In fact, I defy you to produce a single book that knows the Jews better than the Holy Bible and I defy you to produce a single book that more grimly declares their condemnation and ultimate annihilation. “Pastor” John Hagee doesn’t define Christianity, the words of Christ do.
When Christianity and the Bible were the bedrock of European civilization, there was true flourishing. Now that this old foundation is largely rejected, there is horrible decay. Not only decay, but certain doom. I have never faced a civilizational collapse outside of this present one, but it sure seems to me that a people in such a predicament cannot even begin to respond to it without a vision — and not just a man-made one either, but one from Heaven. Further, even with a God-given vision, men still need the many assistances of God to find their way through to the goal which God has for them. Yes, the many forms of protest against the hideous modern world is good. It’s a good start. The attempts at bonding with like-minded people and reclaiming a semblance of community is also good. The practical work being done to counteract the is likewise good. But if all we have is the activity of men working, however bravely, independently of God the value of all these things is ultimately nothing.
Our forefathers accepted Christianity at a time when men were much more virile and spiritual and keen-minded than nearly all of the best of us are today. Nowadays, however, we have some folks who evidently see themselves as knowing paganism better than our forefathers did — and not only that, but knowing Christianity better than the Church Fathers. The fact is, in the clash between paganism and Christianity, paganism lost. Our forefathers lived in a world which, at least in the opinion of all of my readers, was vastly superior to our present one: a world of masculine men, of modest and feminine women, a world wherein honor was everything, a world of physical labor, a world whose hardships tended to refine the character. Those ancestors of ours turned from the Odins and the Peruns and the what-have-you’s and accepted Christ. The result was not “pathological altruism”. The result was not pacifism and the feminization of men. The result was not Christian Zionism. Quite the contrary, the result was the retaining of all of the old virtues along with the addition of new ones. The Christian European had absolutely no problem defending himself, defending his family, and defending his honor. The Christian European had no religion-based obstacles to seeking his due justice or to owning honestly acquired property. Unlike modern man, the Christian European man was the head of his household and Christian Europeans were no more pacifist than their pagan forebears. Jan Sobieski, after slaughtering thousands of Turks in Vienna, could in all good conscience declare, “Veni, vidi, Deus vicit“—”I came, I saw, God conquered”.
The fact that European nations are today mortifying themselves at the feet of the Turks and Arabs and Negro hordes cannot at all be pinned on Christianity. It is plain as day that the European nations most zealously engaged in this suicide are exactly the same ones who saw themselves as too enlightened for the old fables of Christianity. The problem is not Christianity. The problem is modernity. Modernity is a very perilous set of circumstances. It is difficult enough for the truly committed and learned Christian to deal with the radical changes which have taken place in the last 150 years. Such a person — such a nation of persons — will find enough stumbling and hardship. But when you have people — nations even — which do not merely stumble through the difficult terrain of modernism, but wholeheartedly embrace it and even add to it, it is sure to be their undoing.
This civilizational suicide never originated in Christianity. It originated in the various counter-Christian movements which arose in the dawn of modernity, such as marxism, feminism, universal suffrage, gay rights, etc. Practically all of the creators of these movements hated the Church and were opposed by the Church. The misappropriation of Christian ethical maxims by the radicals was simply a way of deflecting Tradition’s criticism of their deeds, words, and ideas. It was never sincere. It has always been shallow and self-serving. You can see this happening right now with the homo-movement: These sodomite agitators hate Christianity and often have a record of lashing out against the faith in the most vile of ways, yet they feel no hesitation in tossing some Bible verse about “love” or “compassion” at their critics in an attempt to silence the criticism. Generally, it is women and weak men fall for this trick. Then, once enough women and weak men have fallen for it, it starts to have an influence on the less traditional churches. If such an attitude becomes solidified enough in the less traditional churches, it starts to stir things up even in the more traditional ones.
Now it is 2019 and the world is in a such a state of degeneracy that serious thinkers have described it as the possibility that we are actually in hell.
Andrew Anglin then goes on to enumerate some of the evidence in favor of this theory: (1) Evil, monstrous nonhuman beings (which appear to be demonic in nature) flooding in and raping and murdering us on a mass scale. (2) Rule by the killers of Christ. (3) Widescale belief in nonsensical gibberish by the general population. (4) Celebration of homosexuality. (5) Government assisting homosexuals to kidnap and rape children. (6) Trannies. (7) Tranny children encouraged by their parents as a celebration of moral superiority. (8) Being ruled over by women. (9) Mass addiction to poisonous drugs. (10) Irredeemable, bloodsucking whores. (11) Incelism. (12) Mass obesity. (13) The persecution of righteousness. (14) History’s most heroic men are defiled as the incarnation of evil. (15) Mass abortion. (16) Selling the bodies of dead babies for medical experiments. (17) Pornography. (18) Destruction of the natural world. (19) The name and image of Christ cursed everywhere we look. (19) Total death of masculinity among general population. (20) A hatred of beauty and a celebration of ugliness.
Like Mr Anglin, I come down with the answer that, No, we are not in hell. Hell will actually be much, much worse — that’s what the Word of God says. Hell is truly a reality into which all who enter are powerless but to abandon all hope. Nonetheless, what we have now is certainly a foretaste of hell. We are in this state because our societies have, for about 3-4 generations now, abandoned the truth and hope that is in Christ. Remember the parable of the swept house (Matthew 12:38-15, Luke 11:16-36), there are no spiritual vacuums — either our selves and our homes are filled with the Holy Spirit or they are filled with demonic spirits. There’s is no middle ground. The Enlightenment and the consequent Industrial Revolution threw God out of our hearts and out of our societies. We sought new morals from new prophets and we preferred the marvels of industry over the mysteries of God. Now we are reaping the bitter and maddening consequences. Christ foretold all of this. He asked whether there would be any faith left in the world when the Son of Man returns (Luke 18:6-8). He said that false prophets would come and increase the wickedness of the world, with the result being that the love of many would grow cold (Matthew 24:11,12). Do not be one of those who fail to endure till the end (Matthew 24:13)! Don’t let it be you. Don’t let it be your family. Don’t let it be your nation.
Although there are a few maxims of Christ that have become horribly mangled in our present time, I will address a major one that has led to many troubles. I have in mind here the emphasis on Christian love, or mercy, which has become a stumbling block for many on our side as well as a deadly weapon in the hands of the enemy and his useful idiots.
We’ve all seen it, “love” being used as the impetus for literally every form of the current civilizational suicide. Clearly, it does not matter how costly, how destructive, how contrary to all sound thinking and Christian tradition; this so called “love” is apparently the supreme virtue which must upend all others. The rush from judgement which is so characteristic of our society is apparently demanded by Christian “love”. The accommodation of our society to an ever-growing swamp of deviancy, sexual and otherwise, is apparently demanded by Christian “love”. The throwing open of the gates of our [once] White countries to the unlimited rapefugee hordes of the Third World, is apparently demanded by Christian “love”. The massive work of Western NGO’s in the Third World, the massive expenditure of Western money (from private and state funds), as well as the expenditure of blood in the form of the “peace-keeping” missions of Western powers, is apparently demanded by Christian “love”. And as if that were a small thing, the reasonable resistance to all this folly and self-harm must also be crushed, even with physical violence, as apparently demanded by so-called Christian “love”.
Again, I remind the reader that these self-destructive ideologies and policies originally emerged as rebellions against a 17-century-old Christian civilization and as they grew, they co-opted Christian language and ethics (severed from the context of actual Christianity) so as to silence some of the critics and recruit naive people from the mainstream. All of this stuff is the fruits of the Enlightenment. The whole gist of the Enlightenment was the delusion that humans could do morality better than God and His Church. Shortly after the onset of the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution comes around and — inevitably — led to the increase of inferior humans. For some time now we have had a population explosion of intellectually inferior people living absurdly comfortable lives and looking for problems to fix so as to take the edge off their post-religion first-world angst. Of course these people are going to glom onto some NGO mission to Africa, all the better if it has “Jesus” window dressing on it so as to provide the “feel” of spirituality without the demands of traditional discipleship! As of this while their own mother — their native countries and civilization — is dying. This Enlightenment-Industrial pathology has become so colossal it has influenced the very Christianity it initially rebelled against (some churches more, some churches less).
By the way, our pagan-revivalist friends must admit this to be the case, i.e., that we have a problem of modernism infecting Christianity like a foreign virus and not a problem of Christianity infecting the world with self-destructive error. All that one must do to verify this is to subject contemporary paganism to the same “as-is” type of examination which the pagans are fond of using on Christianity. The findings are mighty bad for them! Proportionally speaking, contemporary pagans are far, far more likely to be engulfed in a malaise of “anti-judgment” than Christians of Catholic, Orthodox, or older Protestant faiths are. They are far more likely to be accepting of homosexuality and other sexual deviancy. They are also huge into race-mixing, “global-citizenry”, and the rest of the antifa grab-bag of social anti-norms. An Alt-Right man is going to get kicked out of far more pagan communities than Catholic or Orthodox ones. Guaranteed.
Now, let’s get back to Christian love. The first thing we need to establish is that God is anti-decay. (See my articles about the awesome Power of Hate.) God created us for the purpose of theosis/divinization. Our life is given to us as an opportunity to achieve a union with God. Our individual lives are given to us so that we will seek literal sainthood — nothing less. Our societies, likewise, are supposed to represent this: holy people building holy nations is literally our calling. True Christian Love does not leave a trail of innocent victims and degeneracy in it’s wake (Luke 6:9, Matthew 5:13). True Christian love does not contribute to entropy in the world. On the contrary, Christian Love is a way of taking action in the world whereby more of God’s will to create and uplift is manifest than could be manifest through bare justice alone. Justice, of course is absolutely necessary to a godly world. It is the, after all, the rule and foundation upon which all things rest — it’s just that there are special opportunities in which foregoing the justice due to you might present a credible opportunity for the godly up-building of your life that is superior to only insisting on your due.
It is very important to keep in mind that a Christian is called to turn his [own] cheek. Nowhere does it say to turn your neighbor’s cheek. (Likewise, nowhere does it say to feed the poor, etc., from your neighbors’ pantry.) Furthermore, a strike to the cheek is clearly an illustration of a personal slight, not a dangerous physical assault. Robbers (and rapefugees) do not assail their victims by means of cheek slappings. Sweden and similarly deranged Western countries are not suffering from a nasty bout of personal slights from black/brown immigrants; they are suffering from literal terrorist attacks, massively increased incidents of rape, murder, armed robberies, and the annihilation of their race and culture. There is nothing about about getting marauded and conquered that is of the nature of personal insults or petty disputes. (In fact, in a certain ontological sense, one need not consider his assailants “enemies” anymore than a cancer patient need consider cancer his “enemy” — it is simply something that must be eradicated in order to live.)
To use Sweden as a further example: it is true that all Swedish Christian’s have an obligation to love, but to love whom? Clearly, if Swedish Christians love their sons and daughters and if they love their ancestors who bequeathed to them a unique nation, culture, and identity, they MUST eradicate the brown cancer that is afflicting them by all means necessary. It is simply the Christian thing to do. Period. The vast majority of parables that Christ Himself has given us pertaining to the relationship between God and Man use the imagery of paternal love for one’s own children or children’s duty to their parents. Additionally, there is repeated use of the image of the good man who wisely guards his house, there is the repeated praise of virginity (which certainly doesn’t harmonize with a laissez faire attitude towards moslem perverts), and there is even the very stern obligation to not greet or welcome into your home people who oppose Christianity (II John 1:9-11).
Swedish people who are literally destroying their nation, destroying their children and dishonoring their ancestors are in no way Christian. There is simply no pre-modern tenet of Christianity that they could point to in order to justify their actions. Indeed, as I have said before, Christianity existed for many centuries where it had no problem at all spilling the blood of evil people, including moslem invaders. For more than one and a half millennia Christianity understood that the most gracious thing that one could possibly do in many cases is to administer undiluted justice.
Nonetheless, you may be pressed by some fool who just doesn’t get it. They may insist that they are following some make-believe injunction to “love everybody”. This is simply impossible. Logically, you cannot love “everybody”. You can only love some. This is true not only psychologically, but also practically. The fool’s so-called love of moslem invaders is a grievous act of anti-love towards me and millions of others. We are not required to let ourselves, our children, our communities, our way of life, our cultural and ethnic legacy be destroyed just to gratify somebody’s addiction to virtue signalling (something Jesus constantly rebuked, by the way). And how does my so-called “Christian” fellow subordinate my well-being below that of a person newly arrived from a distant continent? How is the African’s blood redder than mine? It’s not. For me, nobody’s blood is redder than that of my own kin, and his is exactly as Nature and God would have it. If Africans loved their own even half as much as suicidal Westerners loved Africans, Africa would instantly find relief from many woes. The most genuine love that could be offered to the Third World would be to compel them to stay well at home and to take care of their own. I mean that with all sincerity.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for people and nations sending help (financial and otherwise) to the other side of the world if some natural disaster hits (if said people/nations can afford it). But this idea that Christianity is supposed to be some sort of suicide pact is perverse. Traditional Christianity never stood for this.
Cardinal Wyszyński is exactly right, by the way. Whatever value there may be in loving distant strangers (and by distant, I mean ethnically, racially, and culturally as well as geographically) it is dwarfed by the value of faithfully loving your own.
“This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.“ (John 15:12,13)
Think carefully about that verse. FRIENDS. It is the laying down of one’s life for friends which shows the greatest love according to Christ.
No doubt, there is something to loving your “enemy” — i.e., a person who has affronted you, a person with whom you have an ongoing personal dispute, a “cheek slapper”, etc. — it may be one of the most powerful things you can do. Or it may not. It depends on the character of the person and the circumstances. If your spouse has “slapped your cheek”, if your sibling has wronged you, if your friend has failed you, you really should ponder whether you have a unique opportunity to heal a relationship by responding with magnanimity. If it seems like a magnanimous response to a wrong could elevate your piece of the social world better than strict justice, then, yes, go for it. But keep in mind that if you truly care for people, sometimes strict justice is more beneficial for them than mercy. It must also be remembered that the “love your enemy” line is a critique by Jesus of a prevailing Jewish attitude. Thus, “you have heard it said . . . hate your enemy” — which shows that we are talking about a well-known oral tradition. Most non-Jews are not aware that Jews have a long-standing tradition of something called sinat chinam — whereby members of one their factions will denigrate and abuse members of another faction, feeling it their religious duty to do so. This is well documented in Jewish sources to have existed since ancient times and even to have played a large role in earning divine punishments, such as the destruction of the 2nd Temple.
Christ was fond of teaching the “Greatest Commandment” as a two-fold requirement to love God above all and to love one’s neighbor as one’s self. Get that? Your neighbor. Nowhere does Christ teach to set your sights on the most distant stranger and love them as yourself. The Greek for neighbor in this verse, plesion, literally means neighbor or friend and derives from the word for “near” — much the same way that neighbor derives from “neigh” which is old English for “near”. Not only that, in the Vulgate, Jerome uses “proximus” — again, somebody “close to you”. The translations of the Bible which I can read with fluency — Polish, Russian, and German — render the word bliźni, ближний, and nächster, all renderings of plesion which highlight the personal closeness that one person has to another. In fact, in the case of the two Slavic languages, this is the word from which the word for “twin” is built! Seemingly all of the scholars who gave us biblical literacy were in agreement on this.
Some people may wonder why God would be so insistent on us loving our neighbors, our “near-ones”. “Isn’t it easy to love your near-ones?” No. This is the muddled thinking of fools. Your near-ones are actually the hardest ones to love. It’s hard to not take them for granted. It’s much easier to pour out shallow “love” or show-boat “love” on people from Africa or other visible charity cases you have little meaningful bond with. That’s one important part of what is going in the once great, once Christian, Western countries which are lately very vocal about how much they “love” the Third World and how much they “righteously” despise their own men.
Loving your brother is difficult. The first murder in the biblical narrative is Cain’s slaying of Able. There is an enormous lesson here. The heart of Cain is a heart that is very much alive in our time and it must be converted if we are to survive.
“If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.” (I John 4:20-21)
Gee, it’s seems as if God insists that we love our kinsmen and calls us liars if we don’t!