The Problem with Christianity; an Exclusive Reliance on Scare Tactics

I recently asked Christians, mostly as a rhetorical device, to give up their Christianity, and work on recruiting fundamentalists who are no longer allowed to be anti-gay, to join us.

Christianity is a Mind-Worm, a Brain Slug, that has infected us for 2000 years.

Why do I call it a Brain Slug? Because it is all based on scare tactics. It does not offer anything verifiable. If you do no follow Jesus, you’ll go to hell. If you offend Christians, you’ll lose my support and your mindweapon will go out with a whimper. (implying that his support was essential to the effort, which it may or may not be, but there’s no evidence that it is). Without Jesus, you can’t win. Without Jesus, pride goeth before a fall. There’s no atheists in foxholes. (fear of mortality).

Also, I have seen how people use Christianity to actually forgive themselves their own sins, constantly. So Christianity actually makes a lot of people less moral. It creates a rhetorical hiding place for psychopaths and sociopaths and predators. White parents who love Jesus so much will say, “I don’t care if my son/daughter marries a black, as long as he/she loves Jesus.” I’ve heard this with my own ears. Jesus talk is real real easy. It’s an easy con, and white Christians are easy targets.

If you want to defend Christianity, on this blog, you have to use something besides unverifiable scare tactics. You have to show where Christianity makes life better and makes people better and results in superior life outcomes that have nothing to do with fear of mortality or the afterlife.

You have to do something besides scold me, in other words.

Also, no Bible quoting is allowed. No Bible quoting, and no finger wagging type talk, “If you don’t X then you won’t y! No Jesus no Victory!”

And please, no threats to walk out the door, to abandon the effort, to go away. If you want to threaten to leave, just leave. If your comment is a threat to go elsewhere, save your keystrokes and just go.

I want to see if the Christians have anything besides threats to leave, prophecies of defeat, and other scare tactics. The ball is in your court.


About mindweapon

The Fundamental Theorem of this Blog: We can defeat ZOG and take over the state just by having enough smart people in our group to overwhelm the Democracy-Idiocracy of 2040.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

113 Responses to The Problem with Christianity; an Exclusive Reliance on Scare Tactics

  1. PA says:

    This post is unusual for you in its tone. You normally do amused mastery, and very well at that. To the extent that modern Christians are race-liberal it’s because their leadership — including the Vatican — made lethal compromizes with liberalism decades ago.

    • mindweapon says:

      I realized that Christianity at it’s core was based on scare tactics. Based on superstition. Therefore, when people learn causation, they refuse scare tactics. They might not close their mind totally to any kind of theism, but they will turn their back on a theism that relies solely on scare tactics.

      Every Christian I have ever dealt with has used only scare tactics and threats. That’s how you smell a con, but I’m nto saying the Christians themselves know they are perpetuating a con. They just don’t realize that you can’t built an advocacy of anything solely based on scare tactics.

      Think about it; it’s an insult to your intelligence to have someone tell you so aggressively that you will lose or fail or fall with no evidence backing it up, just a tautology; “Because Jesus!”

      Because Jesus does not cut it any more. It worked for 2k years. No more.

      • Svigor says:

        Sounds like you’re arguing with too many Baptists and Evangelicals, i.e., low-rent Christianity for low brows. E.g., Baptists are into the fire and brimstone thing; intelligent believers left that behind a long time ago because no one with an intellectual bent can believe in the goodness of a God who casts his creations into an eternal fire for misdeeds accumulated in the very short lives we’re afforded; the punishment is infinitely disproportionate to the crime for any list of offenses one produces.

        I’m an agnostic, but I’m also a secular Christian. A few quick reasons to support (our friendly version of) Christianity:

        1.) Our enemies fucking hate it. Especially our most steadfast enemies, the Jews. Jews fucking despise Christianity. This strongly suggests the threat (or potential threat) Christianity poses to liberals in general, and Jews in particular.

        2.) The ethnocentric (Jewish) roots of Christianity. The OT is brazenly racist. In the NT Jesus avers, “not a jot or a tittle” of the “old law” will pass away; thus, the NT is an amendment, but it obviates none of the OT. Now, there is some dancing to be done to convert Jewish-particularist ethno-religion into a workable universalist particularism (sounds like an oxymoron, but it isn’t; everyone has the right to ethnocentrism) platform, but that’s what theology is for.

        3.) Group cohesion: this is probably a big part of why Jews despise Christianity; it’s a profoundly strong source of group cohesion. People die for things bigger than themselves. People become fanatics and zealots and martyrs for things bigger than themselves. God tops the list of things bigger than ourselves.

        4) The OT says believers must choose their rulers from among their own people; bye-bye, Obama. Bye-bye, Jewish elite.

        5) I can go on at extensive length about scripture that forms a religious basis for ethnocentrism.

      • Svigor says:

        6.) The Rock of Scripture; Scripture doesn’t change. Liberals fucking hate anything solid like this that they can’t change. Leaving aside the matter of interpretation, emphasis, and theology, which can and do change (thus allowing the perversions of Christianity we see today), this source of consistency is a real thorn in the side of the mindbenders.

      • Svigor says:

        7.) Spiritual rewards: confession & prayer work. Prayer lets the believer get his mind right with God/Universe. That affords one a hell of a lot of personal/spiritual power.

  2. john says:

    For better or worse it’s part of who we are. It did a good job of defending us against the tribe for centuries. You can’t fight something with nothing. Just because it’s crap now doesn’t mean it will continue to be so. Keep an open mind about the Church – it could be our salvation.

    • mindweapon says:

      I think it made us more vulnerable to the Tribe, because their book was our book. the Old Testament is part of Christianity, and the New Testament is from a Jewish sect.

      We could have done something else had the Roman empire not fallen to a Jewish sect.

      • Matt Strictland says:

        I’ve said the same thing many a time, Christianity is a Jewish splinter sect and if there is going to be that big conflict of interest between The Tribe and Our Folk (and this is not mandatory, the ball is in their court) we ought to seriously consider not being part of their memeplex.

        More importantly, the old Christ Killer meme that was used as a prophylactic against Jewish assimilation fails on logic grounds, Christ had to die for there to even be Christianity and as such while “the Jews” killed him, there was no other way it could have gone down. Its weak logic

        Now understand I am nominally Christian of a Heathenish sort. I always joke our family religion is something like

        “Well the Chief went White Christ and I go baptized. Praise Thor that that stuff with the water is over, Ha! I thought he was trying to dedicate me to Ran there for a while.”

        The hypothetical wife “You do know the Chief expects you to tithe and go to that church once in a while, right?”

        “Bah, I’ll be at the sacred grove trying to figure that all out. No more raiding monasteries now I guess, sigh…”

        Our problem in the West is we don’t really have a faith of our own for us. Most of the newer ones, Wicca and New Age stuff have all the spiritual foundation of a wet paper towel. They are also derived from Kabbala and Eastern Religions which doesn’t help either.

        Neo Druidism isn’t folkist enough, its universal and liberal and thats the last thing we need right now.

        We could reconstruct the Celtic faith, The Ancient World of the Celts by
        Peter Berresford Ellis lays out the case that its a sort of Hinduism though, probably practiced by the original White Aryans (from India) who brought it to Ireland back in the dawn time. Its not bad but it requires work to fit.

        We could also take up Helenic Paganism again but it got Universalized by the Romans and is lost.

        Last up is Asatru/Wodanism and the whole Northways. That is our stuff and its only lightly touched by Christianity. Its ripe for Folkism and has many powerful symbols as well. Though new it has resonance and a foundation.

        It lacks however one critical thing, people who are powerful and work to being wealthy. This is a critical component of any faith success, Constantine and the converted kings kicked off Christianity to a great deal.

        This problem is something the AFA (Asatru Folk Assembly) is well aware of (I’ve seen YouTube videos on it) but as many of the followers are basically right wing hippies and as such are still stuck in the “money is the root of all evil” vibe .

        If we Whites are going to do better we have to make money, respect being wealthy and generous and use that money to White ends . Get rich, build that Hof and promulgate our ways.

        Don’t get me wrong, Christianity has its appeal especially to the downtrodden. Its not a bad faith and has a good foundation. I’m Christian , its just that I don’t think its right anymore for most Whites and that “wrongness” at this time (the past is just that past) is why so many of us are eschewing it.

      • Svigor says:

        That’s like saying Christianity afforded power to heretics. Possibly true in a sense, but not particularly meaningful.

        The Western Empire collapsed under its own weight. It’s time was up, and it died.

      • boulder says:

        The talmud worshippers have no use for the old testament – many of them have acknowleged this ON THE PUBLIC RECORD, ITS NO SECRET. The OT is useful to us because it records lots of irksome details about what the YKW’s did back in BC times, stuff like sacrificing their children to false gods etc etc – but many ykw’s are utterly indifferent to it. The filthy talmud is everything.

      • oogenhand says:

        Talmud study is limited to men. So, in effect, Talmudism is patrilinear.

      • Svigor says:

        Boulder, indeed, faux Christians (i.e., libtard-Christians) ignore the OT. The proper response is to out them as the heretics they are.

      • mindweapon says:

        So attack them for corrupting your religion, not me for attacking them.

      • oogenhand says:

        Emphasize that Judaism added the Talmud.

  3. PA says:

    There are two points to keep in mind with regards to Christianity in particular and with religion in general:

    – Any religion or ideology adopted by a people will take the forms and ideals innate to the people themselves. The Mosaic religions came from the land of sand, sun, and scorpions. They are harsh but orderly desert religions. The Europeans, particularly northern Euros, are a people of retreating ice ages, dark forests and seasonal rhythms. When we adopted Christianity, we conformed it to our temperament, not vice-versa.

    – Why the rage against hell? All religions have a system of punishments and rewards. It’s faggy Unitarians who did away with hell. That aside, the Bible speaks very little of hell — I’d argue it’s a rewards-based theology, with its promise of eternal life.

    – The Byzantine Empire did very well as a Christian state 500 years after the fall of Rome. Had teh Crusades gone well, maybe it would have lasted much longer.

    – Much is said about Christinaity being a Jewish imposition. If so, why such commitment of Jewish Leftists to eradicate Christianity and its symbols from Western nations’ public life?

    – I am not saying that WNs must be Christian. I am saying that Christianity is not the enemy.

    • mindweapon says:

      Liberalism is the modern Christianity. The Christians surrendered to it willingly.

      The problem is not a “rage against Hell.” I propose an alternative Hell – the Hell of Unreason, and that one is here and now.

      The problem is threatening “Hell” when you don’t know what the “Hell” you are talking about. Christians make very strong assertions and threats with nothing verifiably real to back up these assertions and threats.

    • conchobar14 says:

      if i am mistaken the crusading frankish and norman warriors sacked the capital of the byzantines, in typical pagan germanic style. they laid waste to the opulent and decadent faggotry of jesus worshipping greco-armenian pedaristic sodomites. the byzantines actually lost it all themselves, mostly due to the internal power struggles of the elites. the principle battle leading to the turkish control of asia minor, was manzikert, where the byzantine emperor was captured by the turkish dogs with his bodyguard of aryan vikings. he was captured not due to his pagan bodyguard, who fought on till the last man, dying proudly unlike the armenians and christian turks, who converted to islam and joined alp arslan, but because his brother departed the battlefield with all the heavy cavalry at the key point of the battle.

      • Shamas says:

        There is NOTHING ..”Liberal” about modern Christianity .. it is and continues to be mankind’s only Contagious Mental Illness… spread orally and feeds upon ignorance… denial and fear…. Modern christians have slipped into the archaic mindset of the witch hunts and the inquisitions…. it’s a worthless bain on man’s existence and has yet to yeild any kind of Scientific data towards the ends of truth.

  4. Hey, MW:

    I think you are confusing Christianity with what I call “Christ-Insanity.” I define “Christ-Insanity” as allowing the enemies of Christ to redefine him and His beliefs and to interpret His actions and words to promote their own agenda.

    I think the biggest problem with Christianity itself is that we no longer KNOW what Christianity was meant to be from jump street. I believe the Scofield Bible Concordance propelling the dispensationalist, Christian Zionist Rapture Bunny movement is only the most recent evidence of tampering with this religion. I strongly suspect that Saul of Tarsus hijacked Christianity and even instigated the execution of Jesus brother, the Apostle James to do it. For circumstantial evidence, I cite “the Apostle Paul”‘s antics in the Book of Acts not to mention how almost all his teachings have him swearing that he is not lying.

    I think Christianity’s biggest flaw is that, unlike the Torah and the Quran, it doesn’t have any secret teachings (respectively the Talmud and the Sunnah) that give its adherents an out to pursue their own self-interests.

    I think the biggest tragedy is that Ben Klassen (who was well-versed in Biblical studies as a Mennonite) chose to leave Christianity to start his Creativity Movement rather than author a Concordance or secret teaching that incorporated his Creativity beliefs. If he had, he would have probably been much more successful not to mention put the teeth, muscles and necessary claws into Christianity. Sometimes it is better to infiltrate existing institutions to change it from within. JMO.

    • mindweapon says:

      Well, Cly, the Christians are welcome to go do any of that. I’m not stopping them. But I have no use for it. Sunday School was child abuse.

      The Christians chose their collection plates over their principles. They sold out to the enemy, like naked women dancing on a hill to go have sex with the winner, whether the winner is their own tribe or the enemy attacking tribe.

      the doctrines that Christianity teaches are tailor made to ferment into Cultural Marxism.

      • yjohn says:

        Christianity contains practically any belief system someone wants to promulgate. You want rules against race-mixing? Look to Ezra. You want rules favoring race-mixing? Look to Acts. You want rules prohibiting divorce? Look to John. You want rules allowing divorce? Look to Matthew.

        Cultural Marxism — or rather, the linear modernist worldview — truly is Christianity with the element of Christ removed. However, it is a tailored subset of Christianity. Full christianity at least recognizes the concept of right/wrong as measured against an outside standard of value, whereas cultural marxism is fluid and self-referential.

      • mindweapon says:

        right, that’s why we need more precision in our moral code.

      • conchobar14 says:

        mindweapons i’d suggest some the works of alain de benoist in this situation, he has a great essay noting the connection between totalitarianism and monotheism. that the fanaticism of the smell tribesmen and their belief in “one truth”, led to the gulag. also nietzsche in the anti-christ, makes the best case with the lines on the “priestly virtue”: “scare tactics”

      • Maureen says:

        Evil creatures such as Billy Graham knew Truth but chose to preach a lie, misleading millions. I hope he and the likes of him, rot in hell.

    • oogenhand says:

      No secret language, no secret teachings;

  5. robroysimmons says:

    Good arguments MW, and I agree Hell has been replaced by a teddy bear afterlife cult.

    But speaking of no proof, that is basically the whole of the anti-white cult in a nutshell. Instead of hell they have what amounts to a teenaged girls cult that will shun the non-believers, and if that is not enough they resort to violence or threats of violence.

  6. Ryu says:

    Great post.

    I would also like to hear the part where niggers, spics and dinks are excluded from God’s kingdom. Does Jesus want the white race to survive?

    The gold of religion is fanaticism. From many Christians, I suspect they love Jesus more than the white race. Thus at the moment of truth, they may chose a Christian negro over a pagen White.

  7. yjohn says:

    All religions — including my own (Odinism) — are unverifiable. Nearly all values have difficulty being verified as valid without reference to an outside unverifiable source.

    Most people of any race are not very bright. By definition, half of all whites are below median (100) IQ. Nietzsche and Machiavelli are philosophies for people on the right side of that curve. The people on the left side of the curve must be controlled by instilling values from something more simple.

    Is it wrong for me to kill someone and steal his stuff?

    Biologically, maybe by killing that person I will then have an opportunity to rape and impregnate his wife, causing my genes to be more widely distributed. By taking his stuff, my greater access to resources would likewise make me more reproductively successful. Read the Sagas and you’ll see it was not uncommon for Vikings to go raiding the coastal communities of Ireland, and genetic evidence says rape took place on a large scale.

    So why shouldn’t we all have values saying we should kill people, steal their things and rape their women?

    Someone to the RIGHT side of the Bell Curve can think of many really good reasons why such values should not be widely adopted, why they are incompatible with civilization, how the long-term results would be antithetical to important goals, etc.

    But someone on the LEFT side of the Bell Curve has a hard time thinking that way. That’s why the population of jails is overwhelmingly from the left side of the curve. Obviously, you can use law and the prospect of punishment to control this behavior, but that is only effective if people are convinced they will be caught and punished — which is not the case for a huge proportion of murders. An alternative is to convince them there is a God who sees and knows all and will deliver rewards and punishments even for behavior that isn’t punished by other humans.

    In other words, as Norman Lowell has suggested, we need to establish a hierarchical society in which the leadership tier has Nietzschean and Machiavellian values steered by an overall racial prerogative but the lower tiers would be steered by other value systems more appropriate for their intelligence.

    Agreed, modern Christianity is often used as a mind weapon of our enemies — but so is modern liberalism, conservatism, psychology, sociology, etc. etc. etc. Christianity reflects the current Masters. It could just as easily reflect the values that New Masters want it to convey.

  8. PA says:

    Cultural Marxism is a specie of elite/aspiring caste’s alliance with underclass castes against middle classes. That’s all. It woudl have materialized with or without Christianity as long as a nation has ambitious people who want to grab power. .

    It’s Jewish flavor looks like Karl Marx. Its Savic flavor looks like the Politburo. Its Anglo flavor looks like the Labour Party.

  9. Joe Rebel says:

    Since we’re on the subject of hell, in the Strong’s Concoradance (If I may be allowed to use that as an example), hell is actually taken from the Hebraic word “sheol” which simply translates “the grave” or “the pit”.

  10. Snake says:

    Jesus was the Norman Finkelstein of 30AD.
    His egalitarianism ran afoul of the Judiac establishment. Rome, exasperated with whining Juden, executed him.

    • Svigor says:

      That’s why he spurned the pagan woman who asked him to heal her child, telling her “I have come only for the Sons of Israel,” I guess.

      Then there’s the Good Samaritan, which basically amounts to a Pan-Jewish Nationalist parable (he chose Samaritans because they were to the Hebrews what Armenians are to WNs, as opposed to any of the far more alien peoples known to the Hebes of the time (Ethiopians, central Asians, Persians, Indians, etc.) that he could’ve chosen if egalitarianism was really his aim).

      • Snake says:

        Commanding his disciples to go forth and baptize all the nations sounds pretty egalitarian. As does healing a pagan child and favorably dealing with Samaritans. But yes, there is an undercurrent of Judaic nationalism.

        Gilding one’s ethnocentrism with universal love or vice versa is a classic trick. Just read what Irmin Vinson has to say about Spielberg. Such duplicity is a poor basis for an authentic White religion. After 2,000 years of failing to make the shoe fit, White People are moving on.

  11. WhiteLight says:

    There are some parts of it that are about secret teachings. Christianity itself follows the pattern of the baal cycle (which is a part of syro-hurrian mythology rather than jewish mythology) very closely with the idea of a dying and rising god who dies and resurrects in order to defeat death in order to reclaim souls from the god of death. The book of revelation for example is if anything a classic baalist book. Hence why Jerusalem is called Sodom and Egypt (and mystery babylon for that matter) and the discussion about the synagogue of satan and god favoring greek christians over them (revelation chapter 3).

    Overall however, you cannot fit the doctrine of christianity into the OT without performing some major mangling of the text. The god of the OT is a stalinist who has a certain morality that centers around breeding up the nation of israel. The greatest act of faith in the OT and the Koran is God telling abraham to sacrifice his son isaac as a burnt offering (for no reason other than god asked for it) and abraham being willing to go through with it. The other thing to know is that judaism itself borrows almost entirely from egyptian concepts. The egyptian book of the dead contains what is regarded as the world’s first major negative confession. The covenant of circumcision that was supposed to be abrahamic was practiced over the entirety of egypt as were the religious dietary laws of judaism such as the prohibition on consuming pigs meat. Even some of the more odd portions of the OT such as the request from King David’s fiancee for hundreds of philistine foreskins as a wedding present mirrors the ancient egyptian battle practice of taking foreskins from dead uncircumcised foes and hands from dead circumcised foes.

  12. WhiteLight says:

    Interestingly enough the enemies of baal are called the many or the rabbim (which in other semitic languages can also mean lord).

  13. robroysimmons says:

    MW can the next thread be one about asking anti-whites if they believe in the Blank Slate Theory?

  14. Matthew says:

    I clarified my “whimper” comment on the last post. Suffice it to say that I don’t think Christians are necessary for you to win, and I hope they’re not, because I also don’t think you’re going to get many of them.

    That much of Christian participation has historically been based on fear I cannot dispute. Mine’s not, and I don’t proselytize in that manner. Given the choice of comrades, I’ll take Mindweapons and Ryu over the churchians any day.

    • mindweapon says:

      Given the choice of comrades, I’ll take Mindweapons and Ryu over the churchians any day.


      • Yes, as a relatively new Christian (grew up Atheist), despite my initial hesitation, as I got my footing on both (WN and Xtianity), it became clear that it is better for us all if these things are in the open. All that can be asked is that it is treated forthrightly and respectfully, so as not to serve as entertainment for our enemies and we do not descend into the sickening sight of hoisting our individualism (and dissent) through employing the critical theory poison inoculated into our people by YKW. Sticking to logic, we can shun the egalitarian impulse, while synthesizing strategy, and avoiding (our own) deconstruction.

      • mindweapon says:

        You’re a Christian FWM? I wouldn’t have known at all if you didn’t say. No obnoxious Bible quoting, no threats to walk out, no prophesies of defeat. If you are a Christian, the Christians should all follow your example.

  15. Matthew says:

    “If you want to defend Christianity, on this blog, you have to use something besides unverifiable scare tactics. You have to show where Christianity makes life better and makes people better and results in superior life outcomes that have nothing to do with fear of mortality or the afterlife.”

    The lives of Christians are not guaranteed to be better; we were told, rather, that many would suffer. Christians are not guaranteed to be better people; I have relatives who were life-long Christians, beloved of their congregations, and they got away with some fairly nasty private behavior by playing the church game.

    The only incentive for choosing to be a vassal of the Christ is the promise of physical resurrection. If that hope is in vain, then our loyalty is futile. Why might a man come to believe in such a promise? The reasons can be discovered by those who seek for them. Convincing you is not my concern; consider me Puddy to your Elaine.

    Churches are instruments of social and political control. They have been since Christians stopped meeting informally each others’ houses. I do not recommend that anyone participate in any formal church. I would rather that Christians meet and work together in the kinds of communities that this blog has suggested. Small gatherings, networking, mutual aid.

    I doubt that kind of change will happen by conversion, by proselytization. If it happens, it will happen in a Kuhnian sort of way, by the dying out of the old and the fertility of the new. White churchianity will pass on without a struggle, with those who cling to its universalist dogmas suffering the fate of the weakminded. Perhaps many of the rootless children of the churchians can be stripped away by a vigorous white preservationist community. I would welcome this; better to be hot or cold than to be passionless universalist heretics.

  16. WhiteLight says:

    There is a way to make christianity pro white. One would have to identify christ with Manu, the originator of the european peoples and reject semitic influences upon the belief system. Then you could reinterpret the holy grail as a bloodline instead of a rather pointless religious symbol. To do this means merging christianity with paganism, however that is not implausible as there are already many different Hellenistic concepts within christianity from plato and hesiod. At this point the religion would be unrecognizable from the foreign egypto-judeo-christianity of times past and would be a natural religion to follow.

    The distinction between monotheism and polytheism also needs to be erased. If one understands basic cosmology then of course everything had one origin be it from a supreme god or from natural processes. However, that is a naturally divisive act rather than a unifying act as christians would preach.

    • AAB says:

      ‘There is a way to make christianity pro white.’

      White Nationalists have already tried to make Christanity a racially exclusive and pro-White religion: Christian Identity, British-Israelism; neither of which have taken off and been successful in the way that you would hope for. Whatever you do to try and reform Christianity, you’re left with the problem of bloodlines, or the incest and other immorality of the OT. Besides, the bible is just ripped off Aryan beliefs from the middle east: see Revilo Olivers book on Christianity.

      • Svigor says:

        WNism hasn’t taken off and been successful in the way that you would hope for, either.

      • WhiteLight says:

        I never argued for the OT. What I will say is that there are some concepts in the NT that were useful in the past. As far as being a rip off, in many places yes. The OT has many clear parallels to egyptian beliefs although with a less sophisticated presentation on the afterlife. You can get some good stuff in the NT, but of course there is also incorrect doctrine in there. You are talking about a bunch of human commentators after all so read them as such. I am quite familiar with middle eastern religions from canaanite religion to babylonian religion to sumerian religion. Thus, I an tell you what concepts have been taken from where. For example, the splitting of men into different tongues in the original sumerian mythology is attributed to Enki who is Odin.

        However, what one has to realize is that christian concepts are prevalent in the world of today. If you want to get white christians on board, you might want to consider utilizing terms that they are familiar with. For example, if you can show that the people that they consider their enemies are worshiping a bunch of ancient gods who are identified as their enemies, they might listen. If you can give them a bunch of quotes from luciferian types encouraging the same ideologies that the churches promote, they will listen. As an added note, also consider that the gods are designed as psychological archetypes. The Christ archetype can be made to fit the european high god character which is a valuable consideration.


      • AAB says:

        Svigor says:
        ‘WNism hasn’t taken off and been successful in the way that you would hope for, either.’

        Perhaps, I’m not sure on the numbers front. But if you look at the Green Party (UK) for instance, that didn’t have any voter success 10-20 years ago, now they gain an average 5% at national elections and have a seat at parliament. Golden Dawn are taking off in Greece, and that happened in a short space of time. Little beans > big bean stalk > Jack slays the Giant.

        WhiteLight says:
        ‘the splitting of men into different tongues in the original sumerian mythology is attributed to Enki who is Odin.’

        I’ve never come across that before, only that Odin is part of the ancient Proto-Indo Trinity (along with Ve and Vili – senses and Willfullness resepectively). I’ll look into it, thanks.

        ‘If you want to get white christians on board, you might want to consider utilizing terms that they are familiar with.’

        Completely agree here. For instance the Angels of Christians are the Gods of the Pagans.

  17. 1rw says:

    What you are castigating is the Protestant or evangelical attitude that salvation is thru faith alone, that is quick to dismiss “works” whic are tangible actions to make the world better. Not all branches of Christianity espouse this. Orthodox Christianity sees the two as inseparable, a person of faith is a decent person who acts well. Paul explains that faith is the bare minimum for salvation, and that all shall receive their just rewards in heaven. Thus, if you are a n!gger f@$&ing PWT slut on earth that loves Jesus, your social status in heaven will be comparable.

    My personal interpretation is that having faith is no excuse from good behavior, it is a call to good behavior.

    Remember, psychopaths will twist any system into their personal playground because they are psychopaths, not because the system is bad. Imagine a Cosmotheist psychopath “growing” and deciding whom to leave behind.

    The one religion I’m vaguely aware of that stands out on this question is Talmudic Judaism, no subversion required.

  18. It may be possible for Christianity to be pro-White, but I have huge reservations about it.

    When Whites form moral communities, they take them seriously. If their moral community is based on a text such as the Bible, they’ll interpret it to the best of their ability, set their best minds towards discovering The Truth, and follow the text, well, religiously. Even if the moral community is against their best interests.

    Blacks and jews, amongst others, don’t have this problem. Islam and Christianity are universalist religons, but blacks have managed to turn Islam into a sort of black nationalist organization a la the Nation of Islam, and there’s black nationalist churches along the lines of Jeremiah Wright. Their race feeling can’t be overcome by an abstracted moral community/sense.

    Judaism as a religion is explicitly racial and separatist (chosen people, people that shall dwell apart, etc.). When they take up a secular religion (liberalism, communism, conservativism, etc.) they manage to change it so it benefits them, latch onto a winning horse, subvert it for their own purposes, etc.

    The problem with any religion, any political system, which is not explicitly of, by, and for Whites is that the moral community Whites create can be subverted either from within or from without.

  19. I am a Christian and White Nationalist and have no problem in reconciling the faith and the aspirations of my race. I understand the complete breakdown of our racial cohesivness and admit pointing to the established church as a main culprit. But understand always first it is a religion of a personal nature with a personal MAN who lived on this messed up planet we call Earth 2000yrs ago . Regardless of everyone’s mindless commenting understanding its validity to those of us who do follow him is critical. When MW and his choir choose to mock my faith it is a sign of complete cluelessness. Surely the hierarchy of the institution called the church grew out of this sect to become what any human institution does over any amount of time. Start building bridges with us.

    • conchobar14 says:

      you should read about the jesus/buddhist connection, all the trancendant thought that the carpenter came up with was invented or dscovered or (if you believe in agartha/atlantis) rediscovered, by one of our common indo-european ayran ancestors. these philosophies were later brought back to us and added in with a bit of martial prowess native to our culture by nietzsche in thus spake zarathustra and in the “testiment” of the white russian general, baron roman ungern von sternberg, the latter openly flaunting his buddhism as a form of high nationalistic csarism based on the spiritual levels of understanding or trancendence found in buddhism

  20. Apologist says:


    Before I decide whether to engage you on this, we must clarify something. You said,
    Also, no Bible quoting is allowed.

    The Word of God is the basis of everything I believe; my worldview and weltanschauung.

    While I might decide not to directly quote from it, every idea and statement I will offer will be predicated on it. It is my absolute standard.

    You have a standard too, MW. I am guessing you would say that your standard of truth is reason.

    You asking me to abandon the Bible for this discussion is like me asking you to abandon your reason (or whatever it is that you use as a standard).

    To which you might reply, “You can’t use the Bible, I don’t believe it.”

    There is your inconsistency. I reject your standard (if it is anything other than the Word of God), yet I would not ask you to abandon it for a discussion.

    I will engage in this discussion if you remove this unreasonable and arbitrary limitation.

    You cannot challenge Christians and Christianity, yet preclude them from using the Bible.

    Anything not based on the Bible is, by definition, not Christian. I might not even quote from the Word, but this a priori limitation eliminates the possibility of a real discussion. Surely that is not your intent, is it?

    Let me know. The ball is in your court. Do you want a debate/discussion with a Christian, or not?

    • mindweapon says:

      Maybe you should try thinking outside your Bible-Babble. If you cannot think or discuss without your Bible-Crutch, too bad. That’s a hard rule, and I knew it would confound the Bible-bound minds.

      Do you Bible quoting people realize how you bore the crap out of people?

      • Apologist says:


        What is your standard for truth?

        Can you answer even that, or is the extent of your intellectual prowess limited to insults?

        Quit being a little girl.

        YOU issued the challenge.

        The ball is -again- in your court.

      • Svigor says:

        Sorry, you’re the one using a crutch. You want people to make a case for Christianity without using Christianity. Sounds more like you just want to talk shit.

        And this isn’t coming from a “Bible-bound” mind, but an agnostic.

      • mindweapon says:

        Yes, you need to make a case for Christianity without referring to the Bible, because the Christian case for Christianity only uses weaponized assertions (threats).

        I’m not the one using a crutch because I’m not the one making the case; I’m saying the burden of proof is on Christians to provide evidence outside of threats and prophesies.

        I think it’s a very useful exercises, because the Christians are caught in what the Russians call “Zakoldovanniy Krug” or a “Vicious Circle” in their thinking.

        Christian polemics is purely self referential; it uses itself to argue for itself. Shorter Christianity:

        Because Jesus!

        Because Salvation!

        Because the Bible!

        You can tell when you are talking to a person caught in a vicious circle of self referential argument by the fact that they are very boring. They want you to argue against their Christian apologetics, in terms of Christian apologetics! They want you to step into their frame.

        I say no, you step into my frame for once. My frame is to ask what actually works. One thing I grant the extreme homeschool Christians is fertility and family formation, and that’s a pretty important thing. But they are also mental Luddites. Like Matt Parrott talked about, the extreme backward looking Christianity can morph into extreme CUltural Marxism. First generation Amish, second generation Mennonite, third generation married to an African man or a lesbian.

        My frame is a futurism that can be. We have to carve out a whole new way of being in this world. That’s the advantage the liberals have over us, is that they changed the world very fast, and we are slow to adapt. And the liberals are hoping that we will adapt in a way that weakens and diminishes us.

        But they don’t account for the possibility that we will adapt in a way that strengthens and increases us into a New Force, the kind of force that rips through old technology, as the Mongol Hordes went light and had composite bows that could shoot an arrow 1300 feet. Mongol archers carried 60 arrows. They were also able to outrun heavier armored opponents, so they could inflict damage from a distance and then avoid counter-damage. Fast retreat was not cowardly, it was smart because it was about inflicting casualties on them while minimizing ones own casualties so you can attack some more.

        Christianity is a Mindworm that keeps people from thinking, and therefore, prevents them from adapting new tactics, new strategies. Christianity teaches resignation and surrender and glib meekness and hatred for the bold.

        The Christians call us “sociopaths,” nowadays, as if, without Christianity, we are totally amoral. They can’t stand the thought of a morality that isn’t based on fear but on joy and fascination with the emerging future.

        They want you to be afraid of the unknown, like those medieval maps that showed that if you went too far out to see, Here Be Dragons:

        It’s a good thing Columbus didn’t believe in dragons.

        I happen to agree with Matt Strictland, that the old religions are dying, and some new one will take its place. We are basically in an interim phase, a period of uncertain Deistic Succession. One thing that might happen is that robots might become smarter than humans and become the new gods, the Terminator idea. Go to 52 minutes:

        THis is a robotics expert who predicts that in the 2040’s the machines will be smarter than us. He basically makes the Terminator prophesy. THe other men ask him why he works in developing robotic intelligence if that’s the case. He doesn’t have a good answer.

        But I don’t want to end on a down note. The Mindweapon way to go forward is to become the robot programmers, become the oil fracking engineers, become the owners and bosses of society, and use our wealth to create more Mindweapons — who will become the dominant caste of humanity.

    • Matt Strictland says:

      The way you need to communicate here is to avoid the circular Bible Logic trap.

      Approach the issue as if the Bible is not the revealed truth of the creator but is the best solution for rational minds, in other words, think like the other guy does.

      if you can do that, discussion is worth the time. If you can’t? Don’t bother .

      • Apologist says:


        Yet what tells the rationalists that their worldview is the correct one?


        And they call my logic circular?

        Come on.

        What I hear is that I should compromise my beliefs to “meet in the middle”. That is preposterous. I do not expect that of MW.

        He issued the challenge, after all, yet he seems singularly unwilling to prove himself equal to it.

      • Apologist says:


        Yet what tells the rationalists that their worldview is the correct one?


        And they call my logic circular?

        in other words, think like the other guy does.

        You mean, think like an unbeliever? Do you not see the contradiction there? MW asked for a Christian worldview, but is completely unwilling to listen to one.

        Come on.

        What I hear is that I should compromise my beliefs to “meet in the middle”. That is preposterous. I do not expect that of MW.

        He issued the challenge, after all, yet he seems singularly unwilling to prove himself equal to it.

      • Svigor says:

        Approach the issue as if the Bible is not the revealed truth of the creator but is the best solution for rational minds, in other words, think like the other guy does.

        Precisely. I approach the Bible as a text I can use to my race’s advantage. Period, end of story.

    • conchobar14 says:

      so a bunch of smelly jews who lived in the late roman empire formulated your entire worldview? read the iliad or something

      • Matt Strictland says:

        A lot of truth there.

        The reason I have a basically rational world view is I trust my own lying eyes and things that are tested over and over. The vast bulk of science is something anyone, you, me, anyone can go prove for themselves.

        The problem with Bible based well anything is you are basing a world view on a translation of a translation of a book of stories. And in case you ask, sure scientists do lie, they lie less often and are wrong (or able to course correct more often) than theologians.

        Religion you have take on faith and while faith has value, its not just that faith , not observable proof that pretty much anyone can observe and pretty much everyone observes the same way.

        Is rationality perfect? No of course not but it the best tool we have to manage the world that we live in.

        As for other possible worlds, they might exist but the evidence for them is very weak and right here, right now is the world we need to be concerned with.

        Our ethical system needs to be the best practices for ourselves and our race. And yes you can’t prove the utility of race in this case. It is from my limited observable evidence liable to lead to the outcome that I think is best.

        I don’t think Christianity does that for anyone in the 1st world to any great degree and thats why on a broad basis present company excluded its becoming he refuge of the ignorant and poor. The more Christian a nation, the worse they seem to be these days.

        This is kind of a shame really, the faith has a long intellectual tradition but times and needs change and Christianity seems no longer up to the challenge of making the lives of the group of people I choose to care about better.

  21. Attila says:

    If you want to get energized- read the Prophets (Nevi’im) in Hebrew (it’s not THAT hard). Before long- you will forget about Chrishmishtianity and it’s overly complex dogmas and regain an awareness of the One behind the phenomena if you stick with it (which is unnamed in Israel and but referred to as Allah in Islam). Learn learn learn from the experts —- keep your friends close and your enemies closer. It’s no wonder the Tribe rejects anything that came after them- they have a LOAD of mind-food-memes – and that’s not even getting into Talmud and pre- and post-Lurianic Kabbalah (not the Madonna variety). Ask me anything about Judaism/Kabbalah and/or Islam/Tassawuf=Sufism and I can make some recommendations. Both traditions still have a Near-Eastern warrior ethos flavor, unlike Buddhism (except Zen). At some point- I will have to revisit the Bhagavad-Gita, hopefully after getting some reading knowledge of Sanskrit.

  22. john says:

    State worship is declining. Our people will return to the church. The sooner the better.

  23. April Gaede says:

    Last year Dresden my daughter who is 8 stayed with her cousins who are Fundamentalist Mennonites. They wear the long dresses and dont watch TV and live a simple and healthy White life for the most part. Dresden told them that I dont believe in the Bible or God and her cousins told her that ” if you dont believe when you die you will go to burn in hell”. Dresden replied, ” I dont think that when you die tthey bury you that deep down where the lava is”.

    I love that story and it is totally true. My little Dresden is a logical person and knows enough about geology at 8 to know that the whole burn in hell thing is ridiculous.

    Also last year I had to put the nix on the paternal grandparents wish to take Dresden to Vacation Bible School. I thought that it wouldnt hurt her to learn some Bible stories but it ended up being a combination of a silly theme based program about New York of all the evil places in the world. check that shit out……seriously.

    On the first day she came home with this I love NY stuff and I asked her grandparents who also attended how that related to the Bible. They said that ” its the theme”. Then I asked the obvious question. Why would you tell young children, who take things literally, to ” love” a city that they A. have probably never seen. and B. Is really a dirty degenerate and unGodly place by most moral standards? They had no answer except that it ” is the theme”. They told me to attend but I didnt want to show up and rip these people a new one so I let her attend a second day. Still only vague Bible stories and more ” I love NY” themed stuff to bring home. I ask how telling a child that using the word “love” in that way is reasonable. Kids get confused easily and yeah we say, ” I love ice cream” but to be taught to use the work ” love” in a biblical sense doesn’t seem to equate to a city. On the third day she came home with a bookmark that told her to ” confess you are a sinner”. That was the last day that she attended and she will NOT attend any more of this Bible camp garbage as long as I live.

    I guess what really got me the most is how lazy these Christians are to use some prefab curriculum like that. I mean What the Fuck Dude!!!!

    • mindweapon says:

      Great stories, April! They really are intellectually lazy! THe video at the website you linked of the guy coming up with the theme — what a bunch of unserious nonsense!

  24. a boy and his dog says:

    The problem with Christianity is that its basic tenets are gibberish that has outlasted its explanatory usefulness. This subject is basically begging Christians to show up and claim that if only you read the ‘correct’ doctrinal hairsplitting you’d be converted, or that if only you were more receptive to a 2000 year old spooky ghost who wants to walk with you and hold your hand, you’d see the light. I reject the whole thing on its face and don’t require anything to replace it with: as Hume said even morality is just force of habit.

    I’d rather see Christianity decompose naturally to find out what replaces it. My guess would be a form of religious tribalism/animism in the long term (because that appears to be the default for humanity), even if its preceded by feel good universalism in the short term. Trying to bring dead religions back from the dead misses the point.

  25. April Gaede says:

    Also, I have been trying to read the bible by putting it in the bathroom so that I can read a page or two on the Lou. Well I didnt realize how fucking ridiculous, hypocritical and boring that thing is…………good grief.

  26. Observer says:

    Religion is the ultimate mindweapon. Look around the world. Islamic reactionaries are currently winning a death struggle against the United States government. That’s more than you can say for any other reactionary group.

    Religion effectively motivates people to sacrifice for the cause. Race, not so much. Sacrificing your life for your ethnic genetic interest is rarely rational under a Darwinian calculus.

    Liberalism grew out of Christianity, but Christianity does not necessarily lead to liberalism. For many hundreds of years Christianity was not liberal. Many ideologies grew out of Christianity, liberalism was just the most successful at perverting Christian teachings.

    Unfortunately, progressives have taken control of the Christian mindweapon in America and today virtually all Christian institutions are preaching a slightly out of date version of progressivism. However, religious revivals have occurred before. It is probably easier to convert Christians to a more conservative type of Christianity than it is to convert them into atheistic White Nationalists who will risk their lives for their ethnic genetic interest.

    While Christianity in America has been turned into a branch of progressivism, Christianity in Russia is currently serving as an important bulwark against progressivism. And the facts are on the side of Christian reactionaries; liberal Christianity is pretty clearly based on perversions of the historical teachings of Christianity. Consequently, Christian reactionaries are an important mindweapon. Just by pointing out the truth, they can decrease the progressive orientation of other Christians.

    WNs should maintain a loose, informal and cautious alliance with Christian reactionaries. There is a great commonality of interest there. Race realist sentiments are omnipresent in the Christian react-o-sphere. If you want to think about a mindweapon, think about the possibility of Christian reactionaries spreading something along the lines of Russian Orthodox Christianity in American churches. Religious revivals have happened before.

  27. You might check out Revilo Oliver’s long essay, Christianity and the Survival of the West.

  28. lights says:

    Seems like the majority of this criticism is directed at a certain type of American Protestantism. MW, do you take issue with specific versions of Christianity or is it the faith in general?

    Thing is, those shabbos goy Zionist nutjobs and universalist loons aren’t exactly comparable to folks like Charles Martel. I recognize and state quite often myself that if the Battle of Tours in 732 were to take place today, the post-Vatican II Catholic Church would fold like a house of cards and exhort her followers to welcome the invader, cause racism is bad mmmkay.

    As for not being allowed to use the Bible in debate, that’s fine. It’s tiresome. The Church and Church tradition predate and supersede the Bible in terms of authority. After all, it was the Church that decided centuries later what was going to comprise the thing! Rather than invalidating the Bible, this means the book can only be interpreted according to Church tradition. Which is refreshing if you’ve ever gotten tired of some asshole justifying his anti-white attitudes with Galations 3:28 while he simultaneously opposes gay marriage. Sola Scriptura is a heretical doctrine because if scripture is self-referential then it’s only as meaningful as modern leftism. All that is to say that the Bible is not a collection of soundbites for believers to dip into when they run out of original thoughts. The New Testament is letters and accounts written down by Church founders and the book can only be interpreted by the proper authority, not the average joe.

    These views would place me in the Orthodox camp. That’s the same Orthodox Church that’s supporting Golden Dawn. I see no contradiction in being a Christian and white nationalist. Yeah, all Christians may be spiritual brothers, but a fellow Christian invading my land is still an invader and unwelcome. Put another way, God made me white before he made me a Christian.

    I share your exasperation with lukewarm Churchians. Those folks seem more concerned with not angering the church ladies than preserving and defending the race that allowed this faith to flourish in the first place. That being said, I’d ask you to realize that in the days ahead you’re going to have plenty of Christians, NOT judeo-Christians, in your corner, and I count myself as one of them.

    Anyway, if any of that was incomprehensible let me know and I’ll clarify. I’m not writing my best due to lack of sleep.

  29. April Gaede says:

    So if he was God, why did he only have one son? Why not 14 or 88 or a million? And arent we all supposed to be God’s children. And how does the crucifixion and suffering of Jesus let us off the hook with our sins? That doesn’t make logical sense. Also, if Jesus knew he was coming back to life, how big a sacrifice was that really? People sacrifice themselves for others all the time and pay with their lives. why should I have to accept that a guy who was God’s son died 2000 years ago for me to avoid going to hell?

    Will heaven have nonWhites? Because if it does. I dont want to go. Will people be grown, like babies or old people who died? What about the widow who married again after her husband died? Will she be with her first or second husband? Will child molesters who ” found God” in prison be there? So a guy can do all kinds of BS things during his life, accept Jesus and go to Heaven and meanwhile someone who lives a good life but doesnt accept Jesus goes to hell or limbo or somewhere else? That’s bs. What do they do in Heaven because I think it sounds boring.

    Why didnt God want Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of Knowledge? Why put it there and then expect them not to eat it? Why make it in the first place? Why wouldnt he want them to be as smart as him? Why did he lie and tell them it would kill them? Also if eating it gave them the Knowledge of Gods what is wrong with that?

    Why was God such an asshole to Cain? Why did he tell the Jews to sell roadkill to people in the next town?

    Is God good? Seriously, he does a lot of really fucked up stuff. Maybe he is real but just a real asshole. Why are we all assuming that he is good? Just because he made us? He also made a lot of bad stuff. Is he a sadist? Why would he allow little babies to be raped and not kill the guy doing it before he started? Just for that one he needs a major kick in the ass.

    I think that most Christians dont realize that for people like MW and myself it if mentally and physically impossible for us to suspend logic and reason for long enough to ” have faith”. You cant just say ” I will accept Jesus as my savior” if you cannot believe in him and I just cant.

  30. john says:

    Moderns think of the most pathetic thing possible – themselves. Whether god is real or not is not important (only idiots pontificate about that). The only question that matters is “is it good for our people?” God works in mysterious ways.

  31. WhiteLight says:

    As Pious the XI said: “Spiritually we are all Semites”. That’s the ideology and that’s why all of these guys get along so well too. Catholics have never ever been for racial solidarity, their name means universal. They have used the popular new world order global government concept consistently in their documents since 1950 and even before that.
    If anyone thinks that protestantism is any better, take a look at the ideology encouraged by groups like the methodists and the calvinists. Both are universalistic and both will always preach that men are the same in soul because they allegedly have the same father which is the fundamental lie that the whole modern world is based upon. Protestants are just the bastard children of rome period. The conservative movement is a perfect representation of what this ideology must come to in the end. They believe only in values that change with the eb and flow of time.
    To see how utterly falacious these differences are, compare the substance of the quotes below:

    A quote about the communistic enlightenment group called the illuminati

    ( Chapter 2)
    “The baleful effects of general superstition, and even of any peculiar religious prepossession, are now strongly inculcated, and the discernment of the pupils in these matters is learned by questions which are given them from time to time to discuss. These are managed with delicacy and circumspection, that the timid may not be alarmed. In like manner, the political doctrines of the Order are inculcated with the utmost caution. After the mind of the pupil has been warmed by the pictures of universal happiness, and convinced that it is a possible thing to unite all the inhabitants of the earth in one great society ; and after it has been made out, in some measure to the satisfaction of the pupil, that a great addition of happiness would be trained by the abolition of national distinctions and animosities ; it may frequently be no hard talk to make him think that patriotism is a narrow-minded monopolising sentiment, and even incompatible with the more enlarged views of the Order namely, the uniting the whole human race into one great and happy society.

    A few quotes from a luciferian theosophist:
    Alice Bailey
    Problems of humanity
    Chapter 2
    ““The world war has produced great migrations. Armies have marched and fought in every part of the world; persecuted peoples have escaped from one land to another; welfare workers have gone from country to country, serving the soldiers, salvaging the sick, feeding the hungry and studying conditions. The world today is very small and men are discovering (sometimes for the first time in their lives) that humanity is one and that all men, no matter what the colour of their skin or the country in which they live, resemble each other. We are all intermingled today. The United States is composed of people from every known country; over fifty different races or nations compose the U.S.S.R. The United Kingdom is a Commonwealth of independent nations bound together into one group. India is composed of a multiplicity of peoples, religions and tongues and hence her problem. The world itself is a great fusing pot, out of which the One Humanity is emerging. This necessitates a drastic change in our [45] methods of presenting history and geography. Science has always been universal. Great art and literature have always belonged to the world. It is upon these facts that the education to be given to the children of the world must be built—upon our similarities, our creative achievements, our spiritual idealisms, and our points of contact. Unless this is done, the wounds of the nations will never be healed and the barriers which have existed for centuries will never be removed.”

    “World democracy will take form when men everywhere are regarded in reality as equal; when boys and girls are taught that it does not matter whether a man is an Asiatic, an American, a European, British, a Jew or a Gentile but only that each has an historical background which enables him to contribute something to the good of the whole, that the major requirement is an attitude of goodwill and a constant effort to foster right human relations. World Unity will be a fact when the children of the world are taught that religious differences are largely a matter of birth; that if a man is born in Italy, the probability is that he will be a Roman Catholic; if he is born a Jew, he will follow the Jewish teaching; if born in Asia, he may be a Mohammedan, a Buddhist, or belong to one of the Hindu sects; if born in other countries, he may be a Protestant and so on. He will learn that the religious differences are largely the result of man-made quarrels over human interpretations of truth. Thus gradually, our quarrels and differences will be offset and the idea of the One Humanity will take their place.”

    “Brotherhood is a great natural fact; all men are brothers; under the divergences of colour, creed, cultures and civilizations, there is only one humanity without distinction or differences in its essential nature, in its origin, its spiritual and mental objectives, its capacities, its qualities and its mode of development and of evolutionary unfoldment. In these divine attributes (for that is [148] what they are) all men are equal; it is only in relation to time and in the extent to which progress has been made in the revelation of innate divinity in all its fullness that temporary differences become apparent. It is the temporary differences and the sins which ignorance and inexperience betray which have engrossed the attention of the churches to the exclusion of the penetrating, piercing vision of the divine in every man. It is the fact of brotherhood which the churches must begin to teach—not from the angle of a transcendent God, an external unknowable Father—but from the angle of the divine life, eternally present in every human heart, and eternally struggling to express itself through individuals, nations and races.

    Peter Sutherland: UN Migration chief, non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former chairman of oil giant BP
    “The EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of its member states, the UN’s special representative for migration has said.
    Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.
    He also suggested the UK government’s immigration policy had no basis in international law.”

  32. WhiteLight says:


    Tony Blair
    Speech from April 3rd, 2008

    “Let me summarise my argument to you this evening. Under the momentum of globalisation the world is opening up, and at an astonishing speed.
    Old boundaries of culture, identity and even nationhood are falling. The 21st Century world is becoming ever more interdependent. In this world, religious faith, crucial to so many people’s culture and identity, can play a positive or a negative role. Either positively it will encourage peaceful co-existence by people of faith coming together in respect, understanding and tolerance, retaining their distinctive identity but living happily with those who do not share that identity. Or it will work against such co-existence by defining people by difference, those of one faith in opposition to others of a different faith.”
    ““Faith answers to the basic, irrepressible, irresistible human wish for spiritual betterment, to do good, to think and act beyond the limitations of selfish human desires. More than that , it is rooted in a belief that the impulse to do good or try to, is not utilitarian or self-interested but is about putting aside self, in being aware of something bigger, more central, more essential to our human condition than self. In this, the ‘other’ is not to be rejected still less excluded, but embraced as more important than you or me. And people of faith believe we are driven or guided to this end. For those who feel in this way, God is not some wise Old Man up in the sky, but the true source of life. God is selfless love, merciful and an infinite dispenser of Grace.
    Organised religion seen in this light, is, then, not about arid ritual but a collective demonstration of faith, a coming together of people who believe in the power of God’ s mercy and love, who believe that it is of universal application, and who in coming together symbolise that communion with God and with fellow human beings.””

    Pope John Paul II
    June 2, 2000
    “On June 2, a multiethnic festival, which included the participation of some 30,000 people, gathered at St. Peter’s Square, Rome, for the Migrants’ and Itinerants’ Jubilee Mass celebrated by Pope John Paul II. At the service, the Pope made it clear that one cannot be both a Catholic and a racist at the same time. He said, “Even today in the world, there are narrow-minded attitudes, including rejection, due to unfounded fears and withdrawal into self interest. But, these are discriminations that are incompatible with belonging to Christ and the Church. Furthermore, the Christian community is called to spread the yeast of fraternity and of coexistence in the world, where no one is a foreigner and no one is excluded.””
    MARCH 26, 1967

    43. Development of the individual necessarily entails a joint effort for the development of the human race as a whole. At Bombay We said: “Man must meet man, nation must meet nation, as brothers and sisters, as children of God. In this mutual understanding and friendship, in this sacred communion, we must also begin to work together to build the common future of the human race.” (47) We also urge men to explore concrete and practicable ways of organizing and coordinating their efforts, so that available resources might be shared with others; in this way genuine bonds between nations might be forged.
    Three Major Duties
    44. This duty concerns first and foremost the wealthier nations. Their obligations stem from the human and supernatural brotherhood of man, and present a three-fold obligation: 1) mutual solidarity—the aid that the richer nations must give to developing nations; 2) social justice—the rectification of trade relations between strong and weak nations; 3) universal charity—the effort to build a more humane world community, where all can give and receive, and where the progress of some is not bought at the expense of others. The matter is urgent, for on it depends the future of world civilization.
    “Superfluous Wealth
    49. We must repeat that the superfluous goods of wealthier nations ought to be placed at the disposal of poorer nations. The rule, by virtue of which in times past those nearest us were to be helped in time of need, applies today to all the needy throughout the world. And the prospering peoples will be the first to benefit from this. Continuing avarice on their part will arouse the judgment of God and the wrath of the poor, with consequences no one can foresee. If prosperous nations continue to be jealous of their own advantage alone, they will jeopardize their highest values, sacrificing the pursuit of excellence to the acquisition of possessions. We might well apply to them the parable of the rich man. His fields yielded an abundant harvest and he did not know where to store it: “But God said to him, ‘Fool, this very night your soul will be demanded from you . . .’ ” (54)”
    The Obstacles of Nationalism
    62. There are other obstacles to creation of a more just social order and to the development of world solidarity: nationalism and racism. It is quite natural that nations recently arrived at political independence should be quite jealous of their new-found but fragile unity and make every effort to preserve it. It is also quite natural for nations with a long-standing cultural tradition to be proud of their traditional heritage. But this commendable attitude should be further ennobled by love, a love for the whole family of man. Haughty pride in one’s own nation disunites nations and poses obstacles to their true welfare. It is especially harmful where the weak state of the economy calls for a pooling of information, efforts and financial resources to implement programs of development and to increase commercial and cultural interchange. . . . and Racism
    63. Racism is not the exclusive attribute of young nations, where sometimes it hides beneath the rivalries of clans and political parties, with heavy losses for justice and at the risk of civil war. During the colonial period it often flared up between the colonists and the indigenous population, and stood in the way of mutually profitable understanding, often giving rise to bitterness in the wake of genuine injustices. It is still an obstacle to collaboration among disadvantaged nations and a cause of division and hatred within countries whenever individuals and families see the inviolable rights of the human person held in scorn, as they themselves are unjustly subjected to a regime of discrimination because of their race or their color.
    69. Emigrant workers should also be given a warm welcome. Their living conditions are often inhuman, and they must scrimp on their earnings in order to send help to their families who have remained behind in their native land in poverty.
    Service to the World
    73. Sincere dialogue between cultures, as between individuals, paves the way for ties of brotherhood. Plans proposed for man’s betterment will unite all nations in the joint effort to be undertaken, if every citizen—be he a government leader, a public official, or a simple workman—is motivated by brotherly love and is truly anxious to build one universal human civilization that spans the globe. Then we shall see the start of a dialogue on man rather than on the products of the soil or of technology.
    This dialogue will be fruitful if it shows the participants how to make economic progress and how to achieve spiritual growth as well; if the technicians take the role of teachers and educators; if the training provided is characterized by a concern for spiritual and moral values, so that it ensures human betterment as well as economic growth. Then the bonds of solidarity will endure, even when the aid programs are past and gone. It is not plain to all that closer ties of this sort will contribute immeasurably to the preservation of world peace?
    Toward an Effective World Authority
    78. Such international collaboration among the nations of the world certainly calls for institutions that will promote, coordinate and direct it, until a new juridical order is firmly established and fully ratified. We give willing and wholehearted support to those public organizations that have already joined in promoting the development of nations, and We ardently hope that they will enjoy ever growing authority. As We told the United Nations General Assembly in New York: “Your vocation is to bring not just some peoples but all peoples together as brothers. . . Who can fail to see the need and importance of thus gradually coming to the establishment of a world authority capable of taking effective action on the juridical and political planes?” (66)
    Hope for the Future
    79. Some would regard these hopes as vain flights of fancy. It may be that these people are not realistic enough, and that they have not noticed that the world is moving rapidly in a certain direction. Men are growing more anxious to establish closer ties of brotherhood; despite their ignorance, their mistakes, their offenses, and even their lapses into barbarism and their wanderings from the path of salvation, they are slowly making their way to the Creator, even without adverting to it.
    This struggle toward a more human way of life certainly calls for hard work and imposes difficult sacrifices. But even adversity, when endured for the sake of one’s brothers and out of love for them, can contribute greatly to human progress. The Christian knows full well that when he unites himself with the expiatory sacrifice of the Divine Savior, he helps greatly to build up the body of Christ, (67) to assemble the People of God into the fullness of Christ.
    To All Men of Good Will
    83. Finally, We look to all men of good will, reminding them that civil progress and economic development are the only road to peace. Delegates to international organizations, public officials, gentlemen of the press, teachers and educators—all of you must realize that you have your part to play in the construction of a new world order. We ask God to enlighten and strengthen you all, so that you may persuade all men to turn their attention to these grave questions and prompt nations to work toward their solution .
    (yes, the head of the alleged conservative resistance just used the term new world order in exactly the same context with the exact same verbiage as the luciferian did)

    These guys are all preaching the exact same thing. Note that anyone who is racially or ethnically minded is declared to be a narrow minded bigot from the illuminati to the luciferians to the catholics. And now we have muslims in iran using the same terminology too. All of these guys think the same way just under different religious system ideals. And that my friends is why you cannot have a universalistic religion. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Luciferianism, socialism and conservatism are all different names for the same stupid universalistic concept.

    The Christian regards the most wonderful promise of the bible as the promise that one day the nations shall beat their swords into plowshears and no longer make war (which is to say become a bunch of slaves).

    Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
    That the mountain of the LORD’s house
    Shall be established on the top of the mountains,
    And shall be exalted above the hills;
    And all nations shall flow to it.
    3 Many people shall come and say,
    “Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
    To the house of the God of Jacob;
    He will teach us His ways,
    And we shall walk in His paths.”
    For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
    And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
    4 He shall judge between the nations,
    And rebuke many people;
    They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
    And their spears into pruning hooks;
    Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
    Neither shall they learn war anymore.
    This is the primary monument that stands in recognition of this passage. Take a look which empire state donated the statue and ask yourself a few questions:

  33. WhiteLight says:

    Another thing, catholics also fought for interracial marriage just like a lot of the protestant fanatic egalitarians:

    So basically to sum it up ask yourself a few questions:

    If god X asks person Y to sacrifice his kid just because he said so, is he a good holy unchanging god?

    If the eschatology of god X requires blood to flow to the heights of the highest mountains, what would you call him?

    In theory if the church is god’s bride and it is multiracial then how must this effect how we look upon society given that god’s bride is presented as flawless?

    After reading the full Baal cycle story (here:, what horrible twist do most christian interpretations of christ’s sacrifice for sin put upon that story?

    How much OT theology and practice are based upon a fusion between canaanite and egyptian religious ideologies and practices?

    What is the significance of the time period where the Amun-Ra priesthood was deposed from egypt (1300 BC) and where did they go? Which white empire was fatally weakened by the plagues from this group as they came out of egypt?

    The people of hebron were genocided by the israelites in the bible by yahweh’s command. What ethnicity would this group have been at the time?

    The Bible says that nothing evil can come before god. Yet, we see satan able to present himself in heaven before god as a judge of man. How is this the case unless satan works for yahweh?

    In ancient mythology, who is the angle of death?

    Why is the same action of the stirring david to perform a census attributed to god in 2 Samuel 24 and satan in 1 Chronicles 21? What are the implications of satan and yahweh being one and the same? Is this possibly reflected in the current political setup of the world and in the original luciferian narrative linked below?

    Given that the christian historians were not exactly known for being conscious of what sort of rumors and hearsay they tossed into historical texts, what makes them reliable?

    Just for fun, what does the name of the evil canaanite lord of jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, translate as? Keep in mind that this is the title that he is given.

    What is the significance of this story to the tale of Cain and Abel? :

    If the shepherd kings were indeed favored by the god that this story indicates, then what are we to make of this story which is the original luciferian narrative?:

    What characteristics do the deities above have that form the perverted mythological archetype of modern society?

    Why is the European God the Thunder God associated with Farmers while yahweh is the shepherd god? What characteristics do devil characters in european mythology typically have, especially the trickster deity? What did the European God do to the god who stole fire from the sun be it prometheus who stole fire, Loki who stole Sif’s hair, pr Louhi of the Kalevala? (

    If all the gods of the european nations are demons, would this include such characters as Nereus? (“But Pontos, the great sea, was father of truthful Nereus who tells no lies, eldest of his sons. They call him the Old Gentleman because he is trustworthy, and gentle, and never forgetful of what is right, but the thoughts of his mind are mild and righteous.”)

  34. Craig says:

    Off topic, sorry, thought it was a good find though and a brilliant example of MWisation.

    “German far-right extremists tap into green movement for support”

    • anonymous says:

      Great post Craig! Thanks

    • mindweapon says:

      yep, I was saying to do that like 10 years ago, and people were saying, “the greens are commie scum who will be useless to us.” there’s some truth to this, but there’s also a burgeoning appropriate tech movement that isn’t commie scum. I suspect a certain “global guerilla” is one of us, though he’s very careful about never tipping a hand in our direction, and I wouldn’t push him to do so.

      In other words, there’s already very implicit, very quiet, Taqqiyah mindweapon WN’s in the appropriate technology and sustainable living movement. If you go there, you’ll find them, though you don’t want to go explicit before it’s time to go explicit.

      White nationalism is the Hate that Dare Not Speak It’s Name. LOL Or perhaps, as the White Rabbit people would say, “undercover lover” or “the love (for the white race) that dare not speak its name.”

      There is definitely an analogy becoming more and more clear that White Race Love is now, what teh ghey was back 100 years ago.

      • Matt Strictland says:

        I like to remind people , especially fence sitters that loving your race above others does not mandate hating or harming people who are not harming you.

        When those people get this its a like a permission slip for some of them, its OK to be White and to love your folk. It doesn’t make you have to be a Nazi or a bad person and you can even keep on keeping on. Just put your folk first and strive to be the best White we can.

        We get people to do this in scale and we will dominate.

  35. Robot Sam says:

    Violence and scare tactics are the bread and butter of control freaks. Whether it is nuclear annihilation, AIDS, global warming, damnation, karma, expulsion from society for having raysist thoughts, growing hair on your palms/going blind, or simply the swine flu hoax, people in power as well as mini tyrants and DWLs love fear, and love to use it as a weapon. They do it because they have nothing to offer which is positive, or which is at the best neutral and wouldn’t pass muster if based on a purely rational basis. The problem is that when you offer people something miraculous, positive and new, they come to expect to receive it forever, and take it for granted. Some examples include combustion engines, refrigeration, and inoculation. These extremely good things become mundane, and expected, but destruction by some force bigger than you?!? That’s always alarming.

    Example; my mother is always going on about how she has been provided for in rough times by Gob. The truth is she works a little and my father started some business endeavors and her children actually work. It has nothing to do with Gob. If anything all she has done is scraped by with the help of family, so why would Gob keep her at that level? Is Gob a total asshole? Maybe she is at that level because it is bullshit and a little more realism, more planning and a bit of drive for a better life, and less delusion would have worked better.

  36. Anon says:

    Christianity is a custom built social network with around two thousand years of social proof, barring the recent march through the institutions it has done quite well for itself, and for us. Christian social practices laid the foundation for nationalism, and were much less opposed to innovation than, say, Islam was. As others have mentioned, the left end of the tailcurve needs something like this for its own good. You’re not going to create that kind of network again from the ground up in a short period of time, especially not when surrounded by enemies.

    Despite its fairly recent transformation, Christianity is still under attack, perhaps there is a fear there that it could regain a measure of its old power and attitude. I am willing to concede that it is all wishful thinking though.

  37. attila says:

    adonai means lord in hebrew, tzedek means just or righteous

  38. Hereward Saxon says:

    Re: “I ask Christians to give up Christianity” and “no Bible quoting is allowed”:
    May it never be so.

  39. Svigor says:

    Also, no Bible quoting is allowed.

    WTF? That makes no sense at all. You don’t want a discussion, then? Scripture is the very basis of Christianity.

    Also, your “no fire and brimstone” is far too contentious. Half of the things you characterize as “fear tactics” become “joy tactics” with a bit of reframing. E.g., “you’ll go to hell if you don’t believe” is a hair’s breadth from “you’ll go to heaven if you believe”; keep in mind that the two phrases are not corollaries; one can believe in eternal life for the believer without believing in eternal torment for the heathen – in fact, most higher-brow Christians believe precisely that.

    • April Gaede says:

      Dont you understand, quoting the Bible to those of us who believe it was written by men, for political purposes, no matter how well meaning, and not the divine inspiration of God, doesnt carry any weight.

      • Matthew says:

        April, do you believe that Alexander, the son of Philip of Macedon, existed? If so, upon what evidence?

        I admit that what I just asked is an unimaginative, time-worn gambit in Christian apologetics. But my use of it is intended to highlight the idea that the texts usually identified as “scripture” also have use as historical documents.

        I do agree, profoundly, that it is foolhardy for Christians to cite isolated sections of historical documents as if they were QED-bombs against you infidels.

        FWIW, the last time I was out of a job, I looked for software development positions in Kalispell.

      • Svigor says:

        Don’t you understand, Scripture is the only way to understand Christianity, and having a conversation about the nature of a thing while ruling out talking about the nature of a thing is idiocy?

  40. Hereward Saxon says:

    Yet there are some who believe it all, and ask infidels to give up their infidelity.

    • Matthew says:

      Do we go so far as to actually ask them? What good is that? Odysseus has been MIA for ten years, but we should try to reason with the supporters of the new regime?

  41. Hereward Saxon says:

    Re: Christians as CON gamers, intellectually lazy, forgivers of their own sins, the resurrected Christ a myth, etc.:

    There is no middle ground.

  42. Hereward Saxon says:

    On the other hand, what was said about Sunday School as “an abuse,” the senseless Bible Camp lessons, the prevalence of hypocrisy, etc. is all true. However, “Let God be true and every man a liar.”

    • Matthew says:

      I read Paul Johnson’s History of Christianity and drew near to despair. I read G. K. Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man and grew joyful in my laughter.

  43. oogenhand says:

    Reblogged this on oogenhand and commented:
    Hell beats nukes.

  44. skeeter145 says:

    White Christianity’s not the problem; the white mainstream’s current particular interpretation of Christianity is the problem. It’s like Pierce said about America’s white settlers — theirs was a Christianity of survival and life, as opposed to today’s white Christianity of surrender and death. After their third or fourth massacre by the Indians, the settlers had a choice of returning to Europe or getting rid of the Indians. So they got busy shooting Indians — and their faith had no problem with this, even blessed it, in fact.
    There’s no reason why Christianity need be incompatible with white survival and advancement. The faith just needs a tune-up: a few simple adjustments, and Christianity can once again provide the stability and support our race needs for our elite to lead us to the stars. Our people have 1,500 to 2,000 years of spiritual equity invested in Christianity. We can’t just throw it away. And I’m saying that as a heathen. Let’s follow the example of other races — they don’t let theological differences divide them. You ever see black Christians and Muslims at each other’s throat in this country? Don’t think so.

  45. LeroyJenkins says:

    The old “we would have been nothing without Xtianity” argument is circular logic. “White people acheived X in Y year. At the time most of us were Christians. Therefore Christianity is essential to Whites” Keep worshiping YKW if you want just don’t try to pull another inquisition on those of us who seek real spirituality.

  46. Svigor says:

    Commanding his disciples to go forth and baptize all the nations sounds pretty egalitarian.

    It’s imperialistic. But not necessarily egalitarian. The Americas were subjugated by Christians, under Christianity, with Christianity.

    As does healing a pagan child and favorably dealing with Samaritans. But yes, there is an undercurrent of Judaic nationalism.

    Really, it’s much more than an undercurrent. The entire OT is woven through with ethnocentrism, and the OT is as much the law as the NT.

    Gilding one’s ethnocentrism with universal love or vice versa is a classic trick. Just read what Irmin Vinson has to say about Spielberg. Such duplicity is a poor basis for an authentic White religion. After 2,000 years of failing to make the shoe fit, White People are moving on.

    After 2,000 years, many whites are not moving on. In fact, many whites will never move on as long as we set our race in opposition to their God.

    Golden Dawn are taking off in Greece, and that happened in a short space of time. Little beans > big bean stalk > Jack slays the Giant.

    I bet Golden Dawn has a higher proportion of Christians than Greece in general. Just a guess.

    When Whites form moral communities, they take them seriously. If their moral community is based on a text such as the Bible, they’ll interpret it to the best of their ability, set their best minds towards discovering The Truth, and follow the text, well, religiously. Even if the moral community is against their best interests.

    Theology can serve to steer the faithful. Priests and ministers go to school, and their beliefs are shaped by theology. Then they go and teach that theologically-molded religion to the flock. The theology that is taught to the priests and ministers is where we come in.

    You mention how blacks don’t have the same problem whites do in taking their religion too far. True. In fact, I once read an article about “black liberation theology” (I think that’s the term for it). I think it was about REVRUN “God damn America” Wright, and his theological pedigree. Basically, it said that one of the underpinning ideas is that God wants blacks to be strong and to do well, and if he didn’t, he’s not really God, he’s something else being presented as God. That’s the sort of thinking I’m talking about.

    Religion is the ultimate mindweapon.

    Bingo. Religion immunizes the believer against the world and its propaganda and fads.

    Unfortunately, progressives have taken control of the Christian mindweapon in America and today virtually all Christian institutions are preaching a slightly out of date version of progressivism.

    Yes, and the solution is to take Christianity back for ourselves. Set our Christians against their Christian heretics.

    And the facts are on the side of Christian reactionaries; liberal Christianity is pretty clearly based on perversions of the historical teachings of Christianity.

    Yep. We should be opening up their back-panels and hacking them, not trying to destroy or reject them.

    The old “we would have been nothing without Xtianity” argument is circular logic. “White people acheived X in Y year. At the time most of us were Christians. Therefore Christianity is essential to Whites” Keep worshiping YKW if you want just don’t try to pull another inquisition on those of us who seek real spirituality.

    I think “Christianity was a necessary condition” is no more absurd than “Christianity is necessarily a problem.”

  47. Hereward Saxon says:

    Is Christianity egalitarian or universalistic, as “WHOSOEVER will may come” sounds? Not really, because the moral standards of the faith are absolute, and the consequence of disobedience is the same, regardless of the ability or apparent inability of any individuals or ethnic groups to live up to them.

  48. Hereward Saxon says:

    “After 2,000 years, many whites are not moving on. In fact, many whites will never move on as long as we set our race in opposition to their God.”

    Accepting them WITH their baggage of Christianity is the best approach to weaning whites away from “their” God?

  49. Hereward Saxon says:

    In the comment above, “regardless of the ability or apparent inability of any individuals or ethnic groups to live up to them” should have been: “regardless of the ability or apparent inability of some individuals or ethnic groups to live up to them.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s