Break’s over, back to business.

Not entirely satisfied with my previous post so let’s try again.

Yesterday I was driving by a church and its big engraved letters on the front read: ‘JESUS WILL SAVE US.’ I wished my gut reaction was: ‘Yes! Deus Vult!’ but it was not. My actual gut reaction was: ‘yeah right.’

I can not pretend to be something I’m not. I’m not a Christian. But at the same time, I’m not not a Christian. My bloodline has been Christian for centuries. But that faith is gone and no amount of wishful thinking is bringing it back. Jesus was a wise teacher, and the bible is a wise book. But the dead will not save us.

That said, calling Jesus a miracle faker is futile and disrespectful – why would I hate on my ancestors? This to me seems a much more compelling argument for respect than Christians’ insistence that Jesus will save us. No, he already saved us, cut the man some slack, this time we have to come up with something new.

So debates about the literal versus metaphorical nature of Jesus’ miracles are not so relevant. Either Christians conquer society once again and I’ll bite my tongue, or something new comes along which by necessity will be respectful towards Jesus which will render moot my annoyance of Christians acting holier than me.

I have very little faith in Christians reconquering society. All I’ve met are cucked beta soyboys intermingled with the occasional silver tongued psychopath. Perhaps on the internet it is different, perhaps there are more shades of Christians, but so far I am not so impressed. I like Jesus, but I dislike these Christians. Well I like Christians, I dislike their moral posturing. ‘Jesus will save me’ said the young white girl surrounded by 5 black men. If everything around you is burning and you say: ‘this is fine, this is OK’, yet I see everything is burning, how the hell can I take your faith serious? Similarly, those Christians who do see everything is burning: how long am I supposed to wait for a miracle? How am I supposed to organize, if every time I quote scripture Christians meet me with some other scripture that is sufficiently vague that in their mind it counters my point? These are not fertile grounds for cooperation.

So. If Christians want to cooperate with me, they will have to show respect and trust me to do the right thing, instead of demanding me to show respect and trust them to do the right thing.

Saint Darwin in this sense is not so much a helpful suggestion as it is a statement of belief, a cross to ward off fake Christians. And there are many fake Christians, for rarely does a Christian accept the full implication of evolution; he tends to wriggle around it. I am told that the Catholic church holds no official position on evolution, yet with every Christian I meet it is never: ah, evolution..! It is always: evolution, but…. Similarly with vaccinations: yes some side-effects remain to be seen, yes the pro-vaccination witch hunt is out in full force, but polio was a nasty disease and we have eradicated it. Any child walking around with deformed hands in 2018 is a permanent advertisement that Christians can be pretty anti-Darwin.

If you, my dear Christian reader, are deeply and inexcusably offended by this, by all means: pray for me tonight and never read this blog again. That is all.

Now, back to where my faith does lie. If that church sign had said: ‘JIM WILL SAVE US’ I would have responded very enthusiastically. Unfortunately Jim misses that touch of delusion that makes him say: ‘the way to the Father is through me’. Sad. Though on the plus side it makes him humble and consistent and consistency is really the most you can hope for.

Part of me just wants to resolve this religion issue here and now, to draw borders around it, say ‘this is the new religion’ and call it a day. But it does not work like that. Life flows, changes, evolves. The religion that will allow Western society to rise out of its debris is at this point as undefined as Christianity was before it raised the debris of the Roman empire out of its dark ages. So even if I refer to the new religion as Jimianity, I am being preemptive, and it is best to let time take its course and see where this shining white pill takes us.

21 thoughts on “Christianity

  1. I rather think that Charles the Second may well save us.

    The bible being printed in the common tongue, and everyone getting a copy, was a disaster from which we have not recovered. But having the information widely available about what everyone else did right and did wrong, and reading the bible in the context provided by that information, may well save us.

    For a while, our past was being erased. Libraries were systematically burning old books, and still are, even when those books are extremely valuable and worth hundreds of dollars on the old books market. Our past was being erased after the fashion depicted in 1984. Old books were kept only in special libraries where they could only be read by people thoroughly vetted for their conformity to the current year, and the only information available about are past was the current year interpretation of our past. The internet has stopped this process, and made our past readily available.

    1. Make reading Latin and Greek high status, and English low status. Hard to do, perhaps, but it solves the problem of the readily available Bibles.

  2. God helps those who help themselves. You are making the demotist mistake of listening to the crowd. Who cares what Christians believe? Many of them will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven because the way is narrow and dangerous. Priests and warriors should no more argue with the laity than men argue with women. The instruction is given, and it falls to them to obey or rebel. The consequences likewise fall on them as well.

    Give them instruction. You are not suited to the task, for reasons I have pointed out, but a man such as Jim is. Find such a man, and help him. You are not a warrior, and a leader of men. You might advise one who is, and that is just as needed. Offer a warrior an idea that does not end in death and loss, and you can have much influence that way.

  3. The single most important thing anyone can do is pick up the $100 bills lying on the sidewalk: high-IQ young men with a bit too much latent testosterone and self-respect to comfortably face the prospect of a career of self-abasement before mudbloods and women. As far as I know, latter-day Christianity is very much a Middle American phenomenon and totally devoid of this natural aristocracy.

    Relatedly, who says we even need a “religion”? What is a religion, anyway? As far as I can tell, calling something a religion is tantamount to disavowing its primacy, hence calling Progressivism a religion is like the Freeze portion of Alinsky’s Rules.

    I think we don’t need a religion, just a shared understanding of what constitutes a glorious future.

    1. What you call a shared understanding of what constitutes a glorious future I call a religion. In the end they are of course only words, it is the reality that matters.

      1. When you utter the words “shared understanding of a glorious future”, not a soul on the planet experiences the same meaning as when you utter the word “religion”. “Religion” means Christianity, overwhelmingly, which is dead and was weak and sickly long before its last rattling breath; or Islam, possibly, which is at this point pretty much an apparition of the alphabet soup. And what parts of Christianity or Islam? The symbolism. None of the deeper stuff, like the vigorous masculine society’s suffusive promise to deliver impromptu physical correction as required. Not the conception of God, which often shares little similarity even between Christian sects. Not the conception of reality, in which unrestricted Darwinism operates on biological organisms on geological timescales. The cross, the Bible, the Jesus figure, the prayer mat bobbing, the head bag, the jihad.

        Here’s an example: you say that it’s all “just words” and it’s “the reality” that really matters. Okay – and this is the one really important thing I learned from Jordan “Soros is my Homeboy” Peterson – just what the hell is “the reality”, anyway? Our conscious experience is a hallucination and the physical world as expressed across time (narrative structure) is far too complex for us to be aware of even 1% of what’s going on under the hood.

        No one needs a new religion. They just need to know why things are the way they are now, have hope for a glorious future, and know how to make it happen. See: Elon Musk’s Rocket Futurism.

        1. The great lie of modernity is that we are done with religion. We are never, because cooperation demands shared spirituality. Thus, as Moldbug pointed out, our modern religions, such as progressivism, are all religions that sell themselves as not being a religion.

          From a mathematician’s point of view, religion remains an unsolved equation. Cannot do without it.

          1. It really depends on how you define “religion”. Or, how “religion” is defined, both the concept and the word. It seems to me that, to any given two men, “religion” is something at least subtly different, if not wildly different; furthermore, that, more often than not, one man can use the word in subtly differing senses in sequential sentences on the same topic. So, let’s attempt, however vainly, to define some words.

            Suppose that the infinite complexity of Religion can be reduced to a single-axis sliding scale. At one extreme, which we will call ReligionMAX, everything is religion: God is everywhere at all times, always watching, always judging, cold, aloof, inhuman, totalizing, and so everything is imbued with religious notions of this or that, which is to say that every act is a religious act. At the other end, we have ReligionMIN: God is a man, if indeed a god at all, little is immediately recognizably “religious” (in the sense of ritual and symbolism), and people don’t make a habit of believing in various superstitions, e.g. the knocking of wood, the kissing beneath mistletoe, or the equality of man.

            From my IV C.Y. perspective, it seems to me that Catholicism or Islam would plot points much more toward the ReligionMAX than not. What would qualify as ReligionMIN? I don’t know; maybe the better strains of Protestantism, like Congregationalism, or noncommieistic scientific materialism.

            But have we captured the meaning of religion? Perhaps a little bit. But a lot? I don’t think so. What strikes me about your claim about “religions that sell themselves as not being religions”, is that no religion would self-profess itself as being a religion… in the sense of the word I think you’re using, intentionally or unintentionally, chiefly: something along the lines of a progressive’s snorting dismissal of Christianity as “oh, just religion” (notice that when a progressive uses the word “religion” he only ever refers to Christianity — when he means Islam he says Islam; when he means Judaism he says Judaism; when he means Buddhism he says Buddhism, and so on), or of Moldbug the defective progressive’s definition in twisting of the loaded gun in upon its user.

            What I’m trying to get at here, ultimately, despite the incredible slipperiness of this terrain, (and brace yourself for a heretofore-unmatched level of self-referentialism) is that “we need a new religion” can be part of your understanding of your reality, but it cannot actually be your religion. Does this make sense? “Our old religion is dead; we are in search of a new religion” could be the animating principle of a great multitude until the end of time. Yea.

  4. I agreed with you until this:

    But that faith is gone and no amount of wishful thinking is bringing it back. Jesus was a wise teacher, and the bible is a wise book. But the dead will not save us.

    In many times and many places, men wise in the ways of the world confidently proclaimed Christianity to be dead and gone. That they keep finding the need to say it, seems to counter what they say.

    “The dead will not save us.” This is the fundamental disagreement between Christians and heretics. Christians believe Christ raised, as in NOT dead. It is the living Christ who we think will save us. Which is of course rank foolishness to the mind of anyone who thinks Jesus merely a wise teacher who is now dead.

    I have very little faith in Christians reconquering society.

    Well, naturally, since you don’t believe in Christ.

    All I’ve met are cucked beta soyboys intermingled with the occasional silver tongued psychopath.

    Which am I? I might admit to a little psychopathy, but my tongue is more like lead than silver. And calling me a cucked soyboy is fighting words. I get the impression you’re conveying, yes, there are many cucks and many liars among the Christians of our society. BUT, there are also many cucks and many liars among the standard populace of our society, so it is not so bad as it might seem. What really matters is not if there are cucks, or even lots of cucks, but if there are any alphas. I can only speak from the Christians I know, but even in a libcuck city of Austin, there are alphas among us. Maybe not as many as I’d like, but definitely not zero. If you look in a cucked heretical form of Christianity, don’t be surprised at what you find, but if you look in a traditional latin mass Catholic form of Christianity, you get something substantially different: ie, large families, male respect, etc.

    1. There is a grey area.

      I doubt Christianity has ever been as dead and gone as it is today. Yet that does not take away it might still be revived, as you say, and as Jim in one form or other also says.

      The question is how many Christians get what is going on and get what needs to be done. In the Netherlands, I have yet to meet the first Christian that leaves a positive impression on me. But who knows; I have not gone out of my way to search for them.

      For me it is a matter of hoping for the best, preparing for the worst. If the best scenario for Christianity literal reinstatement as during the reign of Charles the second, the worst is more pozzed Christianity of what we have today.

      1. Based on the way you present yourself online, Christian warriors are going to want to have nothing to do with you. You will only meet cucked soyboys because none of the warriors would want you around. You have selection bias, in that you are looking for a rare type of man in a method and manner that is off-putting to that kind of man.

        1. How should I present myself if I wish to meet, befriend and eventually emulate Christian warrior types?

          1. I cannot speak for Knight, but what seems to work for me:
            1. show that you are on their side, support them, as opposed to 99% of priests who will virtue signal against them.
            2. show consistent strength.

          2. The strength of the pack is the strength of the wolf. Be strong, be useful, and never be too proud to take criticism.

            The strength of the wolf is the pack. Back up other men, help them, and ask for their help. Only invest

            Sometimes you have to be the first. If you cannot find the men you seek, be the man other men will seek. Then get better.

    2. >Christians believe Christ raised, as in NOT dead.

      I mean, look, you can have your kike-on-a-stick personality cult thing if you like, like the Catholics have their whole I’m-praying-for-absolution-to-the-incredibly-virtuous-and-thoroughly-unfucked-wife-of-little-remembered-stand-in-father-figure-Joseph,-who-totally-wasn’t-cuckolded-by-God-or-maybe-just-another-brown-Jew,-take-your-pick,-and-who-by-the-way-isn’t-a-demigod-we’re-totally-not-into-that-polytheism-thing-we-swear thing, but the supposed reanimation of a Galilean preacher three days after his untimely demise to Roman justice, witnessed only by his most ardent fanboys immediately before he was magically spirited up into the aether, though not before promising to return “soon”, “soon” apparently meaning more than 2000 years and 80 generations later, after Rome had long since fallen, his people had been wiped off the face of the Earth by Mohammed the Kiddy-Diddler (Peace Be Upon Him), entire cities had been obliterated by manmade death-rain from the sky, and the entire freaking planet had come within a hairsbreadth of nuclear annihilation multiple times, is actually one of the less important aspects of traditional and historical Christianity, and your apparent nation that anyone, having once experienced a sudden flood of conviction-feeling re: the unreasoned and unsupported historicity of such, is automatically, immediately, and fully as Xtian as anyone else, without regard for intelligence, talent, wealth, sophistication, breeding, social standing, lifelong sexual integrity in the case of women and prowess in the case of men, fertility, or literally any other sensible and restrictive criteria for the dispensation of in-group membership in good standing, is immensely compelling evidence of just how shallow, coarse, and democratic has the spirit of Xtianity become in this, The Year of the Sky King, IV C.Y. [Current Year]

  5. Maybe Jesus was not delusional when he proclaimed, “the way to the father is through me.” Maybe he said what he needed to say as that was what was needed to get things done.

    So maybe Jim can be persuaded to pretend to be delusional and proclaim, “The way to the father is through me.”

    Now where are the Hindus going to find a Jim. We have a Modbug, but no Jim.

    Note: The Christian attitude that “Jesus will save us” perfectly mirrors the Hindu attitude that “Vishnu will take another incarnation as Kalki and then save us.” This sort of attitude is what is called Fatalism and drives away all thinking people and what is worse, it drives away men of action.

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.