25 Painful Red Pill Questions Christians Need To Ask Themselves

Part I – Scientific Repression

1. Do I not disagree that the Roman Catholic Church played a major role in repressing all major scientific and technological innovation in Europe for the greater part of 1000 years after the fall of the Roman Empire? From approximately A.D. 400 to A.D. 1400?

2. Do I not disagree that the invention of the Gutenberg Press in 1450, and the fall of Constantinople in 1453 (resulting in an influx of more advanced Arabic & Turkish knowledge into Europe) finally began to end this Catholic stranglehold of scientific repression and knowledge enslavement?

3. Do I not disagree that the Dutch Golden Age of the 1600s was attributed to the Dutch Republic’s climate of intellectual and religious tolerance? And that this religious freedom (uncommon for the era) made Dutch science and technology the most acclaimed in the world during this time?

4. Do I not disagree that Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution in the 1800s was based upon tangible evidence and sound reasoning? And that the discoveries of dinosaurs and other fossils which are millions of years old, proves that our Earth is far older than the mere 6,000 years that many Christians believe?

5. Do I not disagree that if Christianity never existed, we could very well be at a level of technology and cultural enlightenment so unfathomably advanced, beyond our wildest dreams, in the year 2014?

Part II – Bad Popes

6. Do I not disagree that the Cadaver Synod of 897 (the posthumous ecclesiastical trial of Catholic Pope Formosus) was one of the most bizarre, freaky, and disgusting scenarios in the history of humanity?

7. Do I not disagree that Pope Stephen VI was a pitiful excuse to be leader of the Catholic Church, as his conduct towards the rotting remains of his predecessor, Pope Formosus, were extremely vile and depraved?

(The rotting corpse of Formosus was exhumed and put on trial in the so-called Cadaver Synod in January 897. With the corpse propped up on a throne, a deacon was appointed to answer for the deceased pontiff. The corpse was accordingly found guilty, stripped of its sacred vestments, and deprived of three fingers of its right hand.)

8. Do I not disagree that Pope Benedict IX was a pitiful excuse to be leader of the Catholic Church? Due to living an extremely dissolute life, having few qualifications for the papacy other than connections with a socially powerful family, being repeatedly accused of rape and murder, and for selling the papacy like it was nothing more than a commodity?

“a disgrace to the Chair of Peter” – The Catholic Encyclopedia

“a demon from hell in the disguise of a priest… occupied the chair of Peter and profaned the sacred mysteries of religion by his insolent courses” – Ferdinand Gregorovius, Papal Historian

“his rapes, murders and other unspeakable acts. His life as a pope was so vile, so foul, so execrable, that I shudder to think of it”- Pope Victor III

9. Do I not disagree that Pope Nicholas V (1397-1455) was a pitiful excuse to be leader of the Catholic Church, as he authorized the King of Portugal in 1452 to enslave any and all non-believers in perpetuity through the Dum Diversas?

The Papal Bull of Dum Diversas, 18th of June 1452

“We grant you [Kings of Spain and Portugal] by these present documents, with our Apostolic Authority, full and free permission to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate the Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers and enemies of Christ wherever they may be, as well as their kingdoms, duchies, counties, principalities, and other property […] and to reduce their persons into perpetual slavery.”

10. Do I not disagree that Pope Urban VI was a pitiful excuse to be leader of the Catholic Church, due to his very violent temperament, and that he complained he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were being tortured to death?

Part III – Wars & Atrocities

11. Do I not disagree on the ridiculousness that after the World War I Christmas Truces of 1914, the soldiers of various nations across Europe (all following Christianity) resumed shooting at each other the following day by order of their political and military superiors? But this time against their new found friends?

12. Do I not disagree that all of the 40,000-60,000 women in Europe and North America who were executed during the Witch Hunts that occurred between 1480-1750, were more than likely innocent of all accusations? And that these were instances of fundamentalist Christian mass hysteria and ignorance, and completely lacking in compassion or logic?

13. Do I not disagree on the ridiculousness that Wehrmacht personnel in Nazi Germany were made to invade nations, loot property, murder and enslave various ‘Untermensch’ (Sub Humans), and commit other heinous crimes all while wearing a belt buckle inscribed with “Gott mit uns” (God with us)?

14. Do I not disagree that the Spanish Conquistadors made an absolute mockery of the so-called “peaceful” Christian religion which they claimed to follow? By raping, pillaging, enslaving, and decimating all major Native American civilizations they came in contact with during the Age of Discovery?

15. Do I not disagree that George W. Bush claimed he was ‘told by God’ to end the tyranny in Iraq? And that this conflict has directly or indirectly caused the death of at least 500,000 innocent Iraqis and many thousands of U.S. troops, based on a story of lies and deception?

Part IV – Evil Bible Verses

16. Do I not disagree that Psalm 137:9 “Happy they shall be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock” is so morally repugnant that it’s making infanticide sound like a party?

(“No moral justification can be offered for this notorious concluding line. All one can do is to recall the background of outraged feeling that triggers the conclusion.” – Robert Alter, Bible Scholar)

17. Do I not disagree that Peter 2:18 “Slaves, accept the authority of your master with all deference, not only those who are gentle but also those who are harsh” has no place in a civil society where all human beings have the right to personal liberty, and to appropriately retaliate when they are being oppressed?

18. Do I not disagree that Kings 2:23-24 “”From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. “Go up baldhead,” they shouted, “go up baldhead!” The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces” is a bit of a harsh, bizarre, and exaggerated punishment for teasing a prophet of God for simply having a bald head? Especially when directed against such young children?

19. Do I not disagree that Samuel 15:2-3 “This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: ‘I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses” Is a passage of wanton and indiscriminate mass murder which is not suitable for this religion of ‘peace’?

20. Do I not disagree that Deuteronomy 22:28-29 “If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her” is sheer lunacy? What kind of God would mandate that a rape victim marry her attacker?

Part V – General Questions

21. Do I not disagree that countries such as Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands are among the most prosperous, peaceful, and charitable societies on Earth? And that these traditionally Christian nations ironically have among the highest percentages of non-religious, agnostics, and atheists in the world?

22. Do I not disagree that the United States and Brazil, the two most populous countries on Earth where the vast majority of inhabitants claim Christianity as their religion, have far higher per capita instances of robbery, rape, and murder than largely non-religious Northern Europe?

23. Do I not disagree that the state of Mississippi is the most religious state in the USA, yet it bottoms out on many national social indicators which are not complimentary? Such as being the poorest and most obese? In addition to having the lowest life expectancy, lowest reading and math scores, lowest prevalence of STEM careers, and the highest infant mortality rate in the nation?

24. Do I not disagree it’s disheartening that God is supposed to be all-knowing and all-powerful, and capable of divine intervention, yet has never once intervened (with solid proof) to stop a good or righteous person from being tortured, mutilated, gravely injured or killed by wicked persons, animals, or the forces of nature?

25. Do I not disagree it’s a ridiculous concept that God is supposed to be all-powerful and capable of miracles, yet has no power and control over something as petty as money? And that we as flesh-and-blood humans are supposed to fill the void by constantly donating to charities, churches, and other religious organizations with our hard-earned fiat currency?

Conclusion – The Red Pill Truth

“The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the sun, in which they put a man called Christ in the place of the sun, and pay him the adoration originally payed to the sun.” – (Thomas Paine)

“Lighthouses are more useful than Churches.” – (Benjamin Franklin)

“Avoid gurus and religions. They’re bad for your mental health, and they want your money.” – (Richard Sutphen)

Read MoreDoes God Have A Place In The Red Pill Man’s Life?

615 thoughts on “25 Painful Red Pill Questions Christians Need To Ask Themselves”

  1. how are any of those red pill questions? the red pill has nothing to do with any of that…?

    1. “the red pill is the truth . . .”
      You were doing great right up until here, and then your vision fell short.
      Perhaps you need glasses:

    2. I don’t mind them delving into these topics as long as we don’t get at eachother’s throats and divide ourselves as a community and thus allow our opponents to break up what has been an excellent place for men to be men. This would naturally involve discussion about important issues such as faith.
      It’s not like Women are capable of having these types of discussions(except for darlings like Sunshine Mary)

        1. Nothing’s worse than a stroppy, headstrong submissive. Especially one who sanctimoniously attention whores on religious men’s sites.
          Why she’s tolerated is utterly beyond me. Lots of megathirsty bible thumpers out there, I guess.

    3. It’s much more than that.
      This may be a bit above your level, but check out the books linked here:

  2. You could create a similar red-pill list for The United States. In retrospect our country has done many bad things. But, we are an evolving country that has different values now that we did 250 years ago. Same with the Catholic Church. The modern Catholic Church has evolved in many ways. Its a flawed institution to be sure but has many great institutions and is still a force for good.

    1. Imagine the list you could make with “science.” How many people has science harmed? “Megadeaths” was a term invented to describe the amount of death science can bring…

  3. ” God is supposed to be all-knowing and all-powerful, and capable of divine intervention, yet has never once intervened (with solid proof) to stop a good or righteous person from being tortured, mutilated, gravely injured or killed by wicked persons, animals, or the forces of nature?”
    And you know this to be true? Not one?
    Stipulated: Men have done many evil and terrible things in the name of God. Where is your list of positive things done in the name of God?

  4. Right off the bat this guy proves he’s drunk the Koolaid. Read God’s Philosopher’s by James Hannam, or better yet, Tim O’Neill’s review of it. Even as an atheist, O’Neill admits that the trope of the science-hating Catholic Church is total modernist bunk.
    The rest of the article reads like regurgitated new atheist propaganda, capped off with the dumb Zeitgeist clip. This site deserves better content than warmed-over Richard Dawkins.
    Do you not disagree?

    1. “Right off the bat this guy proves he’s drunk the Koolaid. Read God’s
      Philosopher’s by James Hannam, or better yet, Tim O’Neill’s review of
      it. Even as an atheist, O’Neill admits that the trope of the
      science-hating Catholic Church is total modernist bunk.”
      No kidding. The idea that the church was anti-science was debunked long ago. And no ‘m not a Catholic and have absolutely ZERO interest in becoming one..

      1. You should ask Galileo that.
        This is however an extremely important topic of discussion that doesn’t appear to be addressed anywhere on the manosphere. That is, what is progress, and how does a society move forward with some sense of scientific, political and technological progress while retaining the institutions it needs to maintain order.
        The word progress holds a negative connotation in a lot of conservative circles, but progress is also penicillin and democracy.

        1. Oh noez! Galileo was put on house arrest where he could still conduct studies while the Church which was peer-reviewing his work internally debated his theories, and whether or not they should continue to support his work & publications. Oh, won’t SCIENCE SAVE US?!

        2. The Church allowed other scientists to engage in the same enquiries as Galileo. Galileo was put under simple house arrest for the contemptuous behaviour he was showing to others. The Church was not theologically committed to a position on Galileo’s work, and the idea that Catholic theology would depend upon such a thing is absurd. This is modernist bunk, cooked up after the fact.

        3. Not least because everyone who was in a position to know and talk about it (ie: in latin) knew a) the earth is round, and b) the bible clearly thinks it is flat. The church has known this pretty much forever, they just didn’t talk about it with the common people.

        4. Please, quote me a passage from the Bible indicating a belief in a flat earth.

    2. Yeah, the kid thinks the Nazis weren’t pagans. That’s where I stopped even skimming it.
      Whatever, hey, it’s click bait. Baby needs new shoes.

  5. This is blue pill atheist anti Christain propaganda. It isn’t red pill at all.
    Whatever the faults of Christianity, a Christain nation created the wealth of America which is a pretty nice place to live.
    This is what a real red pill would look like:
    Men are polyamourous and women are Hypergamous. Men are capable of loving multiple women and women only want the best. Humans are 3.5 million years old, and civilized for maybe 10k years of that. 61% of men who ever lived never had enough sex to reproduce. The top half of those men, 20% of all men, reproduced with 75% of the women.
    The leftover men were locked into a life or death war struggle for sex, and resources. Life before civilization was brutish and short. The winners got all of the women and got endless war from the rest of men. Doubtless some men opted out of war and sex, and became drains on society too,
    Two things had t happen to make civilization possible. Mairrage and religion. Mairrage is fundamentally a restriction on the sex lives of women and alphas, and is necessary to enable the sex lives of betas. Instead of warring society, betas can build it. But, mairrage is also a screwjob to alphas who could have more, and a screwjob to women who could have alphas. Hence, religion. Religion is the likes that it takes for society to avoid devolving into barbarism.

      1. The other way around, when 2/3 does that, less efficient aspects of a society are replaced by more efficient ones civilization goes up,
        When that stops, civilization stops going up but that does not save it, because it is still very much able to down.
        First social contract was that the group was an ape #1 and a few others right behind had priority over the others, making the group into an evolutionnary advantage.

    1. Agree with all you said. I’m a right wing , traditionalist atheist. I think there are 4 of us. I stand in solidarity with religious folks usually because they believe there are more important things than the govt e.g family , church, God, community, the country . There is a RELIGIOUS LEFT and they worship the government and themselves. Would rather hang with you guys any day…

    2. wow dude that was real good. definitaly like to read more in depth about that. any sources?
      think you also explained why librarls have a lot of women n athesits. only difference they dont want to compete with the alpha but use him.

    3. I like this post. While I might argue specifics differently, It’s good to see someone else who knows that most of those rules aren’t just there because “god said so”.
      Most traditional rules(the general ones, not specific sect’s crazy rules like stoning fornicators) are there because following those rules creates social conditions that allow for a society to advance economically and technologically.

    4. Very we’ll put. Would you believe that atheist Freud shared (nearly) this same perspective?
      Research “civilization & it’s Discontents” as he describes that civilization is only possible if we repress our sexual & murderous passions. Freud agrees with the Church as to the requirements for successful society.

    5. Nope.
      It is the exact other way around, when betas are in charge, things are not built, they stagnate. Societies eats themselves.
      Betas doesn´t build no more than cavalery horses uses swords or police dogs uses guns.
      If anything, it is letting them having such a sex life that is destroying civilization.

      Dark ages and inquistion, later wars of religions, something which secular leaders (aka alphas) put an end to.
      The more christians moved away from the old testament roots, the better they where off, at least until liberalism came along, which really is a pseudo-christian religion.

      1. In short, the successful being punished in order to benefit the losers does not create societies, it destroys them.

  6. What a moronic list. First of all, there is no disagreement between science and Christianity. The rise of scientific knowledge and civilization went hand in hand with the rise of Christianity. And, most of the great scientific advancements in history were made by Christian scientists. The theory of evolution is unsubstantiated nonsense. A single-celled, asexually reproducing organism (which we all supposedly started as under this theory) would be the “fittest” organism in the world in terms of Darwinian evolution. There is no logical reason why “evolution” would result in the creation of more and more complex organisms.
    As to the “difficult” Bible verses cited, saying that we should submit to earthly rulers or masters is not a moral statement as to the system of government or system of servitude we are under. It is simply a call to focus on higher authority/objectives.
    And, numbers 21-23 have to do with race, not religion. Scandinavian countries are peaceful with high standards of living because they are rich in natural resources and, mostly, ethnically homogenous. Likewise, Mississippi ranks dead last in things like health and education because it has the highest percentage of African-Americans of all states. It has nothing to do with religion. If Massachusetts or Oregon were to become 40% African-America overnight, they would slip to the bottom of the list in all standard of living measurements as well.

    1. It’s my opinion that Scandinavia’s relatively peaceful society is the result of the legacy left by their Christian forefathers.
      As they descend further into godlessness, paganism and Islam we will see these societies begin to unravel.

      1. Unfortunately, most people are hypocrites and 99% of people do not take their religious beliefs seriously act on their stated religious beliefs unless it backs up what they already wanted to do. If Europe was subjected to Islam hundreds of years ago, I don’t think it would be much different than it is now. And, the Middle East would be a violent basket case regardless of what religion those people practice.

        1. Another ignorant American who doesn´t/can’t understand Christianity basically created Europe and the West

        2. Did you not read my initial comment, genius? I stated that the rise of Western civilization occurred alongside the rise of Christianity.

      2. Actually the “heathen” gods were revered for aalmost a millenium after the introduction of Christianity in Scandinavia. The God of the Hebrews simply wasn’t relevant to them in every day life.

        1. If the heathen gods were revered or relevant to the Scandinavians, they would have never converted to Christianity in the first place.

        2. Joining Christendom lent a lot of political and economy advantages. It was a convenience really, adapted by Scandinavia’s nobility. They joined the club and reaped the rewards.

        3. Constantine had them all converted at sword point or they chose death. Their temples were razed and churches were erected in place.

        4. Constantine? Constantine died about 500-600 years before Scandinavia was converted to Christianity.

      3. And Japan what? I am not impressed by Scandinavia at all, as they are very few and far between

        1. They adopted Christian ethic of labor however they are dying already, easily infected by fatalism (they are practical atheists) and feminism.

  7. 26 Do I not disagree that Jesus is the biggest pussy of all fictional gods? Thor slays frost gainsts with a hammer, Zeus fucks every cock-worthy chick and Greece and Jesus got tacked to the wall like a Justin bieber poster.

    1. Which in a way is evidence in favor of the truth of Christianity. If it had been completely made up, they would have invented a heroic, conquering warrior-god like pretty much every other made up god.

      1. There is no reference of any “Jesus Christ” anywhere outside of the bible. If he did exist, he was nothing more than a cult leader who was executed by the state.

        1. “There is no reference of any “Jesus Christ” anywhere outside of the bible.”
          Irrelevant and untrue. Only a small fraction of writings from 2000 years ago exist. We have more evidence for the existence of Jesus than any other individual from that time period. And, Jesus is mentioned in both the Koran and Talmud.
          Sorry. But I can’t take anyone seriously who doubts the historical existence of Jesus. Literally no serious historian with the exception of the leftist, atheist crank Richard Carrier agrees with you.

        2. There were a ton of references in numerous documents to Jesus. The references were so great and numerous that the ancients took them all and compiled them into one book, known as “The Bible”
          Pretty cool, huh. Oh, and there were some that didn’t make the cut, therefore are references that are not in the Bible.

        3. Atheist Stumped by Overwhelming Evidence for Jesus’ Existence…From an AGNOSTIC LIBERAL Scholar!

    2. Jesus came as a baby to fulfill the prophecy of being a sacrificial lamb.
      The next time he comes back he’s bringing a sword, and a boat-load of righteous judgement.

    3. His first task is to destroy sin and the power of the devil which is death which he successfully did on the cross and by his resurrection. His apparent physical defeat is a spiritual victory. He atones for sin for one and hence spares the forgiven the coming wrath. And he defeats death therefore which is the penalty of sin by rising from the dead.

        1. He is the embodiment of Justice and all that is good. Of course that is how is he going to act.
          You cannot expect a perfectly moral unchanging perfect being to do otherwise.
          Likewise there is nothing in him that makes him unwilling to do right. So he is not really forced anyway.

    4. This is what Jesus will do upon his return:
      8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.
      9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: 10 and they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? 11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as theywere, should be fulfilled.
      12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; 13 and the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. 14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. 15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17 for the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

  8. Meh..It beat this new religion of Cultural Marxism and political correctness we subscribe to now in the West. At least men and women you know ..actually lived in harmony and had the ability to raise children in a loving environment for the most part.
    You forget when the YKW made it cool for us Western goyim to rid ourselves of Christian morality we just substituted it for something else.

  9. There is a VAST difference between Christianity and Catholicism. Do not lump them in the same category. This article is LOADED with bias and clearly the author hasn’t done much research from the other perspective.

      1. “Zombie Jew is their savior”….OUCH. C-sure you have nailed it ( ha a pun..get it NAILED it?) re: Jesus. Never heard Jesus ( aka the resurrection) described as a zombie but that is exactly what it is…

      2. “Zombie Jew” – a most profound reflection on the true meaning of the resurrection. discuss

      3. Is believing that a zombie Jew is your savior much worse than believing what secular materialists believe: that magically animated sacks of meat have rights, feelings, free will, and reasonable thoughts?

        1. Not wrong to believe in Jesus but just incorrect. The evidence for Jesus is scant and most would label the story as myth…

        2. please clarify – are you talking about his very existence or simply his biographical narratives as contained in the Gospels?

        3. Most people would say Socrates existed, but we only know about him because one other man, just one, wrote about him (Plato). Not only did Josephus the Jewish historian mention Jesus, but so does Jewish rabbinical tradition, aside from the 4 gospel writers and other accounts in the New Testament.

        4. Platonic philosophy does not depend on whether Socrates was a real man or a literary invention of Plato’s.
          Christian theology, however, does depend entirely on the existence of Jesus.

        5. If it is incorrect, then it is wrong- so don’t patronize me. Although most would not label Jesus a myth, who cares what most would do? Although the evidence is scant, it is good. And why don’t you address my charge that atheism involves a magical belief about randumbly talking meat sacks?
          Are you a woman?

        6. Atheism is a religion . . . atheists worship the state. The state is the most immoral entity there can be. Everything the state owns it has stolen from the private citizens either at gun point or through taxes. The only thing which has come from the state is poverty, death, and wars.

        7. Ar you talking about that well-known and obvious forgery in Josepus’ history of the Jews?

        8. No, the evidence *isn’t* good. Here’s an exercise for you: go through the accounts of the death, resurrection, and post-resurrection appearances of Jesus in the three synoptic gospels and try to piece together a consistent narrative of what actually happened. Even a casual reading of Matthew and Luke will convince you that they independently invented all the stuff that happened prior to where Mark picks up the story, at Jesus’ baptism.
          The oldest stuff we have – St Paul’s writings – don’t have a human Jesus at all. Jesus wasn’t born in Bethlehem, didn’t preach in Jerusalem, wasn’t crucified on calvary and most certainly didn’t have a mother: he came down from heaven, was crucified by demon spirits in the lower sphere, and ascended back up. Check out Paul’s (authentic) writings. His Jesus is entirely spiritual.
          (PS: how does Luke know what Jesus prayed at Gethsemane?)

        9. No he didn’t. He wrote about Christians who belived in Jesus, a century after the events in the gospels were meant to have occured. He even manages to get Pilate’s title wrong.

      4. So you characterize any notion as resurrection as a rotted slow or fast flesh or brain eating monster?

      5. If there ever was a good and righteous man who walked this Earth 2,000+ years ago, then two things are surely true: his name wasn’t actually “Jesus Christ”, and he certainly wasn’t a shameless and soulless Jew.

        1. Of course not. His original rendering was Yeshua or Yehoshua. Jesus is derived from the greek: “Ieosus” derived from Yeshua. And Christ is derived from Christos which is Greek for Mašíaḥ.

    1. The true religion is Buddhism, enough said, the success of Buddhist countries is impressive : Japan ( with its Pokémon ), South Korea (Gangnam Style) ,Taiwan (Meteor Garden ), Hong Kong (Buddha bless Jackie Chan as he is a loyal and proud Buddhist) and Singapore (such a clean and not corrupt country).

      1. any religion can turn into crap, but clearly the wisdom in buddhism, especially Zen…. is more immediately apparent than in a bunch of mumbo jumbo superstitious fairy tales about a mythical guy getting nailed to a cross… that there is no actual historical evidence for, despite it only being 2000 years ago when literature and history is well documented…
        in fact historical evidence pretty much shows that the Christs fairy tale was a common fable going back several hundred years BC – AND the Romans hijacked it to make the troublesome jews look bad…. if they killed their own messiah then they’d be less powerful… AND it worked !
        the matrix gives anyone a crash course in Zen Buddhism and everyone got the message, whether they chose to practice it or not.

        1. “than in a bunch of mumbo jumbo superstitious fairy tales about a
          mythical guy getting nailed to a cross… that there is no actual
          historical evidence for, despite it only being 2000 years ago when
          literature and history is well documented…”
          “About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . .come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of
          Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared”
          “On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy.”
          Babylonian Talmud
          Likewise since he was an executed common criminal by Roman standards he wouldn’t make much news.

        2. “Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James,
          and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed
          an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to
          be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the
          citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws,
          they disliked what was done.”
          Flavius Josephus

        3. Atheist Stumped by Overwhelming Evidence for Jesus’ Existence…From an AGNOSTIC LIBERAL Scholar!

        4. A devout Jew would never have written this. The Testimonium Flavuim is a well-known and obvious forgery.

  10. perhaps the writer should swallow his own pill knowing “documentaries” like zeitgeist are not historically accurate with their facts, and have been refuted by even non-religious communities. As an more an agnostic, I am certainly not defending religion or those who practice it that were discussed in this article but I also don’t think its fair to dismiss an entire faith based on the actions of those who claim to follow it but don’t(which is what the majority of the points centered on). Try a more objective approach next time.

  11. Wait, is this a Jezebel article that was accidentally posted to Return of Kings?

  12. Great post. Commenters are wondering what this has to do ROK, Red Pill and banging chicks. To swallow the red pill means you wake up and embrace the truth in everything ie chicks , work, life and even religion. Religions are man made. Religiosity is blue pill . Science is Red Pill. I don’t think Red Pill wisdom and religion can be compatible at all. However , would I fake being religious ( God Game) and say go to church in order to bang a chick? Hell yes….

    1. “To swallow the red pill means you wake up and embrace the truth in everything ie chicks , work, life and even religion.”
      True. But this column does not contain any truths about religion. It contains the same made up nonsense spouted by radical feminists, left-wing atheists, and people too stupid to realize that “Zeitgeist” is fictional.

      1. Perhaps, but the overall undertone is “God does not exist”.
        That is really all the author is trying to say in his long-winded article.

        1. Good. I wasn’t talking to you. So why interject yourself by saying you don’t want to interject yourself?

        2. How did the name on your comment all of a sudden change? I guess I was talking to you.

      2. Made up nonsense? What the author describes is history and actual events. Galileo was under house arrest by the Catholic church most of his life. Copernicus was touch and go with the Inquisition. Listen to Sam Harris’s vid…describes historical events. Crusades, witch burning, repression of science all happened. Some religious people believe the Earth is 6000 yrs old and there was an actual flood with an Ark etc etc…..

    2. you forget. Faith that there is NOT a god is just as much a religion as faith that there IS a god. The difference? Secular humanism requires faith in stuff DESPITE evidence to the contrary.

        1. apparently you haven’t been keeping abreast of the militant atheist community. and by saying there is no god you are denying a lack of knowledge.

  13. For anyone looking at a solid background of the Catholic Church I would urge you to watch: The fuel project: Catholic Church.
    The church itself has been infiltrated by pagans and was left to warp true Christianity. In fact 5th column tactics have been used throughout Christianity’s existence to destroy it through subversion(see: Frankfurt Marxism). I can say that the reformation was an important display of courage by men who wanted to take authority away from men who thought their word was infallible.
    In the 20th century we saw atheistic communism kill over 100m people. Over 55m Americans have been victims of abortion since 1973, much of this is due to the moral relativism born from the lack of faith in judgement from a righteous power.
    Over the past 2000 years there have been three major conflicts between Christendom and Islam. The battle of Tours in the 8th century against the satanic Moops; the naval battle of Lepanto where brave Romans repelled the Ottoman Turks were destroyed by superior sailors. Finally there was the Gates of Vienna, a truly great victory to preserve Europe from the scourge of Islam.
    The reason I bring these battles up is because in my opinion atheistic societies, or ones that decend into depravity do not last very long. Without a transcendent purpose for life, and the sacrifices our ancestors made we would not be here today. Faith in a higher power links generations together and ensures that we have the connection to our past needed to approach the future.

  14. I am suprised there are so many Christian red-pillers. The two are, in practice, mutually exclusive.
    Regardless, atheists should take a position of irrelevance towards religion. There is no personal gain in preaching. I empathize with well-intentioned religious people, as they mean good, even if from a different paradigm.

      1. seriously, most ‘red pillers’ accept the fact that there is no proof that there is a god. and yet, they are willing to behave as if there is because of the social stability it provides.
        Accepting a possible unproven hypothesis for it’s benefits is totally red pill.

        1. it is if you are still learning. and frankly, every red piller is learning constantly… our views change as our information expands, and one thing that all red pillers have in common… perhaps the only thing we have in common, is that we are voracious informafiles.

        2. I agree wholeheartedly but there’s a significant difference between noncommittal and indecisive. No one respects a man who can’t do his own research and draw his own conclusions.

  15. And now a rebuttal in short:
    1. Scientific repression:
    Science flourished because of the monastary culture of early christianity. Are modern christians suppressing science? Usually, I see the PC culture having a worse effect because research conclusions are “mean” or “racist/homophobic/mysoginist/etc”.
    2. Bad popes:
    We have bad presidents, dictators, tyrants, emperors, plumbers, carpenters, mechanics, doctors, nurses, etc. etc.
    Perhaps you are projecting some sort of infallibility onto the Church. How unAtheist of you.
    3. Wars and atrocities:
    Connecting God with the Nazi’s is dubious at best. The regimes use of God can hardly be seen as consistently Christian. Its funny you fault christianity for forcing WWI soldiers to resume shooting at each other after Christmas, but do not credit it with getting them to stop shooting each other. The French Revolution and communism have done far more damage than Christianity has ever done, and both were atheist movements.
    4. Evil Bible verses. Its all about context. You are mistaking telling something happened for endorsement. It would be the same as if you told me Ted Bundy raped and ate people. Then I freaked out and was like, “Oh my God, you liked that shit. Thats so evil. You’re sick”. Even a modicum of unbiased thought would put much better light on those quotes than you’ve given them hear today.
    5. General questions:
    Compare the demographics of countries with Sweden with countries like Brazil. Crime rates have shown that Africans in America commit robbery at 7x the rate of American whites. Do you want God to come here and hold your hand physically throughout life?
    Your 25 questions are less red pill and more low church atheistkult stuff that is easily debunked. I will admit that Christianity is not perfect in my perception,but what is? Atheism tends to lend to the masses replacing God with the state or man himself. When you see outcomes for something you should really ask yourself “compared to what”.

    1. I never understood why people think that Hitler was a Christian simply because he was baptised Catholic at 8 days old.
      He was clearly fascinated by occult practices and Nordic Paganism. It should explain why he planned on renaming Berlin ‘Valhalla’ once he finished his global conquest.

    2. But I thought the bible was the revealed word of God?? Are the biblical stories metaphors or truth?? Can you pick and choose?? There were dozens of gospels but it was a confab of cardinals ( Some Council of this or that) that determined what and which gospels were put in the bible. Can you take white out to all the icky passages???

      1. Your post is nonsequiter and has nothing to do with the argument. Whether the stories in the Bible are historical or metaphorical has no bearing on the fact that just because something happens in the Bible doesn’t mean the Bible condones it necessarily.

    1. Proverbs 1-7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge:
      but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

  16. 1. Do I not know that the Roman Catholic Church played a
    major role in preserving literacy, monarchy, social order, university, medical
    ethics, and funded and published science and art throughout its history?
    3. Do I not know that religious tolerance is not a religious
    value? Do I not agree that the state of living in pure nature has no warrant
    for tolerance of any kind whatsoever?
    4. Do I not know that Charles Darwin’s Theory was based upon
    nothing more than the observation that black people have different shaped noses
    than Asians, but somehow leads to the idea that they are separate species even
    though they can still interbreed? And that the early commentators on the Old
    Testament did not believe the world was 6,000 years old, nor does the bible say
    anywhere that the world is 6,000 years old?
    5. Do I not know that if Christianity and King Jan Sobieski never
    existed, we could very well be speaking Arabic right now? (Nor would we be
    drinking his vodka, since that is haram)
    Part II – Bad Popes
    Oh noez, over 2,000 years of history produces some anecdotal
    weird shit that didn’t come from Christian teachings or sound doctrine, but
    also occurs in every other major civilization ever known!
    11. Do I not know that after the World War I, European
    leaders were following the lovely theories of Darwin and social evolution and
    steady state cosmology and German philosophy- more than scriptural Christianity?
    Do I not know that religion can be used to manipulate the masses without said
    manipulators subscribing to the religion
    12. Do I not know that regurgitating bullshit straight from
    Wikipedia does not make for a substantive argument on an issue as complex and
    nuanced as witchcraft over a period of 300 years? Do I now know that many people
    legitimately practiced witchcraft, knew the consequences of practicing
    witchcraft, yet still did it anyways? Do I not know that 40,000 or even 100,000
    deaths over 300 years was all in a days work for the 20th century’s
    anti-religious governments?
    13. Do I not know the Gott Mitt Uns does NOT mean “Jesus With
    Us” and that Mein Kampf clearly describes God as a Darwinian force of nature?
    14. Do I not know that the Spanish Conquistadors were not
    run by the Catholic church, but were run by the Spaniards, and that the
    Catholic Monks who accompanied the Conquistadors or founded missions wrote the
    texts we now read in order to expose their horror at what the Spanish were
    doing, and that these experiences led to the first theories of human rights and
    international law, and that nobody really cared about the treatment of
    indigenous people except these monks and friars?
    15. Do I not know that George W. Bush claimed he was ‘told
    by God’ to end the tyranny in Iraq and that Iraq may end up better off in the
    end, perhaps even grateful for Bush?
    16. Do I not know that Psalm 137:9 “Happy they shall be who
    take your little ones and dash them against the rock” is hyperbole used to
    illustrate the violence that violence begets, and the consequences of
    disobeying a God if that God is in fact real?
    17. Do I not know that slavery does not always mean chattel
    slavery, that there were strict rules and guildelines for slave operations in
    the Old Testament, that slaves had rights and limited indenture? Do I not know
    that human beings no right to personal liberty, nor to appropriately retaliate
    when they are being oppressed, because “rights” cannot be found under a
    microscope by science or reason, but can only be found from religion?
    18. Do I not know that if I were traveling alone and suddenly
    surrounded in the wilderness by a hateful gang of young Trayvons, I myself, a white
    idiot fool atheist in my mom’s basement on break from College, would suddenly
    be desperately praying to God for a bear to come and help me out a bit?
    19. Do I not know that the Christian religion is not a
    religion of peace, and that God himself has killed entire populations with
    floods, famines, fire, and warfare? Do I not know that I should be greatful for
    the wars that Christians have fought to preserve my “human rights” and protect
    me from what non-Christians would do to me as an atheist. Do I not admit that I’d
    rather be an atheist in a Christian nation than in any other religion?
    20. Do I not know that ancient Hebrew penal codes aimed at
    preventing and restituting rape is much better than what existed outside of Israel,
    or much better than what exists in a pure state of nature?
    21. Do I not know that countries such as Sweden, Norway, and
    the Netherlands are among the most pathetic, feminized, defenseless,
    self-loathing on Earth, and are practically begging Muslims to come and take
    over their entire society, and hate free speech, and will literally throw you
    in jail for insulting Muslims or Feminists.
    22. Do I know that the United States and Brazil, the two
    most populous countries on Earth where the vast majority of inhabitants claim
    Christianity as their religion, have far higher per capita instances of
    robbery, rape, and murder than largely racially homogenous Northern Europe? Do
    I not know that diversity is our strength? LOLZLZLZ
    24. Do I know for a fact God has never once intervened (with
    solid proof) to stop a good or righteous person from being tortured? No, I don’t
    know that. But that don’t stop dumb ass atheists from running their mouths.
    Being an atheist means never having to say your sorry.
    25. Do I know it’s a ridiculous concept that God is supposed
    be like a genie in a bottle and give me all the money I need in life, and make
    sure I neva-eva hurt myself with my own stupidity and malice?
    Conclusion – Watch Zeitgeist?!
    LOLZ, more to follow…

    1. Zeitgeist… I did see this movie about a year or less
      ago, before I became a
      believer. This is currently one of the most popular
      videos on the internet. If
      you look at Google Video in the most viewed section, it
      has been either first,
      or on the first page for quite a while.
      Zeitgeist presents their arguments in three parts,
      attacking Christianity, the
      Government/Military/Industrial Complex, and then The
      Federal Reserve
      (& international banking.) They posit that all three
      entities are coming together
      to take control of the world in an either surreptitious
      or explicit form. The
      funny part is that in many ways I totally agree! But
      where I differ is my
      solution: God. Their solution is man- which is a proven
      Zeitgeist may be considered a part of the postmodern
      system of philosophy. Some
      hallmarks of postmodernism: there is no such thing as
      evil, everything is
      tolerable, there is no truth, everything is relative,
      there is no God or all
      gods are the same, all truth is tolerable unless you
      proclaim your truth on
      someone else. Looking at the opening remarks of Rinpoche,
      we see that the
      producer is borrowing lines from a Buddhist to tease us
      with the idea that we
      should only be concerned about the “now” and that
      divinity is a “whatever.” His
      monologue lends well to the idea of postmodernism that
      searching for truth is
      fruitless because no one can know it. It is ironic that
      this film has postmodern
      underpinnings but is part of the “Truth Movement.” For
      more on postmodernism
      see D.A. Carson’s work on the subject.
      Then begins the barrage of violent images and startling
      music designed to slap
      you in the face and make you sit up straight. After that
      is Jordan Maxwell
      attacking religious institutions, saying they “are at the
      bottom of the dirt.”
      He then threads it into Banking, Government, and his view
      of what God really is
      (or isn’t.) Maxwell’s religious/occult theories influence
      the first part of the
      film. His theory is similar to that of “Osiris-Dionysus”
      or that Christianity
      parallels paganism and that most religions have been
      derived from a “secret
      religion.” This theory has been around in various forms
      since before Jesus was
      around. Another portion of the film’s first section is
      based on work by authors
      like Freke/Gancy, and D.M. Murock, both of whose work is
      in turn based on
      Gerald Massey- an Egyptologist that wrote about the scene
      at Luxor (more on
      this later.)
      Then the film moves to George Carlin, a stand-up
      comedian. Carlin makes many
      good points about why the Religions of men are sometimes
      full of crap. I agree
      with him, and so did the Reformers like John Calvin,
      Martin Luther, and The
      Puritans. The Carlin section is comical, making fun of
      God and his Laws; pretty
      offensive to a Christian- so they’re obviously passing a
      message of anger, and
      an angry argument is a fickle thing in my opinion. Also,
      anger shows an agenda-
      not unbiased objective reasonable consideration.
      And then begins the non-stop fast paced continuous spew
      of unreferenced
      proclamations! “This is the sun…” it begins, and just
      gets more abstract from
      there. The pulsing, tense music continues to drive away
      in the background as
      the narrator’s voice falls into cadence, and the imagery
      is floating, animated,
      expository, and even a bit silly. “This is Horus…” he
      then proclaims.
      Unfortunately for the narrator, it is not Horus. “Broadly
      speaking” they go
      into the true story of Horus, if by “broadly speaking”
      they mean “mostly made
      up.” Horus was not born on Dec 25th, nor was Jesus born
      on Dec 25th. Horus was
      not born of a virgin; he was born from Isis and Osiris.
      Further, Horus was a
      myth that existed over a period of thousands of years,
      and his myth changed and
      evolved constantly. At one point he was Ra. At one point
      he was the sky god,
      then later the sun and moon god at the same time. The
      Greeks got a hold of the
      myths and changed them. Then the Romans got a hold of the
      Greek gods and
      changed them. Several of their proclamations about Horus
      are taken from
      different evolutionary periods of the myths. The reason
      you’ve never heard
      these arguments before is because they’ve been laid to
      rest, not because it is
      some new idea that has recently been discovered. These
      theories have been
      postulated since Paul was writing his letters to the
      early churches and warning
      them about “Antichrists.” Celsus was criticizing
      Christians in the second
      century and Justin Martyr was defending against them.
      Then after going through Horus, the author quickly says,
      “These attributes of
      Horus, whether original or not…” read that again. He
      says it just to cover
      his butt. They are original, as in- mostly made up and
      passed off as bona fide
      Egyptology. Then we go through the gods Attis, Krishna,
      Dionysus, Mithra; on
      and on, all failing to realize that Jesus was not born on
      Dec 25th, that the
      celebration of Christmas/Easter is in fact influenced by
      paganism and
      humanistic ideals that came AFTER Jesus. They say that
      Mithra was worshiped on
      Sunday as if that is supposed to be some kind of shocking
      parallel; the Sabbath
      was originally on the seventh & last day of the week:
      Saturday. All the
      verbiage about the Lamb of God, Truth and the Light, Son
      of God, Alpha and
      Omega, 12 disciples, virgin birth and resurrection,
      etc… there are no
      citations of sources, and after researching for a long
      time I realized that it
      is just mostly made up, with only a few actual
      parallels here and there. Their agenda and their
      unscrupulous means are clear
      by this point.
      Then the narrator moves into the “most recent of the
      solar messiahs” and the
      first thing he says is “Jesus Christ was born… on
      December 25th.” In my
      opinion, if the author can’t even get such a basic and
      fundamental theological
      premise straight, then they are a flawed theologian
      philosopher or scientist.
      After that, it’s a bunch of Astrological information,
      some based on the flawed
      belief that Jesus was born in December (more like August
      or September) and that
      Easter or Christmas actually have anything to do with God
      or the Bible (neither
      are in the bible.) Then they give astrological
      explanations for the Cross or
      Crux, End of the Age, the Bull, the Ram, the Fish… it
      seems that they’re
      saying that just because the men of the bible used these
      symbols that God was
      created by Astrology. But the Bible says that
      Astrological signs were created
      by God to mark the seasons and serve as signs. I will
      admit that I know very
      little about Astronomy or
      Astrology, but their basic Christmas premise is flawed,
      their reputation of
      making unverifiable claims is building; I smell a rat. It
      appears that they are
      often attacking the religion that men have built;
      something I do with fellow
      believers quite often; I consider religion without
      biblical principle errant.
      Perhaps I will be back later after an Astronomy class or
      two for further
      (Update: I took an astronomy class. The Southern Cross is
      the southern
      hemisphere’s version of the North Star, and is not
      visible to the northern hemisphere
      except for a short period of time of year. So perhaps
      this part is an accurate
      account of astronomical activity, although I have
      wondered how someone would
      notice the “sun on a stellar cross” when stars usually
      cannot be seen when the
      sun is up. Also, I found out that the Southern Crux was
      not its own
      constellation until the 1600’s- until then it was part of
      Centaurus according
      to the Greeks, and this is only one of the many cultural
      systems of
      constellations. Other cultures have considered it to be
      an anchor, a possum in
      a tree, stair/bridge, or a stingray. So I see no evidence
      that anyone thought
      it was a cross at that time, and only after Christians
      catalogued in centuries
      later was it ever considered a cross at all.)
      Then it’s back to Horus and the virgin birth by the Holy
      Spirit. This is where
      the film perhaps makes the most interesting argument:
      that the depictions on
      the wall at the Temple of Luxor portray a virgin birth by
      divine conception and
      the adoration of a god/man/king. This is supposedly an
      example of Jews stealing
      myths from the Egyptians and writing them down as
      prophecy in the Old
      Testament. Contradictorily, some believe that the
      conception portrayed at Luxor
      involves actual sex vs. immaculate conception, and some
      argue that the
      adoration was called on by the child king and not a
      spontaneous arrival of
      magi. I’m not fluent in hieroglyphics, but is this
      possibly another example of
      how many different stories there are of the gods and how
      they changed so many
      times? Does this mean that the Jews stole their
      prophecies from the Egyptians-
      especially one random carving on one wall in a pyramid?
      Does this make Jesus a
      Basically, some people want to say that Jesus or Sampson
      or Moses etc. is a
      superhero myth; that the early followers of Christ wanted
      to preach the gospel
      to the Romans and Greeks using a mythical figure similar
      to their native gods-
      and resurrection/virgin birth/super powers (miracles) are
      just ways to relate
      to the heathen masses and the old status quo for legit
      gods. People also apply
      this to the Flood which is found not only in the Bible,
      but several other
      mythologies from all around the world. Unfortunately,
      Jesus does not come close
      to any kind of Superhero I’ve ever seen- usually they are
      going around killing
      their enemies and laying the smack down. Jesus was
      brutally murdered, mocked
      the whole way, and died for the lowest elements of
      society: tax collectors and
      So if they want to use comic shop philosophy on me, I
      will say: perhaps mankind
      has always had need of a savior? What if our tendency to
      create superheroes and
      mythical beings are based in the realization that we are
      weak sinners enslaved
      to greed and corruption and tyranny? What if we design
      these superheroes in
      recognition that there must be a way to throw off these
      bonds of sin and
      achieve harmony and find justice? What if we design these
      superheroes in the
      sinless mold and form of Christ and the God who designed
      us in his own image;
      the God that we all know is there but often refuse to
      acknowledge? What if we
      are all looking for a savior?
      To put this video in a larger context, I will mention
      some things. This video is one that I consider to be part
      of the “Truth
      Movement” which has arisen since 2001, and more
      widely since about 2005
      (approx. since things have been going really bad in
      Iraq.) This “Truth
      Movement” seems to focus on September 11th as its
      main platform. People
      are striving to make sense of 9/11 because when you look
      at it; when I look at
      it- it doesn’t make a lot of sense; its almost too crazy
      to believe. So then
      enters an internet film called “Loose Change.” This film
      has undergone several
      revisions, and each revision propels several “conspiracy
      theories” as to how
      something like 9/11 could happen. They posit that either
      the U.S. Government
      made 9/11 happen on purpose, or that they just let it
      happen on purpose even
      though they knew it was coming. Some of their arguments
      and evidences are very
      logical and possible. However, in each revision of this
      film, some of their
      “crazier” conspiracies are thrown out and new ones
      introduced. I’m not faulting
      them for revising their theories, but I am pointing out
      that no matter how
      “crazy” their theories are, even among other “Truthers,”
      the theories are
      presented in amazingly sharp and crisp arguments that are
      accompanied with
      incredible music and imagery- flowing like a rock music
      video, subtly tweaking
      your emotions and breaking you down into questioning
      everything you’ve ever
      known. The production work (in my ignorant opinion) is
      awesome. The main intent
      of Loose Change is not to present strong and logical
      arguments. Its main intent
      is to slap you in the face as hard as it can, to knock
      people from their mocha
      latte stupor and start asking questions about everything.
      This “Truth Movement” has subsequently branched out from
      9/11 as its focal
      point. Why would the U.S. Government do such a thing? The
      tested and true
      arguments that anyone- secular or theist, can agree on:
      money and power. In
      other words, Bankers and Governments forming a New World
      Order. This movement
      has incorporated the old school southern style
      separatists, Tax Protesters,
      Libertarians, Christian Conservatives, and the
      impressionable youth everywhere.
      I’ve met with Truthers here and there, and it’s
      fascinating to see the mix of
      progressive liberal high school/college kids talking with
      gray-haired IRS
      hating home-schooling Republicans. This is part of the
      reason that Dr. Ron Paul
      became so popular- he supported the dismantling of the
      IRS, the Federal
      Reserve, the Department of Education… all while
      speaking regularly against
      the New World Order and “neoconservatives.” The
      interesting thing is that Dr.
      Paul is a Christian, and is still supported by many
      secular-minded folks.
      As far as the other two sections of Zeitgeist go- they
      are again attempting to
      stir your emotions. I am no fan of the Federal Reserve or
      of corporate greed,
      but I have come to realize that YES, there IS a
      conspiracy: it’s called sin and
      its aims are in fact to rule the world and proclaim
      mankind the one and only
      god. Whether we can see direct evidence of a new world
      order or not is
      irrelevant, mankind is going to try to become god- it is
      his nature. Men will
      work toward that end whether they realize they are doing
      it or not- from the
      most powerful politicians and bankers down to the
      dorkiest accountants and
      janitors who think they’re not part of the corrupt
      So the Truth Movement meets postmodernism, and to me it
      is like watching The
      Three Stooges dressed up fancy at a dinner party. I’ve
      looked for answers from
      these people and their friends and their enemies too, and
      I didn’t find it.
      I’ve opened myself to Buddhism, Atheism, The Marine
      Corps, 7 Habits of Highly
      Effective people, Socrates, The Matrix; various
      philosophies. I didn’t
      subscribe wholly to any of them because they were all
      incomplete systems. The
      only truth I found was that we are all slaves to sin, and
      that the Bible is the
      most complete and profound philosophy I’ve ever
      researched. It has survived the
      test of time, can stand up to any philosophy, and
      contains more truth than
      anything I’ve ever seen- it touches on every aspect of
      life from metaphysics to
      parenting to government to banking to war to counseling.
      It has outlived the Greeks,
      the Romans, the Muslims, Apostasy, the Communists… so I
      stopped sitting on
      the fence and asked God for inspiration, and He gave it
      to me. I began to
      believe, and I don’t know how, nor do I ultimately
      accredit it to anything I’ve
      done or studied or debated or seen or experienced- I
      accredit it to the work of
      God in me, regenerating my heart and raising me up by His

    2. 26…You have faith in stuff that can’t be proven. Faith is belief without evidence
      27 Will non christians ie muslims and hindus burn in hell? Are they damned?
      28. Science is constant. If the world and civilization was wiped clean we would have all new religions but the science would remain the same cause it’s SCIENCE
      29 Do you believe there was a flood and some man built an ark and was able to house all the animals , slugs and amoebas and ALL Living things in a big boat
      30. Mormons believe they are a lost tribe of Israel that came to the new world in cigarette shaped boats. Do you believe this??
      31. Our founding fathers were quasi atheists and men of the enlightenment..
      32.. Wonder whatever happened to spain and Portugal and their respective empires?? They became backwaters because of their clinging to the crusty old Catholic church…
      33. Do you believe a fella can turn water into wine or 3 fishes into 5000??

      1. Actually, the left controls moderns science, so let’s all just chill out with our science boner for a second. In the end, you’re really just choosing to have faith in what the scientists tell you, rather than what the priests tell you. One claims that there is a god. The other claims that he performed an experiment. Neither is inherently true or false. Science isn’t valid simply because science.

        1. Cmon …science can be proven , reproduced and uses experimentation. Science tries to prove stuff. Religions say “believe” ( or else for some religions) . Science also says “I don’t know”

        2. This is all true. But in the end science is not infallible, as many people seem to think it is. It’s not that I even disagree with you… I love science too. I just don’t like how it’s paraded around by many people as the ultimate truth, when, in the end, it’s created by people, and people sometimes lie. Especially these days, when science is, unfortunately, highly politicized.

        3. Of course skepticism all around. Wouldn’t say science is created by people . Religions are created by people eg Mormonism was created by Joseph Smith . Science tries to discover what IS. The planets revolving around the sun is reality not just made up.

        4. You need to quit while you’re ahead because your skepticism clearly stops at “because Richard Dawkins et al said so…”

        5. The scientific method is created as a tool to accurately define nature. But whatever the method reality just is.

        6. Science cannot be proven, nor can you even come up with a scientific experiment which would prove “science.”
          What would be your null hypothesis, and your H1? What would be your population and how would you sample it? What would be your variables and controls? Which statistical test method would you use? Student’s T test? Two sample Z test? What power and confidence interval would you consider persuasive?

        7. “The other claims that he performed an experiment.”
          First, I didn’t take Galileo’s word for it, I measured gravity.
          Second, I showed others how to perform the measurement.
          If the experiment hasn’t been done at least twice, by two different people, the second trying to see if he gets a different result, it simply isn’t science.
          Jurying for publication is only supposed to be the beginning of peer review, not the end of it. The most important part of peer review happens after publication.
          The problem is that we now have “scientists” who refuse to even let people review their data and form closed juries. These people aren’t scientists at all, their experiments aren’t science and the people who believe them, yes, do so on faith. Even if they call themselves “scientist.”

        8. Using science broadly . Say chemistry for example. Bohr’s law, Law of Laplace, Laws of thermodynamics…Newton’s laws. Religion is based on faith and belief. Some guys wrote stuff down in a book and you say it is a FACT . You don’t require evidence or proof like you would say in buying a car.

        9. Dawkins? Pinker? Hitchens?
          They’re some of the most popular atheist scientists, and they have all said things that have feminists go crazy.

        10. Yeah, that’s basically what I meant. Science isn’t the problem, “science” is the problem. If something can be repeatedly experimentally confirmed, it’s reality. But the people who just read something that came from “scientists” and take it as the new holy truth are just fuckin idiots who are probably just rebelling against their parents and the Christian establishment. The vast majority of atheists are just the modern incarnation of hippies. And I’m not even a Christian, this is just what I’ve observed.

        11. I think your referencing the post modern liberal type who constantly bleats like a sheep “Science Good! Religion Bad!” because it validates their world view. They get on my nerves too.

        12. Nobody has ever made the claim that science in infallible. It’s the religion that makes this claim about itself and then attributes it to science. Those “many people” are religious themselves.
          Science, first and foremost, is SELF CORRECTING. If a dominant scientific theory isn’t supported by new scientific facts, a new theory will arise and replace the old one. Where do you see infallibility? It’s the religious mind that craves for the infallibility.
          Religion itself is simply different day, same shit.
          Nobody stops the conservative figures from pulling their head out of their asses and embracing science. It’s not a liberal’s fault that they know how wield this sword and that the conservatives only know how to quote mine the Bible.
          To attribute religion to being conservative and science to being liberal is a fallacy that has to end.

        13. Nobody worships Dawkins, you loon.
          You’re simply projecting your own mentality onto others.

        14. Bravo sir…Science is Self Corrective yes!! Science also admits to “not knowing” but doesn’t attribute the gap in knowledge to God or the supernatural….

        15. The truth is Evolutionism is a religion as well, created by atheists: the Pagan religion of our time nothing really new here just another Mother Goddess Cult. A wrong turn which has diverted true scientific examination of the creation for the last hundred years or so.
          A dog is still a dog and bacteria are still bacteria.
          What do you have to do to change a cow into a whale? virtually every feature of the cow has to change; has to be re-adaptive since we know that life on earth and life in the water are fundamentally different enterprises we have some sense of the number of changes that have to occur.
          Lets just look at a simple number of changes: it’s skin has to change completely it has to be water proof, it’s eyes have to be protected under water, the breathing apparatus has to change, a diving mechanisms has to be developed, lactation systems have to be put in place, the hearing has to be altered, feeding mechanism have to be change after all a cow eats grass and whales eat krill and fish, we can go from fifty thousand to perhaps a million morphological changes which have to occur, brain, joints, muscles, blood vessels, cartilage on and on.
          These changes cannot evolved independently they must all be linked together they must be coordinated.
          How are these constraints met? if there are fifty thousand or a million and what does this suggest as to what we should see in the fossil record?
          If Darwinian evolution is correct we should see an enormous plethora of transitional forms intermediates lets say between Ambulocetus and the next step in the evolutionary chain; there should be millions of these fossilized cow/whale animals showing the intermediate stages but there aren’t.
          And this should be true for lions, tigers and bears and just about every other specie on the planet.
          This is a big problem for Darwinian Evolution.

        16. Science also says that there’s global warming… then the same science–er… scientists, that discovered it, are saying something else. Some things are proven, but the rest we simply have ‘faith’ in because they proved a few things.
          Sounds familiar?

        17. Science cant even prevent the common cold and I am to put all my “faith” into it. Just when science said the measles were a thing of the past, it returns. Scientists cant even come to an agreement on global warming/ climate change/ new euphemism of the week . . . they argue with themselves over this. Really science? Really? REALLY!!!

        18. The real issue is Evolutionist who conflate/fuse into one entity Darwinian Evolution and science as if they were the same entity, but Evolutionism is actually a false pagan religion. These Cretans also conflate macro-evolution with the measurable micro-evolution.
          There’s absolutely no credible scientific evidence to prove Darwinian Evolution people, its all a house of card destine to fall to the ground very soon.
          Christianity has used science to prove the creation for two millennium.
          Science = Knowledge
          1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
          2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
          3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.
          4. systematized knowledge in general.
          5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.

        19. Except someone who actually have some scientific knowledge, Michael Crichton, could tell what was behind Global Warming.

        20. When the left decides what science says, someone who actually have some scientific knowledge or even just common sense can figure it out.
          Michael Crichton for example, he was able to tell quiet what was wrong with global warming.
          Hovewer, being religious does not automatically mean being dumb enough to believe that the bible, quran, talmud or whatever else is The Word of the Lord and so.

        21. Does prayers regrow amputated limbs and regrow eyes? Did the Vatican come up the internet and satellites on the advice of (non-fallen) angels?
          As for global laming, if you think there is a scientific consensus on that like the medias tells you…

        22. Personally, I believe that you are responsible for global laming. The one thing that God, science and I all agree on.

      2. “26…You have faith in stuff that can’t be proven. Faith is belief without evidence”
        The clearest is the life death and resurrection of Jesus. If Jesus didn’t rise from the dead then Christianity is bogus.
        “33. Do you believe a fella can turn water into wine or 3 fishes into 5000??”
        If God created everything and in him we move and have our being(Acts 17:28). Is this feat then so hard for him?

        1. Your claim earlier was ‘no evidence’ and you defined faith as ‘belief without evidence.’ That’s not the accepted definition in Christian orthodoxy. It’s not even the main definition in most dictionaries. Faith usually just means belief (which is what everybody has when they think anything is true for any reason…evidential, intuition, or whatever). On the other hand, you’ve misunderstood evidence. Evidence just means ‘reason for believing something.’ You’re defining it, apparently, as scientific experiment. If that’s the real definition of evidence, then all you have is hearsay (you spelled it wrong) unless you’ve done every single science experiment ever. Almost all we have is testimonial evidence of any given thing.
          Aside from that, something being written is not, by definition hearsay. In fact, written evidence of what an out of court individual stated is often precisely an exception to hearsay laws. I know it can be hard to be confronted by definitions, I see it a lot as a teacher when students misuse words. But that doesn’t make it unhelpful in the long run.
          There is, whether it happened or not, just as much documentary evidence and evidence of historical effect of Jesus’ resurrection as there is of the existence of Aristotle.
          You comment about science being constant makes me wonder if you’re using agree and then amplify…it seems to be a parody but I can’t tell. What are they teaching in these schools?

      3. No but God can turn water into wine and feed 5000 with 3 fishes.
        That is the whole point of the Gospel Christ Jesus the lamb of God the Lord all mighty God took on flesh, born of a virgin without sin and unblemished came down to us on Earth to be as one with us, the sacrificial lamb.
        This was foretold in the Old Testament:
        Genesis 22-7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? 8 And Abraham said, My son, GOD WILL PROVIDE HIMSELF A LAMB FOR A BURNT OFFERING: so they went both of them together. 9 And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. 10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. 11 And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. 12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

        Only the blood of God can pay for our sins. All the miracles Jesus performed were to attest to his God-hood. The Lord of Lords and King of Kings the messiah come to us as a humble shepherd with love, open arms and righteousness beyond measure. Healing the sick and raising the dead fore he is a personal God.
        Make no mistake about it; he could have called a thousand angles down or but with a blink of an eye have crushed the entire Roman Empire.
        Yet He allowed himself to be humiliated, mutilated, beaten beyond recognition and hung naked on a cross for our sins.
        If you can’t see the enormity of that sacrifice you are lost and forever in darkness.
        Read the Bible carefully (every word is perfect) “KJV” King James Version before you blasphemy the name of his only begotten son.

        1. ^^^ wow. I don’t want to worship any god that would allow his son to be tortured and killed. Awful. God could have had a better way to punish sinners by a series of fines or tickets. Angels would function like cops or meter maids. If you sinned you would be fined ie get a ticket from say a celestial “morality angel”. Much better than sacrificing your son….
          Spouting biblical passages doesn’t make them true…
          Get off your knees slave and live like a man…

        2. Three Gods in one: the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Son is the Father and the Father the Son, the Holy Spirit.
          You can only be a man when you kneel down before a Holy and True God.
          You are the slave here in darkness and ignorance only a women sees things in shades of grey; men see things as black or white. Ultimately there are but two choices God or Satan.

        3. Fluffybiskuts, you have finally come clean. You admit that if there is a God and even if he proved himself to you personally, you would not submit to it unless it did what you told it to do. I like that. “Submit to me and I will then follow you.” Sounds perfectly reasonable… if you’re a woman, that is.

        4. Naaaw, you’re only a Real Man™ when you submit and marry up a woman. Everyone knows that.
          q1 – which God should we all be kneeling down before? You just said there were three of ’em.
          q2 – is God what you would call “good”?

        5. The Trinity: Father, Son and the Holy Spirit all three are one.
          Read the Bible from beginning to end; KJV King James Version only all others have been corrupted. You will see that every word is perfect and there are no logical contradictions. It is the perfect word of God and Red Pill to the nth degree.
          Only a woman sees things in shades of grey, a man knows there is only black or white and life is short.
          Ultimately there are only two entities a man will kneel down to: God or Satan.
          Its your choice He gave you free will.
          Peace and Grace be on to you.

        6. q2 – is God what you would call “good”?
          God is the ultimate source of Morality.
          q1- explain what you mean by “good”?

      4. 26. There are numerous scientific “beliefs” that are not proven, yet are assumed to be true. Scientific faith.
        27. Non Christians will receive isolation from God himself. This is generally defined as Hell.
        28. You make the assumption that no religion would resurface the same. But you have no idea. Scientific faith.
        29. I personally believe in evolution, however the creationist argument for how this would have happened is actually quite logical. Look it up.
        30. What does Mormon belief have to do with Christianity?
        31. “Quasi-atheists.” Lol. “Under God” and “By God” appear numerous times in almost every document attributed to the founding of our nation.
        32. Wonder whatever happened to the ancient Greek or Ottoman empires? Their pagan religion and lack of religion were obviously their downfall.
        33. The Son of God isn’t a “fella”

    3. Excellent rebuttal.
      Red pill? In its womanly histrionics disguised as Wikipedia “facts”, this “article” reads more like an angry teenager’s rant at having to attend Sunday church.

      1. seems to have more to do with taking the holy communion than the red pill…. though on the plus side, popping into church might be a better place to find a virgin than your local night club…

        1. I know a guy who joined the dating site “Christian Mingle” to bag chicks. A total amoral pagan hound this guy. Would say anything to these gals to get laid. He would go to church and bible study with them. He banged a few ladies. He said they tended to be freaky. If there is a hell he’s going there…

        2. AKA Sunday Morning Nightclub Game. Score major points for fornicating with a slore at church. After all, you would be doing the lord’s work.

        3. Church game works, but beware of born again 30-somethings.
          If a bint says she puts Jesus first, and her husband second, stay far far far away. She will use “jesus” as an excuse to try to dominate you.

        4. Virgins in church? Not one over the age of 14. They do it, tearfully repent, and then in 28 days when they are in heat once more do it again. The only difference with church girls is the flavour of the hypergamy.
          Ever heard a christian girl complain that christian boys are “wimpy”? What she is complaining about is that christian boys don’t escalate. So many of them actually believe.

      2. There are Buddhist testimonies about the spiritual facts happening in Buddhists, and how some Buddhas and Boddhisattvas have made contact with people. For example.
        The Dalit Buddhist movement is a 19th and 20th-century Buddhist revival movement in India. call for the conversion of Hindu Dalits to Buddhism, to escape a caste-based society that considered them to be the lowest in the hierarchy. (Minoru Sasai) popularly known as Sasai is a Japanese-born Buddhist monk who later chose India as his working destination. Susai came to India in 1966 and met Nichidatsu Fujii, whom he helped with the Peace Pagoda at Rajgir. He fell out with Fuji, however, and started home, but, by his own account, was stopped by a dream in which a figure resembling Nagarjuna ( Nagarjuna Born in Southern India, one of the most important Buddhist philosophers after the historical Buddha. Along with his disciple Āryadeva, he is considered to be the founder of the Madhyamaka school of Mahāyāna Buddhism.) appeared and said, “Go to Nagpur”. In Nagpur, he met Wamanrao Godbole, the person who had organized the conversion ceremony for Dr. Ambedkar in 1956. Sasai claims that when he saw a photograph of Dr. Ambedkar at Godbole’s home, he realized that it was Ambedkar who had appeared in his dream. Sasai is one of the main leaders of the campaign to free the Mahabodhi Temple at Bodh Gaya from Hindu control

        1. Emptying all parts of yourself that are based on reactive behavior caused by fear and neediness. Reaching the natural state and acting upon ones intent.
          David Deida calls it your Core Purpose.
          Aleister Crowley calls it your True Will:
          “DO WHAT THOU WILT” can often be misunderstood to mean “do what you
          want”. When one says “do what thou wilt”, this means that the origin of
          will directs the path. To understand and act upon one’s True Will is a
          sort of “enlightenment” to Thelemites. The ultimate goal of a Thelemite
          would be to understand and perform their True Will. True Will directs
          the individual towards destiny and forces them into the joy of
          accomplishing what they were meant to accomplish without “lust of
          result” (outside motivations).

        2. That is pressingly what is mean by Satanic original sin: “do what thou wilt”.
          Genesis 3-4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
          You must realize that atheism in our modern day Pagan religion and a Goddess Cult.
          You have been confused because there is a massive effort, the troops have been sent out from the fortress called the “Feminist Agenda,” to spread their philosophy throughout this society. Radical feminism has so brainwashed our culture that church leaders and church members have even capitulated to the lies. And as a result, marriage and the family, the primary
          building blocks of social and moral order, are in shambles. Much of this can be laid at the feet of the Feminist Movement because it has overturned the
          thinking of women so dramatically that they have abandoned their God-intended
          role and consequently the family has felt the consequences. Unthinking
          believers, untaught Christians have become prey to the ideology of the feminists.
          Gloria Steinem, editor of Ms. Magazine, quote: “By the year
          2000 we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not
          God.” Satan’s ideologies can’t ever just stop with social issues, they always go to theological ones. It can’t just stop on the social level, it’s got
          to assault God because unless God is dethroned and the God of Christianity is
          eliminated from their thinking, they’re going to have to deal with the Bible and that’s a problem. So we get rid of God and everything supposedly attributed to Him. The Bible is out of the picture.
          The Red Pill is taken to open you eyes to reality; to embrace the masculine and keep the Feminine in check. You cannot do this without Yahweh.
          You are drinking from the Satanic Bible my brother.
          As a Christian I hope that you someday come to understand the good news of the Gospel and peace and grace be unto you forever at the right hand of the Father.
          Judgment day he will say “thy will be done” because you never said “thy will be done”. The gates of Hell are locked from the inside and your wish will be granted.

        3. It’s amazing what an honest moment of individually experiencing reality does for all the belief systems people have picked up swords and laid down their lives for – it blows them all out of the water. No belief needed, no mythical figure (real or imaginary), no God required – simply seeing your essence as radiant emptiness that happens to enjoy being in human form for a season.
          I do believe in masculine / feminine polarities and the power of understanding one’s natural role. It doesn’t require invoking a Yahweh God-concept that is more like a ‘demonic demi-urge’ that a being that deserves any respect.
          I was a staunch believer for decades before I tasted the dissatisfaction of having ‘truth’ handed to me second-hand. I sat down and meditated regularly, questioned existence and examined beliefs. As people such as Anthony De Mello did. What is ultimately True cannot be said and must not be worshipped (which is why you ‘kill the Buddha’ or any god/idol you meet on the road – it is a false salvation).
          We are all Buddhas, Christs – enlightened. It is only through a sequence of beliefs which become actions that we behave as though we are not. The Truth of existence – yours, mine, everyones – cannot ever be stated in words. Words can point but you must take them within and then transcend the words.
          “The Kingdom of Heaven is within.”
          There is more than passing evidence that EVERY religion including Christianity used psychedelics as a fundamental part of their rituals. Nothing proves better at wiping the egoic slate clean that mindful psychedelic use. No wonder the PTB have demonized it (only slowly gaining more acceptance as with LSD, DMT, etc. studies) and promote sugar, cigarettes, mindless sex, empty carbs and alcohol.
          When you have seen your divinity you don’t need anyone telling you ‘don’t sleep with just anyone.’ You KNOW your inner sacredness! This is self-restraint our of self-awareness and self-love. You see every being as being as aspect of your own self – not in some fantasy “we are all one” mantra but in actual fact. This cannot happen while mired in dogma / beliefs.
          To all who read, please trust the wise silence within your soul more than any external source. This is the mystery of YOUR existence that you can be in touch with. Not to figure out but to BE the awake, wise, loving, powerful mystery and see how it moves.

        4. GTFO with that New Age nonsense. “Inner sacredness” LMAO.
          Your beliefs sound like solipsism dude, get help.

      3. I’m an atheist, and this article embarrasses me.
        The author should spend more time attacking religions that are still medieval murder machines, like Islam, and leave harmless modern believers alone.

        1. replace “medieval murder mahines” with alpha and “harmless modern” with beta feminisation. Plus cant really say harmless considering its history, more so with islam and chances are you never heard of it until 9/11 like a typical westerner

        2. harmless modern believers = enablers
          Like every fat teenager on MTV has fat parents and every drug addict has its buddies, religion wouldn’t be able to function without your “harmless believers”.
          They are the reason why pope lives in a fucking palace. They are the reason someone is still making money by telling a 2000-year-old fairy tale. Every shepherd needs its sheep.
          To still believe in that fairy tale, one has to be an ultra blue piller.
          This is why I love RoK – they know how to rustle jimmies. Whether it’s feminists or religious loons crawling out of the woodwork – jimmies are rustled.
          Mission accomplished.

        3. Agreed. The point of religion is to install traditions in society. Religion, ironically enough, has very little to do with belief. Taking religion literally is dumb as fuck. Fundamentalists and atheists have more in common than one would realize.

        4. Christopher Hitchens had a great rant about how Catholics and religious types go on about the church funded architecture , art etc. The Vatican is amazing and I’m glad it’s there but was it very useful to the people of Italy and Rome?? Not very. The place was not open to the public and no tourism then. Hitchens asks “What if all that Vatican /Sistine Chapel $$ money was spent on hospitals, roads and sewers? What if all that palace/ pope /Vatican $$ money was spent on say a university ?? All that opulence when so many folks were poor…shameful.

        5. Yes there are poor folks. Guess what .. as well as being an atheist, I’m a libertarian. If people want to give money to a modern religion, it is their business. If you don’t like how they use their assets, don’t participate.
          As for healthy people who choose to stay poor .. screw them.

        6. Any religion that makes a claim of “The truth” must be judged as being either true or false.

        7. I cant believe 481 faggots would read, much less comment on an article like this.
          Because really, when it comes to religion…
          Who the FUCK cares.

        8. You don’t believe in magic. Except for that one time.
          Atheist can’t even explain a simple biological concept – life. They take it for granted, disregard science’s complete in ability to address it’s source or how to create it. No, it was all a happy accident. Cue a million monkeys with typewriters. The universe is there and always was there except for when it created itself out of nothing during a Big Bang event.
          Seriously? That’s all you’ve got? And you make fun of people who believe in the supernatural. Atheists believe in the supernatural, they just don’t give it a name.

        9. It takes a lot of money and power to preserve the art and culture of a civilization. Please thank the Church for their work.

        10. “Spend the money on hospitals? And just how many hospitals have atheists EVER built? The very idea of a hospital is religious and specifically, Christian. Did you know that in India, the nurses are all called “sister” (at least they were in 1984 when I was admitted to one), because all the first hospitals in India were built by Christians.
          Tell me, if you atheists care so much about the poor an downtrodden, why have you NEVER done ANYTHING in all of history for them except KILL THEM? Twenty million by Lenin-Stalin, 80 million by Mao Zedong and 2 million by Pol Pot. Atheists all.

        11. Just re hospitals: did you know that in India all the nurses are called “sister” because prior to Christian missionaries coming to India there were no hospitals in India? Hospitals are a logical consequence of obeying Jesus when He said, “I was sick and you cared for me.”
          Atheism has no intellectual capital to create anything good. It did not create science, ethics, human rights, equality under the law nor any other benefit of Judeo-Christian civilization.
          Name one beneficial concept or institution atheism has given the world. Social Darwinism? Communism? Nihilism?

        12. “And it was the Irish monasteries that preserved all the combined knowledge of the western world during the dark ages when the light of civilization nearly went out for good.”
          That actually isn’t strictly true. Many societies saved Classical philosophy in the middle ages. This idea was born out of the false belief that the Roman Empire ceased to exist in 480 AD.
          The Roman Empire actually survived until 1453, when it was destroyed by the Islamic Turks – but in 400 AD the geopolitical and economic center of the Roman Empire moved from Rome to Constantinople in what people call the Byzantine Empire.
          The Byzantines preserved classical philosophy as they were the descendants of the Romans. There was some opposition at times to classical philosophy as evidenced by Justinian closing the Platonic Academy, but other institutions remained such as the University of Constantinople, which is regarded as the ancestor to the modern university. If you take the construction of the Hagia Sophia in 534 that is ample evidence that mathematics and physics was still progressing. They produced many scholars like Maximus the Confessor – that kept classical knowledge alive.
          The sack of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453 led to an exodus of scholars from Byzantium to Renaissance Italy and they carried a lot of books with them that reignited interest in Greek.
          Outside of the Eastern Roman Empire there was plenty of other activity going on in preserving the classics. Isidore of Seville labored in Spain to halt the decline of civilisation by writing the Etymologiae – an Encyclopedia that summarised much of the classical worlds knowledge.
          Boethius lived in 6th century Italy and was another figure who preserved classical knowledge. The reality is that many aspects of Western society were actively trying to preserve knowledge and civilisation, and most of the scholars were christian theologians in the West or in Byzantium, the aristocratic and professional classes.

        13. I think you’re confusing, or perhaps deliberately conflating Catholicism with Christianity. And have an axe to grind. Telling other people what to believe is for women, deliberately misrepresenting those beliefs while making an argument is for feminists.

        14. Islam hasn’t contributed anything to modern civilization ? Throwing out the baby with the bath water again..

    4. Might be worth noting that for 20, there is no Hebrew word for “rape” (in the ancient world) and, more likely than not, it was referring to pre-marital sex, which would, suddenly, make the rendering of that passage make a great deal more sense, period.

      1. Yes, but the Bible also seems to have plenty of references to Israelites using captured women for their own pleasure… They might not have called it rape, but they certainly were aware of and permitted it…

        1. What are you going to do with captured women?
          1. Kill them outright
          2. enslave them
          3. release them (they’ll probably starve to death since “Captured” implies you probably just sacked their civilization.
          Compared to what?

        2. Erm, I don’t know, perhaps NOT rape them when you enslave them?
          Simply make them do farm or household labor in exchange for food, shelter, and clothing, and let them buy their freedom afterwards?
          The “it’s for her own good” hamsterization of rape is not going to fly…
          Besides, the whole “kill all the men, wipe out the civilization, and capture all the women and children” thing is rather barbaric in and of itself. Wouldn’t it be a bit nicer to keep the civilization intact and not massacre its inhabitants when you conquer it?

        3. Honestly, it entirely depends on the civilization. If you live next to a violent, barbaric people who are constantly causing problems, then perhaps razing it to the ground is the best thing.
          If you are dealing with a rational people and have gone to war over a certain grievance, and the matter is now settled, it’s probably fine to leave things as they are.
          In the ancient world, where tribes and peoples were far smaller than nation-states, and were constantly dealing with vaguely defined territories (and constantly trying to expand as population grew), often leaving your enemies alive and functioning was a sure way to guarantee the rape and murder of your own people. It was a brutal time, but that’s how it was. Enslaving the men was better than killing them, and taking the women into your harem was better than killing them, too.

        4. Or you can simply kill the troublemaker alpha males in battle, and elevate a loyal Satrap to rule the tribe on your behalf.
          Obviously, for this you need a functioning civilization and political system, which the Jews didn’t have at the time. However, you’d expect better from God’s chosen people…

        5. Not really. As St. Paul – Jew Extraordinaire and disciple of Gamaliel the Magnificent – said: the Old Testament was “a pedagogue unto Christ.” I.e., it was a teacher that led schoolboys gradually to Christ. In the Old Testament, there is a clear progression from near-barbarism to an almost Christian morality, spanning from Genesis through to the last of the prophets. What I expect, is to see a people progress from heathen barbarism to something better. And that’s what we do see. The Church teaches that only the morality of the New Testament is the morality of the Kingdom of Heaven revealed in the fulness of time.
          Also, though I understand people have a hard time with the blunt nature of this view: God is not in the same position as mortal men, and morals are not the same for Him. A man has a somewhat different morality from a woman, and each from their children. How much more God, in whose gift our life and everything else lies. God can lead His people slowly through the steps, gradually bringing them to an higher level of moral and spiritual truth. And He is not constrained by man’s moral limitations – the reason why it is wrong to murder, after all, is that man is in God’s image and we have no authority to snuff that out, unless a man has so defiled it in himself first through some horrible crime or other. But God is obviously not so limited, and there is nothing immoral about it, when He disposes of His handiwork as He will. He is perfect love, and we can be sure that every man has received, at a minimum, what is just from the hand of God.
          It’s a matter of gradual development on the one hand, and allowing God to be sovereign in the knowledge that His goodness and perfection are certain, on the other. And so, if we think we have found a pretext to question His morality, we can know that we have made the mistake, not him. To some people, that sounds like blind obedience. But when His qualities are determined by other demonstrations, and when one realizes the irrationality of a finite creature presuming to complain about the infinite fashioner, it is not hard to see the traditional way of thinking as rational and pious.

        6. So many sad excuses.
          So why would an all-powerfull deity leave the choosen people exposed to that?
          Or even stop the Roman legions from making judea into a part of the Empire or support the hebrews when they revolted against Roman rule or even act when the temple was erased?
          The relation between the “perfect” yaweh and the “chosen people” makes Twilight books look like an example of a healthy relationship.

        7. As to the Jews, they continually violated the contract with God and were given over to the consequences of their actions. If they wanted to forsake God for Baal, God was happy to let Baal take them. As to Rome specifically, the Jews ceased to be the chosen people as soon as they rejected the Messiah. I see so many Evangelicals speaking as though the Jews were still “Israel.” St. Paul clearly shows in his epistle to the Romans that the Church is now the True Israel. God has pruned off Israel “according to the flesh” (i.e., the Jewish people) and has grafted on Israel according to the Spirit of adoption (i.e., the Church, comprised of the Sons of Abraham, who was justified through faith apart from the Law). The True Israel of God is now the Catholic Church; Christ Himself prophesied the destruction of the temple, and clearly connected it to the apostasy of the Jews.
          The relationship between Israel according to the flesh and God, is really no different than the relationship between God and every erring soul. I have no difficulties understanding that man has chosen and continues to choose to defect from the good, and that, as man is the crown of creation, evil has flowed through him into the entire created order. I blame God for absolutely none of the evil that has ravaged the universe, because I see myself choose the evil on a daily basis – and having seen the Liberal-Progressives at work, I also understand that human evil has a powerful element of “unforseen consequences” operating at all times. I used to be an atheist, but honestly, I have never understood the argument that attempts to find fault with God, or blame Him for human suffering or natural disasters, etc. I just don’t get it. Plus, if we find such things to be evil and tragic, then let us admit that only the existence of God could possibly give meaning to the terms “evil” and “tragic.” If there is no God, and no transcendent morality (but rather, only our passing and irrational emotions about things), then “tragic events” are simply the random events of no moral significance that happen throughout the Universe. It’s no more sad that the Jews suffered under the Persians, Babylonians, Romans, etc., than it is when you step on an anthill. In a Godless, nihilistic cosmos our outrage over such things can only be seen as irrational, and rooted in our merely emotional connection to the event.
          The sense of moral outrage or sorrow over tragic events and the destruction of human life, if we want to believe it points to anything of moral significance, must point to the existence of God; even when I was atheist, I never understood why people used this as an argument against God; all its force goes the other way. But then, I was always a more rational person than most people I knew. Most people simply use reason to reverse-justify their emotional inclinations and hunches, especially atheists. Most Christians just stick with the hunches and forget about reason. 😉
          As to Rome, what happened to it? Well, Christianity spread like wildfire through it, Christianizing Africa, the Near East, Scythia, the Mediterranean, Gaul and Britain up to the Wall of Hadrian. Then, to preserve the independence of the Bishop of Rome as the Church entered a period of intense internal development, God had the Emperor move the capitol to the East, to Byzantium. The influx of barbarians in the West did not so much want to destroy Rome as become Romans, so this led to the Christianization of the Goths and, eventually, all the Germanic and Northern European peoples. In the East, New Rome continued to exist for another millennium, bringing the Gospel to the Slavs. I do not see the collapse of Imperial power in the West as God “abandoning” His people, for “here we have no continuing country,” in the New Testament. I actually see the collapse of Imperial power in the West as a huge benefit for the development of the Church, especially through to the 8th century, when the Great Ecumenical Councils of undivided Christendom were held.
          Besides, if you wanted to see the collapse of the Empire in the West (because, remember, the Roman Empire continued to exist in the Eastern capitol until 1453) as some kind of divine judgment or abandonment, it is worth noting that the precipitous decline of the Empire in the West came immediately upon the heels of Julian the Apostate, the Emperor who reverted to Paganism and left his forces in shambles before the Sassanids.
          Hope some of that was helpful…

        8. No. God is sovereign and possessed of an infinite goodness that no creature is even capable of comprehending. In fact, it goes beyond even our concept of goodness, it is so great, unfathomable and utterly beyond our idea of the good.
          That is the point. He is in a completely different moral category than you. Do you judge your dog for crapping in the park? Do you think you should be able to drop your drawers and crap in the park, too? Or do you realize that there is a vast gulf of moral differentiation between you and your dog? But you are both creatures. How much greater is the gulf between a creature and the Infinite, Incomprehensible Being that created it? What man, who owes his entire existence to God, could reasonably complain when God has brought his days to an end? It is a sign of how degraded and entitled our generation has become, that we turn to our Maker, Who is beyond all our power of thought, and sputter impotently like feminists whining about reality.
          God is not us. He is far less subject to our moral judgments than your dog is subject to human moral standards. You are in no position to judge His character or His deeds. One day, in fact, He will judge yours. God grant us both the grace of repentance.

        9. “No. God is sovereign and possessed of an infinite goodness that no creature is even capable of comprehending. In fact, it goes beyond even our concept of goodness, it is so great, unfathomable and utterly beyond our idea of the good.”
          Like I said. God is a dick.

        10. Will power really steal away the desire for vengeance?
          Or will it give them an opportunity to avenge the blood of their comrades? You can give a man power but not necessarily take away his loyalty to his former comrades. Case in point Arminius of Germanica.

    5. Darwin’s theories were based upon observations of plant and animal life from around the world including fossils. Most people attribute his discovery of evolutionary theory to his observations of finches. Not sure where you got the blacks and asians thing…

      1. But were they based upon observations of new organs appearing in animals, also known as speciation? No. Nor is speciation observed now. Nor do we know the mechanism for new useable organs suddenly appearing in an animal. Nor has anyone observed that all animals share a common ancestor. It was all just daydreaming, and still is. Daydreaming of a world without God.
        Darwins finches, which I’ve seen tattoos of, were analagous to the observation that black and asian people have different shaped noses. It takes a strong case of aspergers to think that discovery is worth immortalizing.

      2. A single cell is more complicate than the space shuttle there’s no way it could have evolved from nothing through mutation and random natural selection. It could only have been designed and created.

        1. Just because something is complex and amazing doesn’t mean it had supernatural origins. Who says “no way it could have evolved through mutation and natural selection” not real scientist I bet. Creationist would say this . Also just because there is a gap in knowledge or something can’t be explained by science quite yet doesn’t support intelligent design also..

        2. Evolutionism is a religion not a part of science there is just no credible evidence for the Darwinian theory of evolution it’s actually on its’ death bed.

        3. Jesus Christ help fluffybiscuits with his meds. Pay attention son, my point was not to prove ID true, nor did “awake” comment about ID; my point was to explain that Darwin’s little daydream was not intellectually/scientifically significant and macroevolution has not ever actually been observed. Why are you bringing up ID/Creationism when we were not discussing it? Do you need ritalin to maintain focus, son? Just admit that what I said about Darwin’s daydream is true, or refute it directly. Shift goal posts much?

        4. Charles Darwin was an idiot. He flunked out of Medical school and to avoid humiliation from his rich parents and to avoid REAL work, he hoped aboard the HMS Beagle guised as a naturalist. He then ripped off Jean-Baptiste Lamarck’s evolutionary theories as his own. So, in a nutshell, atheism is based on theft and the “cult-of-atheism” follows a liar and thief. . . kind of like Scientology.

        5. What to say such supernatural origins would automatically have to be “The Lord” of the abrahamic religions?
          You mock my religion? You immature, foolish child!
          Other religions? They are all just complete bullcrap, Satan deceiving people!

          Phillip Lovecraft´s “Gods” are more likely at least, he had more imagination than the writters of the bible and surely less self-dellusions and blind fanaticism.

        6. Its seems YHWH has the most evidence on his side when it comes to action in human history and fulfilled prophecy.

        7. Pre-trib rapture is a load of bullocks. It is not a biblical position. The rapture will only happen with the 2nd coming.
          Now here is evidence of fulfilled prophecy:

        8. Believers think it’s interesting when atheists can’t adequately explain something and then attribute it to something they can’t see or prove.

        9. That’s called an appeal to ignorance. The cell is filled with complex interdependent systems that do not function unless they are all in place together. Random mutations would only result in parts of these complex systems and have no selective purpose or advantage to lead them to remain and survive. Natural selection is inadequate to explain these systems and so intentional design is the only possible conclusion. The question we need to stop focusing on is whether the cell was designed or not because the only reason to ask that question in the negative is if you have a religious dogma saying that it must be wholly natural and materialistic and arose spontaneously. The denial of the fact of intentional design by atheists is about as silly to me as the 6000 year old earth idea is to atheists. it requires an incredible amount of delusion on their part to continue in that denial.

        10. LOL!
          A woman having sex with an animal is a confusion. Picking up snakes is not dangerous for the believers, for they are protected against the poison.

          Do you work on Sabbath day?

        11. Not only do I work on the Sabbath, I cut the hair on the sides of my head, eat pork and do a host of things that you’d better understand if you had a more thorough exposure and comprehensive understanding of the Bible.
          You think you’re posing “gotcha” questions, but you’re just demonstrating a lack of comprehension.

        12. Bible is full of nonsense and retardation, true or false? Evilbibe. c om
          Yey yes, that horrible ethnocentrism prevents me from seeing how wonderfull the cultures of the goat fuckers where back then and still are today.
          Thought if I interpreted and understood it the way many apparently pretend to do, I would prolly find it to be beautifull and perfect word of Teh Lord, know that Islam is a religion of peace, the sky is red and that 2 + 2 = 5.

      3. David Berlinski: Rebelious In
        Inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S89IskZI740tellectual Defies Darwinism

    6. Jack Chick would be proud. This was a ridiculous cut-and-paste job, written by an angry, undereducated kid. I get annoyed at poorly-researched work and ad hominem attacks- there is plenty of ammo if one wants to be critical of the Catholic church… so why use wrong info or distort things?

    7. Speaking as a non-Christian with dear friends who are, I have to say that Christianity is a “mixed bag” of good and bad”. But then that’s the nature of all of large enterprises that involve the human element.

    8. your making weak points, here’s some information: if every church spent it’s money on making a difference then trying to build the biggest church, reminiscent of a mansion, there would be no world hunger. You have helped destroy the world.

    9. This reply is so on-point it’s scary. I get a kick out of the association the article author makes between Christianity and these moral ills which Christianity expressly opposes. Christianity can’t catch a fair break.

    10. This article is pathetic. Honestly, this site has gone down so far in quality that it sickens me. I don’t give a fuck about the “evils of feminism.” That war was fought and lost a long time ago. We need to do our best to mitigate the effects- right now, we’re no better than Jezebel. In many cases, we’re worse, because people can successfully paint us as angry, right-wing misogynists, which most of us seem to be. Every article about “Women shouldn’t XYZ” only proves it.
      Personally, this article about explains why I’ve left the mainstream for most of this. I care about game and important shit, not some guy on spring break bitching about ‘libertarian ideals’ (which don’t work in reality) and how religion is BS. Yeah, a lot of religion is BS (I’m a Deist), but the fact remains that it has value, and people who believe in God shouldn’t be made fun of.

    11. holy fucking shit this comment is just brutal
      the writer just got blown.the.fuck.out #rekt
      good post earl!

    12. The manosphere seems to attract a LOT of clueless Christians who seem to be under the impression that red pill thinking is related to Christianity.
      Listen up: It isn’t.
      Red pill thinking is about sifting through the propaganda you have been fed, especially where it concerns sexual relationships between men and women. It’s based on observation and psychology, not bullshit religious propaganda. There is *nothing* more blue-pill than religious thinking. If you can’t even make the logical jump necessary to realize that christianity is bullshit, how can you possibly expect to think rationally in other areas?
      To top it off, there is no major religion that has female worship as part of its core social structure as much as modern christianity does. Almost all christian apologists during the past century were serious blue-pill betas. The female worship is so pervasive that most people don’t even realize it’s there – until they compare christianity with Islam or Judaism, whereupon the difference becomes dramatically obvious.

      1. You’ve learned nothing. You’ve wasted your time.
        Tradition is the distilled wisdom of generations. Discarding tradition has led us to the point where red pill discussions are required. You could learn a lot from tradition, the same goes for the religions that are the root of those traditions.
        You think that red pill blogs are the only arcane wisdom out there?

        1. Tradition is the distilled wisdom of generations. Discarding tradition has led us to the point where red pill discussions are required.

          The true nature of women was always laid bare in the Abrahamic religions.

    13. spot on Earl!
      Mr. Grumm – where’s the red pill in this rehash of new atheist ravings?

    14. A reply to a few of your replies:
      1. Logical error: time. “Throughout its history” refers to all of history. This question was only mentioning 400-1400. I disagree with the author’s use of this example because it’s so arbitrary and hard to prove or define, but the counterpoint was a very poorly-constructed one. The question is if scientific or technological innovation was repressed in any way. If your answer is no. That’s fine. Proudly say, “No” and provide some premises for your conclusion. Instead we just have a logical fallacy: red herring. Preserving literacy and social order in no way means that innovation wasn’t hindered. I get it. It’s avoiding the question because you’re a Christian and have to always avoid the point if you don’t have a good response (the same way liberals and women act).
      3. Fallacy: red herring. Again, a failure to answer a question. Did religious and intellectual tolerance have any positive effects? If your answer is No, please explain your theory behind that. You won’t do that because you don’t have a case.
      4. a) Logical fallacy: Straw man. But we can ignore that for now. Here we have another 80 IQ pseudoscience guy who believes it’s a giant conspiracy in the Encyclopedia Brittanica, peer-reviewed science journals, and Wikipedia. How about you correct the claims on Wikipedia as well as submit your own scientific reports if you believe so strongly about evolution being utterly false? Oh yeah, that’s right. Because you have no background in the field, no research, and no understanding of the subject.
      b) http://creationwiki.org/Biblical_age_of_the_Earth Okay, so you disagree with this. That’s fine. Why don’t you lay out your own timeline of the events that took place if you disagree? Any idea why you won’t? Because it’ll make you look stupid to expose your real beliefs. The comment simply stated that many Christians believe the earth is no older than 7,000 years old. That’s true. Many Christians do believe that. How many is a different issue, but it’s sad all the same. A person who has no critical thinking skills (who has no clue what a burden of proof is and couldn’t pass a logic 101 high class school) is able to believe a lot of illogical things without convincing evidence, including creationism, intelligent design, and the Bible. These are your classic beta blue pill boys with very low intelligence, as Somali Pirate’s comment explained.
      You go on to claim Hitler was an atheist (or at the very least, Godless and not a ‘real’ Christian) who killed because of (or being led by) Darwin’s discoveries. Create a premise-premise-conclusion argument for that. I think you’ll have trouble not laughing yourself. Too funny reading the absurdly stupid arguments. I’ll give you a source since you probably don’t speak German: http://www.examiner.com/article/refuting-the-myth-that-hitler-stalin-and-pol-pot-were-atheists-1
      Red pill is associated with individual critical thinking skills. Simply put: being able to observe and recognize facts in a sea of lies. The ability to see through the brainwashing of children that occurs through liberal education/Hollywood/media and all religions. I get it. You justify everything your religion has ever done and won’t admit to any of their faults or that any Bible passages advocate irrational behavior. This is associated with lack of objectivity more than anything else. The main people I see online like this are liberals and Christians, who share way too many similarities. When you learn what a ‘burden of proof’ is, get back to me (that might explain the classic logical fallacy for #24 you used – funny huh, you believe miracles happened, and he’s an idiot for doubting you – only a Christian could use such hilariously poor reasoning). Sad that the other 200 people who liked this comment have no critical thinking skills themselves if they can’t see any of your logically fallacious reasoning. Just a bunch of blue pill losers clinging to the beliefs their mommies taught them. Wake up you braindead idiots. This is exactly what the red pill is fighting against.

    15. I am often surprised by the amount of people who generalizes everyone thing outside of their own personal experience. The Catholic faith and the Christian faith are two different faiths. Roman Catholosim is nothing more than the Roman Empire whom decided on a more effiecent model of rule is over the soul than its body. Its really just a religious franchise that governs u based on what is spiritual than what is physical. True Christians are similar to what I have read of MGTOW. Our only authority is our perception of God, not the manipulations of his scriptures by immoral man. To quote Holy Roman Empire History to me is like telling a foreign diplomate that he isn’t allowed to park where he pleases.
      Christianity isn’t peaceful. It is war without weapons where the battlefield is the mind. I’ll let Sun Tzu remind you that in order to win, you must know both your enemy and yourself. What you will find if YOU personally do unassisted research will astond you.

  17. Typical Christians going for the throat because they read this and were like omfg this makes sense, but you extremists can’t possibly fathom that GOD doesnt exist. Lol

    1. but you extremists can’t possibly fathom that GOD doesnt exist. Lol
      Then why do you?

  18. 6. Do I not disagree that Psalm 137:9 “Happy they shall be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock” is so morally repugnant that it’s making infanticide sound like a party?
    19. Do I not disagree that Samuel 15:2-3 “This
    is what the Lord of hosts has to say: ‘I will punish what Amalek did to
    Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now,
    attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do
    not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and
    sheep, camels and asses” Is a passage of wanton and indiscriminate mass murder which is not suitable for this religion of ‘peace’?

  19. As a Christian, I do disagree with most of these, know little about some of the incidents in question (the several popes, etc.) and consider many questions non-sequiturs or absurd (#21, Scandinavia was Christian and is now secular therefore atheism.)
    Regarding a few specific questions, #1 is patently false to any student of scientific history, the Church fostered a worldview that allowed science to happen believing that God created an orderly an ultimately understandable world, not to mention the many devout Christians involved in the Scientific Revolution. In addition the notion that religion is in conflict with science is absurd and a relatively new concoction during the 19th century. Evolution in no way debunks Christianity, many Christians believe in evolution, and evolution has a seal of approval from the Catholic Church (who seems to bear the brunt of your criticisms), Alvin Plantiga, a Christian philosopher of religion is a defender of theistic evolution claiming that evolution could only have happened under the guidance of a divine being.
    Concerning Wars and Atrocities, Christianity has a very good track record considering its status in the last millenia. Christians cannot control what Nazis put on their belt buckles. I think we can all agree that claiming you hear God’s voice does not mean you actually hear God’s voice. Witch hunts were largely a public hysteria according to my understanding and not encouraged by the Church at large and the literature for finding witches was not endorsed by the church.
    Concerning Bad Popes, you seem to be making the assumption that since there were some bad popes, all Christians are bad, or evil, etc. The same reasoning applied to any group fails, see some men rape, therefore all men rape, and so on. In addition picking on bad popes is a longstanding Christian tradition, in Dante’s Divine Comedy, popes are placed in the lowest depths of hell.
    Concerning Bible verses, did you read the context of any of the verses you mentioned? Specifically, did you read Psalm 149? Do you know what it meant to call someone bald in the ancient Near East? Do you know the difference between judgement by God mandated by him and human violence perpetrated by man for his own ends; one is damned by the Old Testament, one is ordered by God in very specific instances, ones not replicated today.
    I think that covers most of your objections of which I am familiar, you have given me some interesting reading concerning some Middle Ages popes however. Ponder these red pill questions about your skepticism:
    1. How did the universe come into being given the impossibility of an actual infinite?
    2. How can we trust our senses given naturalistic means of evolution?
    3. How can we ground morality given the non-existence of a deity?

  20. I just scanned this and I’ll read this more thoroughly but some of these questions remind me much of the shaming tactics employed by statists (contemporary liberals).

  21. 20. Do I not disagree that Deuteronomy 22:28-29 “If
    a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged,
    he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the
    young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to
    divorce her” is sheer lunacy? What kind of God would mandate that a rape victim marry her attacker?
    18. Do I not disagree that Kings 2:23-24 “”From
    there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small
    boys came out of the city and jeered at him. “Go up baldhead,” they
    shouted, “go up baldhead!” The prophet turned and saw them, and he
    cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the
    woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces” is a bit of a
    harsh, bizarre, and exaggerated punishment for teasing a prophet of God
    for simply having a bald head? Especially when directed against such
    young children?

    1. Really. Then why would God send his only son so that before a Holy God whatever wrong you done will be forgiven if you believe in him. For all evil is ultimately against God.

    1. That was a little bit funny, but he’s wrong. He said that there can’t be a god because things on Earth are fucked up so much, but he neglects a core aspect of Christian theology, which states that god has an antagonist: the devil, whom holds dominion over the Earth.
      And then he goes on to state that if there was a god it has to be a man, because no woman would fuck things up this badly, well, I mean… that’s as just about as blue pill as it gets. In reality women are much more likely to fuck things up, because they’re on the whole generally less intelligent, ingenuitive and capable than men.

      1. Sorry but this “all men are more intelligent and capable than women” is a myth. It’s all about distribution of inteligence: women are mostly average while there are many intelligent men above this average and about as many complete morons who are below. I neither know nor care what color of pill it is – it’s actual observation about world, not some deluded generalisation about gender.

        1. No Centipede, the actual myth is the one that you said: that there is a differing pattern of distribution between the sexes, and that there are more male idiots as well as more male geniuses in the world. As I say, this is a myth, and is not backed up by the slightest shred of evidence, and in fact is shown by all the evidence to indeed be false.
          The fact of the matter is that men are at all points along the distribution curve more intelligent than women, and I’m afraid that’s just a straight scientific fact with no caveats or qualifications. You have to accept it, because its the truth. Failure to accept the plain truth, whether because of politic correctness or indoctrination or for whatever reason, is blue pill.

  22. I’ve never understood why atheists care so much about what other people believe. If I didn’t believe in God, then I wouldn’t waste a second of my life arguing with someone about the issue. I just wouldn’t care.
    Militant, evangelical atheists like to talk so much about their non-belief because they are trying to convince themselves that God doesn’t exist. Deep down, they either know they are wrong or are deeply conflicted.

  23. 1) Some useful reading on the subject generally:
    2) Christian societies and science; the term “Dark Ages” came from scholars who were in love with Ancient Rome; second link written by a self-described atheist:
    2) If this was the year 1914, we could argue about the merits of a rational, atheistic society. However, the quote by Winston Churchill applies: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” We saw two great powers in the Soviet Union and Maoist China that were extremely proud to be atheist, as well as other lesser atheist regimes and leaders (e.g. Pol Pot), and these countries had a tendency to kill millions of their own people.
    3) “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” – John Adams

    1. I didn’t even know Vox was part of the red pill community until recently. I originally heard of him from his book countering the New Atheists, which was excellent. Wish he’d take a peek over here and set things straight.

  24. So many mischaracterizations, misunderstanding, out of context citations, and downright falsehoods that I have neither the time nor the inclination to bother refuting them all.

  25. article is a demolition job, but it makes a fair point, which isn’t really about whether God does / does not exist or whether religion makes the world a nicer place. Its about whether red pill can mean allowing the scales to fall from your eyes with respect to women & sex for example, while choosing to disregard evidence that questions or dis-confirms other beliefs you hold dear. As the number of comments on this pretty recent article attests debates about the truth or falsehood of religion are not going to go away, but consolation, and wilful self-deception, are never going to be red pill. For the record there is modern day theology that would have no trouble with any of this

  26. Most of these are just silly and have been debunked before. I was hoping for a new perspective on belief from a red pill guy, but I don’t see anything original here, just a list of stuff Dawkins and Sam Harris fans like to trot out. Also, just because some religious groups and religious people have been rotten at times and some Bible passages are difficult to understand does not mean there is no God.

    1. No, it doesn’t. But it may well mean that God is not the god of the Bible. Absolute proof of God could well be absolute dis proof of YHWH.

    2. Religion isn’t about belief. It’s about installing a set of rituals in society. If you think religion is about belief, you’re just kidding yourself. Religion isn’t meant to be taken literally.

  27. This is such an absurd article, and it smacks to me like just another militant atheist with an Axe to grind. Why the hostility against Christianity? You hate your own culture so much? As for Norway, Sweden and Holland, how about you look at the enormous numbers of violent pack rapes of young blonde girls by Islamist immigrants before extolling the virtues of their sickening left-wing, limp-wristed, ultra-feminist cultures.

    1. “violent pack rapes of young blonde girls by Islamist immigrants”
      I agree that the scum of the 3rd world should never be permitted into a Western White nation.

      1. Good to see you’re irrationality is confined to the subject of religion. There’s hope for you yet.

      2. found the white nationalists,this is rok…stormfront is that way——>
        But this whole rape of women in scandinavia is being alil overblown. As or 08 to now the cities of Oslo and Stokholm have had a majority of foreign offenders(typically christan africans and sometimes MENA among other groups including foreign whites)
        the overall total one survey came up with a 47% of all offences in the 2 nations(others had em much lower). Not the majority but a huge over representation in those immigrant groups.Its rather ironic that the land of vikings is “getting raped and pillaged” by the world now.
        But this whole rape against white women gets more attention then ethnic girls like the rape and murder of Farrah noor Adams by a scotsman. Media really white knights white women.
        This “rape epidemic of blondes” has to be taken with a grain of salt considering rape there has a very broad range. Like you can have consensual sex without a condom and she can complain and say its rape. You white nationalists are white knights with your women. She is not innocent and holistic. Especially in Scandinavia where feminism and hypergamy is an all time high, no nation can match that.Not even USA.
        So stop posting that 1 picture of that bloody battered blonde. Cause im guessing a good number of those nordic girls crying rape is just lying cause they got pumped n dump by a 3rd world alpha whom give them the “tingles” better then their uber-beta nordic men.From vikings to complete vaginas.
        white knighting is called white knight for a reason. Not black zulu or yellow samurai or brown rajput or whatever cause they didnt put the puss on the pedestal.

        1. Also worth remembering that “I was raped” is the go-to defence of a white woman who has sex with a black guy.

  28. The religion vs. science thing is largely made up. The Catholic Church never oppressed anyone because of their science and still don’t. The Church supported the sciences completely.
    Google “Draper White” or “conflict thesis”. Religion vs. science is a modern thing, and even then it’s only small pockets of western christianity.
    Before the bitching starts, i’m no Christian but a strong agnostic. I just like real history and everytime this bullshit pops up I say something.

    1. The question is not Religion vs Science but rather Creationism vs Evolutionism which are both Religious in nature.
      Christians have been using science since the inception of the Church to prove the creation, but there is no credible scientific evidence for: Macro Evolution or The Big Bang theory of cosmic evolution. Furthermore the Geologic column does not exist anywhere in the world it was completely made up. All any Evolutionist can point to is Micro evolution: like kinds begetting like kinds with some variations which is the only observable process on Earth, but there’s no credible scientific evidence proving that mud and stones created a living creature. Billions of years is a lie perpetuated by Marxist professors who need to destroy Genesis in order to control your mind!

  29. Those are not “painful questions”; they are not even new or original questions. What they actually are are questions that might be asked by someone whose approach to any given issue is to only read from sources that confirm his pre-existing beliefs, or perhaps by someone who is 16 and thinks he is terribly edgy. In reality, these questions have been answered so often that to simply ask them is to risk making one look juvenile and to demonstrate the terrible risks that one takes when one gets their entire knowledge of a subject from 10 minute youtube clips, snippets from Wikipedia, various forum discussions and possibly a few Star Trek conventions. Grow up.

  30. Every word of this article is facile bullshit, even the “ands” and “the’s.”

  31. As an atheist I have to say that this is the most embarassing article published on RoK so far, and displays the perfect opposite to the red-pill attitude. “Red-pill” should mean making thoroughly investigated, truthful statements about the way the world and society functions. These are repetitions of tired modernist myths that have been disproved countless times, that are peddled by the intellectual lightweights of the New Atheist movement (humanists, liberals, feminists). Do the red-pill thing and actually read some books, do some research, and form conclusions based on evidence.
    I recommend this article to everyone interested in the Religion vs. Science (non-) issue: http://armariummagnus.blogspot.co.at/2009/10/gods-philosophers-how-medieval-world.html?m=1

    1. Nathan did you not attempt to refute evolution in your comments below?
      And you talk of embarrassment?

      1. Pretty dumb to assume that all guest accounts are the same person. I’m not Nathan, and I have no problem with evolution.

  32. If there is one group of countries id hate to live in it’s the North European ones like Sweden. They are the most beta, feminine, diversity loving bunch of pussies in the world, to think they produced the Vikings, now look at them. As for the rest of the article, there is nothing specifically red pill about it, it’s just the same old shit atheists and Christians argue about all over the internet, neither being able to conclusively prove each other wrong. Kinda odd to see it being spun as red pill.

    1. yeah, every time I see something about Norway, I just think to myself, “These are the descendants of the pirate raiders that terrorized three continents?

      1. It makes more sense when you realize they are the descendants of the ones who stayed behind while their kinsmen terrorized three continents.

  33. Even if we didn’t have all the evidence for the theory of evolution based on making inferences about the past, we can see in the here-and-now that we get here through random chance by considering the sloppy, haphazard way human reproduction works. Just look at how many of us of “got here” because our feral mothers drank too much alcohol at a party around the time they ovulated, and they wound up in bed with some guy they just met. I don’t see any “intelligent design” in the process.

    1. Read Genesis. When God spoke: it was. Its not like God actually designed every thing in a design workshop.
      So if evolution happened. Then it happened because God spoke.

  34. Well, according to religion extramarital sex is a grave sin you should be ashamed of. Having lovers is bad. Sex itself is bad. It’s dirty act you shouldn’t have fun with as it is related to sacred act of giving life. Contraception is forbidden. You need to marry woman and live with her until death do you part and after marriage even looking at other women is act of adultery that needs to be revealed to your confessor. Reading articles from sites like this is actually corrupting your mind, you should stop immediately and pray for your soul. After that you should give all of your money to the poor or you’re risking that you will not be saved when promised day comes. So, dear red-piller believers, why are you soiling yourself with reading RoK anyway?

    1. Yep…jerking off gets you a death sentence according to the Old Testament…

      1. Nope its just that Onan refused to impregnate his dead-brothers widow that continues his brothers bloodline. So God killed him.

  35. Pretty much true. However science as an ongoing enterprise as we know it developed only in Christendom and nowhere else. It had some beginnings elsewhere but failed. Other cultures executed witches (who were not all female there or here), conquered, and enslaved while expressing good intentions.
    It is time to move away from religion as it has been, however.

  36. when u put that list up and among other things that happened under their watch such as genocide colonialism slavery etc. christianity has more blood on its hands then any other religion. someone owes islam an apology lol. its ironic that whites or christians preach love and tolerance to other groups. like a whore preaching for chastity to unwed couples.

      1. well its not up to 4 wives.Its been brought down to 4.They use to have way more(well tribe didnt..hypergamy and polymorus).
        Never heard of the dirty water thing, cuz they are not suppose to trash water cuz there is like no water in the desert. Then again thats the ancient even today people die of many water bourne disease among other things. Which is why many died early. But strange thing is shouldnt their immune system get better or depend on the bacteria to digest it?
        But to add to the excrements you are better off washing your ass with water then with toilet paper other wise bacteria can grow there.
        Th reason I say this I knew this pakistani girl whose family went into a kinda shock for drinking clean water. One documentry about slums in india and those guys wound being immune to those disease.
        Dirty water,saliva, never heard of these things but remember the middle east is a region of scarcity not abundance such as europe and asia so cant really be picky.
        camel urine is used as medicine since ancient times,in europe the whites used horse urine and people in india to this day use cow urine. Its something to do with the ammonia in the urine to fight colds or something.

  37. 5. Do I not disagree that if Christianity never existed, we could very well be at a level of technology and cultural enlightenment so unfathomably advanced, beyond our wildest dreams, in the year 2014?

    Or else things would have stayed at just about the same low preindustrial economic and scientific level over the past 2,000 years regardless. The Roman social model had already begun to break down well before the christians became numerous enough to enforce their restrictions on education and on freedom of thought and inquiry.

  38. “Do I not disagree that countries such as Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands are among the most prosperous, peaceful, and charitable societies on Earth? And that these traditionally Christian nations ironically have among the highest percentages of non-religious, agnostics, and atheists in the world?”
    They’re all socialist, though. ‘Nuff said.

  39. Christianity banned cousin marriage, and if you read Chateau Heartiste and/or other blogs in the HBDsphere, you know what huge implications this single social policy had on the development of Western civ.

    1. Simply false, European Christian monarchs and aristocrats have been practicing consanguinity right up to the 1980s with Princess Diana and Prince Charles. The term “Habsburg Jaw” (a huge underbite) came from the crazy interbreeding of the Austrian royal family. I don’t know where you are getting this from, but these Christian monarchs and aristocrats simply ignored the “ban.” Also Joseph and Mary were cousins in the Bible, so how could the Bible have banned consanguinity?

  40. 21. Do I not disagree that countries such as Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands are among the most prosperous, peaceful, and charitable societies on Earth? And that these traditionally Christian nations ironically have among the highest percentages of non-religious, agnostics, and atheists in the world?

    Not all white populations can pull their acts together (e.g. Argentina). But on average they do that better than nonwhite populations from tropical places.

  41. Looks like someone watched some youtube documentaries and now wants to spread the gospel of zeitgeist. What if anything does this article have to do with Red/Blue pill? Shall we now discuss how advanced China was before the Kahn’s conquered it? Or perhaps how the U.S. involvement in WW1 may have led to the rise of Fascism? Oh wait…..wrong site.

  42. Atheist here. This article is mostly trashy, uneducated bile, uncommunicative and just slanderous. Written with little religious, biblical, historical or political knowledge.
    Stupid article that looks at one religion, has very shoddy understanding of history, and doesn’t understand the vastly different geo-political, moral and social truths of the times it hopes to criticize.
    I’m an atheist, but I know that very little science was repressed during the perdiod of 400-1400, Bacon, Anthemius of Tralles, The Venerable Bede, Pope Sylvester II (OMG! a pope who reintroduced proper math to the people! How evil!), Duns Scotus, William of Ockham, St. Thomas Aquinas.
    The Bad Popes section, meh, who cares. There have been tonnes of shitty people, but you can still separate the people operating under an organisation with the organisation itself- especially in a religion where there is a core doctrine to adhere to vis-a-vis the bible.
    Wars and atrocities. Yeah, you should see what Islamic people and Jewish people do to each other to this day, let alone in history. This article is so one sided and just screams fedora it’s sad. The Catholic church wasn’t a fan of Hitler, and criticized him on many occasions.
    Bible verses. Taken out of social context. Taken out of clerical and interpretational context. Little is done to show the changing moral climate of the church which lead away from the teaching of those verses. Not to mention they’re almost all contained in the Old Testament which requires years of biblical study to understand and interpret correctly (according to Christian tradition).
    Oh and then you link to the Zeitgeist at the end of this hate-fest and “red pill”. Rename this article call it Fedora Atheism or something. Or maybe write a nice article criticizing Islam and Judaism for a change rather than bashing what is by far the most peaceful religion on our earth in this year.

    1. ^^^ You are not an atheist . ^^^^ Bible verses taken out of context?? Adulterers were (are)stoned to death because the holy books say so…
      In Saudi Arabia women are hid because of what is says in the Koran..
      Dietary laws of the Jews?? Do you have 3 hours??
      Orthodox Jews can’t turn on a fucking lite switch during the Sabbath because of the biblical prohibition of “making fire”.
      Circumcision is from the bible….

      1. Social context. Clerical and interpretational context. Metaphor contexts.
        The bible doesn´t actually mean what it states, thought that doesn´t stop me from quoting it.

    2. In 2008, intelligence
      researcher Helmuth Nyborg examined whether IQ relates to denomination
      and income, using representative data from the National Longitudinal
      Study of Youth, which includes intelligence tests on a representative
      selection of white American youth, where they have also replied to
      questions about religious belief. His results, published in the
      scientific journal Intelligence, demonstrated that atheists scored an
      average of 1.95 IQ points higher than agnostics, 3.82 points higher than
      liberal persuasions, and 5.89 IQ points higher than other dogmatic

    3. islam already kinda gets trashed on this not just the comments section but typically indirectly like change of laws or taking over the west.
      Judaism well only from zionist conspirators in only comments very occasional.
      the other ones dont a get a mention(aside from the mention of budhism)

    4. Sorry, but that Newton was a christian means little. He was also an alchemist.

  43. This article is crap in so many ways, not least the obvious point that in the United States, among Scandanavians, we have a low crime rate too. Does the author not agree that hospitals, food kitchens, overseas charities … are almost exclusively christian? Wonder why that is.

  44. Did the author REALLY just mention Sweden and Norway, two of the greatest bastions of feminism in existence, in a positive light?
    That alone destroys this man’s credibility as a red pill thinker.
    As for the rest of this post, it’s mostly indictments of Christians and not Christ Himself.
    In fact, the author didn’t levy a SINGLE CRITICISM of Christ’s teachings. That should tell you all you need to know.

  45. Too many posts to be worth individually examined, but most of these
    result either from the fact that the author has swallowed the blue pill,
    public school, version of history hook line and sinker. It’s both an
    oversimplification and inaccurate to say that religion “repressed
    science”…..and let’s not even get into the esoteric and metaphysical
    interpretations of religion(which are highly scientific).
    of the rest of these points suffer from the author’s inability to
    distinguish between actions taken BY religion, and actions taken by
    governments attempting to use religion for secular ends (for
    example….Bush claiming God was on America’s side while the church was
    denouncing Iraq as an unjust war).

    1. Your first sentence hits the nail on the head. I don’t really care that this dude wrote the above article. My problem with it is that it’s been passed off as Red Pill which it is most assuredly not. Roosh and the other mods blew it allowing this article to be posted under the guise of red pill thinking.

  46. This article is blue pill. Sounds like the author pulled it straight off redddit/r/atheism.

  47. Reading list for you believers….
    —Jesus Interrupted
    —God is not Great—Christopher Hitchens
    —The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins
    —anything by Sam Harris
    —the Holy Bible, Koran, Torah…lots of great stuff in there but lots of fantastical stuff too e.g floods , kooky miracles, smiting , pillars of salt…
    —Thomas Paine—-
    –Old Testament esp Leviticus . Scary stuff….
    —Freethinkers by Susan Jacoby
    —Gore Vidal—he’s an insufferable homo but he’s a contrarian…read “Julian” and “Lincoln”
    —-The Grand Grand Inquisitors Manual ” by Kirsch

    1. That’s all well and good, but if you think for one second that the above article is red pill, you’re sadly mistaken.
      Not only is it rife with false assumptions and petty examples of moral failure, but it praises Norway and Sweden, two hugely feminist countries.
      This is blue pill thinking. Period. Full stop.

      1. The author is pointing out that these countries are SECULAR and have great stats re: life expectancy, health, prosperity, education way better than religious countries…
        Religiosity doesn’t correlate with good things

        1. But these countries’ feminism rose hand in hand with their atheism.
          Both their atheism and feminism have the same root: a break from traditional mores.
          And that’s why praising such a country is bullshit.

        2. I don’t know where my reply to this went, so I’ll repost:
          This article was posted as a red pill article, which is therefore supposed to be the antithesis of feminism.
          Therefore, any article that’s posted that praises an overwhelmingly feminist country is automatically not red pill.

        3. Cough cough ,you don’t see much Feminism in secular Asian countries like Japan or Hong Kong.

        4. Yes the Japanese cannot bother to procreate, and the Chinese cannot bother to have daughters. We’ll see how well that works out for them over there.

        5. And yet that’s not the full story, because those countries ALSO are the leading bastions of feminism.
          You can’t pick and choose what parts you want to look at.
          And since this is a red pill site, the feminism of these countries is far more important than anything you just listed.

        6. Japan has its own serious problems, so don’t even go there. As for Hong Kong, I wonder just what percentage of the people are atheists, and whether it even matters since it’s such a comparably tiny place.

      1. I’ve read Letters and thought it was very funny. Twain, unlike most new-Atheists, had some knowledge of what he attacked. Yet he still missed the mark too often, and still somehow managed to respect Christians to a degree that belies his criticism.

  48. re: # 20
    Why do morons always quote this without actually asking anyone to explain this?
    “Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her”
    HE must marry her. The GUY is forced to do it, NOT the girl. No woman anywhere is obligated to marry anyone if she does not want to.
    How does this apply? Well, let’s say John Doe gets hot and heavy with some chick and the next day she cries rape. First, they take him out and whip him 49 times which is the standard penalty for violating a law that isn’t a capital punishment crime and involves an action; next, they tell him that he has now agreed to marry the bitch if that’s what she wants. Finally, he has to pay her father the equivalent of 20,000$
    Maybe you don’t like that penalty, but it’s a helluva lot more than a free marriage, and personally, I think it’s a lot more fair than the false rape nightmare that currently exists.

    1. The emphasis is on must, not he.
      “No woman anywhere is obligated to marry anyone if she does not want to.”
      There are always those few who commit suicide as a way declining.
      It is the father who gives consent, not the woman. The woman has no legal method of even doing so. She is not signatory to the contract. She may well become legally married without even knowing that the marriage has taken place.
      “Finally, he has to pay her father the equivalent of 20,000$”
      No. The price is 50 silver shekels. That is 17.5 troy ounces of silver. If you don’t like that price, go argue it out with God and Moses.
      “Maybe you don’t like that penalty, but it’s a helluva lot more than a free marriage. . .”
      It’s not a penalty. It’s the ketubah. The bride-price. It is paid to the father who is supposed to set it aside for the maintenance of his daughter should her husband ever be unable to do so.
      Free marriage is a modern concept. No Biblical father would marry off his daughter without a katubah unless the only alternative was tossing her off a cliff or something. Even then he might prefer to toss her.
      That is the law.
      Of course you can always pull out that “Second Covenant” dodge that allows you to pick and choose which eternal laws of God you like and toss those that you do not.

  49. This article is the most liberal load of blue pill historical revisionism and misstatement I have ever seen.
    It belongs on salon.com. seriously. The amount of error and outright lying is friggin disgusting.

  50. Doesn’t a shrewd understanding of human nature actually teach us that religions have played a necessary role in keeping societies together? We have only to watch the mob to see that most require a slave morality with clear incentives and/or the threat of punishment in order to behave.
    People aren’t rational actors and are not moved by rational ideas. Scientific secularism has never succeeded as the foundation for a society, and every successful society we’ve yet seen is backed by religion.
    Results matter…and the results are unanimous.
    Nitpicking over every perceived flaw in religions is superfluous and pointless. Religious systems serve a critical purpose on the large scale.
    We might as well also list every problem that has ever existed in farming techniques, systems of taxation, and every mistake an army has ever made.
    This whole exercise is tiresome and literal-minded.
    You unwittingly rehash classic enlightenment concepts of “reason.” This nonsense is exactly what many of us are reacting to!

    1. Much of what you say is true. Religion isn’t all bad. Some religions are better than others e.g Christianity better than islam. Some religions are more evolved. But religion plays a big part in public policy and government. Saudi Arabia and Iran are dictatorships /theocracies . Religion is the source of their laws e.g stoning of gays and amputation of arms for thieves is derived from their holy books. This is a big deal. In the USA pols have to be religious in order to get elected. If Jefferson , Ben Franklin were alive today we would not elect them… I would prefer people to do the right thing because of the inherent goodness of the act instead of doing it to prevent diving retribution or not going to heaven etc…

      1. “I would prefer people to do the right thing because of the inherent goodness of the act”
        We’d also prefer money growing on trees and hot women trying to rip our pants open at first sight.

        1. So religion and holy books are stopping you from being a raping , marauding hun? You NEED to be told not to rape and pillage?? Give yourself some credit.

        2. that depends, if you were born viking, where raping and pillaging are ‘good business’, perhaps you DO need to be told.
          The idea that there is an ‘inherent conscience’ is patently ridiculous. Ethics are TAUGHT, not innate. That is why Feminism and liberal evil have taken root so strongly in our culture… they have specifically usurped the educational process since the 60’s

        3. “We’d also prefer money growing on trees”
          They make money out of paper these days.

      2. All laws are nothing more than codified morality; one group of people telling another group of people what to do or not to do. All morality is supernatural. All morality is religious in nature. Morality does not come from science. Therefore all laws are nothing more than supernatural ideas. Therefore there is no such thing as secular law. All law revolved around personal religious beliefs en masse.

  51. Scientific repression by the church? Giodorno Bruno was locked up and later burned by the Inquisition for his support of Copernicus . Watch episode 1 of Cosmos….

    1. watch a TV docudrama show created ‘based on a real story’ by the liberal MSM in order to inform yourself of ‘the truth’? Really?

      1. I also saw that movie where Abe Lincoln wasn’t a totalitarian mass murderer too, and realized how great them Yankees truly are after all. I even burned my Confederate flag!

        1. sure, ‘abe lincoln vampire hunter’ proves that he wasn’t a tyrant that stomped all over the constitution and state’s rights to secede.
          and no, I am not a ‘redneck’, I was born in virginia, and I still consider Lincoln a fucking power-hungry monster.

  52. I made it through the first five questions, but the level of ignorance you display in this article is embarrassing and too much for me. Pick up a history book, try to learn a bit about Christianity and try harder next time.

  53. Experimental science was being done by Catholic priests in Oxford in the 1200s. Look up Bishop Robert Grosseteste.
    Heard of Scotus, Albert the Great, Aquinas?
    This article is an absolute disgrace.
    The Christian Church has always taught obedience for wives. That is Red Pill enough.

  54. You’re arguing against a system of belief which nobody (at least, nobody who was literate) clung to in 1400; I can’t argue that present day “Christians” aren’t utter fools who believe in magic and witchcraft, but the “Christianity” you’re arguing against stands in stark contrast to what Christianity actually was and is.
    To address your first five points:
    1. The Christian religion is what led to the invention of science! In tribal Africa, you can teach all the medical science you want, but their belief in demons and spirits will drive them back to witch doctors, without the mojo of the white man around; Buddhism – though containing many noble truths – is too fatalistic, and acepting of the status quo to invent science.
    Not only did Christian theology lead to the development of science, the Catholic Church specifically fostered science, and the majority of scientific discoveries were at the hands of priests until well into the 18th century.
    2. The “Dark Age” is 50% Protestant propaganda, and 50% a direct result of Muslim piracy on our mediterranean trade routes.
    3. Religious freedom, and religious tolerance, are *Christian* ideals – our inquisitors sought to correct those who’d gone astray, not torture and murder everybody who disagreed with them. Educate yourself about the Spanish Inquisition.
    4. Listen, Creationism (big C – the rejection of small-e evolution*) is not only scientifically ignorant, it’s theologically blasphemous. You need to study actual Christian theology, not loud-mouth Southern Baptist Churchianity (you American Christians are nice people, but your theology is on par with Scientology).
    5. If Christianity had never existed, we’d be raping our daughters and beating our wives according to the will of Allah.
    And moving on…
    25. I think you need to study the theology behind free will, and better comprehend the nature of grace. To sum it up with a quote from Apocalypse Now, “Everyone gets everything he wants. I wanted a mission, and for my sins, they gave me one”
    *Big-E Atheistkult Evolution has a lot of pieces missing; it is likely there are some other things at play beyond mere, dumb matter, but much of evolution is true. The problem is that any debate is usually between braying jackasses, neither of whom have a good grasp of what they’re talking about.

    1. You’re implying that ancient India didn’t have advanced diagrams of flying spacecraft thousands of years ago?
      Once again, the root of all culture, religion, science, language, political ideologies, etc, is from ancient India.
      Don’t confuse that with the modern hell which is India, which is because Indians lost their great culture and started imitating the barbarian western culture. You can thank the British “christians” for that.
      Overall, Christians are very evil people.

        1. No kidding. ‘ancient astronauts’, ‘roswell’, and the influence of astrology.
          The only thing the indians ever pioneered was porn… look at their religious writings.

    2. Normally even if we aren’t in the same ball park, we’re at least playing in the same league, but here I’m going to stick up a bit for the running sports.
      “1. The Christian religion is what led to the invention of science!”
      For 250 years before the birth of Jesus the Hellenes had been refining the measurement of the diameter of the Earth. Aristotle and Archimedes are still considered progenitors of science and engineering.
      Science is a western tradition, not a Christian one. When the west became Christianized, yes, most scientists were Christian. Kepler set Galileo’s balls rolling, but the main impediment to Galileo was the Church believing that pagan Aristotle was Christian theologically correct.
      “5. If Christianity had never existed, we’d be raping our daughters and beating our wives according to the will of Allah.”
      If it were not for Pagans Alexander would have been born a Persian and Mohammed would have died a used camel dealer. There has also been plenty of beating and raping done in the name of Eloh.
      Just because Christians did things does imply they would not have been done without Christianity and you can support both Western culture and Christianity without resorting to that claim.
      If they are good, they are good unto themselves.

    3. “Educate yourself about the Spanish Inquisition.”
      Start by googling “strappado”, and “spanish boots”.

  55. while interesting in its framing and selectivity how about an analysis of all organisations, groups, currently operating as standard in the western world.
    this I currently find the most relevant in regards to the institutions and individuals as indicated by this post
    The Gervais Principle
    all parts are good if you have the inclination to go through them

  56. These questions aren’t painful, and are easily rebuffed. It’s always amusing, these religion-bashers – they read a few atheists’ best-sellers, who are like American tourists reading about Berlin from a guide-book and then trying to lecture Germans about their city. Then they think their “brilliant” points can take down centuries of theological study that dealt long ago with every Bible text they bring up and every atheist point they made. You’re a tourist in a land you don’t know much about, Grumm. Only your fellow believers are going to take you seriously — you’ll move and sway no one else.

  57. 1. Actually, the catholic church played the greatest part in preserving the scientific knowledge after the fall of the roman empire. Most university scientists were, in fact, sponsored by the catholic church.
    2. Fucking stupid. The turks and arabs did NOT advance scientific technology. They stole technological advancements from the Jews, and adapted them. Unfortunately, one of the reasons this ‘knowledge’ was kept out of western Europe was the fact that it carried with it an enormous amount of Muslim ideological baggage. Not to mention the fact that while the Arabs possessed a lot of knowledge they were taught by the jews, they also had an enormous store of ‘knowledge’ that was utterly ridiculous, and was treated with exactly the same level of scientific veracity by arabic alchemists and merchants as proven technology. Alchemy, The summoning and binding of djinn, the casting of spells and making of magical writings, the professional creation and application of poison, interplanar communications, spiritism and ritual necrophilia and necromancy, ‘religious’ magic, transformation and animal spirits, phrenology and fortune-telling, astrology, all were treated with the exact same level of versimilitude as medicine and sulfates.
    Not to mention the arabs introduced their own scale of weights and measures and a numbering (not mathematical) system that barely edged out the roman… but was still fucking retardedly based on the number 10, about the most counterintuitive and mathematically useless number in existence.
    3. the dutch ‘Golden age’ and the foundation of the hanseatic league marked a massive decline in the power and prestige of Europe. Merchants usurped the power of rulers, and indulged and encouraged every manner of self-destructive vice, from deadly substances to heritable slavery, from encouraging wars amongst monarchs and usury for same to blackmail… anything that could be used to turn a dime, no matter how horrifying and ruinous for anyone else, they indulged in.
    4. Misstatement. The Catholic church did not oppose or censure Darwin’s research. They said simply “We cannot make a statement about it’s veracity at this time. In point of Fact, Gregor Mendel, a well-respect Augustine monk, laid the groundwork and first advanced the theory of evolution long before Darwin ever started writing. Jean-baptiste Lamarck was also instrumental in advancing the concepts and theories behind evolution… Please do not mistake the protestations of ignorant rednecks for church policy.
    5. If Christianity did not exist, we would far more likely be lucky to have the technology of 1214 at this time.
    6. It was political, and it was VERY important for the church to have a scapegoat at the time. Unlike the ‘non catholics’ of the time, at least noo one was fucking or eating the dead pope’s body. Disgusting is relative. Muslims think we are disgusting if we hold a hamburger in our left hand… we think they are disgusting for wiping their ass with their bare hand.
    7. Apparently you are trying to evoke double jeopardy, two points for the act. Intellectually bankrupt.
    8-10. Yup popes can be human. Sometimes they make mistakes or are basically assholes.
    11. Dumbshit, there was a WAR on. the truce itself is astonishing. (and quite a few in eastern europe never got the memo) and how does this relate to christianity?
    12. You need to re-read your history of witch burning. The entire situation developed due to the rise of premature female empowerment, feminism, and women POISONING THEIR HUSBANDS. The witch burning was mostly a cover for rooting out the new cult of isis (what feminism is today). Yes, there were likely mistakes made, but it was a war for european culture… innocent people die during a war.
    13. So? every fascist tries to claim that god is on their side. It is not an indictment of christianity. Consider muslims screaming ‘Allahuh Ackbar’ as they suicide and kill thousands of people.
    To be more exact, how about the 50 million people starved by chinese communism, and the 20 million murdered by Stalin, all in the name of ‘humanism’ and the rejection of the precepts of christianity.
    14. Look up the culture of the ‘Natives’ in central america. If you are into necrophilia, mass human sacrifice, ritual and cultural cannibalism, heritable slavery, and constant brutal warfare between warring savage city-states, sure, the conquistadores were real assholes. However, if you happen to appreciate ‘technology’ like farming, the Conquistadores were heroes… ‘respect for a culture’ is fucking stupid when the culture is pure evil.
    15. George W. Bush was a card-carrying liberal progressive using conservatives and christianity as a tool. No more. Again, how is this an indictment of organized religion or christianity?
    16. Context
    17. The blue pill is strong with this one.
    18. Actually, it was not ‘children’ it was a gang of youths beating the crap out of an old man because he was funny-looking. Sounds pretty fair to me.
    19. Actually, it was entirely suitable in a culture which took clan warfare to outrageous extremes. You leave one person alive during a feud, in a hundred years the war starts all over again. You seem to have no concept of the harshness of the culture at the time this was written. This sort of behavior was encouraged as a way to ‘end wars’.
    20. Cultural and wording shifts. during the time period, “Rape” That did not involve violence was not rape, it was simply involuntary sex. again, you are trying to conflate historical cultural shifts with christianity.
    21. wait, seriously? WTF? Have you actually LOOKED at those three countries lately? Fucking stupidass blue pill. I am sure you appreciate the muslim rape gangs and welfare societies.
    22. (ROFL) Try looking at London, Chechnya, and the ENTIRE non-christian middle east, dipshit.
    23. Sure, and also Mississippi has historically always been extraordinarily liberal, has one of the largest ‘non concentrated’ negro populations, and has been well-known as the most corrupt state being run by extra-state interests since the carpetbaggers and restorationists of the civil war?
    24. Do research. God does not interfere with free will. And how do you KNOW he has not intervened in your life ten million times before this? Have you personally ever been tortured? Seriously, Negative proof is not proof.
    25. This statement is just utterly full of stupid. Does god giving money to charity help the souls of those who donate? Does giving charity EVER help someone become a self-sufficient human being?
    And I can come up with these refutations OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD! red pill my ass, I am not even christian and I can see the utter stupid of this entire article. This load of liberal, socialist, cult of atheism+, feminist crap is exactly what I come to this site to avoid on places like the atlantic and salon.com
    Honestly, Roosh, I understand you don’t care for religion personally, which I can respect, but when did you start allowing missionaries for the church of the vagina goddess to start proscelytizing here? this is a stupid ‘comment’, not a legitimate red pill article.

    1. Yes, wonderful reply. I proposed the author of this article be publicly proclaimed to be a blue-piller. But, since this particular blue-piller CLAIMS to be a red-pillar (“Red-Pill Grumm” *Snort), then indeed he is an extremely insidious and toxic influence in the community, and should be immediately and harshly ostracized.

  58. This post is moronic and belies an ignorance of actual history that is utterly breathtaking.
    (It’s that or the author seems to believe going along with a series of slanderous lies is the price Christians must pay to be accepted in ‘polite society’.)
    (And, oh yeah: I’m not a Christian–or religious–but I’m also not a complete historical ignoramus like the person that composed this post.)

  59. Here’s hoping that the ROK editors will allow a REAL red pill thinker to write a rebuttal to this bullshit.

  60. The Church of Darwin and Evolution and The Church of Global Warming are modern day replacements for the Catholic Church.
    Can “evolution” be scientifically proven? No (unless you have a time machine).
    The Creationism vs. Evolution debate is as pointless as Democrat vs. Republican.

  61. So if religion were eliminated tomorrow all of you would start raping people and having sex with your sisters?? I think people can act ethically and correctly without fear of divine retribution or eternal hellfire. I’ll give you God or a supreme being. I would not mind going to heaven. But religion? Which one? Why so many religions I wonder? Take a look at Mormonism or the Jehova’s Witnesses…complete nuttiness. Read a study that said 95% of phd’s are atheist/agnostic.

    1. It is obvious that as the Christian ethos is rejected, Americans indeed move toward rape and incest. As well as pederasty and polygamy. As well as statism and a Cult Of Reason probably led my global warming alarmists.

  62. Just a few thoughts. First off, to Red Pill Grumm, you’re going to have to do some red pill stuff and embrace this failure of a post. No big deal, it happens.
    I don’t want to get into the particulars of the scripture quoting. I will say that you need to read the whole book. If you were to read snippets from Sun Tzu it would sound no less strange than reading snippets from the bible. If you want to compare science and religion, I might suggest actually doing some experimenting in both. Find a good church or do some church hopping for a year. It won’t kill you, it might make you a better, more educated, more rounded person.
    I have a question about where you think we would be technologically by now without religion. I make a living flying modern jets. I’ve flown planes made in every decade since the 20’s including war birds. Without getting into who actually made the first powered flight (1903) to make the math easy, we can just say it was in 1900. Neil and Buzz landed on the moon in 1969. Let’s tack a year on that for development and we can comfortably say we went from strapping a rudimentary engine onto a bicycle to landing a man on another celestial body in 70 years. Those were tangible advancements we could hold on to. I often wonder if you 20-something’s actually are aware of what kinds of advancements we’ve made since then that we can’t see. I’m here to tell you–from my limited experience–they are vast.
    I’m a Christian, I’m not a very good one. I take my wife and two kids to church on the days I’m not working. They still go on the days I’m gone. I really like this place. I actually read here to make my self a better businessman, father, Christian–I also read here to help make sure my son doesn’t become a beta pussy and to make sure my daughter doesn’t wind up with some looser that would cause me more problems down the road. What I find real funny and enlightening is agreeing with the atheists here.
    Here’s something that always cracks me up. People complain about Bush listening to God. How is that any different that any of the other wild crap leaders have listened to throughout history? There’s been a lot worse stuff that leaders have gone by.
    I’ve read every article on this blog. It’s rare that you guys miss the mark but when you do, man you do. It’s not the end of the world but guys, stick to what you know. By one of your own articles you would have to admit you aren’t at your philosophical prime which leads me to believe this article could very well be renounced by the author down the road.
    I’ve been off the market for a quarter of a century. I love the shit you guys write. Don’t insult me by calling me a blue-pill guy because I’ve just seen too much in my life to say God has had no part in it.

  63. I am shocked that this site has so many religious God fearing types. Are you all on the down low religious wise?? Does your pastor/priest know that you are on a site that extols the virtues of having sex with gals with eating disorders???

    1. . People have always had all sorts of beliefs. Who gives a shit either way? There is as much proof for maintaining the existence of a God as there is for maintaining non-existence. You are not going to say something so new and decisive that people are going to say, “Well fuck me sideways, I was wrong”. It is not going to happen. So relax, it will all be fine.

  64. The Old Testamanet is as red pill as it gets. And no, I don’t consider myself a religious person.
    You just don not yet have an understanding of the context.
    Once again an ignorant post just for the sake of content. So much for men being rational and logical.
    Roosh predictes about the manosphere going to shit, and ROK is no different.

  65. I was kind of with you until #22, Brazil received more black slaves than the US during the years of the slave trade. Removing the black violence factor in both countries would severely adjust the standings of violent crime here and in Brazil.

    1. except in this case, the ‘religious dogma’ is faith in the church of Dawkins and the liturgy of liberal philosophy.

      1. Scientific literacy is “liberal” huh? The hypocrisy of you creatards display is impressive. How exactly is evolution similar to religion?

        1. Excuse me, athietard, but I don’t respond to people putting words in my mouth.
          let’s try this again, without including the phrase “How exactly is evolution similar to religion?” or even since I never stated, implied, or supported that position. I also never stated implied or supported the position that scientific literacy is liberal. I stated specifically ‘the church of dawkins’ and the ‘liberal philosophy’.
          The liberal philosophy is as follows:
          Humans have ‘innate rights’.
          Your statement was that “Religious dogma and “red-pill” ideology are diametrically opposed.” I stated that that is actually factually incorrect, since MILITANT atheism, of the ‘I HAVE FAITH THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST’ is every bit as much dogmatic religion as any other faith, and thus embracing the opposite of belief in god, the belief in no god, is just as antithetical to critical thinking as unthinking belief in god.
          Frankly, I do NOT believe in god. But I acknowledge that critically, I have no proof of the non-existence of God. For all I know, God sits down in the mud in africa with the tribal shamans every single morning and explains the day’s intinerary, just before he packs up to have lunch with the pope… I have no proof, and there can be no proof.
          I also have no proof that creationism and evolution are not exactly the same process. It has been generally acknowledged by religious scholars (and adopted as a point of doctrine’ that each ‘day’ of god lasts an indeterminate amount of time. Perhaps, god used ‘evolution’ as his way of raising men out of the mud… not in a 24 hour period, but over the course of 40 some billion years.
          recognizing that lack of evidence is not evidence is the very FIRST rule of scientific logic, the very core of ‘red pill’… and it is the rule that militant atheists such as yourself seem to find convenient to sacrifice on the altar of your beliefs.

        2. See the avatar pic I have? Why don’t you look it up and tell me what you find. It isn’t for atheism. You’re not telling me anything I am disagreeing with.

        3. Yes, but you ignored my actual response and immediately posted a ‘you believe this’ list of crap. That sort of thing, putting words in my mouth, severely pisses me off.
          And ask any quantum mechanicist to ‘prove’ the existence of quarks some time. You will get many more hems and hawws and a MUCH less concrete line of reasoning than you would from a Catholic trying to prove that god ‘invented’ life.
          Hell, we still have not managed to even conjecture how organic molecules are formed, much less having any sort of rational, scientifically-plausible rationale for the existence of what we term ‘life’. Right now, even among scientists, ‘God created life’ is actually MORE plausible than that a bunch of mysterious organic chemicals created the first chain of self-replicating organics.
          and no, this is not ‘evolution’ this is ‘the origin of life’. a subject most scientists are terrified of approaching due to it’s singular lack of any sort of rational experimental approach… EVERY experiment to replicate the process of ‘creating’ life has failed spectacularly. So spectacularly, in fact, that even approaching it as a scientist will expose you to severe ridicule.

        4. Men in black?
          Btw- that was facetious. In case you are having trouble actually reading what I write. See my avatar pic? That was me, forty years ago.

        5. Russell’s teapot covers much of your argument. And lack of scientific explanations does NOTHING to validate your man-made religions. I still don’t understand why you creatards pursue that logical fallacy.
          Evolution has nothing to do with abiogenisis either. But other than that sound rebuttal.

        6. I’m agnostic moron. I know how limited you creatards research skills are but my avatar pic should be a give away.

        7. Why do you keep making this about evolution versus creationism? and why do you assume I am on the side of creationsism?
          Learn to read, fuckhead.
          I am done with your trolling.

        8. “Right now, even among scientists, ‘God created life’ is actually MORE plausible than that a bunch of mysterious organic chemicals created the first chain of self-replicating organics.”
          That is why you are categorized with the rest of the creatards. There is ZERO evidence of any deity creating life. Consequently, there cannot be any hypothesis LESS valid than a hypothesis with ZERO supportable evidence. It is an inherent logical fallacy when someone is defaulting to one hypothesis being more supportable than another when neither has any evidential support.

  66. This is blue pill. Red Pill Grumm understands nothing of what the realities are. Without Christianity, there would be no base for civilizational advancement for what the Greeks enjoyed. And we would all be Mongrel dogs under the heel of Islam.
    Truly an embarrassment to the Return of Kings.

  67. Better men than me will tear you apart.
    Take this nonsense to Salon or something.

  68. My personal thoughts on the abrahamic faiths not withstanding (spiritual extortion as far as I am concerned), I don’t think this article will really benefit anyone. No one’s mind is going to be changed, especially not in this manner.
    When it comes to such things, you can’t lecture people, the student must seek out the master. The master doesn’t shout at the crowd to listen.

    1. “When it comes to such things, you can’t lecture people, the student must seek out the master. The master doesn’t shout at the crowd to listen.”
      Good point. Proverbs 8:17 says something similar.

      1. “Those who say, don’t know. Those who know, don’t say”
        Tao Te Ching , chapter 54

  69. Good points but I don’t view religion, or God, as being anywhere near as problematic as humanity’s interpretation of the two. Considering how humanity is essentially a species recovering from amnesia, I view religion as an attempt at rationalizing the metaphysical (consciousness, death, souls, etc), a topic Science has yet to reduce to facts.
    That’s not to say I believe religious dogma supersedes science but I do see the benefit of believing in something greater than yourself or at the very least having a righteous path to follow.
    The issue with religion, isn’t religion itself but rather the sanctimonious hypocrisy and blind egoism of the religious.
    When E. Stanley Jones asked Gandhi how to naturalize Christianity into India. Gandhi replied in part: “I would suggest first of all that all of you Christians, missionaries and all begin to live more like Jesus Christ.” To wit, a religion is only as legitimate as those who practice it.
    Science and Religion are both flawed but you can’t dismiss Religion entirely and consider yourself more enlightened than the ‘godly’ man who completely disregards Science. Science and Religion aren’t mutually exclusive IMHO and if anything, have become mutually dependent.

    1. Heh, good point… One has only to look at the field of quantum mechanics to realize just how much scientific discovery is based as much on faith as on experimentation.

      1. Exactly, it’s ironic how atheists have essentially transposed science into a religion and all but deify Darwin. If we ever reclassify the nature of the relationship between science and religion, they would have much more in common.
        Once mankind begins to view, both Science and Religion, as indispensable facets of a dialectic for ‘rationalizing the metaphysical’ I believe we will begin to find answers to questions such as: What is God? Is God literally, a physical being (e.g. Allah, Yahweh, Jesus Christ et al) or is ‘God’ a primitive human abstraction of our collective consciousness? Do we experience a literal ‘life’ and ‘death’ or is ‘existence’ a by-product of our collective consciousness, experiencing itself, subjectively?
        Sigmund Freud believed religious doctrines were “illusions” and labeled religion as “the universal obsessional neurosis of humanity.”
        This is the standard mindset of ‘scientific atheists’ Which, in my mind, is at least as extreme as claiming the Earth is only 6000 years old (as some Christians do claim).
        Someone once told me a smart man only believes half of what he hears but a wise man knows which half. That is to say, Religions are not real in essence, but do have a very real effect on the human personality; As does a lack thereof. I believe this method of thinking should be applied equally to Science as to Religion.

        1. Actually, I try to tell people that ethical societies exist, not by discarding irrational beliefs, but by carefully and ethically choosing WHICH irrational beliefs most strongly support those things the individual members of a society most value and which hold the most promise of strengthening the society.
          Unfortunately, the irrational beliefs foundational to militant atheism are actively anti-society… and looked at rationally, humans CANNOT choose to ‘go their own way’ without destroying the very society which allowed them to come to their newfound irrational beliefs in the first place.
          Frankly, as far as history has shown, irrational belief in a societally-sound belief, be that a deity, the constitution, the chivalric code, or any other belief system that puts the health, security, safety, and progress ahead of the individual’s needs, and yet at the same time depends utterly on the individual will (rather than being enforced by men with guns, knights, thugs, etc.) for enforcement, is both societally mandated and provides individual fulfillment.
          In short, most people cannot handle the truth… giving it to them does them, and society, no favors, and insisting that everything that makes people feel like they are connected to something greater than themselves, that guarantees immortality (even if it’s a myth) leads to a healthy, happy society of fulfilled individuals. Wallowing in a miserable ‘this is all there is’ existence does nothing but encourage nihilism, narcissism, and despair.

  70. I think it is pretty blue pill to say stick your butt in the air 5 times a day and bray to a volcanic rock in Mecca. I think it is pretty blue pill to bow , scrape and kow tow to a priest / bishop wearing a funny hat. It is absurd and weird to dance with snakes and speak in tongues. I had no idea there were so many religious , God fearing types on ROK. Shocking really cause this site can be kinda naughty. Thought the men here were modern freethinker types.

    1. we are, except that we recognize that ‘free thought’ has to be balanced by critical evaluation of workability.
      Sure, it would be NICE to live in a world where everyone always respected everyone else, no one committed crimes, and every man considered every other man his brother…. but I ain’t waitin’ around for a unicorn, and I ain’t supporting some dumbshit that wants to tear down the very edifice which has protected and reinforced the culture of MY people for the last 2500 years.

    2. Freethinking? There is no such thing as free. That is not a scientific concept. Freedom is a religious concept. Science proves that there is nothing more than matter, energy, and fixed laws by which they behave. We are nothing more than carbon based robots. Robots do not “freethink” nor are their thoughts worth any more than a cow fart, nor are animated meat sacks lives worth anything more than a tree or rock.

  71. I don’t follow Christianity for the simple reason (other than the reasons stated above) that the Judeo-Christian god is Yaweh. Yaweh was simply one of the many desert gods of the Middle East and the ancient Israelites decided to worship only him. There is ultimately no reason for me to worship a desert god who commands his followers to go about killing rival followers of other religions.

      1. I don’t follow any gods. Period. Worshipping a god whose existence can’t be proven is one of the worst human follies. If people want to have their religion, fine. But don’t force it on me, and then call me an oppressor simply because I do not want to share your beliefs.

        1. You dont follow anyone but your own will. That makes you an extremely dangerous person.

      2. Killing people is bad according to fish, and we are directly descended from fish. And bacteria. And fish and bacterian think its really bad to kill people. Except sharks and E. Coli. But those two came from desert gods that were pissed off at ancient Israelites.

    1. No reason? What if the God was real. Then would there be reason? Or is that possibility entirely discounted? If so, then just say “I entirely discount the possibility of God” instead of some mumbo jumbo about what people living in the desert supposedly did ages ago according to ???? I have no idea where you came up with this desert shit

  72. Cardinal Richelieu said “If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged.”
    If you give a man who would hang God, and give him 31,102 lines, plus the lived-lives of 10 billion Christians and Jews over the last 4000 years, he will find a way to hang God.
    What we are still waiting for is the atheist Bible and the collected tales of the lived-lives of the last 4000 years of atheists. Then we’ll get back to you.
    “Not X” does not equal Y, as much as you may wish it so.

  73. What makes ROK such a great website is that its writers generally think outside the box of conventional wisdom and offer new ways of viewing the world. This article, however, is an unfortunate exception to that rule. I could honestly get more original atheist talking points from the fedora-wearing aspies at Reddit.
    I hope the author uses this embarrassing entry as a learning experience. He might fancy himself a red-pill man, but his infantile views would make him a good fit on the faculty of any leftist American university.

  74. Aside from history, the one question that Christians really ponder is:
    If god loves man so much, why are the majority of respectable qualities in men punished so harshly? It’s like by design that men become worse and worse.
    Anyways my dad is a fuckin retarded Christian. He’s a pathetic beta male of a white man who married an insane Hong Kong Chinese woman with a hard on for tall red haired blue eyed guys. Guess where that leaves me? Knowing that I have genetics that are pretty much undesirable to everyone. When I was younger I was good with women because of my semi white face but I’m not fucking stupid and I can see that the way women treat Asian dudes pretty much says it all: they don’t give a fuck about anything except alpha male dick. Character, talent, intelligence, anything else is pretty much meaningless to women. And by default, God. Women are incapable of imagining a higher purpose to their existence beyond the physical. Anyways I fucked up and married a Chinese woman – mainland, mostly because I was just sick of the behavior of western women (American born Chinese women are the sluttiest women that exist on the planet, hands down) and lost pretty much all faith in any inherent goodness that they have, and I’d rather live here than to be lonely and humiliated for the rest of my life. I told her we’ll raise our son here or we won’t raise him at all in the US because he’s pretty much guaranteed to blow his fucking brains out by the time he’s 18. But it’s not his fault.
    Would I love there to be a god? Sure. I’d love the meek to get their day, where normal, law abiding talented men could focus on building a beautiful society that places beauty first and greed and nastiness last. But it won’t ever happen. Why? Because of women.

    1. simple answer. He loves humanity of all sorts, and has promised free will. That means leftist feminist manginas and thugs have just as much freedom to fuck you over as you have to fight back.

  75. This article reeks of blue pill, leftist beta bias. I’m not a Christian, and I certainly agree with many of the author’s arguments, but he clearly has no idea what he is talking about by referring to the socialist, feminized Scandinavian nations as “the most peaceful and prosperous on Earth”. Men are emasculated even more so in Northern Europe and the Netherlands, and the socialist governments confiscate more than half of the average worker’s wages. That’s not prosperity, my friend, that is the government running your life.

  76. You missed Lev 27:28-29, one of the verses about human sacrifice which was not excised form the bible. Of course, the whole story of Christianity is the story of a human sacrifice – only Jesus being sacrificed for the sins of mankind is enough to appeas that bloodthirsty old space alien, Jehovah.

    1. Original sin:
      Genesis 3-4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
      PaulMurrayCbr still living in it.

      1. My comment was about original sin and its role in Christianity. To understand that, you need to read Romans, not Genesis. Rom 5:12-14, and thereabouts. As per the other commenter here complaining that I do not understand christianity, do go read your bible. It might do you some good and convert you to atheism, as it has thousands of others.

  77. You missed most of the goodies from the Bible, like Judges 20-21 and Deuteronomy 20…
    Any person who defends the Bible as the word of God deserves to have a spike driven through his head, either for blasphemy (for those who believe in a benevolent and just God) or for supporting crimes against humanity (for those of us who’re atheists).

  78. @Earl “Do I not know that slavery does not always mean chattel
    slavery, that there were strict rules and guildelines for slave operations in
    the Old Testament, that slaves had rights and limited indenture?”
    That only applied to hebrew slaves. Go read your bible – Lev 25:39-46 is the bit you are thinking of.

  79. “Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces” is a bit of a harsh, bizarre, and exaggerated punishment for teasing a prophet of God for simply having a bald head? Especially when directed against such young children?”
    No and No.
    You’re an excellent example of why someone who doesn’t understand Scripture should not be interpreting (much less passing judgment upon!) Scripture.
    You also do not understand what was being mocked — it was not the bald head, it was where he was going — ie the job he was doing for God — that was being mocked. So they got chomped. Too bad.
    Stick to pua or whatever you imagine you know.

  80. This article is a fucking embarrassment for ROK. I don’t like beating on people for their beliefs, but this thing that poses as an article is so contrived, illogical and meaningless as to damage the cause of a resurgent masculinity effort promoted by ROK.
    Bill Henry

  81. I say this with all due respect, go suck a fucking dick to the author of this article. RoK is supposed to PC free. This article reeks of uber leftist PC stink. Ohhh no, the Christians killed people! (Tears) Oh no the Christians had a few bad popes! (boohoo) They burned a few precious women at the stake! Look at those Conquistadors being all alpha! What a crime! This article is a fucking embarrassment to this site, and Roosh would be well advised to give this asshole a warning. By the way… GOTT MIT UNS!!! Motherfucker.

    1. That first bit about christians I hear ya.Before abrahamic religions we still were do these things to each other under those pagan gods or atheists mentatlty or whatever. But I just find it hyporcritical that you have white westerners whom are christian influenced trashing other sects for doing the same things.
      I think its a complex, like their women are really promiscuous, have few kids resulting in an aging population and the guys have gone beta(which resulted in the former), while these 3rd world migrants are the opposite and dont give a fuck about this feminst ideology. I doubt the deacesed Tsarnoiov brother gave a dam about the american girls feelings. He tamed her perfectly.If she was with an american man, shell be 100 lbs overwieght and busting his balls.
      dont focus on being a “good man” instead be good at being a man. Moraltity is secondary, it is merely an agreement among tribe members to not piss each other off and kill each other.7 billion people on this planet and 7 billion values.

    2. Religion in the 21th century is either for niggers or stupid whites,but mostly for niggers so I’m not even surprised that the most pro-religion guys are low-life negros.Jesus aint gonna save your criminal ass brotha’!

  82. I don’t care what is or isn’t “cool”, no one is going to sway my beliefs to morph me into yet another modern, liberal, atheist “morals are relative” clone with no core/foundation to self-identify with. Why aren’t other religions attacked, why just Christianity (which is what liberal, “progressive”, feminist, etc. writers do constantly)?
    This site has really gone downhill, from the topics, to the grammar/sentence structuring, to this trash that is being promoted in this article. Way to promote the views of the young, trendy-glasses-wearing, skinny-jeans-wearing, skinny-armed, hipster beta males of today: Too scared to stand up for their own beliefs, the beliefs of their ancestors who fought for this land, and the values that shaped what was a once decent society…too scared to appear “old-fashioned”, “traditional”, “patriarchical”, etc. F that.
    If we’re going to be attacking beliefs, it would be better-fitting to write an article discussing how sh*tler embraced darwinism, and the “warning signs” that a chick might share the same sociopathic, uncaring, “backstab whoever to get to the top” mentality – the same mentality found in feminism.
    Son, you disappoint.

    1. heh, the ‘hitler is like that’ arguments are always funny. Hitler liked dogs, played golf, was male, and liked having sex with women. So if any of those apply to you, you must be hitler.
      Frankly, on looking back on world war 2, considering the fact that Stalin murdered 6 times as many people as germany did, I wonder if we chose the right side.

  83. How many of you believe in God?I just want to know because it shows a lot about a man…

  84. The other option without religion is to buy into the corporate game which feminists worship these dysfunctional values. Religion teaches the real essence of what happiness is where personally I’m not religious.
    These a reason why it’s been around for over 2000 years where if u ever really want to go to the next level and find peace and true happiness, u need some kind of religious knowledge!

  85. Deuteronomy 22:28-29
    King James Version (KJV)
    28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
    29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.
    This sounds better than what was in the ‘article’.

  86. I’d take a class at Columbia University in gender studies with a sub-focus on “white male oppression” if I wanted to hear this shit.

  87. Religion is the most blue-pill thing ever created to rule the masses.The need of an “invisible father” who is your shepherd(which means you are a fucking sheep) is absolutely pathetic.You are going to die and no zombie jew is going to save you,I’m sorry,thats it,deal with it.

    1. No you’re the one that’s going to die and no grace will be given on to you by Christ Jesus the Lamb of God, The Lion of the tribe of Judah, JAH, The ever lasting Son who shed his blood for your salvation the only way to the Father.
      Be prepared for eternity with a fat Pagan Atheist Feminist Black Chick with a ten foot strap-on having her way with your sorry carcass. The Goodness will have you begging for more.
      Get on your knees right now and beg for forgiveness you wretch, before its too late!
      The Red Pill is taken to open one’s eyes to reality; when you face him that created you, you will shit your pants.
      Judgment Day is a bitch for All Atheist!!!

  88. Over the last few years online I’ve come to the conclusion that, regardless of the topic, the vast majority of time I agree with Christian people. And more or less the exact opposite of atheists. Neck beards, betas, feminists, twinks, bronys, goons, socialists, Neil Tyson DeGrasse junior high. Fuck ’em.

  89. I am an atheist and this article was alright. Religion is blue pill as it gets, after Santa Claus y’all cannot see the bullshit?

  90. Just think for a second, and honestly do a comparative analysis. Does society function better under religious principles or secularized (read Godless) principles? Were women better to deal with? Were families intact? Were sons estranged from their fathers? Etc… It’s all better under religion. Now the author equates “progress” with the emasculated Scandinavians, basically stipulating that Northern Europe, is the “ideal.” Whose ideal? Do we aspire to be leg crossing manginas who let our women run the households? Clearly that’s what Northern Europe is aspiring to. We’re talking about the descendants of the fucking Vikings for Godsake, that have been turned into pathetic wimps on average. The kind of society the author advocates is a society void of patriarchy and that is a society I am not for. Clearly the concept of Godhead and patriarchy have always been symbiotically attached to each other. The case could be made that no society can function well without some type of Godhead system. Say what you want about Muslim societies, but visit a decent Middle Eastern nation, and the children are extremely well-behaved and respectful, the women are still women and the men run their homes.
    This use to be the model for the West, you know until some atheistic fucking Bolsheviks decided to ruin the world order. You do not necessarily have to even believe in every tenet of a religion, but read, observe and notice how decrepit societies become when they lose contact with the ancient, the eternal, we become nihilistic, materialistic and no better than a Bolshevik in all but name. It’s also become fashionable to attack Christianity, which also shows you the tragic state Christianity is in. These people know that they won’t get beat and beaded in the streets if they attacked Christianity like the Muslims do, or get fired and blacklisted if they attacked the Jews. Christianity has become the favorite whipping boy and it just shows the cowardice on the part of the people who attack it. Attack the Jews and the Talmud, whilst giving your real name. I’d take theocratic monarchy that ensured me my parental rights, and made me the man over my home and woman as nature and God intended. Take your secularized ideas and the republic and shove them back to hell. Below is the ideal Christian family, murdered by Bolsheviks. Whose the ideal American family these days? The Kardashians? LOL “PROGRESS”!!!!

    1. +10
      “I’d take a theocratic monarchy that ensured me my parental rights, and made me the man over my home and woman as nature and God intended.”
      Great comment, I’m with that all the way!
      And that is what Yahweh the God of Abraham has decreed for us men.
      That’s what most guys on this site don’t understand Red Pill Awareness is awareness of reality in all that is male and how to preserve and augment it for our betterment and freedom. They can’t see that atheistic fucking Bolshevism is the new Pagan religion of our times a mother Goddess cult.

  91. If you want to be a badass write a similar article about Islam. Picking on Christians is so wimpy and tired.

    1. Totally. We can start with his 9-year-old wife, mention his rewriting of the scriptures to make it ok to cut down the fruit trees. And that’s about all I know. Some RP info about Islam would be great.

  92. 21. Do I not disagree that countries such as Sweden, Norway,
    and the Netherlands are among the most prosperous, peaceful, and
    charitable societies on Earth? And that these traditionally Christian
    nations ironically have among the highest percentages of non-religious, agnostics, and atheists in the world.
    You’re not from Sweden i would guess. Our society is like a pot with boiling water put a heavy-put lid on it. It will explode sooner or later.
    I’m not a religious man but science and religion is not on the opposite of eachother even though many seem to want that to be. Just gonna look past all the scientists and other thinkers who was able to do their research because of the church.

Comments are closed.