Flawed Blue Pill Interpretation Of Religion Covertly Pedestalizes Women

What is life? I’m sure most of you would have different answers when it comes to defining life, based on your personal experiences and the lessons that you’ve learned through your respective lives so far.

As to how I would define it: Life is a test, a continuous struggle which every man – either poor or rich, successful or loser – has to endure. That’s also how one would understand it in the context of most religions. We have been created to be tested – and we have been tested, are being tested, and will continue to be tested—for no man can escape the tests that life continually throws at us during the duration of our earthly existence.

But one of the most important and fundamental tests we face in our earthly existence is with regards to our faith, and the veracity of our beliefs. I’m sure at some point of our lives, we all go through periods of intense self reflection—either voluntary or forced on us by circumstances—which leads us to ask some of the following questions to ourselves:

  • What is the purpose of our lives?
  • Why are we here? Who put us here?
  • Where are we going to go after we die?
  • Nature reveals structure and balance, but who designed it?
  • Our bodies reveal structure and balance, but who designed it?
  • What is the wisdom behind the creation of the universe, and our existence?

Usually, in the search for these answers, we usually encounter the entry of religion or organized faith in our lives. Religion can liberate us, or it can shackle us indefinitely. And at the same time, as compared to other forms of beta indoctrination of men, its power is far more vast and long lasting.

The power of religious indoctrination

Inside-Catholic-Church

If there is one type of ideology which continues to hold supreme in human history, it is that of religious ideology. The power of religion is a prime example of the undeniable power of belief or faith when it comes to influencing human behavior. Robert Greene effectively postulates how the power of belief can be exploited to attain power in The 48 Laws Of Power with Law 27:

PLAY ON PEOPLE’S NEED TO BELIEVE TO CREATE A CULT-LIKE FOLLOWING
People have an overwhelming desire to believe in something. Become the focal point of such desire by offering them a cause, a new faith to follow. Keep your words vague but full of mist; emphasize enthusiasm over rationality and clear thinking. Give your new disciples rituals to perform, ask them to make sacrifices on your behalf In the absence of organized religion and grand causes, your new belief system will bring you untold power.

It’s equally undeniable to see the effect of the above law in its influence of humanity right from antiquity—either for good or worse—as flawed human nature encompasses those who practice religion, to those who don’t practice it, to those who preach it, and to those who interpret it. Everyone is thus exposed to the great danger of religious misinterpretation of scriptures, which primarily affects the “believers.”

Sometimes, these religious misinterpretations results in disillusionment and disappointment to men who’ve been misguided by it. But at the same time, a vast number continue to remain unaware, because they remain unplugged to their personal blue pill religious matrix.

Religion thus often gets a bad rap from both the insincere practicing of it by some followers, and at the same time from the overzealous blind fanaticism of  its other followers. The irony might be that the scripture itself may not be flawed to begin with, as compared to its interpretation.

IN

This problem of flawed scriptural interpretation  leads to another problem for men: how the scripture pertains to dealing with, and correctly perceiving women.

The deification of women and the gradual feminization of modern patriarchal religions

The red pill has saved many men, and continues to save many others especially when it comes to their interactions with women. Not only has it made us aware of the true nature of women, it has also exposed us to the frailties and flaws of women, rendering them more human than ever before in our eyes, stripping them of the unnecessary deification and pedestalization what modern feminist societies accords them with.

In fact, in today’s world more than ever before, red pill knowledge effectively teaches an often important realization to men in exercising power over the hordes of others: if a man learns to control the women he’s dealing with, he could possibly and effectively control the men who are linked to these women.

Moving to the topic of religion, one finds that the deification of women existed since antiquity. While we might surmise that calling women “goddesses” is stupidity to begin with, primitive pagan religions deified women to a surreal form, which possibly entailed beta indoctrination for the men.

Pussy worship has thus existed both literally and metaphorically throughout human history, and in such cultures it was not uncommon to see a multitude of beta males worshiping the female form. Call a woman as Athena, Aphrodite, or whatever other fancy name—logically speaking why would (or should) a man worship a form his body has been designed to sexually penetrate to begin with?

apd

Yet, even when venturing in the domain of organized patriarchal religions, sometimes I’ve experienced tremendous confusion and glaring contradictions in scriptural interpretation about the purpose of creation of women and their utility, even though the actual meaning of the scriptures might be actually red pill in reality. But the flawed interpretation radically distorts the actual meaning.

Much of the blame for this goes on to the blue pill leaders of modern organized religion, who seek to beta indoctrinate modern men through it. As flawed medical knowledge may destroy a person’s body, similarly flawed religious knowledge might destroy a person’s faith.

Examining scriptures of most patriarchal religions, the more I’ve read and understood them, the more I come to one realization: women are created solely for the reasons of procreation, and that of testing men. Every happiness that a man may obtain from women – whether it may be sex, children, companionship, or support – are all transitory, and subject to change.

Man’s true happiness and contentment comes from a loyal spiritual connection to a divine source which is omnipotent, and more importantly, infinite. This lends psychological stability and satisfaction to a human nature designed to constantly seek gratification in an equally ever-changing earthly world.

At the same time, if God hadn’t created and programmed the all-powerful sexual impulse in man, the purpose of creating women would itself be useless and worthless. Would a man be willing to sacrifice his resources, ideals, reputation, and dignity for something he wouldn’t want to fuck? Probably not. Human history is testament to that – men have usually sacrificed themselves for the sake of women as Napoleon Hill points out in Think and Grow Rich:

So strong and impelling is the desire for sexual contact that men freely run the risk of life and reputation to indulge it. – Napoleon Hill

Thus, women should be actually grateful for the fact that men are inherently programmed to have sex with them to begin with. If men weren’t, a woman’s vagina would not be the most overpriced commodity in the world, and would not serve as well to manipulate men today. It has always been the one thing for which men pay for with their resources, time, efforts, reputation, and sometimes even lives.

Always testing

Right from the time of Adam, women have been testing men – the Bible itself has so many examples of women who’ve led men astray from spiritual evolution, and sometimes to their literal doom. This usually occurs when men choose unconsciously women as their deities who would reward sex and companionship in return for male submission.

But at the same time, the most difficult “blue pill” concepts of even a supposedly red pill patriarchal religion to accept are when men are divinely commanded to be “patient” with women. If women are indeed a blessing for men, the questions which kept harassing my mind were:

  • Does God want man to be a scapegoat for a woman’s wiles and stupidity, in spite of her numerous flaws in character and behavior?
  • Why does man have to be “patient” with a fellow creature which could possibly hurt his spiritual, intellectual and moral evolution in the long run? Simply because it bears a vagina?
  • Is woman really a blessing, or is a woman in reality an aesthetically appealing test (or worse, curse and source of punishment) for men – considering the innate selfishness and ingratitude of women, unchained by in modern times by the ‘religion’ of feminism?

The more I see it, the more I realize that God’s purpose of creating women was solely to test man with them, in the earthly evolution of human masculinity, and of male belief towards Him in spite of the illusionary distractions women might subject men to.

But how many realize this throughout their lives, and struggle to pass these tests? Some men don’t even manage to realize this due to the misleading interpretations of the scriptures, leading men to perceive women in an unreal, blue pill way.

Conclusion

gg

Religion remains an undeniable force in influencing human psychology and behavior. But should we follow religion blindly even when it entails blue pill ignorance at the end? This is a question every believer and non-believer should ask themselves, when it comes to examining faith, or lack of it.

And in today’s world of lies and illusions, it becomes even more important for a “believing” man to examine his beliefs towards life, his relationships, and more so the doctrines which deal with his interaction and perception of women—for even religious misinterpretation of red pill religious doctrines is enough to lead a life of servitude to women, especially when female deification is increasingly promoted both religiously and socially in modern feminist societies.

Even supposedly red pill religions which accept the superiority of men over women are not immune to the gross misinterpretations of religious scriptures to covertly promote feminist ideology. So red pillers need to particularly beware and judge these interpretations closely and correctly, to avoid falling prey to this. This is where religion could fail the modern man: not because of the scripture itself, but more so because of its interpretation.

In the end, the question remains: if a religion teaches men dependency by seeking personal fulfillment—more so spiritual and emotional—through women, is it a red pill religion to begin with?

Read Next: Why You Shouldn’t Seek Emotional Fulfillment Through Women

193 thoughts on “Flawed Blue Pill Interpretation Of Religion Covertly Pedestalizes Women”

  1. I’ve been going to church for quite some time. As I’ve learned more about masculinity from the various manosphere sights, it’s been fun to see how much of it is in line with the teachings of the Bible.
    Fortunately, the majority of pastors I’ve heard from do a good job of interpreting, and will present multiple interpretations so that the congregation has them to think on.
    The biggest issue I’ve had in the church is not interpretation errors, but simple refusal to talk on the controversial issues in order to avoid political incorrectness. This has driven me away from my home church in order to seek another, more traditional one.
    There is such a wealth of wisdom and knowledge in the Bible, It is sad to see it suppressed in order to not interrupt too greatly our comfortable lives.

    1. Good luck finding a traditional church. Really. As someone who’s moved around the country a lot with a family in tow, I wish you luck, or as would be more accurate, I pray you many blessings. I have found the traditional Reformed Calvinist churches to be the most agreeable, but I keep in mind that the church is full of sinners and I am one of them. Sovereign Grace Ministries is where I hang my hat on Sunday.

      1. Calvinists are agreeable? Only if you consider ‘agreeable’ to mean ‘takes absolutely no stand on anything’. Sorry, but the bible and Calvinism’s ‘situational morality’ are incompatible.
        But I am sure calvinists are very agreeable to Unitarians, Goddess Wiccans, and Crowleyists.

        1. I guess we have vastly differing experiences with Calvinists. Take a look at the Calvinist fellowship debate and discussion group on Facebook. They’re so uptight and hard line, I don’t think there is anyone more against paganism or modernity. Many of them still feel drums are of the devil. These are the people that would kill “papists” even today, if the situation called for it. I also find them among the most intellectual and well read Christians.

        2. Intellectual and well read only in that they seem to have removed everything christian from christianity.
          Hard line? Sure, if you just look at them as humanist puritans that pay lip service to ‘god as merchant’

        3. “I also find them among the most intellectual and well read Christians.”
          If well read is avoiding reading anything from the Sub-Apostolic age until Martin Luther and his contemporary Calvin. They automatically fail at being intellectual for failing to see that Christ God, who promised Gehenna wouldn’t triumph over His Church, wouldn’t have needed to send “reformers” to fix it 1500 years later.

  2. Evangelicals and other Christians that pride themselves on their knowledge of Scripture are curiously uncomfortable with certain verses, i.e. “Wives, submit to your husbands.” I’ve heard both Protestants and Catholics get very creative in explaining that one away.
    The way I introduce my religious friends to the red pill is to say, “Women are just as subject to the effects of Original Sin as men.”

    1. I pride myself on knowledge of scripture and I am an agnostic.
      “Slaves be respectful to your masters, wives obey your husbands” is very simple, very straightforward, and needs no explanation. If you don’t like it, run away, and don’t be terribly surprised when every man’s hand turns against you.

      1. I think that quote isn’t as self-explanatory because many people against religion say that God condones slavery because of it. The truth is that slavery back then wasn’t as bad as the slavery we had in America. Slaves were clothed and fed well, they could raise in status over a period of time.
        The part about the wife is simple as well…

        1. true, biblical slaves had a very, very different strategy… more akin to what we would consider ‘public servants’ in many cases (especially among the egyptians… They allowed their hebrew servants to run EVERYTHING involving the day-to-day running of an empire, from taxes to engineering… that was their downfall.)

        2. Workers today are nothing more than slaves. Working for minimum wage and doing whatever your boss tells you is what I call “consented slavery”.

        3. It doesn’t matter what skills you have or how long you’ve been with the company. Your corporate overlords see you as an expensive liability they’d rather do without if they could. If they can outsource your job to foreigners who can do it cheaper, they will. Not everyone has the drive or the talent to be self-employed, but you’ll never be free so long as your livelihood depends on a boss.

  3. Some thoughts on religion:
    1. Back before we had security cameras, the kings/emperors/whatever invented gods who were always watching when they weren’t around. The better to keep the proles in line. I don’t have a problem with God, per se, but his organization is all about social control.
    2. That said, there are plenty of people in church on Sunday to get forgiven for what they did on Saturday night.
    3. The problem with religious girls (for guys who are into that sort of thing) is that, these days, they basically want George Clooney with a bible in his hand.
    4. If you are a “Blue Pill Guy for Gee-ZUSS!!”, ask for the Red Pill wafer at your next communion. Because that sweet, “good girl” who doesn’t want to hold your hand b/c you two might “fall into sin” is going to dive headlong into sin when a guy with enough of the Serpent in him shows up.
    Mistral

    1. The militant atheist commonly cries that religion is just a method of control. And herein, they are correct, but simultaneously miss the point.
      Fedora wearing atheists wish to kill the Christian god and in his place install the modernist cult of pop science and atheism. Where once the wrath of a omniscient, omnipotent god and the prospect of eternal damnation was enough to keep the plebs in line, now we have pervasive surveillance systems and a hyper-militarised police force.
      The current brand of leftist-subverted militant atheism is a de facto religion and has stark similarities with other established religions, not least in the fervour with which its adherents embrace it. It has its creation story in the Big Bang. It has its apocalyptic prophecy in Climate Change. Where before priests would administer to the people, now the people turn to scientific figureheads for their gospels. The god of science is incomprehensible to mortal men so we need the prophets of science like Richard Dawkins and the charlatan black science guy to decipher his words and hand them down to us, written in a 72 point font set against a starry background. Speaking out against the narrative of equalism and diversity is blasphemy. Evolution is just something to bash Christians with, not something that relates to how separate human populations have evolved over the last 50,000 years.
      Science and religion can co-exist. I’m not anti-science at all, but the popular brand of science which has been subverted by the left for their agenda is as much a religion as the one they purport to hate.
      Religion is a method of control, but I have yet to hear a militant atheist propose a better system. I think that for one to have truly digested the red pill, one must, at the very least, be tolerant of Christianity and appreciative of the work it has done to build a healthy, successful civilisation.

      1. I’m not entirely convinced that the battle in question is between traditional christianity and atheism. There is more than a figurative sense in which what we are seeing here is fundamentally religious conflict. I would say that could be true even if many of the participants don’t believe in God or life after death. Religion takes many forms

        1. “Religion takes many forms”
          History is going to make the future better.
          Be careful to stay on the right side of History, or History will squash you like a bug.

        2. I thought it was progressives who thought they had history on their side. Oliver Cromwell thought god made his enemies ‘stubble to our swords’ but it didn’t turn out that way. History is no-one’s bitch, but who knows it may well have a sense of humour

        3. “I thought it was progressives who thought they had history on their side.”
          Right. I’m taking a poke at the concept of Godless Communism(tm).
          From its outset Marxism has been reliant on History as a supernatural force promoting a divine plan. The development of the progressive movement has largely recapitulated that of the Catholic church and reached the point where the Progressives are nothing more nor less than Calvanists.

        4. well I agree about marxism and history. Not sure I’m clear about the last point though – millenial inspired reformation versus counter – reformation?

        5. Khrushchev: “You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright. But we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you finally wake up and find you already have communism.” ~ September 1959

        6. communism is still alive and well and growing stronger by the day, and yes it goes by different mutated forms to that which Marx set out, but my point was simply that rather than the issue being a question about religion versus atheism, there’s a sense that what you have here is a more complex clash of civilizations, nationalism and belief systems that often take a quasi-religious / spiritual form beyond mere atheism

        7. How ironic. The Soviet Empire collapsed and now we are becoming them. With this, Western Civilization is dying and now the only longshot hope to save it might come from Russia and a few other parts of Eastern Europe.

        8. Who runs the media (news, papers, movies)? I’ll give you a clue: it’s not athiests.
          It’s actually a battle between Christianity and Jews, but almost everyone misses that for some reason.

        9. its probably more complex than that, but that’s certainly a big part of it. Problem is its completely under the surface, which is why so many conflicts today, both physical wars and ideological clashes takes the form of proxy wars designed to obscure what is really going on

      2. Wow…..good overview. Vast majority of atheists are rabid left wingers. Super liberal even socialist/marxist. Left wing atheists replace religion (as you pointed out) with Global Warming, Climate change or “the government” . Left wing atheists then can then bash religious people ( who tend to be conservative and right leaning) and get a “twofer” ie mock the religion and their politics. Example:If you have any misgivings about gay marriage why your then called a “right wing religious zealot” Very effective strategy.

        1. …and the “right” too by equating corporate government contractors like banks and Halliburton with capitalism and free enterprise

        1. It’s irrelevant and not something I’m concerned about. Belief in God is a matter of faith, not probabilities.
          Christianity has been an unequivocal force for good, has been the basis of great civilisations and provides an absolute set of morals.
          The modernist church of science can make two shrieking homosexuals wedded partners and parents but has no moral guidance to say whether they should.
          The probability whether God is real or not doesn’t come into it. Science has its place but is poorly equipped to deal with social problems.

        2. The only thing with respect to God’s existence you can figure out is your own expectation that God is indeed there. Put simply, what you already believe, combined with your experiences and your natural capability for discernment determines the degree to which you believe God is real. Tons of men smarter than you and stupider than you across the ages believe in God, and likewise for those that are atheists, and those who’ve felt a presence, but couldn’t discern what it was and sought other answers and beings. From my personal experience and discernment, God most certainly exists, because of the fact that without a panentheistic supreme conscious deity, I’d have to accept the many-minds interpretation of quantum theory as true – as even the computer simulation interpretation is a theistic case, and local and nonlocal realism and materialism at the quantum scale have been debunked. Many-minds interpretation is a branch of the many worlds interpretation. If you believe the many worlds interpretation, or the many-minds interpretation which is the only version that still has any evidence not contradicting it, then you get crazy things such as you being subjectively immortal (as in you can only experience universes in which you don’t die – therefore you never do), the idea that you yourself will eventually become God due to the fact that it is a mere possibility and all possibilities (excluding your own death) must be exhausted if you are immortal, the idea that there are an absolutely infinite (cardinality greater than or equal to aleph-infinity) amount of universes where only a minute quantum difference is the entire difference between the two, and a bunch of other ridiculous ideas. For me, the idea that we are a minds being tested by a grand mind that spawns us is the only way to reconcile the fact that objects don’t concretely exist in exact positions until they are measured in a chain of measurement which leads to a conscious observation – as well as the fact that said objects load up a backhistory upon observation. In this scenario, the grand mind presents information, and upon inspection of that information by an individual mind, He creates the backstory that allows the informational object’s story to be coherent with everything else in the universe’s history. He would be exempt from the requirement of loading a backstory for objects, because he is ontologically different from all other observers, and it is He who does the backloading. This would imply the existence of an entity who has the information about everything in the entire universe, and all the possible configurations of information and observation, as well as the ability to insert things into the timeline in response to observation. Such a being is necessarily omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and personal – as being able to change the timeline asynchronously means that the being in question could do literally anything, has access to all information pertaining about the universe, can do anything anywhere within the universe, and gives enough shits about the observers to actually change things so the observations make sense. Such a being would be able to present Himself in a multitude of ways, but would have to at least be a single being in action in order for our universe to remain self-coherent. There are 5 religions which have held these things to be true: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. Islam’s holy books claim the Earth to be flat, so we can discard it. Hinduism and Buddhism actually say the things the many-worlds interpretation have been saying, but some of their scriptures also say mind-boggling things we almost certainly know not to be true such as humans existing 2 billion years ago on Earth. Judaism and Christianity are the only ones that remain, and if we look to Genesis 1, we see the allowance of animals to exist in the exact order we typically think they evolve, with the word typically translated as ‘birds’ including all flying creatures, such as the flying bugs that were around before land creatures evolved. We additionally see the appearance of the stars and the sun and moon in the night sky in the exact order they appeared after the clouds that covered this planet billions of years ago started dissipating. Now, I could go further into why Christianity seems to have more evidence for it than Judaism, but realize that when you dig into the holy books, Christianity is but a branch of the original Orthodox Judaism that gentiles adopted more after its initial dissemination. The evidence of Christianity over Judaism is evidence from the shared scriptures of the two corroborated with historical records of events from 7BC until today. Regardless of all the evidence anyone may put forth, our future beliefs are always dependent on our present beliefs, and to be entirely honest, God chooses ultimately whether we’ll get the chance to believe in Him and His promises and do His will, or not – that’s the one choice you don’t actually get. If you wonder why Newton, Gauss, and Galileo were Christians, it’s not because of anything special about them or their circumstances, but because God chose to allow them to believe, so that future generations could cite intelligent men of faith who’ve progressed science and mathematics with knowledge He helped them discover. I’m going to be blunt with you – God pretty much slapped me in the face and told me to believe after sending me sign after sign and me ignoring, but He may just not really care about some people, because that’s how He is. It’s a complete absurdity, but if you read the Tanakh or New Testament, you’d quickly see that many things God does are inherently absurd. If you’ve seen this and read all of this, that means that God at least cares about you a little bit, because He wouldn’t otherwise have let you read the evidence I’ve experienced.

        3. So if Im born an American Catholic God loves me and allows me to obtain knowlege, but if Im a Somalian with AIDS God basically doesn’t give a shit about me?

        4. “So if Im born an American Catholic God loves me and allows me to obtain knowlege, but if Im a Somalian with AIDS God basically doesn’t give a shit about me?”
          The Somali, even though perhaps being born into a false religion, through suffering, can have the greater chance of finding eternal life through faith in the Lord (which is all that really matters):

        5. So if I fail to gain eternal life…..how would I know?
          For example, I dont remember what I was doing in 1854 because I wasnt fucking alive.
          You keep pushing the carrot at the end of the stick, fear of death and some reward promised in return for compliant behavior.

        6. That was an interesting read. I’m going to have to read it a couple of times more to digest what you are trying to say. If I understood properly, the “God” you mention is a completely logical being, as much as a CPU works on “pure logic” whereas instead of dealing with primitive switching of voltages to create “binary code”, we are actually dealing with a being capable of manipulating matter at the quantum level as it sees fit, and does so in a logical way, including our very thoughts. Am I interpreting you properly?

      3. Well put.
        The Church of Darwin and The Church of Global Warming/Climate Change are no different than the medieval Catholic Church
        These disciples think “science” is any theory subsidized by government to control the masses.

        1. I sometimes say that Climate Change* is religion for people who don’t believe in God.
          Mistral
          *Although, to be clear, I also think having clean air and clean water are perfectly sane and rational goals….

        2. “Climate Change* is religion for people who don’t believe in God.
          Ha ha, I like that.
          The Climate Change/Al Gore gang hijack legitimate environmental movements (clean air/water) to make money off non-issues such as global warming or endangered species.

        3. Exactly! It’s a religion that, for once, I couldn’t give a fuck if it’s wrong. What’s the worst that can happen if we follow it? Less pollution. Ooh, that’s evil. Sure, there’s now carbon tax. But that’ll inspire the switch to electrically run shit. Sure, electricity is created by mostly polluting means but, again, the carbon tax will inspire investment in non-polluting technologies. It’s a win-win any way you look at it.
          *Note: I’m not a believer in this whole carbon heats shit theory. But I am a believer that car exhausts cause lung cancer (moreso than cigarettes), so I’m fine with playing devil’s advocate here.

        4. The problem is that the alternatives will never replace fossil fuels. They do a 5th of the same power generation and cost 10x over petroleum/natural gas. That “inspiration” to switch us over is going to kill us before it benefits us. Sort of like killing the virus by killing the host.

      4. Yup the athiest left doesn’t get religion is used as a tool by bad people to control others. But athiest who don’t believe in god are a religion. A religion is a set of beliefs. Doesn’t even require a belief in god. And now we have the secular west who implements secular control over its subjects.

        1. Religion is based on faith. Not believing in something that hasn’t, and can’t, be proven does not qualify. That’s equivalently dumb to saying those that don’t believe in invisible, flying elephants are a cult.
          Before you reply with an inevitable dumb comment, absorb what I’m saying. I’m not stating opinion. I’m not using fancy words. I’m not even making any assumptions. I’m just using logic.
          And no circular arguments e.g. God is real because it says so in the Bible. I hear that a lot but that’s equivalently dumb as me writing a book about invisible, flying elephants and saying, “See, there’s the proof. It’s in a book. One, incidentally, that I wrote.”

        2. “I’m just using logic”
          See, that’s where you’re going wrong on here. You’re trying to use reason against people who believe in the unreasonable.

        3. Incorrect, religion is based on a combination of faith and factual historical events. Your comment would be like saying believing george washington and the founding fathers existed, is based on faith.
          Where have numerous historians documented the existence of flying invisble elephants?
          You are not using logic, because to say a historical event witnessed by dozens and in some cases thousands of people is “faith” is utter foolishness.

        4. But what historical fact? Seriously, don’t give me any bullshit, list some historical facts. As far as I know any that are in there are all from the original testament; and even then they’re bullshit. e.g. Moses splitting the sea “could” have been caused by an earthquake or meteorite. or Solomon’s city/castle/town/whatever being on land that has a history of boiling mud rising to the surface. Oh, and while you’re at it, can you show me on the globe where the garden of eden is? I just can’t seem to pin-point it.
          And as for the new testament, it’s a fucking joke claiming anything as fact when the first recordings relating to Jesus were written 50 years after he (apparently) lived/died.

        5. Your argument is grossly irrational. Virtually every text was written by religious people until the enlightenment. Even in non-judeo christian nations and pagan states, it was all written by pagan worshipers.
          Whether its roman, or egyptian or greek geographers and historians they all wrote of some extra-ordinary experience, which if written by a christian or a jew, you’d say was faith and fantasy.
          Most people in the time of Jesus did not know how to write. Its not enough to simply say well Jesus was fantasizing. If Jesus never existed, then the apostels who died for him and got crucified would also have to be crazy.

        6. Assuming the apostles did, in fact, get crucified. LOL.
          The Jesus story is ripped directly from a Pagan fable, which they ripped from an Egyptian fable, and all the stories share similar themes (and identical miracles, in some cases).
          I won’t list all the similarities, it would take over 300 pages (I read a book listing all [or most] of them, “Was Jesus a Pagan God?”). Yes, I know your type, “If you can’t provide links then you have no argument,” like you can’t use google because you’re retarded. Here’s a link: http://www.amazon.com/The-Jesus-Mysteries-Original-Pagan/dp/0609807986 go read it yourself.
          And, btw, your argument is 100% supporting my argument.
          MY ARGUMENT: it’s all bullshit stories written by self serving cunts.
          YOUR ARGUMENT: those bullshit stories were written by the very people who stand to profit from them.
          Good job. 🙂

        7. Yeah, its not like any of this was documented by anyone.
          James, the apostle of the Lord, was the second recorded martyr after Christ’s death
          Both Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius [A roman historian] (Ecclesiastical History II.2) report that after seeing the courage and unrecanting spirit of James, the executioner was so convinced of Christ’s resurrection, that he was executed with him.
          According to Eusebius, Peter thought himself unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Master, and asked to be crucified “head downward.”
          Simon was a Jewish zealot who strived to set his people free from Roman oppression. After he saw with his own eyes that Christ had been resurrected, he became a zealot of the Gospel.
          Historians tell of the many places Simon proclaimed the good news of Christ’s resurrection: Egypt, Cyrene, Africa, Mauritania, Britain, Lybia, and Persia.
          His martyrdom, brought about by a governor in Syria,
          verified his testimony for Christ.
          Why would so many men willing die according to historians for a man who never existed. Was nero lying too. Was everyone lying to justify this conspiracy. This has to be either the largest, most successful, longest running conspiracy in history, or perhaps it really did occur.
          The odds of this being a phony conspiracy is very low, because usually people tend to speak when they realize their lies will get them killed. Yet 11 of 12 apostels willing die for a man who was a fraud? Not counting the dozens of disciples who also died. Why die for a fraud?
          YOUR ARGUMENT:
          it’s all bullshit stories written by self serving cunts.
          My argument: Very few people could write back then. The few who did write support their version of history. And who the hell else would write their story but them? Pagan devil worshippers who were killing them for being christians. That would be like expecting ISIS to write the story of secular americans.

        8. If you’re arguing that Jesus was real because it says so in a book (with the first account written 50 years after his death, and him only named Son of God rounghly 250 years after his death), then you have to argue that snakes can talk, Moses can split seas, Jesus can walk on water, etc etc.
          Fact is, NONE of that shit has happened since. Like, seriously, not one single thing like that (and bleeding or crying statues don’t count, they aren’t even in the same ballpark).
          Did the apostles die? I don’t know for sure, maybe yes, maybe no. But that doesn’t prove or disprove a single thing. Look at ISIS today as an example of how much that doesn’t mean shit.
          Truthfully, I’m down with a bad cold (I prayed to God but he didn’t do shit about curing me; typical) and I’m not up for theological discussions. The overwhelming evidence that it is, indeed, the world’s biggest prank is all out there. You seem to be a scholar of sorts, read up on it, I’m sure you’ll find it interesting (I did, even though I was athiest). Better the devil you know and all.
          P.S. I seriously consider the God written in the Bible as the bad guy and Satan as the good guy. God is a complete tool in the old testament. Satan was just trying to help eve wake up from a stupor of ignorance. In fact, Satan hardly does anything wrong. All the death is by God’s hand (or so they say). He was a fucking mass murderer of the worst degree.

        9. “Did the apostles die? I don’t know for sure, maybe yes, maybe no. But that doesn’t prove or disprove a single thing. Look at ISIS today as an example of how much that doesn’t mean shit.”
          There goes your professed logic. It proves a high degree of low probability that 12 men would chose to die over a known fraud. When all they had to say was Jesus wasn’t real, or they lied and would be allowed to live. How many members of ISIS MET muhammad?
          And “shit like that has happened” miracle of the dancing sun, witnessed by 100,000 people. The miracle of Our Lady of Zeitoun, witnessed by 250,000.
          You Athiest are foolish really,no amount of proof will satisfy, you, even when hundreds of thousands of people in modern period see god come down from the sky, they make so lamo excuse.

        10. And you’re a fucking DUMB cunt if you 100% believe that the apostles even existed.
          Here, let me mock the fuck out of you. Hang on, let me compose myself… The fucking gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, etc) where the Apostles’ tales are recorded is just a result of Chinese whispers. They derived from villages and communities who used to share the same original fable of Jesus. They passed on this information from generation to generation not via scripture, but via folk tales (so-to-speak). And after a few generations they got transferred to paper. Now when the Bible was compiled 250 years after Jesus farted rainbows the high priests needed to consolidate these variations. Took them a while to work out what to omit (e.g. the Gospel of Thomas, and the Gospel of Mary Magdeline. And I won’t even mention the Gospel of Judas where it’s stated that he was asked by Jesus to betray him because he was the most loyal of all the deciples… LOL), but in the end you got the Bible.
          Anyway, now that the history lesson is out the way, let me ask you, do you think there is ANY correlation in the fact we have 12 months in the year and 12 apostles? Or that he was born on the 25th December (after they changed it from the 3rd or 5th of January) which happens to be the shortest/longest day of the year (depending on which hemisphere you’re in)? Fact is, it’s all derived from Pagan literature and belief. Same with Summer, Autumn, Winter and Spring.
          If you read the Bible literally after they make it FUCKING CLEAR that it’s not meant to be taken literally just by Genesis alone (I mean, talking snakes, apples of knowledge, garden of eden… LOL) then you are such a fucking moron that this whole reply will just WHOOSH over your head.

        11. LOL. Once again, THIS ^^^^ is exactly the response you’d expect to hear from a religious cunt who has nothing to fall back on when reality slaps him in the face.
          Damn, I’ve been carving you guys up a fuck load lately. Feels good too.
          Trolololoolllollolol.

        12. Not sure why you have to be such an ass. I happen to agree with you, but I don’t see being religious as a problem as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone. It’s not easy to give up on the hope that religion brings to people. Don’t have to be a dick about it.

      5. Actually, athiests just want for Christians and Jews and Muslims and all the rest to shut the fuck up. It’s like listening to retarded children arguing over the best colour in the world. Who gives a fuck? NONE of you have proof of shit, and always stick your fucking fingers in your ears any time anyone EASILY tears apart your bullshit fables. So SHUT THE FUCK UP ALREADY.
        See it from our perspective. You’re like Forrest Gump going on and on about not knowing what’s in a box of chocolates and we’re telling you, “Just look at the fucking lid, you fucking moron!”

    2. >Back before we had security cameras, the kings/emperors/whatever invented gods who were always watching when they weren’t around
      Interesting idea.

      1. Atheists still invent “security cameras” to watch people to this very day. Atheists call these things human rights, justice, right and wrong. These are non-scientific inventions. They are religious concepts that atheists plagiarize in order to create their own religion of “humanism.”

    3. I will grant your assertions only that you would grant mine, which comes from personal experience and my own conversion.
      There are plenty of atheists who are just running from the God they supposedly don’t believe in, or are angry that God didn’t give them a good daddy, or a god that lets poor people suffer and die in the streets. Being angry at God is a theistic position no matter how many people you tell you are “atheist.”

      1. Do you feel the same way about agnostics?
        I’m not angry at God but I don’t know whats gonna happen when I die.
        Maybe I’ll get to take an escalator to heaven, or reincarnate as a website.
        How should I know?

        1. I say believing in God in an agnostic way is like playing it safe. You don’t lose anything but could gain everything.

        2. Just recognizing the role religion plays in keeping civil society civil is a big step for most people who have been drowning in ‘socially conscious atheism’

        3. It’s a trade-off. Religion fucks a lot of people up, too, whether it’s Catholic priests buggering altar boys or the Muzzies burning down embassies over cartoons.

        4. It all comes down to human’s own thoughts and actions. Like Jesus said “If anyone commits a crime punishable by death, let he without sin cast the first stone.” Muslims should follow this logic, no one is without sin so no one can throw stones at anyone for their sin.

        5. Muslims don’t go by the Gospels. According to the Koran, God is completely in favor of the death penalty.

        6. There are different strains of agnosticism. One common position is that “there is no way to know things about metaphysics.” This position is the same as the post modernism position. Post modernist epistemology is extremely self-contradicting and post modern ethics are relativistic.
          The other common strain of agnosticism is “I can know about metaphysics but I don’t at this time.” This strain strikes me as being lazy and fearful. Scared to commit? Get off the fence. Especially if you are an honest intelligent person.
          The last category of agnostic I have experience with is the unwilling theist. This is the person that believes there is most likely a God or higher power but they don’t know what it is about themselves that does not allow them to be genuine in their faith or religion. This is the person that wants to be a theist but can’t figure out what makes you a theist. I see these occasionally in traditionalist websites: they love everything about traditionalism and religion and the Prime Mover and the ethics that follow from those, but cannot feel genuine in aligning themselves with that worldview.

        7. So buggery of pre-adolescent boys and “martyring” people who don’t buy in to the “ALLAH AHKBAR!” proposition is ok…in moderation? You might want to take that one back down to the Buff-N-Shine and run it through a couple of more times…..

        8. Well, that’s already a hell lot better than the typical reddit atheist who can’t stop blaspheming every time he hears the word “God”, hehe..
          Allow me to philosophize a little here… IMHO being an agnostic is only possible in theory, because in practice, it’s impossible… I guess there’s no such thing as an “agnostic lifestyle”. The person will have to make a definite choice of either living as if there’s a God to whom he will have to answer to, or not, and most agnostics I know choose the last option..
          What happens when we die? Well, I believe in Jesus’ Second Coming and God’s judgement (the annihilationist version). If you want to have a better idea of what may happen with you, you can ask yourself “would I be happy having eternal life in a paradise without anything described as a sin in the Bible and praising God forever? Would I want that?” if the answer is yes, then you can be sure God will try to reach you in some fashion… if not, then, well, just keep going on with life…
          Anyway, that’s just a suggestion and my view of things.. I hope I might have helped you.. in some way…
          Good day!

        9. Interesting point that agnostics have to make a practical decision on how to live their lives…
          I still think it is possible to have an internal moral code, but ultimately that code is based on some sort of faith in some way… Whether it be to God, or some kind of superstitious idea of karma, or just to avoid psychological conflict.
          I choose to live based on some basic tenets… Tolerance and respect of virtue… When I say virtue I mean things like strength, determination, truth-telling, skill, etc. When I say tolerance I just mean that I don’t want to be an absolute judger of everything because I don’t know what is truly absolute.
          If I were 100% atheist then everything is just relative and I might as well just not care about anything or anyone unless it suits my whims. Atheists will argue this point but I know plenty of self-centred atheists who talk from both sides of their mouths… They are vegan and compassionate one second and then look away if helping their fellow man entails making any kind of sacrifice or putting in any work whatsoever.
          Just some random thoughts on what you said… Unfortunately I can’t settle on anything absolute. But I like to think I know integrity when I see it.

      2. “There are plenty of atheists who are just running from the God they supposedly don’t believe in…”
        Oh, totally. IME, the folks that want to yowl at me the loudest about religion are those that are supposedly atheists.
        I tend to describe myself as a “non-theist” b/c “atheist” is (rightfully) a loaded term. There’s enough latent Calvinism in my family to make me say “later for this shit”.
        “Non-theist” isn’t really a great term either, but from a philosophical perspective, I think we’ve gotten the religion thing completely wrong. Whatever God is, he’s not the bloodthirsty “Allah” of the Muslims, the Zombie Cannibal Christ who demands that you partake of his Risen Flesh and Blood*, or the “Untreated OCD” God of the Jews–seriously, if you know any Jewish people well enough, ask them how many commandments they have. It’s not just the Big Ten (and notice how many “Thou Shalt Nots” are in those. Two Words: Social Control). And a bunch of them are really fucked up.
        Anyway, we’ve gotten religion all wrong. If there is a God, he’s like Santa Claus–he’s a happy guy, loves us, and wants us to be happy, too. (Although arguably Santa is happy b/c he knows where all the naughty girls live…)
        Anyone who tells you that if you Don’t Believe EXACTLY What They Believe then you will Burn in a Lake of Fire is full of shit, and an asshole besides.
        Mistral
        *Although, assuming Christ said the things that Paul says he did, he was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay the fuck ahead of his time, and thus had to be executed.

        1. It seems you have a great deal of baggage regarding things that other people believe and say about the gods. I pray that you are able to slice through that baggage and those sour experiences and face the truths and paradoxes of reality and ethics without those distractions, so that you may come to your own solid and reasonable conclusion about our Creator. You need to have your own relationship with your Creator before you start to worry about religion.
          Your relationship to your Creator comes first. That is a primarily intellectual and personal pursuit, all others be damned. Religion unavoidably comes later once you’ve found God.

        2. I just call balls and strikes.
          And, as I said, I don’t have a beef with the “Creator”; it’s his organization that needs work.
          Mistral
          P.S. All my baggage fits in the overhead compartment or underneath the seat in front of me.

        3. As far as I can tell, the red pill atheists are largely ignoring this nonsensical article in favor of RoK articles that might actually help one’s personal growth. The only people I see yowling loudly in the comments section are the believers attempting to create a false equivalence between their cultish belief system and the supposed “cult” of atheism, which is really just the absence of a belief.
          I’ve said it before: I’ll never understand how someone can claim to have dispensed with their illusions through red pill understanding with one breath and then profess belief in a feel good sky fairy with the next.

        4. Its disturbs me too. Some guys on here have a massive blindspot in their beliefs. Its one of the things that makes Redpill so American, rather than international.

        5. I’m deep south American, but I can have a rational conversation about these issues with believers in person. It’s just in the online echo chamber that everybody suddenly thinks that red pill plus dyed in the wool Christianity somehow makes sense.

        6. Not only can the two concepts not work together they are in fact diametrically opposed. You can see the comments on here full of guys ‘hamstering’ like a woman to rationalise this entirely emotional choice and then getting offensive and hysterical when this is pointed out to them. I bet they check their horoscopes in the morning too.

        7. It makes me wonder whether they are actually “red pill” or whether they simply see the manosphere as another forum through which they can proselytize.

      3. I believe many people miss the fact that things like time and money are man made things. My answer to those who say things like “why would God allow poor people to go hungry” is, “Why would YOU allow poor people to go hungry?” God intends for mankind to use thw freewill we were given. God didn’t stop Cain from killing Abel or Eve from eating the forbidden fruit because they had the freedom to shape their own fates and face the consequences of their actions whether good or bad.

        1. I find it funny when non-believers are mad that God lets people suffer. This position is not an atheist position, it is a theist position. A demonic satanic position. Note that in order to be angry at an unjust God is to admit that there is indeed a God out there. You just feel that you’re better than him.

    4. I know a guy who spends his Saturday nights in clubs, trying to chat up women. And then on Sunday morning, he’s in church, looking holy. I asked him why he even bothered going to church if he wasn’t sincere, and he couldn’t give me a straight answer. I also remember that a few trolls made a fake account on a dating site with the image of a tall, muscular, light-haired man and got a young Christian youth worker to say that she’d love to take it up the ass from him and give him a rimjob, and actually gave him her number and wanted to meet up. And, of course, I used to live across the street from a young Christian couple from a particularly conservative church – the type that doesn’t allow people to have televisions. And I know for a fact – because there are a lot of elderly people in that area who do nothing but stare out of their windows – that they had a television in their linen cupboard and they’d watch crime shows and racy night-time television on it.
      I suppose for some people, going to church is just tradition. A formality. A social thing. But it’s those people who really brought me off the whole Christianity thing. If these people are accepted by a church despite the fact that they’re often fairly open about their perversions and their continued willingness to sin, then what value does that church really have anymore? It’s like a police force that’s thoroughly corrupt, or a fire brigade that suffers from collective pyromania, or a jeweler who’s also a kleptomaniac.

      1. Not going to church because it has bad people is like not going to the gym because fat people are there.

        1. These people aren’t there to change, though. They’re there for no particular reason except perhaps social expectations. They’re quite happy living the way they do, and often the people in the church know that and turn a blind eye and don’t even talk to them about it.
          Such a church loses all credibility. So, it’s not like refusing to go to the gym because there are fat people there. It’s like refusing to go to a particular gym because it’s a snake pit full of fat women who do no work to get in shape or lose weight but sit about laughing at men who try.

      1. Hey Jesus, I’ve been meaning to ask this: Can your Dad make a rock so heavy that even He can’t lift it? I just want your take on it; don’t ask Him, lest he say “Dear Me” and vanish in a puff of logic…. 😉

        1. The question itself lacks common sense.
          This is the same as saying what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. If one exists, the other cannot.

    5. That sweet “good girl” who doesn’t want to hold your hand because you two might “fall into sin” is going to dive headlong into sin when a guy with enough of the Serpent in him shows up.
      Poetic, true, and speaks volumes about interacting with women. You’ve got a gift for words, my man.

    6. I am one of those guys who the “good girl” fell for. I’m not Satan, but I am certainly not a church-goer. She loves me, despite my being a heathen.

    7. 4. Is the most true, the same girl who pretends to be religious, will dive mouth wide open ontop of the right cock.

  4. The problem is also that white knight priests have no problem to shame men (‘It’s your duty to care for your wife, care for your children, risk your life for cunt, queen and country, work hard and go to church’) but will not do the same in regards to women (‘You have to submit, cook, clean’).
    When you go to conservative websites, it’s always “the liberals fault” or “the men’s fault”, never the women’s. They don’t even consider women part of the problem. Women are protected by the left and by the right.
    Even the Dalai Lama is a cunt worshipper:
    http://i.imgbox.com/wj1OITdl.jpg

    1. The Dalai Lama is a joke. I saw an interview in which he talks about his bowel movements…
      Buddhism says that compassion arises when all human feelings and desires gave been abandoned. He equates compassion to human love which is changeable and unreliable, especially in women.
      Do you make all these graphics yourself?!

  5. I agree, though think the article is a bit too pessimistic about women. Women are not just a roadblock… they are meant to be enjoyed and taken care of, much like a human dog.

    1. “they are meant to be enjoyed and taken care of”
      this. and you know what hurts? that with todays woman you can forget that. but ultimately, woman are hurt by this as well. that they are not seen as a cute little thing to love and protect anymore, at least not by men who are sane know how the world really is (redpill). so they enjoy their mangina/provider, but are seen as trash by redpillers, even the ones who arent garbage. nice climate created @ feminism, we could indeed need a functioning patriarchy

      1. I know a few woman who would love to be taken care of and would even agree to be a housewife who cooks and cleans the house while the man does the heavy lifting.

  6. This kind of shit is absolutely foreign to me. I cannot, for the life of me, understand what a feminist religion could possibly be like. This is because I grew up going to a conservative as fuck Church of Christ that overtly stated that women were not to be allowed to preach and enforced with an iron fist that divorce was to be shunned and people who engaged in it were to be excommunicated.
    Hell, thanks to this church, it was my own mother who warned me against dating single mothers and told me to never consider any girl I knew from high school as a serious relationship when I started hitting my late twenties. She basically said to me, when I was 19 and going off to the military, “Right now, you’re a nobody and many girls won’t bother with you. Those girls who rejected you in high school are going to come back and want you after you make something of yourself. Especially when you hit thirty. Don’t do it, son. Try to marry one who’s at least 5 years younger.”
    Sadly, this church also was pretty big about no premarital sex, but… that’s to be expected.

    1. Earth religion, gaia, goddess worship, a bit of Wicca, little bit of theosophy. And take down all those offensive phallic like spires ruining the landscape. Women in the church aren’t all radical lesbian theologians like Mary Daly, but certainly a few are, and they are always going to be challenging patriarchal elements within the church, which arguably may simply mean subverting it.

  7. Part of this comes from the ways in which many churches compete for members. Many have forgone dour rituals and the boring emphasis on scripture, and instead turned each church service into Bible-flavored therapy sessions. There are people who haven’t ever actually read the Bible, but they sure have a good time at church with all the music played by a totally hip youth pastor who loves to just rock out to Christ.
    People are told to be nicer people, God loves them, and they should try not to be naughty. They feel good, and then go home to a life and a world spiritually empty, because they’ve already taken into their inmost being all the frivolous and poisonous bullshit of our culture, which too few religious leaders meaningfully oppose.
    Too many church leaders lack the courage to tell people what they need to hear, and instead tell them what they want to hear.

  8. Given how detached organized religion is from empirical reality, it’s not surprising the neo atheist movement is so popular, especially among millennials. Scientists Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, for example, are ‘celebrities’ to large portions of the youth population, and are also correct about Islam being a threat to western civilization. The Church says we’re all equal, that you can all be saved if only you believe; no, that is wrong. Some are better than others (as in providing more economic value, being smarter and advancing humanity’s knowledge, etc). Some people are irredeemably bad that they can never be ‘saved’, nor should they be. The rich and successful should not by cajoled by some parochial organization to donate their money to those who did nothing to earn it, out of a vague, wish-washy, politically correct concept of altruism.

  9. Great article. I do advise every man to make his own connection with spirituality. I did mine with an Ayahuasca experience.
    Thing with spirituality is that it is immensely frightening, especially after a life of atheism. You realize that you’ve been running away from your spirituality all your life into entertainment and the arms of women, away from the terrors that come from contemplating a place that may be ones own conception of hell.
    And once you actually dare to take a look, you may be so shocked that you search for a religion, for someone, something, that will explain the inexplicable. You search for anchors in this world and religion gladly provides them.
    You obey and go to church and listen to their words: “Our existence is small and miserable, we need to be saved.”
    No. The devil is a part of us and god is as well, through our strength. That’s how I see it. They are adversaries in a way, but two sides of the same coin in another.
    Once you stop searching for an anchor in this world, women are just part of a challenge that is life. A test. Well said. Thank you.

  10. I think part of the problem is that religion–at least Christianity–has seem to gotten away from its essential elements and into things that really have nothing to do with religion.
    A good example of this is evolution. Its really incontrovertible due to overwhelming evidence, yet you have crowds of religious people howling that its completely fake and that the earth is only 6,000 years old. What do the teachings of Jesus have to do with evolution? Nothing, really. The parables, beatitudes, and so on are concerned with morality. The fact that we evolved from earlier species has no effect on the validity of messages such as “love thy neighbor” or concepts such as forgiveness.
    This kind of thing has really pushed a lot of people away. If the church is so dead wrong on something so obvious, then it leads you to seriously question the rest of what they’re saying.
    I think another part is the church experience. When I was a kid, my parents (really my mom) dragged us to a Catholic church every sunday. After I got past age 7, I really started to hate it because the whole experience seemed geared towards toddlers, their mothers, and their grandmothers. Even at 15, they had us doing arts and crafts and singing children’s songs. My mom tried out several different Catholic churches, and it was all the same. This kind of thing is guaranteed to repel any self-respecting male.
    And then of course you have people like the Bakkers and their fellow money grubbers, and the child sex scandals. Those two things right there were probably enough to convince millions of men that religion was a scam at best and a predatory organization at worst, rightly or wrongly, and no matter how many good people were actually involved in those organizations.

    1. even in the Old Testament, the timeline of the creation of the Heavens and Earth are described in terms of the time it took to create them , not when they were actually created. It then goes to a generational timeline about the ancestors of Abraham, Moses, David. The New Testament does not even cover the subject, as you correctly stated. The Apostles wrote of Jesus’ teachings and following his crucifxion stated that Jesus sits on “right hand of God with the angels circling above Him” ;that neither the angels or Jesus will know when the “Heavens will fall” meaning nobody but God has certain information.

    2. Heh. evangelists.
      Don’t confuse them with christians.
      Evolution and christianity are absolutely compatible… there’s no argument among non-evangelical christians that Darwin had it right, and That Evolution is one of the tools god used to create the ‘world as we know it’
      The bible referred to each of god’s days as ‘an Era’ (or a word similar to that), King James reinterpreted that to mean each day was ‘a thousand years’. However, each of god’s ‘days’ could have been anywhere from half an hour to 40 billion years. This is not even remotely incompatible with the theory of evolution.

      1. Ah yes, who is a True Christian and who is not? They’ve been arguing that one since the beginning. I grew up in Orange County, CA surrounded by evangelicals. OC is the hometown of Saddleback Church, Trinity Broadcast Network, Crystal Cathedral Ministries, the Harvest Crusade, etc. A lot of them don’t consider Catholics to be Christians!
        Evangelicals are the face of American Christianity today, and listening to some of them you can see how people would come away thinking that evolution and Christianity are incompatible. Vox Day is a good example.
        I think things like this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/28/excommunicated-mormon-los_n_6776250.html might partly explain why Mormonism gains so many converts. They’re actually willing to stand up for what they believe in.

        1. Secret, I live in the heart of mormon country. I am not one, but I have a lot of respect for them as neighbors, and happily pay their ‘social networking’ tax… it’s worth it.

        2. easy. You pay Tithing and lip service, you get access to the most powerful, richest people around every sunday.
          I feel absolutely no guilt or hypocrisy about not being a ‘true believer’. I pay my social network tax, participate where appropriate, and gain access to a huge number of conservative potential friends, people I can hang out with, wealth opportunities, a decent and non-humiliating social safety net, wingmen, and potential pussy.
          I also have the opportunity to give back to the community in some truly meaningful ways like sponsoring or accompanying the boy scout troop (and passing along some serious pg-rated red pill knowledge over a week-long hike) Volunteering at the Bishop’s storehouse (The only truly decent charity I have ever known of) and spending my spare weekends helping people move, or going to parties, or training women in ‘REAL’ self defense (Rule 1, don’t be an idiot. Rule 2, run like hell and scream your head off. Rule 3, do the most horrible thing you can imagine to an attacker long enough to run like hell and scream your head off.)
          And no one ever questions why I never go to the temple, and never even ask for a recommend. Plus sometimes it’s fun to invite one of my slaves to go to church with me while wearing a Dengeki double Rotor.

        3. It sounds like it would just be easier to move to a different state.
          I like living where I currently do. Great beer, legal weed if I wanted it (although I don’t partake), guns in every hardware store, cheap living, and nobody really gives a shit about what you do or don’t believe no lip service necessary.

        4. “nobody really gives a shit”
          That’s the problem, I actually enjoy living in a little thing we call civilization. That means social networking. (In the old meaning of the term)

      2. “Heh. evangelists.
        Don’t confuse them with christians.
        Evolution and christianity are absolutely compatible… there’s no argument among non-evangelical christians that Darwin had it right, and That Evolution is one of the tools god used to create the ‘world as we know it’ ”
        Your knowledge of “non-evangelical Christians” seems limited to Roman Catholicism and “mainline” Protestant churches.
        http://www.sainthermanmonastery.com/product-p/genesis.htm

        1. And mormonism, and Greek and Russian Orthodox.
          That pretty much covers the spectrum of people who actually finished high school before becoming pastors, doesn’t it?

    3. There’s an old joke in Latin America: “When the Catholic Church opted for the poor [i.e. started preaching more about economics and social justice], the poor opted for the Pentecostals.”

      1. I’ve heard an old saying “the Catholic Church died the day they brought in the acoustic guitars.”

  11. Very well written article. I tend to disagree as far as mans interpretation of “gods word”. Religion is the ultimate blue pill model for creating hierarchy in society. How many institutions are we going to watch fail before we realize its ALL bullshit yet we red pillers know this and coming out on top is what red pillers are about despite the obstacles. Religion undoubtedly is by far has been the biggest menace to civilization since this fairy tale has been told. Red pillers should not only reject religion but also to make an effort to tear it down. How any more generations have to suffer these idiots that believe in a god that’ll only save them if they accept him as their lord and saviour. Talk about the ultimate in conditional love. How many more thousands if not millions of kids are gonna be sexually abused by the thousands of pedophile priests that the Vatican continues to shuffle around the world? How many psychopathic muslims do we need to tolerate under the guise of political correctness? The eaxamples go on and on. Lets say we eliminate the middle man, Jesus, God, Mohahmed or any of the other hundreds of gods that have come and gone through out history, and start believing in YOURSELF. You get the credit when you do something good.YOU get the credit when you accomplished a challenging task. These ignorant rappers and athletes that praise god for giving them the talent to throw the winning touchdown are nothing more than narcissistic illiterates that dont know the difference between divine intervention favoritism and genetic talent combined with THEIR own hard work. So what god decided to bless you with the game winning pass in favor of helping the millions of starving kids in Africa? Now thats what I call the ultimate rainbow afro’d superfan! All our institutions have failed us.Red pill Neomasculinists just have to rise to the challenge of handling everything and taking care of business on our own and living with the satisfaction of knowing we can handle anything on our own without a placebo of god and religion.

    1. So you’re saying religion should be outlawed? That’s crazy, If you can believe in aliens or that we are all nothing but hairless apes, you can believe in a god. Religion may hurt some but at the end of the day it helps more. Religion gives hope to the hopeless, you are not a Red Piller my friend.
      Your assumptions are correct but also incorrect, I believe that to say YOU did this or that is fairly narcissistic. It’s guys like you who lose sight so easily. Kids starving, being raped, killed, starting wars. All these things are done by our own hands and yes we should find solutions to things like that ourselves. But remember this, in today’s society god is an after thought and his place are people like you who actually help promote feminism, LGBT, and SJW lifestyles. These things are growing because no one believes in god anymore and believe that there are no morals.

    2. What a charming speech, One could almost not even smell the stench of the enormous mountain of bullshit.
      BTW- in the future, I suggest chopping your bullshit into paragraphs, so it airs out and dries more evenly… a wall o text is difficult for most people to read and/or analyze.
      So let’s start at the beginning, shall we?
      “Religion is the ultimate blue pill model for creating hierarchy in society.”
      Hierarchy in society is as natural to humans as it is to any other creature… when we attempt to create ANYTHING without a hierarchy, it fails… The claims that Religion is ‘blue pill’ is pure Marxist straw men… inventing your own definition of religion so that you can tear it down. You clearly only understand what you think you see of religion, without even the most remote inkling of WHY religion is, or what it is for.
      “Religion undoubtedly is by far has been the biggest menace to civilization since this fairy tale has been told.” Actually, No, barbarians always have been… and the rest of your comment goes on to describe what could, in essence, be described as nothing more than a solipsistic attempt to declare that which you do not understand, anathema… The very definition of ‘blue pill’.
      “How many more thousands if not millions of kids are gonna be sexually
      abused by the thousands of pedophile priests that the Vatican continues
      to shuffle around the world?”
      Been listening to the mainstream media, have we? ten times more children get molested daily in hollywood than have been molested by priests in the entire history of the catholic church.
      Priests are human too… they are capable of mistakes, although they tend to be held to a much higher standard… they are ‘shuffled around’ as punishment, and to try to keep assholes, like you, from sounding off about how imperfect humans, just because they fail to live up to perfection, somehow have made the whole church invalid.
      “nothing more than narcissistic illiterates”
      Actually, giving god credit for your successes is the opposite of Narcissism, and you certainly have trouble recognizing your own inability to properly utilize paragraph structure… far be it for you to ‘throw the first stone’.
      The rest of it is simple self-aggrandizement and insulting those who choose to believe there is more to life than raw dogging randoms until you die. Claiming that a belief in something greater than yourself is ‘blue pill’ is short sighted in the extreme.
      I strongly suggest you lay off the anabolics, they are starting to affect your coherence.

        1. Thanks. I always get a little disgusted with folks that come wandering in at random and try to sell chicken poop coated with ‘gold dust’ in order to instantly attain pop icon status with a single post.
          It never works. Being respected among men requires a long history of consistent and well-thought out commentary. Even the occasional ghastly error (Like my transposing the terms ‘cognitive dissonance’ and ‘choice paradox’…ugh. oops.) Waving a copypasted selection from 70’s self-help books and backing it up with NBC ‘fictionistics’ and indignation over ‘dramatizations’ just makes these guys into flav-r-aid guzzling loonies. With steroids.

  12. The idea of God is necessarily for the normal functioning of organised society. In order to subdue the individual’s natural selfish nature, he needs to believe in a force which is above and beyond him.
    Without the fear of God, society can not control its women and it turns into dog-eats-dog nightmare.

    1. Jeffrey Dahmer: “If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then—then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing…” [An interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, Nov. 29, 1994].

  13. We all have a spiritual side, some just refuse to believe it. Many people who hate religion and call religious people idiots and other forms of the word are usually those people chasing after the so-called, “freedom of thought” utopia. What these people don’t realize is that believing in God freely is freedom of thought.

  14. None of this “blue pill” stuff mattered when women had few political, social, or economic privileges (not rights). If the status of an average woman is inferior to that of an average man, hypergamy already is perfectly enabled. Most men will be able to succeed no matter what they do, because she knows he will be able to provide her and her child with the protection offered by his superior status.

      1. Whatever sociopolitical order arises from the ashes of Western Civilization, women won’t be given the vote. The Founding Fathers were onto something when they restricted the franchise to male property owners.

        1. Although it’s nice to feign that women have a comeuppance laying in wait and that they’ll eventually be relegated to nothing but breeding along with having their noses shoved in perpetual servility under a system that mandates female dependance – How do we begin materializing the utopia? I think it should definitely begin in the home with fathers thwarting their daughters academic and vocational prospects, but even with this proposition taking place in all redpill homes not nearly enough women can be hobbled to make any kind of actionable difference.
          Do you think we can reach conservative pols at this juncture to catalyze the shift against women voting? I would think that republican/conservative/libertarian women would realize that forfeiting their own vote is the only way they could ever see one of their favored candidates in the oval office and they would thus support all women losing access to the franchise.
          We just need to reach one mainstream candidate with enough balls to introduce the ideology in order to make it less publicly shocking and an actual viable conversation starter. Once it begins being discussed it ceases to be a fringe notion. Even liberal men (and I use that term loosely) want to cuntpunch their emasculating slut gf’s and wives. I dare say, everyone will get on board with ratfucking all American sluts. It just needs that initial platform to proliferate and percolate.

        2. Can we re-institute this great tradition? I think its time to shove a giant redpill up the collective American ass. Strategic proactivity is the forte’ of Men – we can do this! Hell, what is the legality of redpill men deciding that they want to run as democrats nation-wide… and then all of a sudden having a massive ideological change of heart after becoming elected >:D
          Would such a Trojan Horse tactic fall outside of the legal parameters? I mean fuck, belief systems are not immutable right? Talk about the ultimate trolling.

        3. “A recent incident on a railroad train justly illustrates the result [of women’s ‘rights’]. A solitary female entered a car where every seat was occupied, and the conductor closed the door upon her and departed. She looked in vain for a seat, and at last appealed to an elderly man near her to know if he would not ‘surrender his seat to a lady.’ He, it seems, was somewhat a humorist, and answered: ‘I will surrender it cheerfully, Madam, as I always do, but will beg leave first to ask a civil question. Are you an advocate of the modern theory of women’s rights?’ Bridling up with intense energy, she replied, “Yes, sir, emphatically; I let you know that it is my glory to be devoted to that noble cause.’ ‘Very well, Madam,’ said he, ‘then the case is altered: You may stand up like the rest of us men, until you can get a seat for yourself.’ This was exact poetic justice; and it foreshadows precisely the fate of their unnatural pretensions Men will treat them as they treat each other; it will be ‘every man for himself, and the devil take the hindmost.’ … [A]nd the society which will emerge from this experiment will present women in the position which she has always held among savages, that of domestic drudge to the stronger animal…. [S]he will reappear from this ill-starred competition defeated and despised, tolerated only to satiate the passion, to amuse the idleness, to do the drudgery, and to receive the curses and blows of her barbarized masters.”
          Rev. Dr. Robert Lewis Dabney (March 5, 1820 – January 3, 1898) Minister, Professor of Theology at Union Theological Seminary and Chief of Staff to General Stonewall Jackson

        4. Restricting the franchise to property-owning adult men was hardly their invention, it had been the way of things in almost all republics up until then.

  15. Let me make this clearer with proper grammar. Fuck religion and the weak minded blue pill idiots that believe in it.

    1. Devil’s Advocate: Christianity is directly responsible for much of the greatest art and music produced in all of human history.

      1. Art and music are overrated, I would rather have science (i.e. logic and knowledge rather than feelings).

        1. Art and music are two of the things that make humans different than common animals. Humans are emotional creatures.
          Even Ayn Rand–hero of logical people–recognized the importance of love, music, and art.

        2. The “Problem” with the world is the faith placed in science as a means to save us from ourselves. Technology is NOT the solution, it is the MAJOR part of the problem. Until everyone grasps this fact nothing will ever change. The egalitarian New World Order/Star Trek is not possible without a pervasive and high level of technology.

        3. More like hero of people who agree with her, who have pretensions that that makes them more rational than everyone else.

        1. No. I’m not a believer myself, but even I can recognize the value that religion can provide to society.

  16. H. L. Mencken noted that women make lousy Christians. Imagine if modern American women were to encounter the historical Jesus. Here is what they would say:
    Jesus: “Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head”
    American woman: “What a loser! He doesn’t have a place to live!
    American woman: He is a 30 year old jewish msn and he does not have a girlfreind? He is a huge loser!
    American woman: Jesus doesn’t have a job? The guy is a bum snd a total loser!

  17. I posit that the real quest is for truth. All men are religious in that they have a system of epistemology, ethics and metaphysics. Which system is best ought to be, for the red pill community, which is the (most) true and how do we know that it is. Is Jesus the Christ; the only begotten Son of the Father and same in substance equal in power and glory? If He is then His ethic as contained in the canon of scripture concerning women is nonnegotiable. The anthropology of men and women in scripture is likewise to be received without reservation. The problem with many of the religious professionals is that they do not present the canon with fidelity and proper method, but with self aggrandizing error. Where the error occludes the truth of the evils commonly practiced by women they ought be condemned. Where the ethic taught is conflict with the ethics of scripture they ought to be rebuked and the error spotlighted. When Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Seminary, writes husbands need to continually earn the right to the marriage bed he was soundly and vociferously opposed by Bible-believing Christians for teaching what is antithetical to scripture. IOW it was the truth of scripture that was used to oppose him, not the elimination of truths of scripture.

    1. “Christianity has been transformed by the Social Gospel to the point that
      it is not even Christianity anymore, the same way that America is not
      America anymore.”
      You need to change that to “Heterodox Christianity.” But, Heterodoxy hasn’t been Orthodoxy since 1054, when the Pope, no longer content on being “first among equals,” demanded lordship over the entire Church and all secular rulers. Ever since the office of Pope has been that of the Grand Inquisitor:
      https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/grand.htm
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heWq8B4sfqI
      .

  18. Goddamn it, guys. This is a misinterpretation of how the female was portrayed in pagan religion. First, there were no “strong independent wymyn” goddesses. All goddesses had male counterparts/companions. And the ones that didn’t were vilified. The focus was on male-female partnership, not pussy worship. That’s anachronistic modern dumb-fuckery that feminists originally came up with and you guys are regurgitating it. Stop that shit.
    The other focus was on opposing but helpful (Yin/Yang type) forces, but opposing forces that were critical to the cycles of things, like life and death, creation and destruction, velvet glove and iron fist, The Sun (masculine) and The Moon (feminine). Mercury and Athena, Mars and Venus, Frey and Freya. It was never pussy worship.

  19. 1 Timothy 2:9-14 in like manner also that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, whith shamefacedness and sobriety not with braided hair, or gold, or costly array; 10. But ( which becometh women professing godliness) with good works . 11. Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. 12 but I suffer not a women to teach, nor usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 for Adam was formed first then Eve 14 and Adam was not decieved, but the women being decieved was in transgression. See the bible just solved 100% of the problems between today’s men and women in a few verses. 1 Corinthians 11:8-9 For the man is not of the women; but the women of the man. 9 neither was man created for the woman; but the women for the man. The bible is clear on the fact that women should be in subjection. See men who believe the bible and actually read and practice what they preach are not deceived. 1 Corinthians 11:3 but I would have you know, that the head of Every man is Christ; and the head of the women is the man; and the head of Christ is God. How do you twist that scripture for a women , the only way is your not really paying attention at all. There’s only one religion it’s the word of God, his word when studied and rightly divided is powerful. Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of thoughts and intents of the heart. See I belive the bible and what it says, the real problem with the world today is we have rejected God. Proverbs 3:35 the wise shall inherit glory:but shame shall be the promotion of fools. That is our society right now see I can summ up the world with one verse. Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. I’ve have sinned and I deserved to pay the price see this world lies in pure evil but not me I choose to be seperate. all you have to Do to be differnt is confess with your mouth and believe with your heart that Jesus is Lord

  20. I liked your article, but in Genesis 2:18, God said “It is not good for man to be alone, let us make him a help like unto himself.”
    NOW they test us like crazy, but it seems they were originally intended to provide us with help and companionship. If you regard the Bible as truth, that is.

  21. Latka lays down The Law! Latka was WAY ahead of the curve and had the feminists number way back in 1982. Thank you very much…

  22. I was looking forward to a Dalrock-style article explaining how feminism and the blue pill had infiltrated and subverted religious traditions that are thought of as being patriarchal, but instead I got to read a bunch of babble that makes little to no sense to those who don’t share the author’s religious thoughts to begin with, which would be something like 99% of the readership here.

  23. Genesis 2:18 describes exactly why womene were created. GOD recognized Adam’s need for sexual desire and companionship (duhh, He created him), but didn’t make a partner….he made “help”. To see women as anything else but helpers usually results in heartache or bitterness because of the lack of knowledge of knowing what they really are.
    With that said, they can be extremely great helpers…so long as you recognize you are the leader, and continue to give orders (including sitting on your 3rd leg). Putting them in a place of equality is disqusting to them (and us) because that is not what they were designed for. Putting them in a higher place than us is just as bad if not worse [read: pedestalizing]. Putting them in a lower position than “helper” (i.e. slave) is just as damaging to your soul.
    They are helpers. The sooner you get it, the sooner you’ll take command over that pussy.

  24. I gave up on religion a long time ago. However, I remain respectful and have not become so daft as to become an atheist.

  25. I gave up on religion when I went to a church for two years and was treated like shit. I’ve learned Christians are some of the most hateful bigots on earth. . While there I was laughed at for having problems and had a guy steal from me. When I confronted them and it got nasty they lied and tried to get the cops to shoot me. . Of course mothers day was all huge while father’s day was a joke of man up calls from the pulpit. Every week I was hounded for money and asked to join a men’s brigade that does work only for single mom’s. . The church did free work for these sluts, gave them cars, money and not once said a bad word about them. Church is as blue pill as you get and it produces manginas. If you have any problem and are single, they will tell you marriage will cure it. Most pastors think men are messed up and that women are victims. . Pastors believe God will send a husband to marry single mom’s. . It’s sick and my balls literally shrunk in the building. . Glad I left. . Convincing most Christians men can suffer or be a victim is like telling tom cruise xenu doesn’t exist.

    1. I’ve got similar experiences with a particular church. My shit ain’t done until I’ve called them out on what they are and rooted the shitsters that hide behind the naive sheeple members. As a ‘non gov’ or exempt group they are balls to the wall hellfire getting away with murder and exempt from oversight as they convert the meat of sjw, fem, soocialist you name it every substance that is foul they shove with impunity and if you can see them for what they are they try to kill you. It is surreal. The devil lives in the church. It’s time to grab the sumbitch by the horns literally and take his two faced church minions and fold up their asses into a shrine . . heh. A TRUE god would be honored by his creation doing that by any true religion.
      If you don’t mind me asking sir, what denomination was this church where you had the bad experience? The church I’m referring to above has done more damage to my family than anything ever could do. I associated with them naively thinking the place was a refuge away from the decadence. The culprits I encountered in the church were the exact kinds of people I was trying to shield my family from, and they were unqualified heads of the goddamned place. Like I said I’m not done on this earth until the mangina pigs from that church have been eviscerated. The church sure did leave me with conviction didn’t it? Yeah, the conviction to get a few motherfuckers so they won’t negatively affect any more families down the road like they did mine.
      But again, if you don’t mind, just curious what the denomination of the church that you had trouble with. I’ve got plenty on my plate but I’ll keep them in mind and be weary.

  26. I personally love the Matrix, and the fact that I’m reading Red Pill/Blue Pill references 16 years after the movie was released.

  27. As a religious guy my take on the Adam and Eve story since taking the red pill goes as follows.
    Eve knew that she was under Adam’s authority because it was Adam and not God who gave her the name “woman”. We know that naming an object brings it under our subjection because God put the animals under man’s dominion and it was the animals that were named by man.
    So the Devil knowing this decides to make an offer to Eve that would not have worked on Adam given his higher authority. He offered her the status of gods. At this point her hypergamy kicked in and the offer of having a status equal to or above her husband seemed too good to pass up so she consumes the fruit.
    She goes back to Adam who had developed one-itis and a scarcity mentality not considering that the woman which God had given her could be easily replaced. If he had developed a mentality of plenty as many of the men successful with ladies have today he would have refused the fruit and went to God and the conversation would have went something like the following.
    Adam: God! That woman you gave me ate the fruit but I didn’t. Can you DTB and get me another one?
    God: Consider it done Adam.
    Instead he folded to the power of the almighty pussy and men have been worshipping it ever since that time, especially the “God botherers”.
    Instead I see the Lord saying to Adam – “Because you listened to your wife and ate the fruit – I’m going to leave and will not come and fix this mess up until you learn the red pill and make me your God instead of that pussy over there”.
    So I can see that men learning the red pill is going to hasten his return as men learn to see what the true nature of women and turn from the pussy god in disgust.
    Edit : fixed up mangled English.

  28. My thoughts on the matter are that from the perspective of Christianity, women are not inherently evil, but are only evil when they are acting outside of the function they were created for. That is: being a submissive “helpmate” for a husband (the reason women were created) , and bearing and nurturing children (her curse after the fall). Women are inferior to men in most aspects although superior in some (looking after young children) and are considered the weaker vessel, cannot have authority over men, have to obey their husbands etc. But spiritually they are equal in that they are also children of God. In short, the negative nature of women is real but it only exists when they are acting outside of the function they were created for. I would also say the same for men (their purpose being to be guardians and leaders of women, and work to subdue and rule the earth)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *