Barbarian Christians: Why Islam May Want To Rethink Taking Over Europe

The main crisis of The West today is one of identity.  I watched a good video series on this dilemma recently and the thrust of the argument presented was this – “race” (i.e. white/European) is no basis for identity that unifies.  What matters is values, morals and world view.  This is what makes a tribe a tribe and binds men together in it. Christianity was the world view that once bound all of Europe’s tribes in common, but it was not always this way.  Before Christ there was Rome, an empire whose collapse was caused by a very different barbarian invasion.

The funny thing I learned watching this History series, and never really thought about or made the connection before, was that the barbarians that destroyed Rome… were us!

Europeans – destroying arrogant and hypocritical empires since the dawn of Man.

The Western Roman empire collapsed because of its inability to properly assimilate the “barbarian” Germans, Brits, Celts and other conquered tribes of western Europe. Of note as well is that these barbarians were 100% pagan; a world view getting increasing interest and research within the ROK community as a possible solution to problems The West faces today.

For all their faults, Romans were the civilized peoples of the age because they were staunch patriarchal pagans, far more so than Greece ever was. In the end, Rome was overrun and destroyed by violent and unrelenting goddess worshiping warriors. A sweeping generalization of the times and its peoples to be sure, but one I feel will stand up with research and honest appraisal of the anthropological evidence. (See the Druids in pre-Roman Britain.)

I start with this short historical introduction in order to explain why Christianity appealed to the barbarian, that is the European, mind and how its adoption transformed Europe into the powerhouse it eventually became.

For the 2nd time in history, Western Europe finds itself beset by outside barbarians from a completely foreign culture and on the verge of collapse. Like Rome, very few men in The West have any interest in saving it because “the empire” simply no longer works for them.  The difference is back then, Christianity was a new cult, just one of many possible answers to metaphysical questions on the nature of the universe and Man. Today, Christianity is 2000 years old and the current Catholic Pope made a historic first in allowing prayer readings from the Quran.

Where faith, politics and cultural change meet, a new radical destiny undreamed of before is born.

Christianity won in Europe when Constantine chose it in the dying days of the Western Roman empire to unify his subjects.  By all accounts, it was as much a choice of true belief and conviction as of politics.  The choice of Christianity would not have won over the masses however if it did not offer something of value; something true to believe in that made better sense to a pagan, and patriarchal, tribal/Roman mind. I believe this is precisely what Red Pill men are doing right now. Paganism, Neomasculinity, MGTOW, all of these are belief systems based on logic and intelligence that provide answers. Answers to a quest for a worldview that is true, that works and, most importantly, binds men in common with one another to make a unified tribe, an identity.

The failure of the Western Roman empire and why it collapsed forms the first lengthy chapters of St. Augustine’s City of God. In short, the pagan view of the world made no sense.  If worshiping and sacrificing to “the gods” was what supported and gave power to Rome, why did these same gods not intervene to save Rome when it was collapsing?  Augustine’s answer is a brilliant philosophical refutation of the fundamental beliefs about the pagan view of the world.

  • Many competing gods/truths
  • High gods have great esteem (Zeus), but no practical power (Hestia seemed to rule all.)
  • The gods are highly immoral and behave in ways no self respecting person would want to behave, yet we are told to hold these characters in high esteem and worship/venerate them
  • With so many goddesses and gods, how can one know which is the right one to pray to and to what end. What if you are wrong?!?!?
  • The gods/goddesses also seem to not care at all about the fate of humans and in fact, do all they can to bring strife and conflict upon them, not peace and harmony

These and many other reasons Augustine outlines as the faults, and thus the lies and falsehoods, of pagan religious belief. Christianity, on the other hand, offered:

  • One true God, the only power/creator over Man and his world
  • Salvation in heaven (an escape from the suffering of life) with righteous living and worship to the true, and thus operative/effective, God
  • A moral code that enshrined the family, Man (patriarchy) and belief in one absolute truth (paganism = relativism)

With Christ made as a living incarnation of God, born of a virgin, who sacrificed himself for Man’s sins, and who frees us with each communal eating and drinking of his sacrificial body and blood, there is very, very, very little intellectual effort required of a pagan mind – and this is key, a PAGAN MIND – to rationalize and accept Jesus as “saviour and Lord.” It is impossible to not see the parallels to pagan god/goddess worship and practice.

I would also add that because Christianity focused on the patriarchal interpretation of the pagan world view (The Father and The Son), it made itself stand that much more apart from what was up to then, a purely goddess dominated human religious history. Goddess worship of Isis was one competitor to Christianity. Another was worship of Dionysus the transvestite. If that sounds familiar, you are not alone.

If you ever wanted a clear explanation for why many men are cucks and how feminism could take such deep root and hold in The West, look to 10,000 plus years of ancestral, female butt worshipping.  For some men, kissing female ass is genetic.

Without the adoption of pagan practices/views, Christianity may have become just another Jewish cult. In fact, a well written book by a Jew on why they rejected Jesus as Messiah suggests just that.  What if… Jews had accepted Jesus?  Would Paul have turned to the gentiles?  The author’s conclusion is as stunning as it is simple; Jesus and his Nazarene followers would still be around today as an offshoot of a small, insignificant sect of a wider Jewish religious identity. But that is not what happened.

By adapting, Christianity become the ultimate syncretization of matriarchal (goddess) paganism and patriarchal (god) monotheism

The result was the creation of a powerful and long lasting patriarchal world view that bound men in common cause. This matriarchal pagan synthesis with patriarchal monotheism created a highly unique culture that did not exist anywhere else in the world.  It re-birthed and united the best of Greece and Rome (philosophy and democracy) with the total triumph of patriarchy (man as head of house and state), now divinely sanctioned based on the absolute truth of reality: God is one and clearly male/masculine.

Which brings us to the present.

The Christian concept of God is now increasingly abandoned by Europeans because of its fundamental pagan formulation as an intellectual argument. A God-man?  A virgin birth? Consumption of flesh and blood? What worked intellectually for Augustine to argue to pagans in the 4th century fails completely in the scientific 21st. While Christianity is not a pagan religion, you cannot deny its pagan formulation to appeal to a pagan mind. Christianity got a lot right and guided Europe well for centuries.  What it got wrong has now brought about its collapse and coming take over by Islam.

Christianity had enough of the truth (one true God) to appeal and succeed, but enough falsehood (pagan intellectual formulation and rites) that in time made it bound to fail once again and for the same reasons paganism did back in the days of Rome’s collapse.

What can we make of all the above historical context?

What does Islam have to fear from barbarian Christians?

Here is something to contemplate about any future “victory” for Islam in The West: just like Christianity taking up pagan concepts to become widespread after the collapse of Rome, Islam will be forced take up Western concepts (secularism, democracy, separation of church and state) as it becomes more widespread and adopted over the course of The West’s (i.e Rome’s) continuing collapse.

Remember: Christianity too was once seen as an invading cult by another long lived and glorious empire with a centuries old religious tradition and world view. Many Roman emperors tried to eradicate it, some more zealous than others.  The parallels to Trump’s ban on Muslims and the increasing backlash against Islam in The West should be pretty easy to see to those with an unbiased view of history.  I am not betting that history will suddenly change course and chalk up a win for underdog Christianity against invading and militant Islam this time round.  It is possible, but the history bookies are placing some very high odds against it.

Islam, for all its claims to be unbending and unyielding to change or reform, is not a monolith.  It is a living religion like any other in the past.  Islam WILL change with it’s likely take over of the formerly Christian West. How is this possible you ask? The same way it did under Constantine.  Once the dust settled and Christianity was accepted as the new religion of the fading empire.

If a pagan barbarian – today a secular European –  wanted to succeed in life, his best option was to become a Christian

While true faith drove many into the arms of the Church, many others were driven purely by pragmatism and the daily grind of living and surviving in a social world undergoing cataclysmic change.  With widespread adoption by both the masses and the political class, top to bottom, Christianity was forced to accommodate and include the majority world view of conquered pagan tribes of the day if it wanted broad acceptance. Also of note is that Christianity’s adoption was not overnight.  Paganism still persisted for many centuries until the states we know now as Europe came together and barbarian Kings like Charlemagne made a bloody push to rid Europe of all pagans.

Given this context from history, what is the majority world view of European barbarians that Islam might have to contend with, like Christianity did with the pagans? Answer: secular separation of church and state within a republican/constitutional democracy governed by the rule of law, not religious texts.

This is the fate of Islam in The West, whether it wants to admit it or not. For the sake of argument, let’s assume the following:

  • ISIS, radical Islam and 9/11 will be investigated
  • the real masters behind this “radical Islamic terror” will be shown to not be Muslims nor represent true Islam at all
  • Saudi Arabia and the Wahabbi/Takfiri CIA sponsored “Islam” will be wiped out (as Putin did in Chechyna).

If you hold these assumptions to be true, we can try projecting 50 to 100 years into the future, looking to the fall of Rome and the Rise of Christian Europe as a guide.

Islam in The West will be seen, as Christianity was, as a possible system that might be a good replacement for Christianity when The West finally collapses. Women, feminists being the first, will convert to Islam because of its complete intolerance for the feminine imperative and denial of gynocentrism. Feminists and SJWs will don hijabs and bow to pray to Allah not because they are virtue signalling but because a woman unconsciously knows her happiness lies in submission.

Women are like Pokemon—they are designed to flourish most when taking orders from the ones they love. And like with Pokemon, the order-giver must prove his worthiness to the order-taker before wholehearted obedience is yielded.

Why “Docility” Is The Best Word To Describe Femininity

This is Red Pill 101 basic knowledge. There is a lot, and I do mean a lot, of rage and cries of hypocrisy on our side of the culture war that just cannot understand or fathom how feminists are embracing Islam.  It’s a no-brainer for me: Islam is uncompromising when it comes to who is the boss in the house – the man. Are ROK readers really that shocked feminists are the first to submit to Islam in The West?

Women led the conversion to Christianity. Many young women are waking up to the lie that is feminism, the outright destruction of their own happiness, and are walking away from feminism in droves. Young women will see value in modesty and dignity and respect because the marketed alternative is Miley Cyrus or Lady Gaga. They will also see the reality of Red Pill men today that they cannot ignore – using them either for sex only or replacing them with artificial wombs.  Lastly, I am betting just as many women as men can’t or won’t return to Christianity for the very same reasons I have listed above, but who want something, something, that is moral, true and of value to becoming a respectable and good human being.

Which brings me to a final question.

What would happen if the entirety of Europe’s barbarian, “infidel” whites were to become Muslim?

Would all of us suddenly sport Roosh power beards and yell Alla hu akbar? No. In fact, as of right now, the first and most immediate benefit to us as marginalized and attacked European, heterosexual white men would be that we become a protected group, 100% beyond criticism by liberals, feminists and the left. The best advantage for white women would be Muslims can no longer rape them, since they are no longer “whores.”

With widespread adoption and conversion to Islam by Europeans, as happened with Christianity during and after the collapse of Rome, our way of life would begin to take root WITHIN Islam and change it. Just like pagan views of a virgin mother and God-son found their way into Christianity, secular ethics and republican democracy will take root in Islam.  In fact, this is the very schism taking place within the wider Islamic community and why you see “radical” Islam in Wahhabi and Takfiri form.

Radical Islam IS the response to the inevitability of change many Muslims fear will happen to their religion as it becomes mainstream in The West

Change and reform is coming to Islam, whether Muslims want it or not. Islam’s contact and confrontation with The West this time round is not with Christianity in another Crusade as defenders, but with western secular philosophy and democracy as invaders themselves.

It is possible, by a slim but not insignificant margin, that Islam could save The West.  But Islam will not be what it is today. The wide scale adoption of Islam by the mass of Europeans will have a cultural affect on its expression.  This is why much of the ugly aspects of cultural Islam (rape culture, pedophilia, dogmatic radical holy text interpretations) are going to fall away.  Fall away because they do not work for a European mind (and technically not a Muslim one, but I understand the anger and skepticism of such a claim), and it is in Europe that Muslims and Islam are attempting to take over.

One only needs to look to Russia, Chechnya and Team Putin/Kadyrov to see what Islam and Christianity, living together and not corrupted, can look like.


This essay is a speculative exercise to look back to history in order to glean lessons and facts that might help predict the future. I understand and respect many who fear Islam and Sharia law. If Europeans as a race completely disappear, the chances of Islam adapting and changing/reforming are greatly decreased. That said, us cis-white Europeans are not going anywhere anytime soon, and certainly not in the next 24 hrs historically speaking.

Trump’s election, and very likely Le Pen’s in France this spring, is now an unstoppable force for change and a return to national and cultural traditions and values of Europeans. But I would ask you, sans Christianity, what are these “values” Le Pen and Europe hope to return to?  This is the question no one in The West seems to be able to answer in the face of Islam charging at it’s gates.

As much as Westerners are fearing Islam’s takeover, I can guarantee you that Muslims are far, far, far more afraid of us backward barbarians changing Islam.  Can you imagine the shock in mosques around Europe and America if they were to be flooded with white faces seeking to take the shahadah? If the European race conquered the whole of the world under a false, pagan interpretation of the One True God that was Christianity, what would Europeans be capable of if they converted to, by Islam’s own admission and call to faith, the true and final revelation of the One True God we already know and have a long historical relationship with?

I leave you with the following quandary I don’t think I am alone in contemplating some nights before bed. If you had only two possible futures to choose from living in The West, (1) forced submission to the goddess and her leftist matriarchy, which includes feminism, LGBTism and the politics of race, identity and gender, or (2) voluntary submission to the patriarchal God of Islam and his Prophet (PBUH), which is a return to an Abrahamic faith that includes recognition of Jesus, the heterosexual family unit and traditional gender roles where man is once again respected, which one would you choose.

Read Next: The Newfound Alliance Between Feminism, Marxism, And Radical Islam

853 thoughts on “Barbarian Christians: Why Islam May Want To Rethink Taking Over Europe”

  1. They will destroy Europe with or without Islam. Making them Christian is pointless. Without Europeans Europe is not even Europe anymore. A bunch of Semites and dindus are not going to move humanity forward.

    Islam WILL change with it’s likely take over of the formerly Christian West.

    I doubt that. Christianity is a pathetic shadow of its former self in the West.

  2. Mohammedism is a satanic religion that without
    Christianity will only become more debased and satanic until the full Baal-lah
    religion of old is restored, along with child sacrifice, etc.
    will happen instead, is that as the West (Christendom) is pushed back into
    itself it will expel the cucks and traitors, and go back to the purity of
    warrior Catholicism – which will then, as the prophesies say, destroy the
    Moslems – with the world ruled by the Great Prince and Church by Pope Peter the

  3. “The parallels to Trump’s ban on Muslims and the increasing backlash against Islam in The West should be pretty easy to see to those with an unbiased view of history. I am not betting that history will suddenly change course and chalk up a win for underdog Christianity against invading and militant Islam this time round.”
    Christianity was founded on righteous principles and led by a self-sacrificing sage while Islam was established by a lustful general.

        1. Wrong.
          Christianity does not call for the murder or subjugation of non believers. Read the New Testament and tell me where you base your claim.

        2. And heads don’t roll anyways? French Revolution, Russian Revolution, Nazis. All happened when man forsake God.

        3. What they don’t tell you about the Salem Witch Trials are the similarities to PizzaGate, if you know what I mean.

      1. The Old Testament is, sure. But the Old Testament is a collection of stories from ancient Israel, not the doctrines preached by Jesus and his disciples.
        I’m not a Christian, and I was never taught this in school. All I heard was my leftist teachers and friends bashing all religion.

  4. It is not only unfair but also pretty pointless to compare Islam with any other faith. Allow me to explain why.
    Of course Islam has a religious side…however it`s ideological-political goals were the primary aims from its very creation to this day.
    Islam claims to come from Abrahamic roots. However, it is essentially pushing Arabic supremacy. You have to read and understand the Quran and the Hadith in Arabic. No matter what some Muslim may tell you: ethnic Arabs (or at least Arabic speakers) have always been on the top of the Muslim world ; both financially and ideologically. The rich Gulf Arab states (Saudi, Qatar, the Emirates) decide what happens in the Muslim world. There is more racism in Islam than in any other religious group. That has not changed for nearly 1400 years if Islam`s troublesome history. Islam is about Arabic supremacy. Period.
    Does the author really think mass conversion in Europe will change the nature of Islam? Is he deluded or just plain drunk/drugged?

    1. I’ve read some, and it specifically states that (paraphrasing): no arab is better than a nonarab and no nonarab is better than an arab, and no black is better than a white and no white is better than a black. And no, the Arab countries are being controlled by Jews (see how Trump allowed the Saudi travel to the US?)

        1. No, I just read what you told me to. I’d like to know of quotes in the Koran about racism

        2. All Muslim play “No Arab is better than a non-Arab…” phrase. You must be seriously stupid if you believe Arabs would treat you equally if you ar enot one of them (and particularly if you are a convert)
          However, in the reality of the Ummah (Muslim community) the Arabs own all the resources and call all the shots. Welcome to the real world.

        3. I have just realized by reading a few of your other comments that you are indeed a Muslim apologist. Getting a fat paycheck from your masters in Riyadh, Mr Choudary?
          Why don`t you take your taqiyya and kitman somewhere else?

        4. I already know to ‘look at Islam, not the Muslims’. I have a friend that went to the arab countries and nonArabs are treated like crap. The Jews are controlling them. But nothing you’ve said has refuted me. Please give a quote

        5. Yeah right…blame it on the Jews like all like all Muslims do.
          Seriously, please get lost.

        6. So it is ok for the West to blame Jews, but no one else? You say to read Koran but when called out, there is no quotes to be had from you. The Saudi-Israeli relationship is well known, but by all means, ignore the evidence.

        7. It is never ok to blame Jewish people for anything. (I love Jewish people, btw,and I do love some Muslims too. That does not stop me from seeing what is wrong with Islam and Arabic racism)
          The article was about Islam. Stop diverting the attention away from it.

        8. It is ok to blame where it lies. I have some Jewish friends as well. I don’t see anything racist in the Koran, nor did you “Produce your truth, if you should be truthful” but I know the pervasiveness of racism in Arab culture. I was giving reason to some of the problems there.

        9. So if it is not in the Quran , it means it does not exist?
          Go live in the KSA, Qatar or the Emirates let`s see how well you will be treated by the people you so staunchly defend over here…

        10. I told you a few times already, lol. Islam=/= Muslims, what is meant to be done and what are actually done are 2 very different things. I know they’re racist there and would look down on me if my features were not as ambiguous, as they do to some people I know. I don’t defend the Saudis at all, they have killed most of the Sufis over there and are hypocrites, with the men wearing typical shorts above the knee (haram) with a woman in hand, all covered up.

        11. ” It is never ok to blame Jewish people for anything. ”
          As an anti-muslim I will have to strongly disagree.

      1. You are correct. I will have to find the ayats but there is equality of human beings in Islam, in the Quran. That said… the racism… is real, especially in SA. Africans fought for Kadaffi (given up on spelling his name right) BECAUSE he followed the Quran and they did not want Arabs taking over. The problem… is Arabs… and specifically… Saudi Arabia. Even the most virulent Muslim/Islam hater would agree the problem is SA at its root.

    2. Thank you for your comment. You are correct, there is more politics/law in Islam because Muslims see God’s word as inviolable and what Man must adhere to. A lot of current day jurisprudence came from Muslims trying to interpret the word of God and his instructions for Man on earth. I read a book that said “Muslims take God seriously.” It struck me because God is now a complete joke in The West, a pasta joke in fact.
      You are also correct on the racist/arab supremacy/militancy. I have read at least 3 versions (possibly 4) of the Quran including the oldest and best referred (and thus non-pc, all the “new” translations water a lot down). However, I would counter your argument that this racism/supremacy is then the root of Islam with your own comment.
      “The rich Gulf Arab states (Saudi, Qatar, the Emirates) decide what happens in the Muslim world.”
      And who does America support in the Middle East. Hmmmm… curious is it not? Outside of those countries, and before 9/11, all the ones currently destroyed, or being destroyed, or planned to be destroyed… were all secular leaning, moderate (excluding Iran) and thus more true versions of the real Islam.
      The fight over the true Islam is one that you need to look into. What we are being shown today is not true Islam. That said, I will not deny that Islam has a political/expansionist element that is strong. Christianity did as well if you remember history.
      The problem with Islam is this… and it is the same with Judaism.
      Islam… has become the Hadith (sayings of the Prophet) and now completely divorced from the Quran except when it suits them. Just like the Talmud poisoning Judaism, the sayings of the Prophet have been given equal status as the Quran (and thus God) when that was never traditionally the case.
      As to your last question… yes, I do think mass conversion of the EUROPEAN natives to Islam would change it. Islam has changed with EVERY culture that adopts it. Saudi Islam is not Indonesian Islam. Iran Islam is not Chinese Islam. Wherever Islam goes, the roots of it are seeded, but the expression is different. Of course my essay being pure speculation, but I am suggesting that if Europeans were to suddenly all convert then yes, Islam would change.
      Islam, despite the media demonization of it, is a living, breathing religion.
      The problem today is that it has become hardened and corrupt from its roots. The speaker in the below video lays the blame squarely… SQUARELY… on Muslims. You of course will never see this anywhere in The West, but this speaker is very influential and represents the majority outside the Hadith worshipping Wahabbit states of the countries you quoted above.
      Thank you again for your comment and feel free to respond with a counter argument.

      1. MD Meridius
        Judging from the tune of your comment I suppose you are one of the recent Western converts to Islam? Am I correct?
        Disappointed by the moral decline in the West and lack of decent , feminine, morally upright women in the West…you came to the conclusion that Islam is the way for you get decent women (Somali, Algerian, Pakistani etc) that would be out of your reach without “accepting Islam”? And you felt the need to create this theory to justify your conversion to yourself? Forgive me for saying, you made a very poor decision and you will bitterly regret it in the future.

      2. MD Meridius
        So you converted to Islam in a hope to be allowed to marry a pretty Somali/Algerian/Turkish/Pakistani etc girl? That`s not going to happen. No Muslim father from any Islamic country will give his virgin daughter to a convert. Forget it. (You may get, if you are really “lucky”, a divorced women with kids from the aforementioned countries, but I guess that`s not what you want.) As a convert you will be expected to marry another convert. Face the reality. Most Muslims still marry along ethnic/tribal lines. And converts in general are not trusted. They assume you had had a past full of immorality. You may not get killed in case you leave Islam, but that`s not the point here.

      3. Your theory of European mass conversion changing Islam and the Ummah for the better is utterly ludicrous. Islamic expansion never ended ethnic rivalries/tensions…in fact is has usually increased them.
        Iran was conquered by Muslims by the beginning of the 8th century by Muslims but the ancient hatred that most Arabs feel towards Persians did not fact it increased. The whole Saudi-Iranian proxy conflict is rather an Arab-Persian conflict and not a Sunni-Shia one. The Berber people of the Maghreb (From Western Sahara to Eastern Lybia) are mostly Arabized now, but they still not considered full Arabs by the Saudis and Qataris. Your idea that European conversion will make Islam more peaceful/tolerant etc is deluded and you know it. I wish you good luck with your newly found “faith”.

      4. MDM
        My longer comments get flagged as “spam” for some weird reason, that`s why I posted three shorter comments to answer you.

  5. Christopher Hitchens said that Islam is unique in its unchanging nature compared to other religions. Actually, there are many Muslim societies with their own culture mixed in but the core is the same among them all.
    And Islam doesn’t actually allow pedophelia, it allows marriage with someone over the age of prepubescence. Which was the way the West, and the whole of mankind, did until the recent age of consent concept (which reduces the chances of getting a high quality woman). That’s pretty much the only way to get a virgin in the west.
    Sharia’s use of corporal punishment also was used in the West for long periods of time. Actually, it could be a solution to the multitudes of prison problems. Saves $, saves human labor, and avoids prison rape too. But this isn’t to say you’ll get a hand cut off for stealing bread. Islamic punishments were actually only given if the criminal had a need (times of drought, for example, had the punishment for stealing with a hand-cut suspended), and had no other recourse; some men and women that were caught fornicating were pressured into marriage. Similar to Toyota’s TQM (Total Quality Management), Sharia sought to deploy resources where there were problems in order to find out why crime happened, and resolve the root of the problem.
    It also was used to stop “tail end” problems of the bell curve- the poorest ones were given enough to improve their lives, while the national treasure was always empty of assets, as they were constantly deployed (and in some cases, wealth hoarding was penalized)

  6. For fornication is the destruction of the soul, separating it from God, and bringing it near to idols, because it deceiveth the mind and understanding, and bringeth down young men into hell before their time.
    The above is what Christianity used to preach.

    1. Yes… and is the very root of The West’s destruction… abandonment of God. Islam in the Quran repeats this over and over and over again. Something to the effect (I paraphrase) “Have you not seen what we did to those tribes of old, who were more powerful and numerous and wealthy than you? We replace a people who reject God with those that love God. It is for us, an easy thing to do.”

      1. But this site promotes fornification, no? So I wonder which side of the fence are we on.

        1. Yes… it is interesting to point that out. I think there will be a change coming to Red Pill men as they get older and wiser. I don’t know what direction it will go (Christianity, Islam, or something new), but it will be interesting to see.

        2. The contrast between the world one wants, and the world one currently inhabits.

  7. I keep waiting for the definitive ROK post on Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, the intellectual father of the project to abolish white people and let Jews run the world:

    The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals. […]
    Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader-nation through this artificial selection process. No wonder that this people, that escaped Ghetto-Prison, developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe. Therefore a gracious Providence provided Europe with a new race of nobility by the Grace of Spirit. This happened at the moment when Europe’s feudal aristocracy became dilapidated, and thanks to Jewish emancipation.

      1. It would help if I could find an English translation of Coudenhove-Kalergi’s German-language book Praktischer Idealismus, which the Wikipedia article references. I took German in high school 40 years ago, but I’ve gotten rusty at it.
        If no one has made such a translation, then you have to wonder why, given Coudenhove-Kalergi’s importance in laying the foundations for the European Union.

    1. Maybe the servant castes. If the elites ever succeed in their quest, the elite will be pure white-jew ethnics. Eventually robotics will advance enough, and they’ll try to cleanse the mud-people-caste when they’re no longer necessary.

  8. I don’t think Europeans should discard their rich traditions and history in Christianity. They just need to return to their more conservative roots like with Eastern Orthodox or some Evangelical churches. Its lead them to build such an advanced and prosperous civilization and to give it up for what? A cult that was created by 6th century schizo warlord who fornicated with a child. The trends are not looking good but remember that the vast majority of Europe is still Christian. The Islamization of Europe will not continue forever. The backlash is beginning as seen in the rising populist wave.

    … and his Prophet (PBUH)

    I wonder if this whole article is just taqiyya.

    1. “taqiyya”.. actually had to look that up. No, I am not lying, just speculating as I concluded on the past and the future.
      I also agree that Europe needs to return to its roots. But with Christianity so demonized and with much of The West now openly atheist/agnostic/pastafarian… it does not look good. I think this is why those Europeans who DO see the danger of what is happening… have no way to galvanize support and respond. We are… splintered. There is no common culture in Europe to rally around and by culture, I mean moral values. Christ… was the glue that WAS Europe. Maybe it can be so again, but I just don’t see the bookies placing very high odds on it happening. We shall see.

      1. Christianity is demonized because the Marxists who rule us and their Muslim pets are afraid of it.

        1. Agreed… but I think it goes deeper than that. It is the rejection of God at the root of the hatred and demonization of Christianity (i.e. the opiate of the masses). I also truly believe that if Islam was the dominant force in Europe (just as my essay speculates) the leftists/Marxists would attack it to bring it down just as hard if not harder. All left posturing for Islam is virtue signalling. They have no moral/ethical argument to support anything they do, so I find the argument that “the left has destroyed Christianity and prefer Islam” not as compelling as “the left hates the God of Christianity but loves Allah of Islam because they are against Christianity and Muslims are a minority who are not white” .

        2. The Left has allied with Islamists and elevated them to the top of their victim totem-pole because Muslims are precisely the MOST un-Western, and if they can be placed into our countries and forced upon us as “compatriots” then literally anyone could. Not because of any particular love or admiration for Islam.

        3. Good point again, but I would ask you… WHO, which, Muslims and Islam are they elevating? There are a LOT of scholars in the Muslim world, and yet all we seem to get from the MSM are the US/CIA/petro-dollar backed Wahhabi fanatic psychopaths that NO actual Muslim in the region wants outside of SA and the Gulf states. Follow the money… it starts in Riyadah and ends in Brussels.
          Belgium providing most ISIS recruits per capita in Europe – UN

        4. Sunni Islam. Of course your average shitlib doesn’t know of the divisions and nuances within Islam, but what they think of is still Sunni islam. Sunnis are the worst of the Muslims, though I still don’t want to deal with any of the different Shiite flavors or Sufi wackos.

        5. Feminism and Islam are in their unholy alliance precisely because both despise Western culture — not because feminists are drawn to submission. Having said that, one could make the successful argument that feminists, traditionally followers, simply gravitate towards strong leaders like Soros. Whether jew socialist or Muslim radical, what really is the difference besides the paint job?

        6. The average cuck Christian I run into ever Sunday emphasizes your point. It is a religion that, while strong and proud in its heritage, has devolved into one run by feminine (weak) principles, and not by muscle as in centuries past. Which men are to defend this? The ones in their flip-flops and wispy beards, or the Crusaders of old — or even a reasonable facsimile?

        7. The crop of ‘ruling’ marxist weeds in the west can feel the spotlight on them more than ever.

        8. The Church has been colonised by feminazis. Now there are female bishops, expect the situation to get worse. In the C of E, men with third rate minds are afraid of women with second rate minds.

        9. Please don’t confuse Episcopalians with Christians. It’s a social justice movement in robes.

      2. If you had to look up taqqiya, I’m not sure you should be confidently writing articles on Islam….

        1. No, not in the case of this word and this article..
          Go look yourself to understand…

        2. Just to give you an idea of how the average ‘red pill’ male of anglo-saxon heritage thinks of Islam (and yes, I’m not speaking for all):
          The day of white western males having to defend themselves is over. The charges laid against it were biased, faulty and, most importantly, made not from genuine concern but part of an insidious campaign to weaken the familial bonds.
          So, sure, Islam wants to come in and say “hey, we’re the solution’ but conveniently forgets the truckloads of people massacred in Mohammed’s name. FIX that first, then maybe you can claim to have an answer. But I just see the perpetuation of the parasitic and destructive nature of Islam.
          My advice: the winds are shifting towards SEPARATION, not more integration. Every time Islam is criticized, the usual answer is ‘well maybe if the west stopped X then we wouldn’t Y.

        3. No, but having no knowledge of a rather important concept that could potentially change your understanding of the subject matter prior to writing an article is somewhat disconcerting. I appreciate the time and thought you put into this lengthy article, but it seems ill-researched and speculative. Just my .02.

        4. It does not change the concept of Islam. Muslims came up with a lot of stuff that is not based on the Quran and I can guarantee you this “lie to the kafir” business is one of them. From my understanding, Muslims can lie ONLY if they are threatened with death for admitting they are Muslim. That is it. Outside of that criterion (and that is not even Quranic by the way, as far as I know), to lie is to go against God. The Quran does not ever, ever, say a Muslim can lie. I know I have linked this vid a few times, but you should watch it. As you say… “could potentially change your understanding.” Don’t watch if you don’t want your understanding of Islam and Muslims to be different than what it is now.

        5. I don’t think it’s as important to know that Islam on the whole is backwards, violent and reactionary in nature. The untrustworthiness element of that is of course known, whether the name for that behavior is or not. The principles are understood.

        6. The reason why non-cuckified individuals see through that nonsense is obvious: Islam has been at this centuries before drone strikes were a thing. It’s all cover for their behavior, which is forced assimilation. Proof of that is obvious as well… Why try to make the West a shithole in the form of the shitholes from which most of these people came? The answer is, it’s an attempt at replication, not assimilation.

        7. I agree with you there, I also believe that the concept of Taqqiya gives many islamists a significant amount of wiggle room with what they consider lying. This alone makes them hard to ever trust.

        8. you do realize that the quran isnt their only sacred text,right? they also have to follow the hadiths.

        9. I do realize that… and hadith IS the problem. The same way Talmud is the curse of the Old Testament for the Jews and precisely what Jesus was rejecting – a bunch of dudes making shit up about God. Wahhabis… seem to have elevated Hadith & Sunna to be ON PAR with Quran. There is ZERO intellectual foundation for this nor historical. THAT… is the problem in the Muslim world right now, period. A lot of what you see “Muslims” doing today… they are claiming Hadith or Sunnah as basis for acceptance. Islam I am learning is as degenerate and corrupt in its scholarship as Christianity is today. This is why many, many Muslims are leaving the faith, perhaps even for Christianity because it might be LESS corrupt in outside scripture interpretation than Islam (in fact, now that I think of it, that is probably true as Christianity does not have ANY text that I am aware of that Christians use as claim for proof of doctrine.)

        10. I’m a guy who lives in the middle east at the moment, I’ve lived in several western countries as I had my higher education there. What you said just hits the spot, almost 99% of Muslims today follow the Hadith thing, and the Hadith is supposed to be what Mohammad said to his people back then but in fact it’s a bunch of text few dudes (mainly Sultans back then) wrote it down and convinced people until today that this Islam that you should follow. Sadly and stupidly, they did. Muslims do not read Quran and not interested in doing so, they are bunch of dumb idiots to be honest. I stopped believing in such bullshit they have but I still believe in one God.
          I tell you, Muslim migrants in general are cancer, get rid of them. They are lazy, leeches, like to feed on the system, love to enforce their views, think they are superior, annoying, don’t respect others and other religions and man the list goes on.

        11. They are also notorious for spinning loose logic to get what’s they want. There are no hard and fast rules. Essentially everything is negotiable or is able to be gotten around.
          What’s the best thing you can say about them when it comes to integrating into the West, that they are bad Muslims??

        12. Of course they don’t read the Quran. Many can’t read in their native language, let alone Arabic.
          Because of this, they fall prey to a Mullah or Mufti who tells them that the Quran says whatever it is that suitable their agenda at the time.

        13. I wouldn’t call it “Falling prey”. Try telling them this Mufti is lying to them and you might get your head cut off, by them.

        14. That’s my point though. They likely wouldn’t have come to that conclusion without first being taught that was the correct response.
          Western enlightenment doesn’t work unless there is a desire to see it as a cultural option. In this case it isn’t as that option is headed off at the pass through summary execution as an apostate or infidel.

        15. Christianity does have outside scripture interpretation… Protestantism doesnt,but the catholic and orthodox churches use writings of the holy fathers,and the ecumenical councils.
          also,not sure what youre getting at,but hadith IS part of islam…just because you say it shouldnt be,doesnt mean its not. very few muslims are quran only. not to mention,the quran says some pretty nasty stuff too.
          and…the talmud didnt exist at the time of Jesus for him to reject it.

        16. Yep. Take a religion-based political movement, then tell them their bullshit is endorsed by their holy book… Predictable results.

        17. Nowhere in the bible is written that christianity is just written in the bible.
          Actually it is impossible because St. Stefanus the first martyr died for christ hundreds of years earlier then the bible exist.
          Read St. Thomas Aquinas and St Augustinus for more information.

        18. Muslims are low IQ and have high inbreeding rates. That’s the problem and why they cannot Assimilate into Western Culture. I don’t believe Islam will win but there Will be a Global Blood bath before Islam is castrated.

      3. If you want also read the Quran, I did it in a Greek translation, and to understand the extent of al-taquiya it must be read ful, the reason is the way it is written which makes it into a surprisingly easy read!
        In short Al-taquiya is a tenet, or better a number of tenets inside the Quran (Shurahs are not chapters in the classical sense) what they mean is that the Muslim has the right, sorry: the moral obligation to push Islam anywhere by any means even by outright lying, for this reason no practicing Muslim can ever be believed, even if he is a moderate!
        Lastly you will find out why Islam is unadoptable here, in fact it is part a religion part a regime.

        1. This happens with movements that aren’t culturally force-fed to those not inclined to accept it. Muslim crusaders accept your rejection, and take your head in exchange.

        2. NO, they are seaking for salvation and we can’t give it to them because we rejected christianity.
          But not “we”, others western europeans. I not.

      4. If you would be kind enough to take a one comment account serious ( I commented previously as Lion of Leicestershire)I would like to share some thoughts on your article, after of course, having giving enough thought to it.
        Christianity is the only way for the European race. Whether they be on her soil or not. This conclusion has and can be reached when destroying all sentimentalism and passion from the question of how to save Europeans. Islam has a number of superior aspects, with even more over this modern judaized churchianity. One need only compare what’s left of modern Islam vs the church of Christ in the 21sr century. This done with pure logic, as if you were neither with zero connection to the people or culture, shows the truth. The one you have seen, as I.
        Now here is where I believe you should go a little deeper. You cannot compare the two final religions for man on earth without taking into account the whole of the church of Christ, and its two pillars and three fold nature.
        The church of Peter, known historically as The Roman Catholic Church. The giver of devotion to god through Christ to all men.
        The Church of John, the hidden esoteric truth pervading the church of Peter. Reality of the One Good. Manifesting unfettered through those who know this church and received its initiation. Only accessible to those few. In Islam this translates most to Sufism.
        The Warrior Christ completes this tradition. That infinite Roman spirit.( I say Roman only because it’s closeness to us.) Krsatriya fully embodied. The very essence of temporal power. One breathed life into the crusades.
        All this exists in Islam and Roman Catholicism. You remove heirarchy from the Church, return it to the true contemplatives, while simultaneously reinvigorate the Nordic Roman warrior tradition and Europe and all her peoples spread all over will never fall again.
        This may need Islam as an ally. It may take not only a revival of Nordic Roman Catholicism but, a revived warrior Christ that accepts Islam as its younger brother and sees the same truth made for two different peoples. If this is accomplished and after the destruction, earth will inhabit a golden age not seen since the beginning.

        1. I agree with you 100%. Don’t recall the other name you commented under. I apologize if I did not respond or did not respond to your liking. There was a lot of discussion on my essay to respond to, I am sure you would agree.
          What I take responsibility for is not realizing just how existential a threat Islam poses to The West. I was simply speculating, intellectually, what an Islam infused with Europeans might become.
          As you said… Christianity today is not a force to counter Islam or leftism. It COULD be a force again, but it would require Christians, as you say, to pick up the sword intellectually and spiritually to once again fight for MORAL TRUTH. Islam is the most natural partner in this task, as you suggest.
          I also think Europe should remain Christian. Personally, I think IF Christianity has a future, it is with the Orthodox faith. The Roman Catholic tradition has shown it is weak in not being able to prevent the split that was the reformation, and the subsequent yielding to modernist/leftist pressure with Vatican II (if I remember correctly from another commenter).
          This is what you see happening in Russia. True Islam, and a strong orthodox Christian faith, uniting to repel leftist/feminist/homosexual degeneracy AND radical Islam.
          The problem is, how do you get people to return to the Church? The problem is no one in The West believes in God anymore. Without fixing THAT problem, you can’t even get to the point of trying to get Europeans to return to their Christian roots. I am fully willing to walk into a church tomorrow, but so much of it is, as you say, completely devoid of any real strength anymore to be of use in combating Islam and leftism in the 21st century.

        2. Good points. Regarding Roman Catholicism’s weaknesses. I believe it all stems from too much centralization, something not seen in the Orthodox Church and especially non existent in Islam. This led to the spiritual decay of the church while simultaneously allowing it to gain immense temporal power, something it was never meant to wield. This gave rise to the Protestant movement which essentially judaized the church. This jewification did its most damage by attempting to hold the common folk to priestly standards, especially when pertaining to normal human passions, mostly sex. This wasn’t to be found in the golden age of the church, think 700 AD to 1250 AD roughly. The period liberal historians refer to as the dark ages which was actually a golden age. This time saw a complete separation of castes. A moral code for each, completely seperated.
          The whole modern world stems mainly from this. Of course their are other forces but these two, the centralization of the church and the jewification as a response to degeneration, destroyed Europe.
          Maybe god wills Russia to rise in the coming decades if this happens, we should take it as a sign that your correct and Orthodox is our way. But maybe Islam is destined for Europe.
          I’m just a man looking for the answer, not just for Europe but mankind. We have to move the wheel backwards. Whatever works is good. But man must find the Roman Spirit. We may have to wait on religion and god until after we are once again conquerors first.

        3. Shivers. I just submitted a 2200 word article on THIS very reply. Let the ROK editors know you would like to see it published. I cover almost every point you bring up, except the decline in Catholic faith because it would have been too much of a tangent.

        4. Just wrote the editors on your behalf. I hope it is published. These are the types of articles along with the comment discussions that we need. If for whatever reason it is declined, I would greatly appreciate a copy for mine own benefit.

        5. “a revived warrior Christ that accepts Islam as its younger brother”
          Very interesting speculation. I was recently reading a book about end times in Islamic eschatology. It mentions that the Son of Mary (pbuh) will descend again to Earth holding onto the shoulders of two angels. His mission will be to help set things aright and he will be wearing armor. Impressive sight, no?
          In short, his previous stint on Earth was his Mecca phase. Now his Madinah phase will begin. It is interesting also that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) mentioned that; once an emissary of God has donned his armor, it is not meet that he take it off until God has decided between him and his foes.

        6. (7) Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. (8) And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: (9) concerning sin because they do not believe in me; (10) concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more; (11) concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. (12) I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. (14) When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. (14) He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (15) All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you (John 16:7-15, Revised Standard Version).

    2. I heard a damn mosque yesterday around midday, first I’d heard one as I am not normally near one at that time of day. A bit scary and prefer church bells.

        1. Yyeeah, think about that one for a second. Their ability to make that racket is dependent on our tolerance, not their superiority.

        2. Men are forbidden by the matriarchy to oppose immigration. Migrants in Germany say to protesting German men “Your female leader invited us here.” The longer men put up with this stinking matriarchy, the more these migrants think you must be weak, stupid and utterly emasculated.

        3. exactly, an insane preference for having ones throat slit over being called racist

    3. “. The Islamization of Europe will not continue forever. The backlash is beginning as seen in the rising populist wave”
      Can you cite any evidence of serious, concerted effort to fight against both the political elites and the lower primate insurgents they brought in?

      1. Can you cite any evidence of serious, concerted effort to fight against both the political elites and the lower primate insurgents they brought in?

        I was referring to the populist parties often labelled as “far-right” or “nazi” by the media like the National Front (France), AfD (Germany), Sweden Democrats, etc. Also, it includes the Party of Freedom in the Netherlands which recently suffered a small setback but grew in popularity nonetheless. The mainstream conservative party in the Netherlands pretty much had to adopt a lot of their rhetoric to stop them.

        1. I hear ya, but my point is that for me resistance must come in the form of actual bring down of those political elites who greenlighted the mass migration shit – actual physical fighting against the system via hand to hand combat of organized civil war.

      2. uh…russia? particularly the church in russia? Patriarch Kirill has called upon the pope to join forces against the “de-Christianization of human civilization”.. times are tough for Christians,and they have been tough before. But Christ is still with us,He is our good shepherd,and we are his little flock. How could he ever let us alone? Christ made a promise to us. “upon this rock i will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.”. through all the intense persecution we have seen as Christians,Christs church still stands,and will continue to stand.

        1. Kirill is an KGB millionaire who is faking beeing “pro christianity”. Russia is just an Imperialist Nation without culture.
          If you really want to know where go to Poland, Baltics and Ukraine. Thats where this is going on.

    4. Just one thing to add here concerning the adoption of Islam: Christianity was adoptable by Europeans because it did not stand against the highest tenets of our civilization. Islam stands against anything that is not Islamic. For this reason the Quran (=the reading, literally) is the ONLY work of classic Arabic literature… Also while the Libs are speaking badly of Christians for burning the library of Alexandria, they should know that the library was reopened by Christians and later burned again by Muslims who they never reconstructed it. In the case of India the places that were controlled by Muslims saw any book that wasn’t the Quran burn.
      Anyway, The countries that will lose christianity will lose the European civilization, even if they adopt paganism. The reason behind this is that Christianity could control the dark, nihilistic and materialistic side of the Europeans, make them able to organize and even more it managed to unite their thought. The fact Europeans managed to adopt such an abstract religion willingly, for the most part, speaks volumes for them.
      The reason we see that return to paganism is one of the general symptoms of the regression we are suffering as a civilization. From highly articulated and useful societies with precise roles for all it’s members, today we see women and men, puzzling over their “gender” (=the grammatical application of sex inside a language i.e. he has masculine gender indicating a person of the male sex) while women work and take care of the kids if they have any.
      Lastly Dionysus was not a transvestite god… He was the god of wine and orgies and probably was of barbarian and not Greek origin, that managed to enter into popular worship through the masses, especially in democratic cities. Oh, I almost forgot he was also the protector of democracy! Ah, his worship has seen a resurgence in Greece (for the love of God what has become of us Greeks)! There is a group in the country who managed to revive for the third year in a row the ancient custom of the Phalyphoria (Ahem-Hmm penis-carrying-around) in which a Giant Penis is being carried around (at least it was in a small area of the centre of the capital) then stood up while it is being worshipped…. The only good thing is that in the end these groups are small and few but this year there was also even a commercial on the TV.

      On 15:15 you litteraly see penis worshiping….
      Honestly after seeing that I lost all respect for neo-pagan movements…

        1. Where did you/we find a single “omniscient and morally perfect God” !? How do you/we come to conclusion that the “God” is indeed “morally perfect” !?

      1. I bet those broads are good in the Sack aka super sluts wow the civilized world appears to be falling fast

        1. I only add that here neo-paganism is more successful with young women, due to a more precise anti-Christian propaganda. In the case of Greece, I think men follow women rather the other way around.
          Plus there are some people (if you watch you will find even some old women and men) who honestly believe it as some extremely civilized custom that needs to be revived…
          Then there are the ones that simply want to have fun…
          In general do not try to make sense of Greeks, I am one and I have quit…

        2. But MSM and Huffington post say that they are the horniest at their sexual prime in the thirties through fourties

        3. In general ALL Greeks are horny, women though can engage in coitus nearly at will. This about women here being especially active during her 30s to 40s, I cannot credibly confirm it*. Though girls who aren’t engaged or in a long-time relationship are the definition of the term slut. Also there is a surprising cougar culture in Greece under which when in 40s to 50s maniacally hunt down younger men, this generation was the one that got introduced to feminism.
          * this I say with some restraint, as I cannot completely trust the person. In short he managed with a help of a colleague to crack the passwords in the computers in his office afterhours and had access to the employees vibers and saw the conversation they were having. In short he could have started a pornsite with the photos…

    5. What Maximus Decimus fails to grasp is that islam is fundamentaly degenerate in comparison to christianity. It doesn’t matter if there is differences between radical islam and “true” islam, the muslim doctrine is literaly opressive.
      Christianity, on the other hand, is the only religion of this world that can be anti-relativist by enforcing objective moral values, at the same time be tolerant of different world-views, and guide a civilization through progress as a consequence.
      Believe me when I say this,my parents were missionaries, we knew first hand how the muslim mind works. Ask a converted muslim if you don’t belive me.
      They will NOT adapt to European values, they will NOT live along with other beliefs.
      It won’t happen. Instead, they will make Europe look like their own countries, any former eupean culture, be it pagan or christian, will be no more.
      But even if the Maximus is right, even if islam change and adapt, acepting separation of state and church and democracy, it will not have nearly the same results of Christianity. Islam has no history or MORAL GROUND capable of giving the same cultural and moral results of christianity.
      Jesus is a historical character, his name divided history, his life, his example, is what gives christianity a moral credibility far much more accurate than that of Islam. How can a pedophile compete with Jesus?
      I don’t know what how Maximus Decimus came to tha conclusion, being who he is. But he is clearly equivocate.

  9. Over the last decade, the relative proportion of U.S. teenagers claiming to be homosexual has increased 85 percent; the relative proportion who have not made up their minds about embracing homosexuality has increased 53 percent; and those claiming interest only in the opposite sex has dropped 6 percent.
    God gives every man and woman a choice to be spiritually minded or to function by worldly wisdom – by the five senses alone. You have to make this choice some time in your life. Worldly wisdom won’t appear to be darkness, but actually will appear as light. But you will slowly sink down and down until you reach ‘without natural affection’. That is, if you reject God and His Word, you will head towards becoming a homosexual or a lesbian. That’s the lowest you can go and if you choose worldly wisdom, you eventually have no choice in the matter.

  10. There is one fundamental difference between the two invasions.
    The Germanic invaders wanted to become Roman. The majority of the late Empire generals were Romanized Germanics that fought valiently to keep the empire alive.
    This invasion is one of pure displacement. These migrants have zero desire to acclimate to western values. Sparing only our women for reproductive purpose, they would not think twice to eradicate the non-complient European men through sharia law.

    1. Thats very true and therefore I think we will see not only killing but also a strong decline of culture, science and engineering in Europe. The first fights will be between the islamic invaders resp. Turkish men and the Europeans. The coward and left governments boost this development (i.e. Merkel and her gang). The modern christianity has lost its power of salt and will vanish in the mist. The only chance would lie in a re-orientation to the caroling heritage.

      1. I predict an eventual re-conquista in the future. Most likely Russia coming in from the east to pick off a weakened, effeminate west.

    2. Very good point. That is a huge difference and I agree with you. I think if Europe does wake up, the response (i.e. the conflict) will be swift and completely unexpected. I think you will see European men simply forget about the state doing anything and create their own no-go zones for the natives to find safety and refuge. From there, it’s on like donkey kong.

      1. “From there, it’s on like donkey kong.”
        The sooner, the better. I predict Justinian 2.0 coming in from the east [most likely Russia] to pick off the weakened west.

    3. The Germanic tribesmen could look like the Romans too, no Arab will ever look German.

  11. Freedom of speech and all that, but seriously…an Islamic apologist post on the RoK?
    Just when you wonder just how low this blog can get…

    1. The most backward European countries were those under muslim domination the longest. To think a muslim Europe would equal the scientific, cultural, and intellectual achievements of a Christian Europe is preposterous.

      1. Are you saying a Muslim Europe made up of 100% European stock would be no different than the native Muslim lands of Turkey and Saudi Arabia? Those backward eastern Europe countries (The Balkans? Yes?) that you seem to suggest are the worst… are also the ones that have LEAST become corrupt, feminist cultural pits of decay. Every country east of Berlin is NOT going along with the acceptance of Muslim immigration. I need to look more into Islam’s domination in eastern Europe, but I think your view may be more black and white than it truly is.

        1. It would become Albania. European stock, muslim beliefs, equate a quasi-3rd world country, in my humble opinion. Not as bad as the middle east, yet nowhere near as great as the Christian West. I agree with everything after your first sentence.

      2. I agree with your 2nd sentence. But I think the backward European countries you refer to has much more to do with recent decades of communism than with muslim domination that occurred 150-600 years ago

        1. You seem to be ignorant of the fact that Albania is one of the least religious countries on the planet. You are much more likely to see women in burqas in the streets of a Western European City than those of an Albanian City. Beduin-like men like that in your picture have “magically” started to appear in the recent years after heavy turkish-saudi funding. Still they and their families barely make 5 % of the population at best. Calling that man your typical Albanian is a big mistake. Christian and pagan traditions have deep roots in the Albanian culture and the society is highly secular. Also I’m pretty sure there is no study that shows Albanians to have a lower IQ than the sorrounding Balkan people. The education system in Albania has a good tradition from the communist time when Soviet texts and programs where implemented in schools. Albanian students do surprisigly well in Western Schools as well.
          Now I’m talking about Albania here not Kosovo. These two countries and their people are so different, ( even though kosovo-people claim to be Albanians too) it’s better not to mix the two.
          Just wanted to add my two cents here since there seems to be a lot of confusion and ignorance about Albania around here. I am an Albanian Orthodox christian btw.

        2. That man is not albanian, that’s his quote.
          I do know that Albanians are still predominently European, however the number of people with Turkish blood is higher on average, and it is at least nominally muslim.
          There are indeed good Albanians out there, especially Christian.
          Research puts Albanian IQ at about 90

          Yes, the Communist left some good stuff there, but now they are reverting to type.
          The problem with Albania is the muslims and the Turkish types. Albania could in theory be saved but that would be quite some work and help from balkan neighbours like the Serbs, and US non-intervention of course.
          As of right now there are too many annoying albanians. Especially the muslim and “turkish” types.
          If Albania is to prosper Christians must reclaim it.

        3. Yeah you have some points but Albanians are not the lowest of lows as you sad before. I wouldn’t say there are some good Albanians out there , rather there are some bad Albanias out there (Kosovo sellouts).
          The Serbs’ IQ is about 89.
          Look modern Albs are not very homogeneous of a population. Those high turk-genes types are concentrated in middle Albania and Kosovo. Probably asiatic people the turks left behind , who now speak Albanian.
          If you want to know about Albanian people or their culture , religion etc look at Albs from the North-West and South of the country.
          I agree Christians must reclaim Albania (one of the lands first Christianised in Europe ) but it can not be done by the serbs or any other sorrounding balcanic people. The roots of ethnic hatred are so deep they would end up massacring the whole population.

        4. If you are indeed from Albania, welcome.I am one of the few commenters around who actually have been to Albania. (Happened nearly ten years ago.) I have to say Albania women are probably the only White women I find attractive both physically and spiritually. Also, i find Albanians in Albania among th only reasonable and decent group of people in the Balkan/Eastern Europe section of the world. Visiting the city of Shkodre where there is still a sizable Roman Catholic population I was seriously considering finding a wife there. My short visit was not enough to achieve that. However, the respect for Albanian people and culture remained. (I am not sure if I would say the same about ethnic Albanians in Kosova). Falemnderit.

        5. That’s interesting. But it really does not paint a positive picture. I cannot imagine Albania fixing itself alone, although it would be ideal. But fixing Albania would be a major step towards more peace in the region.

        6. I’m glad you liked Albania , Sir. May I suggest to you and all ROK readers the beaches of South Albania , during the summer season , on your next visit. The experience is similar to that of other Mediterranian countries and the prices much cheaper. Bonus , there will be lot af women from Eastern Europe and the nightlife is good. Also contrary to the general belief , Albania is a very safe country if you are not involved in any organised local crime like mafia and shit like that. Everybody is nice to Western tourists especially.

  12. This has to be the worst article I’ve read here at RoK. What is this? An intellectual exercise?
    the west is finished gents.
    Racial diversity, religious diversity, cultural diversity, linguistic diversity, sexual diversity.
    Problem after problem after problem.

    1. Thank you for that resounding negative. If you wish, do elaborate. I don’t want an echo chamber and your view being so opposite would be a welcome read for myself as author and others as well.

  13. For someone so dedicated to Roman themes, your subscription to the ‘magic viking’ as the cause of Rome’s fall seems misguided. Western Rome collapsed in upon itself; the barbarians simply came in to grab some bits of the rubble. A couple hundred years of civil wars, money debasement, and bureaucratic corruption will do that.

    1. I highly suggest you watch the 14 part documentary I included at the start of this essay. Here is why I came to the conclusion I did, and it is relevant to today.
      The barbarians as you say were peripheral, in the sense they were always raiding. But a LOT of them DID immigrate into Rome and where Rome had taken over, obviously, they tried to become “Roman”. Over time, their numbers (Muslim demographics) began to match and then exceed the native Roman class and strata. They wanted to play a part in Rome’s success. Become Roman (join the army) and play a role in politics (one barbarian general became emperor, another tried to save Rome in its dying days and voluntarily submitted to execution by the corrupt elite who cared nothing for Rome’s future).
      In short.. demographics is politics and the barbarians, in their native land where they were only ruled over, and in Rome where they increasingly immigrated to for opportunity, they simply took over. This is PRECISELY the plan for Europe now and it is not a mistake. “They” have seen it happen before. They are just running the script a 2nd time to collapse The West.
      All the other factors you mention were also at work, but I have learned that the barbarians, as both invaders and immigrants, played a huge role in bringing down the empire in The West that the East never had (Constantinople was much more uniform as is Turkey today and I think is why it survived.)

      1. I’ve been a student of Roman history for 25 years now, so I’m not certain a documentary will expose me to ideas and theories regarding the fall of Rome which I haven’t yet encountered. I’m quite aware of barbarian migrations into the Empire such as the Visigoths invasion of Dacia and their subsequent absorption into the Empire, and the effects of the Hun invasion on the movement of the germanic tribes.. (As well as who Maximin and Stilicho were…) My point is, however, that the barbarian invasions were a result of various forces that had been in play for hundreds of years prior to Odoacer. Personally I would conclude the primary factor in the fracturing of the Western Empire was the numerous civil wars which occurred from the time of Commodus through the 4th century. Obviously there were many other factors as well, but when the Empire is at war with itself every 20 years it takes a rather massive toll. (Imagine how the US would manage with a civil war every 50 years…) And while I don’t necessarily disagree with your ultimate conclusion regarding demographics and political destiny, I wouldn’t agree that this was the primary cause of Rome’s decline. When the Vandals can migrate through Spain and take control of North Africa, the damage had clearly been done by then; the invaders were simply picking clean the skeleton of a beast already dead.

        1. Excellent and thank you for this. Rome’s collapse is multi-faceted and I too don’t believe you can point to one thing. It was a cacophony of stupid decisions and, if you want to point to one element – decadence. That said, I think you are underestimating the effect of barbarian integration (in Rome and the army specifically) and how the increasing desire to be either a Roman citizen (and thus join the welfare ranks) or be more Roman like (get knowledge/civilization that the pagan tribes did not have)… played a big role. Demographics is politics and the demographics of the western provinces (Germania, Britania, etc) clearly began to become more and more autonomous over time because the barbarians were learning, and becoming, Roman. Who would they be loyal to? Rome or the local warlord/ruler? I would be curious to know if you can confirm if the East (Constantinople) was more uniform in its ethnic make-up. I came away form that documentary with the distinct impression that the tribes were many and varied (even if they could be lumped together with Visigoths, etc). It would explain a lot of the subsequent (and today still) antagonisms even within close proximity European nations (Ukraine being the most glaring example of division despite being literally the neighbor to Germany and Russian).

        2. Exactly Rome was a moronic race mixing, banana republic …
          Christianity was the final nail, crypto-jews posing as christians took over rome & orchestrated the fall of rome.
          Rome was only christian for under 2 centuries, near its end. Proving christianity played a vital role in the fall of Rome.
          Christians then proceeded to destroy europe, creating the dark ages …

        3. Yes, Pre-Christian Hungary, Germany, Poland, Denmark, Russia, Norway, & Sweden were all such advanced nice places to live in.

        4. what? the Church civilized pagan europe and brought about the renaissance and brought an end to the dark ages.
          it wasnt the church that destroyed europe,it was decadent liberal values,just as in the west today.

        5. Wrong pagan europe was civilised, long before jews destroyed europe using fake christianity.
          Do some real research.
          Or have you never heard of pagan rome, pagan greece? bwahahaha
          Pagan rome proves paganism is superior to fake christianity.

        6. there is no point to argue… you pretty much flat out called Christianity a Jewish controlled scam. thats retarded. Christianity historically has been fairly anti-semitic.

        7. 1. Jews are normally against Christianity.
          2. Paganism is fucking around and having fear of gods all the time.
          3. European culture is the oldest in the world. Still existing. Pagan tribes from THEN are still existing. They are called Bavarian (Bajuwaren), Celtics, Gallian, Slavs and so on..
          4. you can’t think, you need to learn. Shut up and listen to people who know better.

      2. Rome lost confidence in itself (sound familiar?) and let all these barbarian tribes in to do their dirty work (namely war).

      3. If we could survive without a wife, citizens of Rome, all of us would do
        without that nuisance.” So proclaimed the Roman general, statesman, and censor Quintus Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus, in 131 B.C. Still, he went on to plead, falling birthrates required that Roman men fulfill
        their duty to reproduce, no matter how irritating Roman women might have become. “Since nature has so decreed that we cannot manage comfortably with them, nor live in any way without them, we must plan for our lasting preservation rather than for our temporary pleasure.”

        1. “no matter how irritating Roman women might have
          It’s not working, not working!!! Same shit… different millenia. Why do women always screw up everything just when it was almost perfect.

        2. Because it is up to men to *husband* their women and see to it that men still wish to be husbands and women are still fit to be wives and mothers, for the continuation of the race.

  14. Whatever happened to that monk who used to write for ROK? He’s sorely missed and needs to be replaced with someone equally knowledgeable if he’s not coming back.
    Just about every current ROK author is woefully ignorant about Christianity.

    1. I am learning. I know a lot more know than I did a decade ago. Read a good book on Eastern Orthodox to see just how it differs from The West but curiously, it too is still heavily split on just how to interpret the divinity of Christ and the Trinity. I respect those who disagree with my current knowledge of Christianity. I am just playing gadfly and trying to write from the perspective of an outsider to the faith who has legitimate questions of it, especially in the 21st century.

  15. Jews and the Left openly deny Christ, but Islam and Catholicism twist/corrupt His truth. This latter is far worse!

  16. Rome fell BECAUSE of christianity, it descended into the usual pussifying effects of christianity.
    Allowing crypto-jews to genocide the masculine pagan religions, responsible for sustaining Rome for centuries.
    Masculine pagan religions are the way back to creating a new rome, minus the race mixing & religion mixing.
    Barbarians were a creation of rome. Rome destroyed the druids & their library’s as well as their culture’s, plunging britain into an age of illiteracy. Causing Rome to be surrounded by an increasing illiterate race.
    Rome was christian when it fell, Rome was at its peak when it was a masculine pagan empire.

    1. With respect, I don’t think you have researched pagan religions enough. They are heavily goddess oriented and is why the males are so violent (see SJWs). I have to agree with another comment above… the collapse of Rome was not due to Christianity or paganism. Rome was at its peak when patriarchal values dominated the goddess religions of the day. Over time, new matriarchal religions (ISIS, Dionysus) came to the fore because of decadence and complacency. (It was just to easy to survive as a Roman.) In the final days, women were in politics, men were not marrying and going MGTOW, Dionysus the transvestite was having devotees cut off their balls in rituals all over the place (look it up, truly bizarre shit). Christianity was a reaction to, and a refuge from, this goddess worshiping insanity. The Father, The Son, The Holy spirit. Promise of an after life that relieved all suffering and pain from this earth (and boy, the final days of Rome were NOT good ones). Christianity was far from pussifying as you say in its earliest incarnation. Read City Of God by Augustine. There is no doubt that whatever patriarchal strength was in a pagan Rome, found its best expression and future in Christianity of the day.

      1. You really dont get it, Christianity & islam is an entry point for jews to invade & swarm in hordes, any country stupid enough to tolerate christians, or muslims.
        Jews invaded rome using christianity, infected it with immigration, race mixing, womens rights, homosexuality & degeneracy. That is an indisputable fact.
        What other race has a track record of using the exact same modus operandi?
        Jews created christianity to destroy the true religion of whites, ancient paganism.
        Jews created islam to destroy the white aryan religion of the middle east & africa, ancient paganism.
        You also seem to forget Zeus & the titans. Plus I have researched the cults in Rome.
        Sun cults were dominant, but Rome has always been babylonian, theres a reason its called the whore of babylon …
        The dates also clearly dispute your comment, Rome was pagan for over 400 years, christianity only 150 years.
        Rome from 25 bc to 300 ad was pagan, it became christian in 300ad, Rome fell in 478ad.
        So yes christianity was indeed a major contributing factor, Rome fell directly after it converted to christianity. & jews raped the shit out of Rome, with immigration, race mixing, womens rights etc.
        You’re also confusing the pagan cults in europe with Rome. Which were goddess dominant.
        Christianity & islam are jewish plagues on aryan civilisation.
        The ENTIRE PLANET practised an ARYAN religion, aryan culture, aryan history.
        The caucus created civilisation, aryan druids created stonhenge 26,000 years ago.
        The jews & catholics are the akhenatons, atonists, eternal enemy of aryan atlantis.
        Know your history white people.

        1. If you want to go back to being the human sacrifice of Druids before they went into battle… be my guest. Jew creations or not, I will take Christianity or Islam over paganism every time. I respect and thank you for your short but succinct explanation of your point of view.

        2. Not true, druids didnt sacrifice human.
          They had a culture of corporal punishment, they may have burned murderers & criminals. Which the romans mistook as part of the religion. Romans also said they ate children & other ludicrous nonsense.
          Christianity is an alien middle eastern religion, it has no place in a european continent.
          Also I would advise, you look up how jews created Islam using the catholic church ..
          Islam in europe, will lead to the death of America & western civilisation, it is a fight we will not win.
          Europe & the u.s is the ONLY stronghold of western civilisation. If europe falls to islam, we will not be able to recover.
          We have to have a clean purge of all alien middle eastern religion’s & culture in europe, including christianity. & replace it with masculine paganism, not the return of matriachial paganism …
          The red pill will ensure a new masculine religion …

        3. “replace it with masculine paganism, not the return of matriachial paganism”
          You just confirmed my points and refuted yourself. If there are TWO paganisms, then your “pure” past can’t be all you say it is.
          There is only one God, and patriarchy derives 100% from acknowledging that fact.
          And which patriarchal paganism (got to get the right one) do I choose? So, so many. But this one says… and that one says… but they can’t both be right… oh, it’s all relative to what you believe… but those matriarchal pagans are bad though… not true… but they have gods marrying/sexing their women… so are those male pgan gods bad too? Oh.. just theres, not ours. Oh shit!!! Those guys have a real bad ass patriarch! They say ours is wrong cause… and don’t believe in many gods… oh no, how do we convince them male gods are relative and it does not matter which one you worship… just so long as it is the male one, not the female ones, unless the female one says she wants to have sex, then I guess we have to do the magic sex thing (fun!!!)
          I respect your passion and beliefs… but intellectually… paganism is past my friend. There is no one going back to it except feminists and their male worshipers.

        4. lol, do you even know what the majority religion was in Rome for over 500 years, before the measly 2 centuries of christianity?
          I never stated a pure past, the majority pagan religions in Rome were masculine sun cults, including zeus …
          The paganism of europe in particular britain was matriarchial.
          Do you even know Christianity is a SOCIALIST religion? There is nothing patriarchial about it …
          Do your research, you clearly havent got a clue about history in any shape or form …

        5. Do you even know Christianity is a SOCIALIST religion?

          Socialist? Where’d you get that idea?
          Socialists have tried to co-opt it, perhaps. …But Christianity teaches voluntary giving of one’s own wealth, rather than forcing others to hand over theirs.

          There is nothing patriarchial about it …

          The New Testament teaches that a woman is not to have authority over a man, and that women should submit to their husbands and obey them.
          No, nothing patriarchal about that…

        6. Its late here & I need to sleep … in regards to women submitting to men, you clearly miss out all the parts where the bible directly contradicts that verse …
          Check out this link, it clearly points out exactly why christianity is a socialist communist religion …
          “Christianity is Communism
          When one realizes that Christianity was a Jewish creation, and that communism was also a Jewish creation.
          Then it shouldn’t surprise us to discover that Christianity is brimming over with communist overtones.”

        7. To get just how central collectivism is to Christian canon, consider that the Bible contains the first description of socialism in history.
          But to understand just how non-capitalistic Christianity is supposed to be we turn to the first chapter after the gospels
          Acts, which describes the events of the early church. Chapters 2 and 4 state that all “the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need… No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had…. There were no needy persons among them. From time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.”
          Now folks, that’s outright socialism of the type described millennia later by Marx – who likely got the general idea from the gospels.

        8. in regards to women submitting to men, you clearly miss out all the parts where the bible directly contradicts that verse …

          …Which you can’t quote. LOL.
          I checked out the link you gave. It’s rubbish.
          The clown who wrote it completely misses the point that Communism is “equality” enforced at gunpoint. Christianity has no such compulsion. Even the early church in Acts were free to give or not to give (see the story of Ananias and Sapphira).

        9. To get just how central collectivism is to Christian canon, consider
          that the Bible contains the first description of socialism in history.

          Where? Acts?! Don’t make me laugh!
          It’s not Socialism — Socialism is robbery. It is two wolves and a sheep getting together and deciding what to have for lunch.
          The whole point of Christian giving is that it is VOLUNTARY.

        10. You’re pissing in the ocean with this kid….I’ve tried to get through to him – he’ll just start repeating stuff.

  17. Nope. I do believe a war within Europe with muslims is unavoidable / and it will happen within a 20 years, first Sweden then France… Erdogan told newly that, “Don’t make 3, make 5 children. You are the future of Europe”. At the same time a Turkish minister has claimed “holy wars will soon begin, in Europe.
    A war in our streets is all ready here, extreme criminality, violence and rapes of our women done by muslims. Showing of muslim power, humiliate the enemies women, typical Islam. No/go zones. Local war fare has begun.
    I believe that in 50/100 years if Europe still are under heavy Islamisation with all the mayhem and crime which follow in its step and war in the streets, Mekka would be targeted by some patriots in the western military, during the pilgrimage. A small or big atom bomb.
    After, Islam will disintegrate. Their mighty Allah which have the power over all atoms, over humans, over every falling or growing leafs on all trees. Allah decides how every atom on planet earth behaves, each and every second as time moves forward. If Mekka gets vaporized, its Allahs doing and wishes.

    1. “The gods have blessed our soil and blood
      it was meant to be
      we carried on through drought and flood
      it was meant to be
      we built this land upon our graves
      it was meant to be
      as fortune favoures just the brave
      it was meant to be
      don’t worry child,
      don’t you fear at all,
      don’t worry child,
      we will kill them all
      your fathers died, so you may live
      it is meant to be
      we can’t forget and we won’t forgive
      it is meant to be
      now I must go, do you hear the drums
      it is meant to be
      we will prevail, whatever comes
      it is meant to be
      don’t worry child,
      don’t you fear at all,
      don’t worry child,
      we will kill them all…”

    2. Not gonna happen in Eastern Europe. They’ll hang the muslims high over there. Or impale them, just as they did before.

      1. It will happen sooner in EE than in the West, their birth rates are awful at best!

        1. It doesn’t matter. The anti immigration sentiment in EE is very high. Just take a look at Hungary.

        2. Once the EU cuts their funding and snaps their fingers they will take in refugees like theres no tomorrow. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the EU will most likely fund the refugee’s paychecks.
          EE is pretty much a lost cause!

    3. If Erdogan’s words aren’t proof enough that we are headed towards a century of Holy Wars, then I don’t know what is…

      1. Yup… Erdogan, not the sharpest crayon in the box, but at least he’s straight to the point. I do think though that this coming conflict is going to be more divided along lines of TRUTH.. vs FALSEHOOD. There are a LOT of Muslims out there who want nothing to do with these Wahhabi nutbars. Yes, they are the majority (?… need to research) in Europe (or at least the most vocal, MSM spotlight), but if and when fighting comes out, you are going to see a lot of Muslims fighting side be side with Europeans in my opinion. Remember… this is a fight over ideology and truth as much as it is religion. Wahhabis claim to have the true version of Islam, but they can only claim that because of the US$$$ petro dollar money that is supporting and spreading it. Take that away… it will be interesting to see just how tough these Imams are when their own people turn against them.
        By the way… a better example of WHY Muslims keep to themselves is this naked shirt, bare chest, John Lennon… just WTF? Good points, but what the hell?

        1. It certainly is a fight for ideology and religion, but it’s also a fight for Europe’s racial character. If Europe remains a Christian liberal shopping mall but becomes inhabited by a majority of Arabs, I will consider Europe to be destroyed.

        2. I agree… but you assume the shopping malls are Christian. They are not and are also dying out (See the latest commercial retail rents/vacancies that are now imploding across America). Even when the mall abandons God, there are consequences it seems.

        3. lol @ “Even when the mall abandons God, there are consequences it seems.”
          I’m just taking a shot at what real-world “Western culture and values” has turned out to be. I’m definitely all for restoring some of the values and common sense of the old world.

    4. Sadly I think you are correct. It was revealing to see Erdogan and Turkey be so open in its comments about taking over Europe. Each day, such events will open more and more eyes in The West. I still have hope though. I think democracy can still save the day. Time is getting short to use it, but if the elite keep rigging it or prevent the people from taking back control of their nation and culture, then yes, a conflict seem inevitable.
      I also think this would see the “power” of Islam be exposed for what it is in Europe. A bunch of misguided, deluded, posturing posers that when challenged, for real, by a people fighting to survive, they will see why Europe was the power it was and will be again.

    5. I agree. If the variants of todays tensions in western society continue, war will be inevitable. The thing is, it will be a war not between nations, unless the turks want to play it hard, but civil war between muslims/marxists against nationalists and traditionalists that want to save the West. War is coming, i have little doubts on that.

      1. That is the scary part. Were the coming war to be the native populace finally standing up and fighting the invading hordes.. it wouldn’t be pretty, but the natives would easily win.
        That’s not what’s going to happen. The western elite, by their actions.. have already sided with the foreigners. I don’t know what’s going to happen when shit hits the fan.
        I should be confident the Western governments will stand beside their own people. But at this point.. I have my doubts.

        1. Agree. When we listen to elected officials declaring that its good to have more and more multiculturalism an that is good for native populations to be in minority, then…we can expect treason. The thing is…treason has already begun.

      2. Do you really think the Muslims are going to fight side by side with feminists/LGBTQ Marxists? Dude… if Muslims do come out swinging, they will first team up with the Christians to wipe femininists/LGBTQs off the face of the earth BEFORE turning on the Christians. By that point, I suspect they might realize they are not enemies anymore. LOL 🙂 But I agree with you… conflict is coming.

        1. Yes i do. I expect them to ally with the marxists because it takes a totalitarian mindset to see another. Then, only then, will they turn on each other. I know, there is the theory of “liberals” being the first to be attacked first. I though that too, but now, with the recent events of reds in the states and other places being side by side whit islamists (see the menopause march for example in DC), i defend that its going to be a tag team thing between the two.

        2. “with the recent events of reds in the states and other places being side by side whit islamists”
          They don’t know who they are standing beside. That is my point. The Left is virtue signalling. The Islamists are using them. WHEN the fighting starts, the Islamists will show true colors (Erdogan in Netherlands on birthrates, immigration, etc). The left will get such a bitch slap back to the back of the mosque and “shit gets real” they won’t know what hit them.

  18. It’s a real downer to see how so many of you bros think this invasion of the west was the doing of Muslims, and that the necessary fight is with them. The west has always been their goal, but they don’t have the right stuff for it. Especially not alone, and not these days.
    They are the pawns, not the players.

    1. “They are the pawns, not the players.”
      100%. I think many deluded Muslims feel that because The West is on the ropes (financially, politically, culturally), that they can “win” with demographics over time. A good plan, but not a very smart one. The only reason they are seeing any take over of Europe on the horizon is because the vast majority of the population is asleep to the threat (but waking up at an exponential rate) and the political elite in power now is enabling the “takeover”. When (hopefully) Europe wakes up, and the political elite change (Trump, Le Pen), it is game over for the “triumph” of Islam over The West. Interesting times to be sure and thank you for your comment.

      1. They thought Europe was on the ropes 900 years ago when they had conquered Sicily, Spain, Anatolia, sacked Rome, and laid siege to Constanitople. Yet we endured, and rose again.

        1. We need a Richard the Lion Heart, Charles Martell, and Jan Siobewaski III all rolled into one man.

        2. Christianity is always on the verge of being wiped out, just any day now science/communism/Islam/the old gods/the romans will have it stamped out..

        3. Oh come on, Christianity has survived worse than sand people, degenerates, and corrupt scientists. This is the religion that survived Roman persecution (the guys who literally wrote the book on repression), the Black Death (which wiped out 1/3 of Christians), and centuries of European infighting (the deadliest and most ferocious known to history). You think modern pansies and drooling mud people can take it down?

        4. Wasn’t being serious, was playing off a theme that Christianity is always under threat but cannot be destroyed.

      1. Men no longer have the political will to organise themselves because they know those in the political establishment have forsaken them.

  19. Rome fell from the following causes: Immigration, Welfare State, High Taxes, and the devaluation of the dianarius. It had nothing to do with religion.

    1. Agreed… and sounds familiar does it not? That said, religion was a key part of life back then and the sea change in religious culture that came about with the collapse of Rome is what I was interested in when writing this essay.

  20. This is the worst article on ROK. This is like asking to surrender to the Nazis to avoid bloodshed. Churchill would have bitched slapped this author. Fuck this article and the author. A real red pill master would have called for a crusade and for men to draw their swords and show the Invaders what Christians can do United together the first time they (the invading oppressing ottomans) were pulling this bullshit.

    1. Thank you for your comment. This was an essay of speculation on the future, not a call for submission or surrender of any kind. I prefer The West work out a solution that sees it remain true to its values and culture (please tell me what they are now if you know them). That said… I am a realist. The purpose of this piece was to speculate on what Europeans have done in the past with a new religion that challenged the old faith (Christianity vs paganism). I am suggesting that the victory for Islam may not be the end of Europe, but a complete takeover of Islam and its future by Europeans. Pure speculation on my part based on the historical evidence and context, not a call for surrender of any kind.

      1. You should re-title it to, “What will happen if we surrender.” Misleading title, defeatist article.

        1. Thank you for your comment. The title is not misleading. It is suggesting a hypothetical question. Christianity did not take over Europe over night. Paganism was entrenched for 1000s of years, literally from the beginning of Man, and remained for 100s more after Rome’s adoption of Christianity.
          What I tried to suggest with this essay was that over time, Christianity became a better intellectual argument for faith (and thus tribal unity) than paganism was. Pure speculation of course, but could the same thing happen with Islam, the threat to the dominant cultural religion of Europe? (Christianity now, paganism then)
          This hypothetical question worked out into an essay the more I thought about the historical context and parallels to Europe today. It is an out there theory, to be sure, but not way there to be totally impossible

        2. Out of curiousity, where is your proof it became a better intellectual argument?
          Christianity genocided white europe, it never became a better anything, it mass murdered anyone in its way.
          Paganism was never entrenched, it was the true religion of white people for 1000’s of years before rome.

        3. Europeans were massacring each other before Christianity and continued to do so after they were converted. The idea that Christianity genocided white europe is absurd. Pagans had even less trouble raping and murdering other europeans than Christians did.

        4. This is not an argument. Beside what do you propose ? is not like the pagan left any writing to go back to….
          All I can say the Christian civilization is much better then the pagan one…Live with it….

        5. We dont need to go back to anything.
          Also the pagan cults of rome are some of the best documented in the world …
          Which is why I called you … ignorant as fuck
          Thanks for the polite response.

        6. Humanity isn’t heading towards more slavery via OBJECTIVE religion.
          No, our progress indicates that the ingrained human desire to be free, to ask questions, to challenge authority is the trend. Unfortunately, we as a species is still so f’ed up that a correction for abusing this freedom is in the shape of a crescent-laded bomb.

        7. I don’t think you can say I’m ignorant about occultism and pagan religions. I’m almost 50 years old and have been a member of a few ‘ associations’
          Having written things about an old cult does not permit to bring them back to life.
          How mush do you know about Pytagorician secret school ?
          We have Pytagor mathematical theses but do not know much about the secret school he created.
          No surprise they called themselves Neo-pagan as they build the cult as they go along….
          And please, do not make me talk about all those Gaia cult followed by feminist…
          All this is illusion and as pertinent to reality as LARPing…

        8. Sure just look at all those ISM..
          All of they do connect God I’m sure :/
          A religion is something different…

        9. Are you troliing me ?
          Frankly how much do you known about Jewish rituals ??
          Do you see much of those unknown rituals around ?
          Don’t you see Catholicism is a mix of all the religions around the mediterranean sea and beyond?..
          As for making a religion out of the northern pagan it would be very difficult as they did not wrote anything..
          Frankly, stop saying stupid thing would you ?

        10. Sorry buddy this isn’t the place you should be recruiting for your new cult. Try your local Games Workshop or Male feminist seminar those places are pretty fertile ground for pagan fantasy make believe ideas.

        11. Ignorant of what you dumb motherfucker? You think the pagan Roman Empire expanded by Really Good Arguments For Roman Supremacy or something? When Vikings raided a town they just took all the ladies out to dinner & a movie and settled for a peck on the cheek before returning them home before 10? The only thing that seems to surpass the omega butthurt of the average internet Pagan is just how stupid you are (and assume everybody else is as dumb and ignorant as you are).

        12. Thats what you get for allowing an alien middle eastern religion, to wipe out thousands of years of white paganism & white heritage …
          What do you think would happen, with no connection to a rich white pagan heritage to keep the roman empire together?
          Everything has consequences, the jewish religion wiped out anything for white people to rally around, leaving behind a fake jewish religion with nothing for white people to identify with.
          What did you expect to happen, with no true white religion or true white heritage?

        13. You are really stupid 🙁
          Don’t you know Paul was coming from Trace ?
          Don’t you know Trace is the northern part of Greece ?
          The new testament was written in Greek for the most part because much of the ‘philosophy’ is coming from Greece
          Peter installed the Catholic church in Rome, not in Jerusalem…
          The Catholic Church is what’s left of the roman empire.
          The pope is Pontifex Maximum a roman emperor title because at the end of the Roman empire he was the other half of the throne…
          Anyway, done wasting my time on you

        14. Islamophobes are always saying Islam should be reformed, but they must understand that the only way to reform Islam is for Islamophobes to adopt it themselves!

        15. There are plenty of true white religions, odinism is a good start
          Google white aryan religions for a good list.
          Why follow an alien middle eastern religion, when you can follow a true white religion, created by white people …

        16. The distinction between religion and politics is a distinction without a difference. Religion is about morality and politics is about imposing your religion on others.

        17. You sound truly unintelligent and uneducated. Why is Odinism a good start? Please elaborate. Are you a pagan or an atheist? If so, how did you reach that conclusion, or are you just another I-hate-you-mom, look at me pagan/atheist?

    2. I don’t like it either. True, Christianity or whiteness is not able to bind together as much as it used to, but if the west did not have a whole lot of traitors on the inside pulling bricks out of the foundations there might be more unifying against a common enemy.

  21. Islam is the most expansionist religion ever created. Why Islam may to rethink conquering Europe? What a laugh. I see cowardice in your words.

    1. You are free to see what you want to see. I would ask for elaboration on just what the cowardice is I have presented. I want discussion and engagement so please feel free to respond in more detail if you wish.

      1. Your premise is that we would cause it to reform, which has never been done since that pedophile first claimed he had an acid trip and spoke to god.

        1. You are free to believe that, but there is a lot of evidence to show Islam is a living religion just as any other. One question… atheist? Or just a hatred for Islam and its god in particular?

  22. That which you touch, touches you. Europes Disease will soon be the Islamic world’s disease.

  23. Hey fellas – not to hijack the conversation here but I’d just like to get everybody’s opinion on el Presidente right now? I know most of us of course were all about him last year.
    In particular, how do you all feel about him seeming to lick the old Israeli boots? I’ve been vocally pro-Trump from day one, and I’m not a run of the mill anti-Semite…But I’m not feeling too swell at all about how he’s jacking off Bibi Netanyahu. I’d like to see us get closer to Russia, Syria gives us that chance…But now we aren’t talking to Assad, we’re attacking anyone we like there, and our star-bellied sneetch buddies seem to be slapping Syria in the face, basically begging Assad to strike back.
    Yeah. Anyway, just wondered. Feel free to answer, or feel free to flag this as spam & tell me to take it elsewhere. Whatever you please. No skin off my nuts.

    1. We’ll see what is rhetoric and what is action.
      Trump tells Jews what they want to hear, but he isn’t playing too friendly with them. He said they need to find a compromise with Palestinians, possibly using a one-state or two-state solution. You cannot imagine how much that statement scared Jews.
      Jews do not like Trump. And Trump so far has not visited the Wailing Wall and is not playing too much in to their demands no matter what he says for PR.

  24. The ideas this article is promoting are simply revolting. Let us all submit to the throat-cutters just to feel manly again.

    1. Agreed. Woeful cuckolding of ideals, not normally found on this site…. I find this abhorrent.

    2. This article assumes an atheist position and that there is no God watching.
      Religion isn’t a “useful tool”. It deals with realities so deeply embedded in man that viewing it as merely changing clothes is woefully naive.
      If God is real and has revealed Himself, then our loyalty is clear. Abandoning the faith when your enemy seems to have the upper hand, when he doesn’t even have the knife to your throat yet is abhorrent.
      If the world profits you nothing if you’re damned, are we going to trade our souls for the right to put women in bags?
      To hell with that.

      1. Exactly right my friend! If God is real and has revealed his religion to us then we owe him fealty, the world be damned!

      2. QUOTE: “This article assumes an atheist position and that there is no God watching.”
        Wow… don’t know how you came up with that but ok, let me give it a try.
        Author [me] is suggesting, as speculation, that Europeans might convert to Islam and have a positive impact/influence on it.
        Allah… is not God, is a false God or Satan… thus Islam has no God… thus it is atheist.
        Following that, talking about Islam is talking from a position of atheism, non belief in God.
        With complete sincerity, is that how your logic flows to get to the quote from your comment above?

        1. Not at all. My logic is that if there is a God and He has a revealed how He wishes to be served in Christianity then there is no converting to Islam to have a positive influence on it. From an atheist perspective, there is no Divine wrath to fear by leaving Christianity for Islam
          Upon reading your comment I realize your position could be semi-universalist, or indifferentist, not necessarily atheist. All religions are similar enough, or at least these religions are similar enough, therefore there is no Divine wrath to fear by switching.
          To be perfectly clear, Allah is from my understanding the Arabic word for God. However, Christianity teaches that who Jesus is is not merely a great prophet, but the Son of God and God incarnate. With Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well, we also see that Jesus cares about doctrine and how God is worshipped (He overtly tells the Samaritan woman that samaritans worship God wrongly).
          Even though Muslims may profess to serve God, for a Christian they are serving a false prophet and are alienating themselves from Him by going against His expressed wishes and plan.

        2. Thank you for that excellent explanation. I suspected it was not as simple as I assumed.
          QUOTE:”However, Christianity teaches that who Jesus is is not merely a great prophet, but the Son of God and God incarnate.”
          And there it is. Ultimately, for a Christian, if you don’t accept Jesus, you are an “atheist” because there is no God without Jesus. Is that more reflective of your position?
          This… the divinity of Christ… is the very, very, very thin… and ONLY… line… that separates Christians from Muslims. Both accept the virgin birth and must accept Jesus as prophet to be believers. All Muslims are saying is… God cannot have a son, nor a daughter.
          But that difference… makes Christians believe Muslims or someone like myself who sees God purely as the transcendent and immaterial reality that He is… as atheist. It is as fascinating as it is frustrating and scarily, it is what will cause bloodshed once again.
          All three religions… Judaism, Christianity and Islam… would be at peace and essentially in agreement if the divinity of Christ was dropped. 2000 plus years of hatred and blood… gone.. over this stubborn belief that has no basis for proof other than a book says so, and a council decreed it. Think on this deeply.

        3. It is far more than a thin line. They also deny the sacrificial death and resurrection. That is key. That is the gospel right there. They don’t really accept the Bible, they believe it to be corrupted and unreliable.
          And no, not accepting Jesus doesn’t make you an atheist. I just took it as atheistic to assume that it doesn’t matter which religion is chosen as long as you get the social results you want, as if to say “since God doesn’t exist, just choose whatever works”. Additionally God is immaterial, Jesus has humanity as well, which is the material part.
          That’s the point is that we cannot accept less than the divinity of Christ, it’s only a problem if it isn’t true. Also, the idea that we would all be at peace if we dropped this is immaterial in this light. If God sent His only begotten Son and we deny that because Muslims will hurt us if we don’t, that cannot fly. You go to God on His terms, not what seems right to you. That sounds like a hard saying, I know, but there’s more mercy in there than might be supposed.
          Plus, it also seems more than a little naive to say we would all be peaceful under Islam. Islam isn’t peaceful under Islam. Tragic as it is, man is wolf to man at all places and at all times. Jesus said that the world would be at war with us, would that be likely if it was just some nice easy to accept theology and philosophy?
          All of that being said the crux of the matter is we are not and have never been simpletons who thought “oh it’s written down and a guy in a robe says it’s true, it must be”. A comment cannot capture the depth of thinking that has gone into this. I can recommend the aforementioned case for Christ by Lee Strobel. It’s accessible and brief. However I will try to cover the basics.
          As far back as records go, the divinity of Christ has been claimed. It’s been understood in various ways, but the incarnation, the death, and resurrection have always been there. Nearly all of the apostles were martyred and would not have martyred themselves over what they knew to be a lie. This is not based on the Bible alone, but independent historical records at the time. The gospel and New Testament accounts track with what we know of contemporaneous history.
          The Old Testament gains credibility because the life of Jesus fits prophecies regarding the Messiah, including obscure and difficult to understand passages that make sense in light of the gospel accounts. Again, it would not have been retconned because the disciples would not have died over what they knew to be a deception. If a book predicts the future, it is clearly more than a book.
          There is much more of course. But I hope it’s enough to show you there’s more to the church and Christian thinking than just memeing an idea.

        4. I really do appreciate your response. However, it does prove to me and many the point at which, with a Christian, one must respectfully ask to agree to disagree. There is just no talk about the divine origin of Christ with a Christian.
          I hear your explanation that his divinity has been taken as a given and true “since the beginning.” I respect that, but I want to pull out the crux of the matter for me, and for anyone who wants to become Christian.
          QUOTE:”That’s the point is that we cannot accept less than the divinity of Christ, it’s only a problem if it isn’t true.”
          Is it true? Can you prove it? Witness is not proof. The book is not proof. The deep thinking, as you say, that has gone into Christ’s divinity is not proof… if the thinking is flawed from the start.
          QUOTE:”Additionally God is immaterial, Jesus has humanity as well, which is the material part.”
          God is immaterial. You do understand what that means yes? Jesus is human, the material part. You do understand what material, empirical means yes? One, immaterial, is not of this world and can never be a part of it because it simply cannot be other than what it is – immaterial. The other, the material, is what it is because it is THIS world, the human world, and NOT the transcendent immaterial reality that is God.
          But you are asking me to believe the immaterial… is material… that he created himself in Jesus… and then ceased to be material (immaterial?) and then returned to material reality and then…
          I am not asking for material/empirical proof of Christ’s divinity.
          I am asking for the logical, the rational, the reasonable belief based on argument starting from a premise that we can prove is true, to a conclusion that is also true.
          You can’t do that with the divinity of the material man Jesus Christ. The immaterial… cannot be… the material.
          About the closest, the most, a Christian can say is that Jesus had a CONNECTION to the divine, through his intellect, his emotions, his human faculties, to come to KNOW the divine, but in no way IS the divine, let alone God in Himself.
          Please… if you can give me a link to a solid, rational argument for the divinity of Christ, reply with it. I have never been able to find one because all explanations rely on the old triune nature of God and Man, which is true WITHIN Man, but does not make that man Jesus, or any man, divine.

        5. Well, it will be hard to convince you if you, unlike every court in the world since the beginning of jurisprudence , won’t accept witness testimony as evidence.
          The logic starts with prophecies, a kind of witness testimony, and then continues to other witnesses attesting to fulfillment centuries later. These testimonies are then cross referenced with historical and archaeological evidence that is extra biblical in nature.
          The divinity of Christ relies upon witness testimony, so for those who accept witness testimony the most we can say is what we do say that Jesus Christ is God. If greater intellectual titans than you and I can accept this, we cannot dismiss it out of hand. I’m not saying that you have to believe it on this alone, I am saying that it has earned the right to be taken seriously.
          Unfortunately you’re also getting hung up on the mechanics of the Incarnation, as Paul said you would. There are plenty of things we know to be true, but do not understand the mechanics of, like the existence and passage of time.
          It seems as if you are demanding that I give you a case on terms that would not apply to any other phenomena outside of mathematics. I know my parents exist through direct experience. They might not. I might have hallucinated them and could be typing this out from deep inside a coma. Can I logically prove I’m not?
          Logic helps refine truths that we get through other than logical (I do not say illogical) means.
          Again, Lee Strobel is probably your man here, because building a full case in a comment is a bit of a stretch to ask.

        6. You can’t trust Jews with Christians because Jews reject Christ.
          You can’t trust Christians with Muslims because Christians reject Muhammad.
          You are supposed to trust Muslims with Jews and Christians because Islam acknowledges its debt to Christianity and Judaism by acknowledging all their prophets.

          You can’t trust Jews with Christians because Jews reject Christ and blame him for the anti-Semitism they subsequently suffered.
          You can’t trust Christians with Muslims because Christians reject Muhammad and Christians imposed the Inquisition on Jews and Muslims as well as conducting the Crusades.
          You *are* supposed to trust Muslims with both Jews *and* Christians because Islam acknowledges its debt to
          Christianity and Judaism by acknowledging *all* their prophets *as well as* the Virgin Birth.
          It is true that the Jews had Christ executed by the Romans.
          It is true that Christians are supposed to believe in the divinity of Christ which must logically and necessarily mean that they must reject subsequent prophets that do not claim divinity ie Muhammad.
          It is only Islam that acknowledges all the prophets of the previous Abrahamic faiths as well as the Virgin Birth.
          If you don’t trust current Muslims to run the show, well, you could become Muslim and run the show yourselves.

        8. The Trinity is an absurdity which all Christians are required to believe in order to be and remain Christian.
          If they don’t, they must pretend they do, in order to be and remain Christian.
          It is not surprising that Christianity is kaput when membership of it requires its adherents to tell lies about the state of their mind.
          Jews and Muslims are only expected to do what Jews are Muslims supposed to do.
          Most people now don;t even believe in God. To expect them to not only believe in God but also to believe that Christ is Son of God is stretching people’s credulity too far in this day and age.

        9. Christianity is low maintenance if you are happy to tell lies about your state of belief, but very high maintenance if you have a strict regard for truth.
          Judaism is very high maintenance because there is so much stuff you have to do and it means spending your entire life fussing about your food and observing the Sabbath.
          Islam seems to be the happy medium.

        10. Apart from their long history of murder and oppression of “people of the Book”.
          It’s like the Soviets, if we’d all just accepted communism there would be “peace”.

        11. It is beyond this – Islam claims all nations were sent prophets – the number of them are simply unknown – including European, East Asian, African prophets (the hundreds or thousands that were forgotten in the pages of history). The Semites do NOT have a monopoly on prophethood. Muslims are agnostic about men like Zoroaster, the Buddha, etc. It considers itself a return to religion primordial – that which is ‘hanif’ – before there was a Jew, before there was a Christian. Bani Israel is a branch – an very important branch – but a branch nonetheless. Islam basically considers itself the closing of the circle from the branch of Bani Ismael – the ones that were awaiting (whether they forgot it or not) the fulfillment of the prayer of their father Abraham (pbuh).
          Interesting thread.

      3. But all the Abrahamic faiths worship the same God with each claiming that their way is best.
        In fact, both the Bible and the Koran promote very similar patriarchal moral values.

        1. If you read the Bible and the Koran, the qualitative differences between the two is beyond question.
          The Koran just isn’t in the same league.

    1. Amazing isn’t it. I was waiting for the line “I welcome my new muslim overlords.”

  25. Of course “we” (white Christians) would change Islam to some extent if assimilated by Islam. But gods, why would we let that happen???

  26. “Europeans – destroying arrogant and hypocritical empires since the dawn of Man” an above caption says. Well boys, WHEN DOES IT START, ALREADY??!! There are battalions — DIVISIONS!! — of men in America (and I presume in Europe too) who are just aching to start kicking Muslim ass in the West. I was born for this moment, but alas all I see are daily outrages, more influx of the Muslim horde, our culture changing before our eyes, and idiot politicians who think we need more of them. And I’m growing old…I fear I won’t live to see the happy day of their utter destruction happen.

    1. No…stop that anger, put some,flowers in your hair and become a new age pagan as the author recommends.

        1. You didn’t, you seem to be recommending Islam.
          This is a real destroying the village to save it argument for a good chunk of us.

        2. I don’t know about you guys here, but I’d gladly join the muslims to throw these faggots off the building. I’d be glad.

        3. You do know nearly the entire Muslim world has a “prison rules” attitude to homosexuality right? The idea is you’re not gay if you’re “pitching”. Trading open sodomy for secret, and largely unwilling, sodomy is not much of an option.
          Plus you’re not showing the whole village. I could just as easily post pictures of large homeschooling families, midnight mass at FSSP churches, tent revivals (they still happen), etc. The west even in its degenerated state is still not reducible to just gay pride parades.

        4. Good points, but the “prison rules” business you speak of, Christianity had the same problem (speaking strictly of it being a secret practice). Any religion that actually practices eliminating homosexuality from society is going to drive these degenerates underground. Why do you think they are still, even today, so vocal in hating us hetero norms? They know we don’t want that shit and will do anything now to rub it in our face that they are out and never going back to the closet. I can’t say open homosexuality is preferable to secret, but if they went back in the closet and never came out again, that would be best do you not think? This is basically what Putin is doing in Russia – no public displays of open homosexuality or the promotion of it. Which would you prefer?
          I can also agree that the village is larger than the gay pride parades, but my point is… the culture, what the hetero majority now have to live and raise their children in… is gay. You can’t say you are living in a village when you never want to leave your own home. THAT… is what a vast majority of people feel like in The West today. We can be ourselves… in our homes. Outside, in school, work, politics, entertainment, even socially, we all bow to the liberal/feminist/fag/tranny or else.

        5. Exactly what happened in Orlando.Do you have problems with that?
          Muslims don’t just talk the talk, they walk the walk.
          I’d be happy to purge these trash.
          I’ll convert to islam just to do that.

        6. Eh. Even that wasn’t enough to wipe them all. When it comes to purging faggots, there’s no such thing as too much.

        7. Because I wasn’t kidding at all about throwing fags from a building.

        8. Yeah, but you can have fun while doing it instead of acting like there’s a spoon in your ass.

  27. Islam does have factions within it that present a very interesting view that Islam itself was changed. The messages in the Quran differ from oral traditions which have messed Islam up. For example the Quran does not command you to kill apostates and teaches there is no compulsion in religion. THe Quran also does not advocate the stoning of adulterers and the overall Quranic message is akin to modern Christianity in the fact that it is positive and humanistic. The Quran also does not advocate the killing of gays, women wearing head and face veils (women are told to dress modestly not like postboxes) or that the prophet married a nine year old. Oral traditions aka Hadith have severely distorted Islam. However the Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia ban websites like in order to stop people waking up to the truth. The movement is the Quranist movement and is still very small because the Muslim governments and overlords/scholars who make the rules to control people actively censor it and discourage dialogue. Rashad Khalifa who promoted this message was actually murdered in 1990 by Sunni Muslims (who follow extremist oral traditions aka Hadith. This knowledge has the potential to overthrow extremist Islam. Visit for more information on how true Islam has been distorted.

  28. With all due respect Maximus, you do not understand the enemy at the gates. This is not a repeat of history as you claim due to the fact that Christianity is a faith and religion, where Islam is a political system first based on a faith.
    Further, Islam calls for the extermination of non believers, or forced conversion.
    Christianity does not call for that. Sure there are people who did force Christianity on others, but they were not following the true teaching of Christ. You do not see Christian nations invading and forcing the population to convert.
    If Islam were to be supreme in the US, there is no chance of it reforming because of us. The entire political structure and religious aspect of it is predecated on conquering and enslavement. No, you and I will be slaughtered for resisting, our wives will be raped, and our daughters married off at the age of 8. Islam will never become westernized.
    Anywhere muslims become the majority, they impose their laws and beliefs on the minority. There is no dilution of their beliefs. We have over a 1000 years of case evidence to prove my point. If what you claim would happen, we would have seen this happen already.
    Our laws and way of life cannot coexist with theirs for the simple fact they don’t believe in individual liberty or freedom of religion.
    Christianity as it spread through Europe didn’t dilute itself with pagan beliefs, it allowed many pagans to keep some rituals. But the core belief, that being a faith in Jesus as being the only way to Heaven, remained paramount.
    As for the women embracing Islam, it’s not because they like its patriarch system, it’s because they’re fools who don’t understand what true Islam does to women.

    1. These women just want to be mothers of legitimate children with a husband who takes his marriage vows more seriously than non-Muslim men, I guess.

  29. The best book ever written about the heroes trying to stop the Islamist invasion against white, Christian Europe during the Middle Ages:
    Géza Gárdonyi: Eclipse of the Crescent Moon
    Generations of young Hungarian boys were raised on this literature!
    Must be one of the reasons why, as adults, we once again became the shield that protects civilized Europe from the Islamist onslaught.
    It is a good read,
    I can heartily recommend for everyone interested in the history of Christian Europe!

    1. Hungary is where a group of the citizens are patrolling the border and snatching up invaders as they try to sneak through the right?

      1. It is our army and police that is defending the borders, not just some random vigilante citizens.

  30. Christianity is inseparable from the soul of the West, to lose it means to lose our very essence, and the same could be said of Christianity that without us it loses its soul (African and Metizio Christianity is hollow and bland).
    Islam is the bastardization of Judaism founded by a camel peddling pedophile warlord, it’s a shallow religion that requires mindless and brutal adherence to tradition. While tradition is important and some of Islam’s tenets may seem attractive, it leads only to circular violence and ruin.

    1. I totally agree with your first paragraph.
      However, we will never defeat Islam if we think they are just a bunch of goat-fucker lunatic dune coons believing in crazy bullshit.
      As a matter of fact, part of the driving force behind the enmity the Islamists evidently feel towards us is the seemingly total lack of morals and ethics which they perceive permeates our societies. And we have to admit: our (((mainstream culture))) which reaches them via the (((Mainstream Media))) totally backs up their claims.
      So, part of the solution is indeed returning to our Christian roots, and taking our culture back from the (((Cultural Marxists))).

      1. I agree that it’s unwise to underestimate an enemy (even Muslims), but epithets and sterotypes are important for propaganda, and any people are ultimately defined by its lowest common denominator. This doesn’t change the facts about Islam (goat-screwing aside) that it was indeed founded by Muhammed, an all around horrible man, and is fundemantally shallow and violent.

      2. An excellent point. If I were from a nation outside of the West (muslim or not), I would feel very strongly that the west is an evil place as I watched millions of women parading around in the streets wearing vagina shaped hats and costumes on television for the entire world to see.

      3. This… 1000%.
        “As a matter of fact, part of the driving force behind the enmity the
        Islamists evidently feel towards us is the seemingly total lack of
        morals and ethics which they perceive permeates our societies.”
        Differences, yes. Need to preserve our own Christian heritage (if it is possible), yes. But Christians and Muslims will agree 100% on what is wrong in The West – abandonment of God and open homosexuality.

        1. I hope you understand that abandoning Christ (I know Islams position, they honor Him but deny His deity and Sonship), is a total non starter for many of us. Believe me embracing the doctrine of Islam on Christ is a source of deep horror to orthodox Christians. We are literally supposed to die before we do something like that.
          To put it in more secular terms it’s like getting the Japanese to abandon the emperor. Even the Japanese communist party didn’t try that.

        2. QUOTE: “Believe me embracing the doctrine of Islam on Christ is a source of deep
          horror to orthodox Christians. We are literally supposed to die before
          we do something like that.”
          All I will say in response to the above is this.
          Contemplate why that is. Why can’t you question this?
          I have much respect for the Orthodox faith and want to do more research. I can see myself in an orthodox church very easily. I really can. But I would hate to choose between the chuch and the mosque. I find so much in both.
          The real change of perspective for me on Islam was when I was watching a former Christian evangelical pastor talk about his conversion to Islam. He was trying to convert a Muslim and had many talks with this man.
          Suddenly, the Muslim said to him “Ok, I will convert if you can answer me one question.”
          The preacher thought he finally had him!!! A Muslim saved by the message and spirit of Christ. The Muslim asked him “I will become Christian if you can prove to me what you believe is true.”
          The preacher said “I can’t prove it. Christ is FAITH!!! That is the miracle and what saves.”
          The Muslim replied… “Well, I need proof or I can convert.”
          The preacher rejoined “What… proof? You really need proof? Does your faith say it can prove what you believe is true?”
          The Muslim at last replied “Do you mean to tell me yours cannot? Muslims have both faith… and proof.”
          THAT… stopped me dead in my tracks. Islam has not just a claim to faith, but PROOF of that faith. I have never heard a Christian tell me they can prove what they believe, they always appeal to faith.
          Maybe there is some merit in faith alone, but that YT video story has stuck with me and I can’t get rid of it. Why can’t we have both proof and faith? Why do I have to program myself to die before I question what I believe?
          As for the Japanese… they should abandon the emperor and would I imagine but for the very reason you used it as analogy – complete inability to question that belief. Good or bad, I don’t know, but absolute blind, unquestioning faith has never sat well with me as a good thing to live one’s life by.
          Not asking you to question, just giving you a different perspective (I probably don’t have to add that but just in case).
          The pre

        3. No offense but that pastor was an idiot.
          Of course you can question it. Apologetics deals with this going back further than Aquinas. CS Lewis popularized one of the most famous arguments for the deity of Christ with the “Lord, liar, or lunatic” question. Shoot in the gospels themselves and acts, you don’t just take Jesus as the Son of God just because someone claims it. The Bible speaks of Jesus showing “many infallible proofs” to the disciples.
          People misunderstand what Faith is. Faith isn’t a magical understanding of the world. Faith is trusting something you can’t see, like trusting in time, space, or gravity is trusting in something real and provable but not seen or touched.
          I’m truly not trying to be offensive but that pastor was either a total jackass or living under some kind of rock. The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel is a very famous work on this topic, so is God in the Dock by CS Lewis and that’s not even going into the doctors of the Church going back centuries or the fact that the Bible tells us to try prophets and spirits to see whether they were from God.
          Of course there is room for doubt in the same sense that there is no purely logical argument against solipsism. Faith is choosing to go with what you know (the “knowledge of Christ”) even though He is not currently seen.
          Ultimately at the moment of salvation God points you to Christ, you receive divine knowledge and God directs you. You have a choice to accept the reality of it or not or not. This is something that enables the very simple and the very wise to believe in Christ. This isn’t a feeling, although strong feelings may accompany it. It is closer to something like spiritual sight. Man can of course choose to pervert, reject, or misunderstand the leading of God but it is a choice God allows.
          This is what the pastor is probably misunderstanding. But even the drawing of men to Christ isn’t faith, faith is the choice to believe what you know to be true. Make no mistake, humans are faced with the choice to believe in reality or not all the time. Many men tragically reject the testimony of their own mind.
          Comparing Islamic apologetics to Christian apologetics is tragic even from a secular perspective. I’ve read Islamic apologetics and it doesn’t function at nearly the same level. Loads of assumptive failures. As well as a tragic blindness at really trying to stress test the Koran. In a way it’s analogous to comparing the Bible to the Koran. Even from a secular perspective, one book is clearly longer, deeper and possessed of more internal logic. Even if you don’t believe either.

        4. As well, the Bible tells you to always be ready to render a reason for the hope that is in us. A reason, not a feeling.
          Man I’m angry at that pastor, I think I even know the one you mean. Please don’t take his idiocy as a reflection of the church, it’s just a reflection of himself.

        5. ” I have never heard a Christian tell me they can prove what they believe, they always appeal to faith.”
          You obviously hang out around the wrong crowd, there are hordes of Christians cranking out solid apologetics, much of it specifically designed to provide evidence. It’s just that most people, Christian or otherwise, don’t really care about evidence (although a lot of atheists pretend they do). That’s just human nature.

        6. But can you refute the logic of the Muslim’s question?
          Case in point… I have learned thanks to a link given to me… that Jesus… according to Catholic church doctrine… was not just a miracle of divine conception, but also one of miraculous birth.

          775. Why call Mary a virgin, seeing that she was a mother. The linking of the two terms is an insult to reason.
          The assertion that an omnipotent God is limited by the natural laws, which He Himself established, is an insult to reason. Jesus, the child of Mary, was conceived miraculously without the intervention of any human father, and was born miraculously, Mary’s virginity being preserved throughout.
          So… without giving me a feeling answer… a rational one… how can you prove a divine birth? Maybe that is my protestant up bringing, and also never thinking about it, but a divine birth?
          No wonder the church had to come out with an answer cause… a lot of people would be like… “How do you call a girl who have birth a virgin? Oh.. she didn’t actually give physical birth, Jesus just what… walked around the corner of the stable then? Was an empty basket when you went left the manger, and a baby in the basket when you came back?”
          That is a LOT to ask of the human intellect… even back then when the science of procreation was still pretty sketchy, but at least acknowledge a physical birth for a physical human being up to that point.
          Again.. not trying to offend any Christian… just trying to understand what they believe.
          So question… in light of new information on Jesus… was their a gestation in the womb or not? How was Mary the mother if there was not a pregnancy? Was her spirit somehow disembodied and merged with God’s (but not in a sexual way)? Was the conception and birth an instant and spontaneous miracle?!?!? Wait… there was some walking being guided by a star right? Mary DID know she was “with child” am I correct? How does this work? I really want to know and the above link does not give the answer (still have to finish reading it but will let you know).

        7. It’s a long answer to actually give, but I will try instead to give the logic behind it.
          The proof of Islam (which means submission) is that God is one. There is no other God (nor son). And Muhammed was the messenger of this proof/truth declaration.
          What Muslims then proceeded to do was… are you ready… intellectually PROVE that God exists. OF course, God does not require proof to exist, but for Man, who has an intellect, he should be able to believe and not insult his intelligence.
          A very quick and dirty proof goes something like this. The car you have in your driveway (lets assume) did not make itself. Someone built it.. i.e created it… and it clearly was build from a plan or design (requiring an intelligence) and for a specific end of transportation (i.e. purpose for its design and creation).
          The longer proof for the existence of God would require a whole article, but it is not dissimilar to the Christian formulation. The argument for God in both Islam and Christianity is, surprise surprise, the same, cause… truth is one, not many.
          The problem is… divine Jesus.
          That.. is the proof the Muslim was asking the preacher for… because as a Muslim, his tradition says he can have faith in God BECAUSE there are proofs to believe what the Quran says about God.
          All the Muslim was asking the preacher was… for the same courtesy to his intellect that Islam already gave him… an explanation of proof, not blind faith.

        8. If God is the author of all life, making a baby without a father is a no brainer.
          God chose to have Mary be the mother of Jesus so that He would have the full experience of humanity. To be a man in full, a human being in full.
          Virginity means that Mary had never had sex. No penetration. Pregnancy to delivery with no sex. Hence the miracle. Of course there was a physical birth, the Bible says Jesus was born. Mary came to delivery.
          An angel didn’t just come to Mary, an angel also came to Joseph that’s the specific bit. He was going to put her away originally. So again, witness testimony.
          If you’re really interested there are great Catholic and Protestant resources available, Catholic Answers, etc.
          I’m not sure where some of your information is coming from but you have to read apologetics from both sides to have a valid answer.
          Can I refute the Muslims logic? Yes here and in my reply earlier in the thread we have.

        9. Ah, so this Muslim fellow got stuck on the concept of the Holy Trinity.
          Arius – founder of the Arian heresy – also got stuck on the problem, and God helped him closer to the truth by shitting his bowels out in a bloody mess.
          Don’t be Arius, or Mohammed for that matter.

          The Trinity is not an insult to human intellect, unless it’s thought to be borne from the human mind. However, since the Trinity preceded our human intellect, the fact that we know it (however limited) is a privileged revelation, and thus a key to understanding how and why we exist in this world (this is why universities, hospitals, arts and social order flourished like mad during the Middle Ages; we call this circumstantial evidence of the truth of Catholic Christianity). Mohammedans may like to call their religion “Submission”, but it is Catholic Christianity’s reverence for the infinite Holy Trinity that is the true submission, because it historically evolved civilisation*, as it was meant to do.
          Islam, like Protestant Christianity, tries to make God completely and utterly understandable to the human mind, and thus creates a false notion of God, or a false god altogether in the case of Islam. Both of these forms of belief have regressed civilisation, as a false idea should do*.
          *My idea that Catholic Christianity essentially built Western Civilisation, the greatest civilisation of all time, is not new. You would have heard it before, but it’s worth mentioning again, because it is true. It’s also worth mentioning that after the 16th century, the so-called Renaissance period (in particular renaissance humanism), the so-called Scientific Revolution, and the so-called Enlightenment were conceited notions that were actually the progenitors of our current decadence. You’ve heard since a child that these paradigm shifts pulled us out of the “Dark Ages” and brought about happiness and prosperity… and yet, here we are, watching everything crumble. If you ever wanted to know why SJWs Always Lie, it goes back about 400 years.

        10. He got stuck because… it does not make sense. If I understand Christianity better, it really is “the mystery” that is the faith. Hence, suspension of the intellect is not ignorant per se, it is simply accepting God as so transcendent and beyond knowing that Man should simply stop inquiring into Him and believe. I think there is some merit in the perils of too much thinking, but it seems from the link kindly referred to me by another commenter, (Catholic Apologetics Online) thinking is precisely why Christianity is in so much trouble.
          Yes, I think you are correct in saying Islam tries to make God “simpler”, but that would make sense coming from a Christian, and a Catholic specifically. The entire library of official church doctrine on questions put to the church… was required because there were CLEARLY a lot of questions being asked about how and why to believe what the Church was asking someone to believe.
          God gave us an intellect to find Him. Yes, by choice we can lead ourselves away from God, but coming to know God should not require some huge, labyrinthian intellectual/theological response. (See the entries in Catholic apologetics below.)
          You say that it was the intellectual spirit that stripped Europe of God (i.e. Darwinisim, Kant, etc), but I would suggest it is the opposite. The church doctrines could simply no longer stand up to scrutiny in the face of scientific evidence, Galileo and the heilocentric universe being the most famous example. A faith… can’t expect to keep followers… if evidence of its false doctrines… continue to mount. As long as Europe was medieval and in the dark, The Roman Catholic Church flourished. As soon as science came along and tried to improve the condition of man materially, the Church got huffy.
          I will tell you why the west is collapsing.
          Christianity… in its full catholic apologetics and theological gymanstics… has for 2000 years… asked man to NOT use his intellect to ask rational questions and demand proof for one’s faith… but instead “just believe” because this book or that pope has declared the doctrines of Christ to be settled on certain lines of inquiry, and must be obeyed.
          Can you say feminism/marxism/SJW/gender theory?
          These leftists are asking for the SAME SUSPENSION of the intellect. The SAME enforcement, by force, of inflexible, dogmatic doctrine that cannot stand up to intellectual inquiry.
          I wonder why The West fell prey to such suspension of rational inquiry, for the personal demand that what one believes can be proven to be true, as opposed to simply declaring it and then intellectualizing (feminist / queer theology, let’s call a spade a spade).
          The West… as Christians… has a history… of believing… what it is told… based on nothing more than loud claims to authority with huge institutions (church, no the universities) to never question its dogma and laws in its books (see feminist queer writings).
          I know why SJWs lie. Christians in the West have been lying to themselves for 2000 years on the nature of God and Jesus. All I am doing is pointing out the parallels. You don’t have to see them if you don’t want to.

          On Mary
          759. Let us turn from your dogma of Christ to those dogmas concerning your goddess Mary.
          761. Yet you insist that she is the Mother of God!
          762. How could Mary be the mother of the One who created her?
          763. Does not the Catholic Church insist also upon the biologically impossible dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary herself?
          764. According to Catholic doctrine the Sacrament of Baptism destroys original sin. Would you say that Mary did not need Baptism?
          765. If Mary was sinless, she could not have needed redemption! Yet is not Christ the Redeemer of every child of Adam?
          766. Is there any evidence in Scripture that Mary was indeed never actually subject to original sin?
          767. St. Paul says that One died for all, and therefore all were dead. II.Cor. V., 14.
          768. St. John knew the Mother of Christ better than the others, yet he does not mention her Immaculate Conception!
          769. Did the early Church know anything of this doctrine?
          770. Your infallible Church allowed St. Bernard to remain in ignorance of this doctrine.
          771. Did not St. Thomas Aquinas deny the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?
          772. Why did the Church withhold that honor from Mary for so long a time?
          773. Did not Franciscans and Dominicans attack each other bitterly over the Immaculate Conception?
          774. Did not Philip III. and Philip IV. ask the Popes Paul V., Gregory V., and Alexander VII. to define the Immaculate
          775. Why call Mary a virgin, seeing that she was a mother. The linking of the two terms is an insult to reason.
          776. Where does it say in Scripture that Mary was ever a virgin?
          777. Did not Mary, to cloak her own sin, persuade St. Joseph that her child was of the Holy Ghost?
          778. If Jesus was born of a virgin why does He say nothing about it?
          779. To prove Davidic descent both Matthew and Luke give the genealogy of Joseph, useless were not Joseph the father of Christ.
          780. St. Matthew says that Joseph knew her not till she brought forth her first-born son. I., 25.
          781. Matt. XIII, 55-56, says, “His brethren James and Joseph, and Simon and Judes and His sisters, are they not all with us?”
          782. There would not be two girls in the one family called Mary.
          783. Why are Protestants, who believe in Scripture, so convinced that Mary had other children?
          784. You urge these privileges granted to Mary as the foundation of your devotion to her, yet Christ said, “Rather blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it.”
          785. Row do you Drove Mary’s bodily assumption into Heaven?

        11. “Pregnancy to delivery with no sex.”
          “Of course there was a physical birth, the Bible says Jesus was born.”
          I want to warn you… according to OFFICIAL Church Catholic doctrine… Mary… did NOT give physical birth to God. That is a disgusting insult to the blessed Virgin, the Mother of our Lord & Saviour. Jesus was a pure miracle birth. He just came into existence, fully born, with no physical delivery because that is the power of God. (See link and quote below.)
          Are you a heretic? Did you not know this question of a physical birth by Mary was denounced as heresy?
          From the apologetics of the Catholic Church found here… unless these are false… God, it is so confusing.

          775. Why call Mary a virgin, seeing that she was a mother. The linking of the two terms is an insult to reason. The assertion that an omnipotent God is limited by the natural laws, which He Himself established, is an insult to reason.
          the child of Mary,
          was conceived miraculously
          without the intervention of any human father,
          Mary’s virginity being preserved throughout.
          I do not claim that any natural laws were responsible for this event. I claim that God was responsible, and the only way you can show that the doctrine is not reasonable is by proving that there is no God, or that He could not do what Catholic doctrine asserts.

        12. Born miraculously does not mean not born physically. You’re reading in a meaning that isn’t in the answer.
          Besides, that’s a guy on the radio. That’s not the catechism. The catechism contains the official doctrine and even then not all doctrine is dogma. So even if the guy did say what you’re reading in, it wouldn’t matter. But of course, he didn’t.
          I don’t know its a heresy to believe in the physical birth of Christ because it isn’t.
          You’ve got to come at me with official doctrine from recognized sources in clear language. I’m fighting a straw man here, although you may not know that. Not trying to be rude, I don’t expect you to be an expert on Christian doctrine.

        13. This one will be short… because it is the root of why Christianity is in the problem that it is in.
          “You’ve got to come at me with official doctrine”
          “Born miraculously does not mean not born physically.”
          What are we talking about here? Is it God? No, it is the “truth” of physical vs miraculous birth of a God-man.
          This is why men left the church. It started with the intellectuals of the Enlightenment. The masses followed soon afterward.
          Their is no intelligence in arguing about the birth of God from a virgin as physical or a miracle. It is complete nonsense and if THAT is the foundation of your faith… for your morals… can you understand why people have left it for leftism/atheism/paganism/buddhism/Islam… all of these faiths are growing… in The West. I understand some will argue Christianity is rising in asia and elsewhere… but that would make sense since they are still much in the pagan mind (i.e. more matriarchal than patriarchal).
          It’s been a good conversation, but my head hurts. I just hope you can see, and respect, why so many people cannot go back to the church so long as it clings to these old, pagan doctrines for faith.

        14. “there are hordes of Christians cranking out solid apologetics”
          Short refutation… which apologetics are true doctrine? Seems there is a lot of debate and division over that. One person linked me to some where Mary, I have learned, gave a miracle birth (not from the womb/vagina). Another said “The Bible clearly states she gave birth.” as if to imply there WAS a physical birth of the God-man Jesus. When I pointed out the apologetics website this other person linked for me… he said there are a lot of “untrue” refutations (i.e. apolgetics) and then proceeded to tell me the the birth Mary had was a miracle, after he stated the Bible clearly said she “gave birth”.
          And here we are… not saying ONE word about God, but trying to figure out how a human female gave birth to a God-man.
          This has been an interesting experience, but more and more, I understand why no thinking person talks to Christians and the churches are empty. There is SO MUCH TIME WASTED just trying to talk/prove Jesus the man-god… all the amazing moral lessons for guidance… are forgotten or people so turned off by the anti-intellectual foundations of the Christians argument… that even if he has a good moral claim, no one will believe him.

        15. “Faith is trusting something you can’t see, like trusting in time, space, or gravity is trusting in something real and provable but not seen or touched.”
          But we CAN prove these things… empirically through science AND intellectually through metaphysical investigation (i.e math/physics).
          So… you should be able to prove the God-man theory of Christ, not just fall back on witnesses (from a book with many authors and questionable authorship).
          I thank you and the others for your vigorous defenses, but as I above to another comment… I now know why no one talks to Christians anymore and the churches are empty. You can’t get past the Jesus stuff to the moral lessons, and the talk of the Jesus stuff turns of anyone with a thinking mind. Nothing the Christian has to say about moral guidance is listened to anymore FOR THAT VERY REASON. The Christian argument against this (from what I have received in comments here) is that “You just don’t take the time to read the apologetics/defences. All the proof for Christ is there.”
          But I AM doing that, even with sources, given to me today… and then I am told “those are not true doctrine” and once again “I am not taking the time to be open to learning the proofs of Christ.” I am…. I have questions… no one has the answers… and I am blamed for not doing the work to learn the truth of Christ or WORST OF ALL… “Well, the proofs are there, if you don’t want to believe, that is your problem.”
          Empty churches… and Christians don’t know why western man left Christ.

        16. so by “proving” that god exists, it automatically proves that islam is the true religion?

        17. Most people in the West are not believing Christians and the Trinity is an absurdity. Indeed, it is the Doctrine of the Trinity that is the Achilles heel of Christianity. Well, Achilles has just been shot in the heel.

        18. If you are atheist/agnostic, you are more likely to accept the reasoning of Islam than the totalitarian requirement of Christianity to believe in the absurdity of the Trinity.

        19. Christianity is only viable in an age of superstition and almost universal illiteracy, but unsustainable when people have easy access to the internet and other competing religions.

        20. You can’t talk to us because you don’t understand us because you don’t want to. Hence the personal turn you’ve taken here.
          Are you kidding? Churches were full the more orthodox the church was and the more the gospel was preached. Jesus IS the intellectual stuff.
          I have directed you to resources, to intellectual giants like Aquinas and more accessible resources like Strobels writings. I have made arguments that were valid, even if you don’t like them. Don’t put your frustrations on me.
          You demand reason, I offered you reason and then you say “that’s not reason” and try another tactic without actually arguing the point. Accidental straw men and claiming the churches are empty because of me are not reason or evidence either.
          I am not responsible if you won’t do the research or listen to reason.

        21. “I am not responsible if you won’t do the research or listen to reason.”
          My conclusion confirmed. Legitimate people… are turned away if they persist in questioning.
          I have done the research. I have been open. The problem is… definitions. Logical, clearly defined definition of terms, when speaking with a Christian.
          God is immaterial, uncreated and transcendent of this world in his essence.
          Man is material, a created being in his essence, and passes away from this world.
          Explain to me a God-Man?
          Can Man have a part of God in him?( Soul spirit). Can man have a connection to God do to this breath given to him by God? Yes, there is nothing in compatible with this as the two definitions (God and Man) remain SEPARATE and logically consistent. There is nothing illogical about saying the human material body is a vessel for the spirit.
          But what the Christian is asking me is…
          That Jesus… is not just a strong spirit connection to God. The Christian is saying… Jesus IS God, IS the immaterial… AND… also WHOLLY human.
          You can’t have it both ways.
          But of course, it is me who does not do the research or listen to reason.
          Try to see things from outside the Christian perspective just to understand a non-Christians point of view.
          You an prove God. You can prove Man. You can prove God’s spirit IN man. You cannot prove a God-Man unless you suspend the intellect and accept this “fact” on blind faith.

        22. No… but proving God exists to someone who is currently an atheist (The West)… would go a LONG way to getting The West back on track. The West went of the rails…. when it killed God, ask Nietzsche. Getting God back into western man’s mind is the root solution to its problems. What path western man takes from there is up to him, but I am truly beginning to see it will be neither Christianity or Islam as formulated – both have problems. Islam at least is closer to the truth, damn close, but needs reform. Which is why I wrote this essay… Europeans WILL change Islam and Islam will be better for it in my opinion.

        23. Oh for goodness sake, read Aquinas and tell me what you don’t understand. Just because you can’t explain it doesn’t make it not real. It’s an easy look up just go to Catholic Encyclapedia’s Summa section. Find an error there and show it to me. I see no necessary contradiction in God and Man being united in one person if God makes it so. He made the rules of what man is, why is this a limitation on God that He cannot do so?
          Confirm nothing, I’m not turning you away from legit questioning. I’m still talking to you aren’t I?
          You have to do your part. You say it can’t be proven but you haven’t shown me why I’m wrong in saying that it is. You have to show me the error in my reasoning to be arguing legitimately.
          And seriously, do I sound like a “know nothing” to you? If I did would this conversation have persisted as long as it has?
          You’re clearly willing to wrestle over this and that’s good. But we’ve got to keep arguing this straight.

        24. Ok… I am trying to do my part and you are too, so let’s keep trying. I will keep my “find an error” to JUST this last reply, strictly for simplicity.
          Do you, or do you not, believe their are definite… DEFINITIONS… of words for use in a logical argument?
          Example: I say “apple”, you say “apple” and we BOTH AGREE that “apple” is what it is and can be nothing else. From there, we can both use the word “apple” and we understand, intellectually, which is to say intelligibly, what we are both talking about. We can be “on the same page” as they say.
          QUOTE:”I see no necessary contradiction in God and Man being united in one person if God makes it so.”
          Ok… you are using two “apples” in this statement/conclusion of Christian fact.
          1) God. 2) Man. If you go up to my last reply, I tried to DEFINE these two “apple” terms so we can both be “on the same page” when trying to have a discussion.
          Now… the Christian… unites these two words, these to definitions, into one… God-Man. They do this DESPITE the one (God) being the polar and completely incompatible opposite of the other (Man).
          Let’s be clear about the meaning of incompatible: “(of two things) so opposed in character as to be INCAPABLE OF EXISTING TOGETHER.”
          Of course… I can only assume we both UNDERSTAND the same term when we both say God to mean the immaterial and permanent, and Man to mean the material and that which passes away.
          These two things/terms/words/definitions/meanings… material/matter and immaterial/transcendent… are incompatible. They CANNOT merge into one “thing” without completely negating what they both are into non existence.
          It is intellectual GYMNASTICS to try and do so (i.e. Christian apologetics), not intellectual REASONING. Christians perform intellectual gymnastics (“He made the rules of what man is, why is this a limitation on God that He cannot do so?”) so they can reconcile two polar opposite and incompatible “apples” when having a conversation with a non-Christian.
          Now… to refute why this is NOT a limitation on God to say he cannot become a God-Man. For one, can God create an object so heavy He cannot lift it? Or course not. God is all powerful, and can create anything, but if he created a rock heavy enough He could not lift it, He would not be God.
          Therefore, it is NOT a limitation that God CANNOT become Man, it is in COMPLETE AGREEMENT with who God IS (i.e. as we have both agreed to define Him to be in order to have a discussion) that He cannot do something that would render His existence null and void. There is a REASON (not gymnastics) that God is not of this world, and we can never truly know him. He created the world and us, but He is NOT us and never can be because to DO so, what negate His existence.
          So… unless you are prepared to say that a Christian CANNOT DEFINE THE TERMS HE USES IN AN ARGUMENT as proof of his beliefs because… can you guess where I am going with this I am sure… God “Can do anything”… THEN… you have a consistent basis for which I can understand how you reason and argue your position. I.e. The Christian will use terms I THOUGHT I understood the meaning of, but “because God” is a rational gymnastic “argument” to change the MEANING & DEFINITION of terms at any time, I can in no way SAY ANYTHING FOR CERTAIN, ABOUT ANYTHING, in response because the Christian can say “God made it so.” and changed the very definition and meaning of a word I THOUGHT I understood the meaning of… to something completely different.
          Can you follow what I am saying? Can you try to understand that their is a process, a legitimate science as it were, of philosophic inquiry using logic with defined terms to try to come to knowledge and truth. If God can change the definitions at will… there is no way for Man to come to know the truth and thus no way for Man to come to Know God… because He Himself can, at any time, change who He is and thus be unable to ever be known.
          Either God IS… or he is NOT. The Christian “God”, as THEY define Him, is an IS-NOT, a God-Man, in Jesus, Lord & Saviour.

        25. OK good, I see where you are coming from. And yes we ought to be able to define terms.
          I think where we disagree, the crux, is the nature of man and what it means to be a man.
          Man proper is a physical and material being, but is also a spiritual being, something immaterial and immortal.
          Hence the unity of God and Man is the unity of two different spiritual natures, one of these spiritual natures also possessing a body.
          So it is not a case of two contra posing natures uniting so much as the unity of two like substances. It is important to note that this is not God indwelling but One Part of God, the Son or the Word, being completely unified with human nature.
          As Athanasius put it this union is analogous to the union of my own soul and body. I am my soul and I am also my body. One animates and acts on the other, even though the substances are very different, as Divine and human substances are very different.

        26. Ok… getting to the heart of the question. I agree 100% with the above. No problem for me.
          The crux… as you say… is this.
          Do you say Christ IS God? Or do you say Christ is MAN, with a divine spirit, but NOT God?
          In my knowledge of Christianity, the former is the basis of Christian faith, the latter is the description of Man’s relation to God (per above reply).
          The Crux is… Christ… is both MAN… AND… GOD… both terms… 100%… in there full definition. Hence, my and many other critics of Christianity… the unsolvable contradiction to intelligence.
          Keep Jesus a MAN… with a supremely divine nature… perhaps even direct connection to God (i.e. Buddhist enlightenment)… this is workable intellectually.
          But to ask me to believe Christ is both Man AND God…
          That is the crux. We have arrived at the point someone makes the personal choice to believe by faith alone… or “reject” Christ and believe in God alone (but be condemned to Hell according to church doctrine).

        27. We’re on the right track. The belief is Jesus Christ is fully God and fully Man. What might help is to emphasize that God took on the humanity of Christ. Jesus did not become God. God took on flesh and human spirit.
          Personally I just don’t see why it would be irreconcilable. Paradoxical sure, but necessarily contradictory. Not a true contradiction. Kind of like Xeno’s paradox, Xeno didn’t see how it worked but he did know that it did work.
          I would emphasize again that you don’t believe by faith alone. Ultimately the Holy Spirit points you to Jesus and you have a choice to believe or not.
          This is no pseudo mystical make believe, “I believe because I believe”. It is I believe because I know.
          Even Paul himself knew it would be a stumbling block at the time to both Jew and Greek. Which is admirable honesty, don’t you think?

        28. “God took on flesh and human spirit.”
          This is where we have to part ways. You can’t conflate flesh and God and call them one and the same. Literal God… became literal flesh. And to think… we got this far without trying to bring in the third gymnast… the spirit! LOL 🙂
          QUOTE: “This is no pseudo mystical make believe, “I believe because I believe”. It is I believe because I know.”
          SJW – Gender is a social construct and all white people are racist. I don’t believe this because I believe. I believe it because I know it is true.
          See what I did there? Intellectual gymnastics. You even allude to the fact that Paul knew this was going to be a tough sell… which is why the Jews did not buy it and the Greeks had question, after question, after question. So was Paul honest? I guess, but he pushed the mental gymnastics anyway knowing it had the shakiest of foundations when examined closely. Every synagogue he took his message to he had his ass tossed out…. by a people who are famous for ripping apart logical arguments and debating those you wish to perform rhetorical flourishes for attention without having any actual substance to their words. Just try this same exercise we just did with a Jew and see how politely you are treated!
          I think we… or at least myself… have come to the end. I have a good enough understanding now having taken this long to get to this point of how Christians will argue their position. I respect the position to accept the mystical/miracle, but if Christians truly want to know why The West walked out en masse from the church… it is all in this comment thread.
          Thank you for your contributions and I hope I did not offend too much. It’s so easy for words on a computer screen to be misconstrued (i.e. emotion and tone projected where none was intended).

        29. That is poppycock. The vast majority of the early Church was Jewish. Many of the first churches began in synagogues. The first great council of the Church was regarding whether or not Gentiles could be part of the same. Paul was literally the only Apostle to the Gentiles. Yes, Christianity exponentially grew in the Gentile West, but the bedrock of the religion was and still is Jewish.
          As for the “you can’t conflate flesh and God” bit – the God I believe in can do whatever He so pleases. Which includes taking mankind into Himself to redeem it from the corruption from which it could not restore itself.

        30. as an ex-muslim i have to tell you that you are seriously deluded, the worst thing in the world according to islam is changes in its belief system and they will kill you for trying to promote them

        31. Does that mean you think I am going to hell? Which way was “it” supposed to go? Just a question… and trying to keep my responses to less than biblical length as per one comment I got. LOL 🙂

        32. One sentence reply. Awesome! LOL Touche. The trouble is, we are returning to times when we can’t laugh at the line neither one will cross and simply enjoy life. To much hate out there now to allow those that disagree to simply agree that is the case and go share a beer.

        33. They will try, I have no doubt… but that very stance is WHY Christianity failed in its formulation and why we are now seeing Islam fail with its hardened, literallist, racial/conquer stance. Islam may win The West, but The West will change it, mark my words.

        34. “the God I believe in can do whatever He so pleases”
          Awesome! So… if God decides to save me… there is literally nothing I can do wrong. Live a good life, believe in God, sin by accident or design…. saved by God’s will and his alone. The Christian, after THAT above statement, has no right or authority to condemn anyone to hell for not believing in Christ. If God so will’s it, His will will be done.

        35. You’re right in that the Christian has no right to condemn anyone to hell. The Father has given that authority to the Son alone, Who will judge the living and the dead on the Last Day.

        36. Yes. As is the Son and the Holy Spirit. “I and the Father are One.” Straight from Jesus’ own mouth. You can call Him a liar, of course, but you certainly can’t claim Him as an advocate of Islam.

        37. @maximus_decimus_2016:disqus Okay I had to look this one up because I didn’t know it myself, but this is what the Council of Trent has to say:
          The Catechism of the Council of Trent says: “He is born of his Mother without any diminution of her maternal virginity … Just as the rays of the sun penetrate without breaking or injuring in the least the solid substance of glass, so after a like but more exalted manner did Jesus Christ come forth from His Mother’s womb without injury to her maternal virginity … To Eve it was said: ‘In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children.’ Mary was exempt from this law, for preserving her virginal integrity inviolate she brought forth Jesus, the Son of God, without experiencing … any sense of pain.”

        38. Maximus, you are distracting yourself from reality. By thinking about miracles. They are miracles.
          More important are the virtues. The “Enlightenment” was an pseudo-scientific movement full of lies (about the Religion) and full of esoteric bullshit – just read the books from back then. About Magick, Masonic bullshit and so on.
          Catholic Christianity is the friendly take over of pagan cultures, removing the bad things (Daemons) and putting in the truth.
          And Pagan is not matriarchal. That’s stupid. A pagan woman was pregnant all the time – for her whole life (20 jears). They did nothing else then beeing pregnant. Nothing more but also nothing less.

        39. “Awesome! So… if God decides to save me… there is literally nothing I can do wrong. Live a good life, believe in God, sin by accident or design…. saved by God’s will and his alone. ”
          Thats how an 16 year old boy with an boner thinks about God.
          Start thinking and man up. Grow some balls and start to ask yourself WHY do you think that Logic has to be Logically.

        40. Everything is without logic. It does not want to be reasonable. The Koran is completly unlogically and idiotic.

        41. Yea…. thinking too much like… hey… birth was once a miracle too you know… the “river” or the “west wind” used to bring the miracle of “pregnancy” to The Great Mother Goddess of each tribe. It’s a miracle boys!!!! Now get to work!!! We got mouths to feed. Yes you… the loser I have NEVER had sex with and spit on every time you look at me. It is your responsibility to help the tribe’s newly delivered “miracles” survive. And if you don’t, I will get my big sexy boy toy who FUCKS THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF ME to beat you to within an inch of your life. No… just because my “miracle” looks like him does NOT make him the “father”. You losers and this father business… who do you think you are!!! Subversives. Anarchists. Terrorists!!!! The Mother Goddess has ALWAYS brought the miracle of human life by HER will and HER will alone. The sexy men fight. We fuck them. You cast out and shunned, sexless losers WORK FOR THE MIGHTY MOTHER GODDESS and her miracle progeny, and the elite alpha fucks males that “protect” our miracles. This is the way it has ALWAYS been, it is the way it will ALWAYS be, it is… the great “miracle” of life. Stop thinking about the miracle human beings that come from our wombs, start worshiping the Mother Goddess and do your duty onto her!!!
          If THAT… sounds frighteningly familiar… you should ponder a matriarchal pagan past a little deeper than you currently do.
          With respect… I know you have not read enough on pagan religions of the past. What we have in the historical record is the beginning of a patriarchal revolution from a pure matriarchal past. Paternity… was just one of those “miracles” a few men started to think a little too much about. Which is why some of the most visceral and successful critics of Christianity (that the church was forced to combat) were pagan men questioning the idea of a virgin birth in an EMERGING PATRIARCHAL SYSTEM that was destroying the “miracles” of the goddess on the daily once men took over the tribe in full.
          I doubt I can convince you of this from your words above, but do look further back. Pre-Greece and back into pre-history. It is Goddess worship and nothing but. Where do you think all the “magick” and bullshit came from?
          Let me give you a start.

          “The ceremony involved sinking sacrifices into the earth by night and
          retrieving the decaying remains of pigs that had been placed the
          previous year in the megara of Demeter, trenches and pits or natural clefts in rock (compare megaron). As snakes were known to congregate in such pits, the scholiast on Lucian
          explains, those who didn’t go to retrieve the remains shouted to scare
          away any that might be lurking down there. After prayers the fetid
          remains of the pigs from the previous year were mixed with seeds and
          planted (Scholiast on Lucian): this is, Burkert observes, “the clearest
          example in Greek religion of agrarian magic.”[9]”
          You… I, and many men, think too much about the “miracles” of the goddess.

        42. “start to ask yourself WHY do you think that Logic has to be Logically.”
          I might be thinking with a boner, but I would never write that and try to expect someone to take me seriously. Just saying is all… READ… what you wrote and what I am to conclude from it.
          Balls? I have them. Fully grown and no need to swing them at anyone to prove anything. I don’t take offense where clear offense was meant to be given. You are free to try again if you wish.

        43. you are arguing like a little boy. That’s the problem. Your thoughts about God is stucked in pre puperty (or how you americans name this).
          If you really wan’t to know whats with this god thing is, then start to research correctly. We have tenthousends of books about this – stop looking at stupid atheistic “debunks” and start to read real stuff.
          If you wan’t to know how rocket science works, you read rocket-science stuff. If you wan’t to know how cars work, you start to read from people who know what they are writing about.
          So stop behaving like an stubborn kid, start reading about God and Christianity. Stop beeing stubborn “it can’t be, because i can’t see it” – read Agustine from Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, the other Church Fathers and Teachers – there are LOTS of them. About 500 people who have written about 10.000 Books.
          But if you close your eyes and close your ears – like a stubborn kid, you will not understand anything. The God thing is easy to understand, it is not complicated and the truth is easy. The main problem is that lot’s of people don’t want to listen because they think that fucking around with X amount of woman is good for them and they don’t want to take responsibility and stop consuming without end like an decadent brat.
          You don’t even know what Augustine said.. “Please god make me chaste, but not yet now”.

        44. Just read 2 seconds in the Koran. This “book” is sorted after the lenght of the sentences……. Shortest sentence at the beginning, longest sentence at the end.
          Have you EVER hold an koran in your hand????

        45. The numbers are supernatural. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. You can’t see them, but they exist. And they will exist if the whole Univers exploded.

        46. after beeing 10 years pagan with wicca, slavic, german and celtic rituals i just saw that it is like this:
          1. Imaginary interpretation of “beautiful cultures before christianity”. They just ignored the killings of children for Thor by an Hammer.
          2. Just silly stupid stories, in where they drunk to much and had to much other substances. It is all about “sex”, “dead”, “war”, and the “circle of live”.
          The miracles in the bible are against the natural preception of People and they where against recognizing them already written in the Bible. Even in the old testament. This miracle are showing to the Humans that this are exeptions to the normal realistic word – and therfor christianity is hard against magical wishing, magical rituals and magical thinking.
          This rituals and other stuff does not work. Praying that God heals my broken heard and helps me to be a better Man helps a lot.
          The hole in our heart can only be closed with the eternal love – and this love comes trough god too us. No manufactured cultish rituals without any rationality.

        47. ” It is all about “sex”, “dead”, “war”, and the “circle of life”.
          You just described a pagan matriarchal society to perfection. That is… all it is about. Sex (procreation), the dead (replacing them), war (the tribe’s fight for survival) and the circle of life (womb to man to
          womb, earth to life to earth).
          Paganism today is a twisted, modern infantile offshoot of the true thing, but the essence is the same… a complete rejection of love, truth and justice. It is all about “ma feels”, hence the common use of alcohol and drugs.
          Praying to God is good for the soul and one’s spirit. There is nothing wrong in Christianity in that sense because it is pointing to the source of love. The problem I find (and is in evidence with its collapse), is the
          formulation that once worked, is no longer, for too many people.

        48. Look kid… because you must be a kid, I will cut you some slack because you are passionate, but that is it. I have read more than you most likely and if you can’t see what I see, that is not my problem. I don’t have to PROVE anything to you. When you have knowledge, you don’t have to argue it or call others ignorant and question their virility (Grow some balls and start to ask yourself WHY do you think that Logic has to be Logically.) If you don’t like what I have to say about Christianity, maybe you need to talk to MORE people outside your faith. My critique of it is not just atheist talking points, they go ALL THE WAY back to the Arian Controversy.

          Arian… in trying to convert pagans… was always getting the standard and obvious reply “You worship three gods, not one.” Augustine, Aquinas, et all can write a whole universe around The Trinity, that still won’t get around the fact Christianity has divided the single God they worship into three parts and venerate (i.e. worship) all three. There is no point arguing this with a Christian because logic ends where faith begins, and the Trinity is an article of Christian faith and thus impossible to debate objectively with a true Christian.
          I have been more than courteous enough in trying to honestly reply to your comments, but this continual attack on my person and knowledge is… well… beneath you and embarrassing to yourself. Keep up your faith and don’t let my words or anyone else’s upset you too much. If you don’t like what you read, stop reading. But if you are going to try and make a counter argument, do so with more intelligence and respect, it will go a lot farther.

        1. No we do not. Christians worship Jesus Christ. The Koran explicitly states that it is impossible that God have a son.

        2. In full sincerity, I am trying to help. I want Christianity to return if it is able to. Take the below as a sincere effort to try and get you to SEE the world as a non Christian sees it… the ones you are trying to bring back to Christ. If all you have is “believe and obey”, Christianity is dead.
          How does God have a son?
          Does it sound reasonable that God would have a son through the material womb of a human female? To come out from her vagina and be God… but also the Son of Himself? Did God have an umbilical cord that needed to be cut? Sorry to be so blunt… but there is no time for sugar coating the intellectual foundation of Christianity if it is going to reform and be accepted again.
          1) Do you believe Jesus came out of Mary’s physical womb?
          2) If yes, then did the God Himself come into the world through Mary’s Womb?
          And many other questions:
          – When did God become Jesus the Son? In the womb? After 30 years?
          – Asked another way, when did Jesus become God?
          – If the answer is God IS Jesus and are one, then who is The Son?
          These are rational questions. You cannot just dismiss them as ignorance of Christianity. That is to belittle people who are honestly trying to understand what you believe without giving them a chance.
          At the HEART of the current intellectual foundation of the Christian faith – God from a female womb/vagina – is what you are asking me to believe among a whole host of other “facts” that I am just supposed to take on faith because… it was revealed (i.e. divine / revealed truth).
          And you can’t deny it. Jesus… is God’s Son, and He came into the world THROUGH MARY… and the only way He could do that was… through her vagina after gestating for 9 months in the womb, granting even virgin conception.
          A Christian cannot get around this fact as the foundation of their faith – God came out of a vagina.
          Or is that not how Jesus came to be God in human form? Correct me if I am wrong? Is there a miracle stork that is missing from the story at Christmas so Mary did not have to actually, physically, go into labor and push out God between her legs?
          Again.. to Christians… please do not be upset with my questioning. This is what you are asking me to believe.
          Did God have sex with Mary? Ok… His spirit was placed inside the womb. But I thought it was God in the womb, the literal logos of all, not just his spirit, implying that spirit is something connecting God to Man, but not God himself.
          Is the spirit the spirit of God or Jesus? When did the spirit come into being? Before inception to enable it, after birth, to inspire prophecy, after Jesus died to spread the word? Which is it?
          And on and on and on and on and on….
          If God created the natural truths / laws that govern His creation, why would his revelation negate and make invalid the laws of his own creation to the very mind of Man given a part of His intellect in order to come to know him?’
          In short… why does God insult my intelligence, that He gave me to know Him, in order to believe?
          All you can really reply in answer, in full honesty is…
          The Bible is divine revelation… it says so… believe or go to hell (literally).
          This argument does not.. and will not… fly in the 21st century.
          If you truly want to save Europe, save Christianity in Europe, you MUST come up with a better argument for God and his moral law than Islam is now offering. You can say “God has spoken, it is up to Man to obey.” and I will say “Ok, I will obey Islam and the God that makes sense to me in the Quran.” And Christianity is now a page in the history books.

        3. All of your questions to Christianity are answered here:
          God Bless

        4. Thank you for the link. I will read through it. But do understand… almost the entire site (as quickly reviewed) is rendered null and void and in NO NEED OF EXPLANATION… if Christ is simply a man. THAT is how much baggage to the intellect you can remove from Christianity by simply being open to reason and change.
          Never mind that the section on Mary confirms God Himself did come out from between her legs.
          Seriously. God… He that created ALL… came out from between a woman’s legs?

        5. Real quick… it seems the Church has decided Jesus was a miraculous birth!!!
          775. Why call Mary a virgin, seeing that she was a mother. The linking of the two terms is an insult to reason.The
          assertion that an omnipotent God is limited by the natural laws, which
          He Himself established, is an insult to reason. Jesus, the child of
          Mary, was conceived miraculously without the intervention of any human
          father, and was born miraculously, Mary’s virginity being preserved
          Jesus… just appeared! I apologize for my vulgar use of such disgusting terms as womb and vagina, but now, I have to believe a material human baby… just… appeared!
          And Christians wonder why no one goes to church anymore.

        6. No, the evil, loveless, punishing Jehovah of the Jews is not God, just their tribal demon.
          The good news arrived with Christ, about the real God who loves us.

        7. Not only did God come out from between a young woman’s legs,
          He was delivered into a food bowl in an animal shelter,
          His family set themselves up in the poor town of Bethlehem
          He grew up as a poor carpenter like his surrogate father,
          His colleagues were uneducated fishermen,
          He died the death of a common thief, hence the crucifixion.

          As you can tell, God is the greatest author of irony the world has ever seen. This is why Catholics are good at art – we simply get it.
          This is why Protestants and Muslims suck at art – they take everything at face value, make a mess of it, and subsequently destroy it.

        8. Respectfully… if you need a miracle to believe in God (as Christians do with the virgin conception AND birth I have now learned, so I think you for that)… Do you have faith? Do you actually believe?
          I don’t require any sign from God to believe in Him. All I require is proof, and that is enough.

        9. I see your point and I will follow you down the rabbit hole
          How can a being which exists outside of the Laws of nature prove to you he exists if not through Miracles?
          If God were to appear to you in the flesh and say “I am God” you would say: “prove it” How would he prove it not doing a Miracle?
          To answer your question no we do not need miracles per-se to have believe in God, but they help and he gives them to us to strengthen us in the faith, so that we can be reminded of his awesome power when we grow weak which happens from time to time.

        10. Thank you for that… and I will respond in kind and measure. These are important discussions that the Christian faith NEEDS to be having with those who are not Christian.
          On proof of a being outside the laws of nature as existing.
          It is called metaphysical logical reasoning. God… is an immaterial and thus metaphysical (not of this world) concept. All the attributes that we can define God to be, yes, as a Christian, can be proven through metaphysical and logical rational deduction. In the end, the conclusion of such an exercise can be shown that there is very much evidence for the probable existence of God. A lot of evidence. Concrete proof is impossible because God is a reality we cannot touch or measure. But by reason, by use of the intellect, by the rules of logic and argument (philosophy 101)… we can prove that our metaphysical premise (God) is highly likely to be true.
          Which will bring us to the material/empirical skeptics (the pagans). As you say, if a man claims he is God, he is going to have to back that up. Miracles are one way to do that… but is the man claiming those miracles, or God? If he is performing miracles in the NAME of God, and by God’s WILL & PERMISSION… that is one way to prove that God exists for the material/empirical who require more real proof than intellectual reasoning alone.
          But then we come to the claim that a man says he IS God… the literal God, made flesh? What miracle can prove… an IMMATERIAL being… has become MATERIAL? There is no miracle possible, especially to a 21st century mind. Even if the miracles this God-man claims to do, He is then going to have to explain how he is doing them HERE, in the material world, when he is supposed to be an immaterial being.
          Can you follow my logic?
          Proving the concept of God as a metaphysical being of immaterial reality by the intellect and reason.. conforms TO the definition of God as He is commonly understood to be defined.
          Explaining miracles as PROOF of God’s existence… done by a mortal, in the name of God, by God’s will… also conforms to reason and logic. (God is immaterial, but works through humans at times or simply performs miracles for humans to believe.)
          But a God-man… begins to cross intellectual categories (the metaphysical and the empirical). This conflation/merging of two POLAR OPPOSITE AND INCOMPATIBLE intellectual concepts.. insults intelligence.
          To the example I found on your website on Mary.
          Q: How can you claim Mary is a virgin if she has given birth?
          A: She did not give birth, the birth was a miracle as well, and to deny the miracle is to deny God can do anything and is thus heresy because if the Church (authority) says God can do it, He must be capable of it because God can do anything.
          That… is the answer I found on the apologetics link you gave me… which has been rejected by another Christian who says it is not doctrine and asks me to use “true” doctrine to argue with him.
          I ask… how can I do that… when there are as many doctrines on the nature of Jesus/Mary as there are stars in the sky? And all of them claiming “miracle” as proof their doctrine is true.
          This is what I am referring to when I say Christianity is NOT pagan (it points to the one true God and creator)… but IS pagan in intellectual formulation (must believe the miracle, from authority, despite logic and reason refuting its premise and claim to truth).
          Lastly.. if you need miracles to strengthen your faith… what if they don’t come? What if Jesus did not perform miracles? (hypothetical scenario) Does that mean Jesus is not God? That he is not a messenger of God? Would you deny Christ WITHOUT the miracles if he were to appear before you today? (i.e. if a man came to you and said he was God but could not perform miracles.) As you say… you don’t need miracles “per se”… as if to admit that I am correct that miracles are not needed to prove God exists… but they “help” in one believing and keeping faith.
          Again… it has been SO LONG without a miracle from God as CLEAR proof… why should I believe? I have no miracles to give me strength, assuming of course I even ACCEPT the miracles God performs (by Him or His Son). The Quran speaks of this and I think acknowledges this very Christian argument for the miracle of Christ. To paraphrase, the Quran has God say “We have sent our signs (miracles) before, and were told ‘This is naught but the magic of old.’”
          So… even with miracles… people won’t believe.
          Therefore… what should be the proper basis for belief in God?
          Miracles… or rational, reasoned, intellectual and logically argued proof that says… with high degree of not just possibility… but probability… that God exists?
          My faith in God… requires no miracles. God’s existence… requires no miracles. God IS… and we can prove He is by use of the intellect He gave us.
          If Christians would focus on THAT… they have a chance against Islam, but it would mean changing the entire foundation of the faith as you say… in believing the miracle of Jesus divine conception/birth and being a God-man.

        11. Yes by logical reasoning we will be lead to believe that the universe has a master and creator to whom we will all be held accountable to. However without divine revelation we would never know the nature of such a being.
          What miracle can prove an immaterial being became material? Raising himself from the dead would be a good start I would think. It is a doctrine that the miracles done by our Lord in the Bible were done so as to be a confirmation of his divine nature.
          As for the idea that if God was made flesh, claimed to be God, and preformed miracles in confirmation of his being that he would have to explain the operation of his Miracles to a 21st century audience I can only offer two critiques. 1. Miracles are by there nature supernatural, that is they are contrary to the laws of nature and cannot be explained by them, thus for them to be explained by natural means would be contrary to the nature of miracles. 2. I think you presume that because God has made himself flesh that this would take away from his divine nature, which is a false presumption. Just because God has come down in the flesh does not make him any more or less God.
          A “God-man” crosses intellectual boundaries….. insults intelligence” I just don’t see how. In fact I think rather it is sublime as it is meant to trip people up in their pride about what God can and cannot do. Remember the primary purpose of Creation is for the glorification of God. I cannot think of anything more glorious than the fact God gave up being in heaven, came down to earth, sacrificed himself in order to save the human race, and then returned to heaven. In fact theologically speaking justification is considered a greater act than creation itself.
          There is only one true doctrine regarding Mary and Jesus and it is held by the Catholic Church. As you can gather from what I have written I state that we do not live in an era that values truth. As such people are supplanting truth for what feels good for them, or what they can intellectually justify in their heads. It is commonly stated every Protestant is his own Pope. (sorry to bring you into this protestants) I use this as a point to show you that yes today there are many thousands of different doctrines, but if you seek real Christianity you must adhere to the Church that Christ founded.
          The real reason of the miracle birth is not because the Church says so despite logic (although there is a whole argument for this I will not get into) It is in fact a logical argument which goes like this: The Virgin Mary was the perfect woman, she was the immaculate bearer of our Lord, therefore because she was immaculate God would not permit her virginity to be defiled.
          “This is what I am referring to when I say Christianity is NOT pagan (it points to the one true God and creator)… but IS pagan in intellectual formulation (must believe the miracle, from authority, despite logic and reason refuting its premise and claim to truth).” – To be completely sincere I don’t know where this comes from, maybe it is my own lack of understanding on these matters. The religion of the Ancient Israelite’s certainly fits this bill and they were not Pagan. If you mean to say that Christianity does not follow the humanistic rationalist formula for establishing itself I suppose you are right, but I would not say that it makes it Pagan. Christianity is on the other hand wonderfully logical once you understand it and in fact developed logic and reason so much that it gave birth to things like scholasticism which is very precise and logical. As for a miracle being forced upon us be authority while being refuted by logic and reasoning this is not an accurate statement. Yes we are expected to believe in public revelation however the miracles do not fly in the face of reason or logic. They were witnessed by many people whose honesty is not in doubt, they were recorded as historical events. Sure you can say in the 21st century that these things did not happen because they could not happen but then who is being presumptuous then?
          It is an article of the faith that when Christ comes again he will come in all his glory and power, so yes I think I would deny a false Christ if one appeared before me. In fact I think the reason that this is so is so that we can deny false Christs when they appear which they are want to do.
          “It’s been a long time with out a miracle (100 years May 17th to be exact) since God has given us a miracle.” This is a condemnation of us. It is said that God sends miracles to those who fervently seek the Truth. What does that say about us?
          “Miracles… or rational, reasoned, intellectual and logically argued proof that says… with high degree of not just possibility… but probability… that God exists?”-Both by all means the two are not mutually exclusive, just the opposite, mutually complementary.
          “My faith in God… requires no miracles. God’s existence… requires no miracles. God IS… and we can prove He is by use of the intellect He gave us.”- See radio replies # 98
          If Christians would focus on THAT… they have a chance against Islam, but it would mean changing the entire foundation of the faith as you say… in believing the miracle of Jesus divine conception/birth and being a God-man.”-This is an irrational statement for if we deny the foundations of our faith then we deny our faith and the battle is forfeited. That is to say if we abandon the tenets of Christianity because they do not fit in with the Liberalism of the day then we are admitting Christianity is a false religion, in which case no one will follow it. In fact what you are arguing is precisely what the Modernists did at Vatican 2 which is exactly why the Church in Europe is dead today.
          Furthermore let me say this: the story of the human race does not end well. Christian doctrine states that man will abandon the faith, fall, and be destroyed as a result with a minority of people who are saved.
          I have tried to answer your questions as best as I can, however I am no theologian. I do admire that you are so interested in these matters and I encourage you to continue to seek the truth. If you have the money to spare and are interested in the Christian faith I will recommend this book to you: “The Defense of the Catholic Church”, by Francis X Doyle S.J. It is a book of apologetics, that is defense of the faith. It goes into great depth all the polemics you have brought up, most of which are very old arguments.
          God Bless!

        12. Excellent answer. Just excellent. A True Catholic and you did your faith proud.
          QUOTE:”A “God-man” crosses intellectual boundaries….. insults intelligence” I
          just don’t see how. In fact I think rather it is sublime as it is meant
          to trip people up in their pride about what God can and cannot do.
          Remember the primary purpose of Creation is for the glorification of
          That is your choice, as much as it is my choice to not see the sublime in the miracle of Christ. But here is a key point of distinction and why Christianity is still in the trouble it started 2000 years ago.
          While you claim the Catholic Church has preserved the rock Christ’s church was built on, the Orthodox also claim to be Paul’s and the disciples original church. They see a Catholic Pope, an authority of God on earth, as heretical (perhaps not that far, but certainly in grave error). Kind of a big split there way back in the day if you remember.
          So… let’s assume I want to become Christian… who has the true Christ?
          If I want to become Christian, the way it is explained in terms of 100% salvation on being in Christ’s TRUE church, I certainly don’t want to get that wrong!!!! Getting Christ right IS the #1 concern of Christians… and why they each are passionate about their version of Jesus out of 100s that you can join… or else (damnation). Can you see how to an outsider, Christians seem to have a version of Christ to suit almost any person? (The Protestant Pope’s as you say.)
          It is the God-Man contradiction that makes getting Christ RIGHT so difficult. Remember now… we are assuming Christ IS the path and the way… but which one? There are so many!!! There is no real, consistent, logic to it for an outsider to know how to know which one is TRUE… and can be proven to be so. In the end, it looks like Christianity is just what you make up and believe to be true about the truth of Christ. (Protestants felt the Catholics got it all wrong with there big elaborate masses, ostentatious architecture, and Mary worship.)
          I think Christianity is at its best when you JUST BELIEVE, whatever flavour of Christ that happens to be. The discussions I have had with you and others have proven this to me. It is effective in communing with God, very effective. But so too can Islam and even Buddhism for that matter (They claim no God, but their mind/consciousness concept, in definition, is equal to that of God).
          I think the key difficulty for me… if we look at Christianity from another direction (consequences of not believing)… is that I am told if I do not accept Christ, I am going to hell. God would never refuse mercy and forgiveness to someone who holds Him in the highest esteem, keeps Him in mind at all times, calls on Him in both happiness and sorrow in praise and lives a virtuous and moral life. If I believe only in God, not Christ, but live out every single commandment to the letter and become a saint no one knows about… am I damned to hell because I did not come to God THROUGH Christ? This is just another view of the God-Man problem in Christianity’s formulation to an outside, non Christian looking at the faith seriously. Is it God that is high-most, or is it Christ?
          If Christ IS God… then if I am worshiping God in my own way I AM worshiping Christ!!! And Christ’s name need not ever be mentioned and in fact, can be removed from the equation entirely because they are co-equal as you say, with no error in worship. I’m saved!!! I figured it out? Can you disprove this? Will you say Christ is NOT God and if I worship God alone I am not worshiping Christ? Who are you to say that is impossible for God to do!!! (See what I did there.)
          Again… I am just running through a logical exercise that any non Christian is going to do when looking at how Christianity is formulated in order to evaluate it as being “true.”
          This is why Christianity has such a rich intellectual tradition. It is not so much intellectual as…. doing the thinking to MAKE THE FAITH WORK. Because taken at face value, with commonly understood definitions for terms (God, man, material, immaterial)… you have to work in some sublime magic to make it work and thankfully, the ultimate sublime glue of God is there to do it!!! I am noticing that when certain lines of inquiry hit a clear contradiction… “Just because God has come down in the flesh does not make him any more or less God.”… see, amazing!!!
          I did not expect such good discussions… but honestly… all of them have nothing to do with my essay, so that was disappointing. Comments were either I am a sell out to Islam or… compassionate patience on Christians part to help me see the light of Christ, as you have done.
          Now I understand more and more why philosophers kept to ivory towers with the doors closed and communicated only though letters with other philosophers. LOL 🙂

        13. Haha I love your last point. And thank you for your kind words, I think a lot gets lost on people with online debates and they take playing the devil’s advocate as polemics and personal attacks, I know I have fallen into this trap before.
          As for all your points that you bring up they are textbook modernism, so rather than addressing them one by one I think it would be valuable if we just cover modernism. Modernism (which is really the theological version of liberalism) is the belief system that people interiorly encounter God and exteriorly manifest this experience in different ways, or religions. Thus we get certain platitudes like “we all worship the same God” or as you describe, and I paraphrase: “we should all just worship Christ in our own way.”
          Now these sound nice right? what could be wrong with modernism? Well besides the fact the history of Modernism (being a theology designed by the enemies of the Church for the operation to destroy the Church) Modernism has a number of flaws.
          Firstly from a utilitarian standpoint, which seems to be the main thrust of your writings, Modernism is what the vast majority of people in Europe today believe. So I commend you for being very astute and representing this question as such. If you look before Christianity codified modernism at the Second Vatican Council the Church was very much alive and Vibrant in Europe. Today under Modernism it is dead, even the buildings this Novus Ordo Church builds are abominations that look like mausoleums.
          Theologically Modernism has many problems.
          First and foremost it relies purely upon the private judgement of man to know God, which logically is flawed to the degree that man is flawed. Therefore since we are all flawed our understanding of God is flawed to that degree. Since God is perfect he cannot be flawed, therefore if we rely on interior judgement we must believe in a false God.
          Secondly as one of the more recent Popes said (I think St. Pius X) Modernism leads to Atheism. Modernism is fundamentally a humanistic religion, (is it any wonder it came from freemasons?) Christianity is God centered. Therefore because Modernism is man centered it can never be Christianity. Modernism leads to Atheism precisely because it puts the focus on man and not God and thus because God is the superior to man the two Ideas of God and humanism cannot exist in the same philosophy. A simple observation will confirm this, all the rabid humanists are also Atheists.
          3. In Modernism there is no truth, only subjectivity and relativity. Because Modernism believes that God is encountered internally and manifested externally differently it holds that there is no concrete God. But this is a falsehood for if we can reason that there is a God then by the very nature of there being a God he must then be more real than creation, since he is the superior of what he has created. Therefore God is more real than the natural laws, such as gravity, that we scientifically know to be concretely true.
          There are many more problems with modernism than I will list but these are the main ones that I can think of off the top of my head.
          As for your other questions I will answer them very simply. Since God is perfect it follows that every action he takes is likewise perfect. Therefore if he established a religion (which all Christians claim) it would have to have the following characteristics: One it would have to trace its founding back to God as the founder. (only two Christian Churches in the world claim this: Catholics and EO) It must be Holy (No Evil Doctrines or disciplines), It must be visible, it must be united. The Four Marks of the Catholic church are that it is the One (only religion founded by God), Holy, Catholic (Universal, unity of faith) Apostolic Church (relating to the apostles I.E. traces its genesis to being founded by Jesus) (Visible hierarchical establishment).
          Additionally it logically follows If you believe in Jesus Christ then you must believe he is who he says he is, and worship him how he says to worship him. This alone also eliminates all of the religions claiming to be Christian save one.
          I hope I do not come across as dodging your questions, that is not my intent. I hope you continue to ask questions and search for the truth. Alas however I do not think I am the best person to really be questioning if you decide to go further as my knowledge in these matters is just about spent.
          God Bless!

        14. I think I can answer the excellent dissection of modernism with another question.
          What if modernists had taken God more seriously having seen He is true among all the faiths of the world?
          Would we have gay marriage and all the other things that have come into being with the falling away of Christianity?
          I would counter it was not modernism that led to atheism. It was the Christian argument FOR God (i.e. the truth) that led people to leave the church and… thus no longer give credence or authority to His commands (i.e. denounce homosexuality).
          The funny thing with moderns is they shit all over the moralizing of Christians… and then virtue signal for Islam and not realize Muslims will bring back the morals of the Bible on steroids!!! The lefty Buddhists… if they actually take their interest in it seriously… will come to realize the Buddha condemned homosexuality and fornication (feminism essentially) as well, in no uncertain terms.
          So… I would argue it is not modernism as you describe it, relative paths to the truth, it is THE TRUTH that people have abandoned (i.e. God) and it is now FALSEHOOD (gender theory, patriarchy, feminism) that is the new God.
          I personally was never truly atheist when I left Lutheranism. I just never gave it much thought. Dawkins and his God Delusion had me atheist for all but a week. Then my Philo 101 professor had a textbook on Francis Bacon’s writings on education… and he said (my interpretation as I don’t have the quote at hand)
          “The more knowledge man gains, the more he tends to disbelieve in God. But if he pursues his quest for knowledge, man returns to God in the end.”
          This was my journey. Once I could see that God was in EVERY religion… it gave all of what those religions had to teach more weight.
          The problem in The West is not modernism. The problem is no one believes in God anymore… period. All paths to the TRUTH may be relative, but you don’t dismiss and deny the truth because the paths are varied.

        15. I actually agree with you. I don’t think modernism would be around if we loved truth as much as we should.
          I encourage you to stay on your journey friend. Maybe look up syncrentism if you have the time, both the arguments for and against it.
          God Bless

Comments are closed.