Theme: Religion

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/84080999_189334059131422_48851346976

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/84080999_189334059131422_4885134697694232576_n_189334055798089.jpg ROBERT HEINLEIN : WESTERN LIBERTARIAN ETHICS NOT JEWISH LIBERTARIAN ETHICSROBERT HEINLEIN : WESTERN LIBERTARIAN ETHICS NOT JEWISH LIBERTARIAN ETHICS


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-23 14:42:00 UTC

  • CONSTANTINE’S DESTRUCTION OF EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION The first episodes of persecu

    CONSTANTINE’S DESTRUCTION OF EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION

    The first episodes of persecution of paganism in the history of the Roman Empire started late in Constantine’s reign, with his orders for the pillaging and the tearing down of pagan temples.[1][2][3] The anti-paganism policy of Constantine the Great evolved from the initial prohibition on the construction of new temples[14] and the toleration of pagan sacrifices,[15] to orders for the looting and the tearing down of the temples by the end of his reign.[1][2][3] Earlier in his reign he had prohibited the construction of new temples[14] but tolerated the practice of pagan sacrifices.[15]

    According to Church historians writing after his death, Constantine converted to Christianity and was baptised on his deathbed, thus making him the first Christian emperor.

    Constantine, though he made his allegiance clear, did not outlaw paganism; in the words of an early edict, he decreed that polytheists could “celebrate the rites of an outmoded illusion,” so long as they did not force Christians to join them.[18][19] In a letter to the King of Persia, Constantine wrote how he shunned the “abominable blood and hateful odors” of pagan sacrifices, and instead worshiped the High God “on bended knee”,[15][20] and in the new capital city he built, Constantine made sure that there were no pagan temples built.[14] Constantine would sporadically prohibit public sacrifice and close pagan temples; very little pressure, however, was put on individual pagans, and there were no pagan martyrs.

    When Constantine dedicated Constantinople, two Neoplatonist friends – Sopater and Praetextus – were present. A year and a half later, on Monday 11 May 330, when the festival of Saint Mocius was celebrated, the city was finally dedicated. The goddess Tyche was invited to come and live in the city, and her statue was placed in the hand of the statue of the emperor that was on top of the Column of Constantine, on the Forum with the same name. Although by now Constantine openly supported Christianity, the city still offered room to pagan religions: there were shrines for the Dioscuri and Tyche. The Acropolis, with its ancient pagan temples, was left as it was. As for worshipping the emperor, Constantine’s mausoleum gave him a Christ-like status: his tomb was set amid 12 monuments, each containing relics of one of the Apostles. Constantine had continued to engage in pagan rituals. The emperor still claimed to be a supernatural being, although the outward form of this personality cult had become Christian.[21]

    According to some authors, the issuing of the Edict of Milan,[22] showed that Constantine continued the policy of toleration which Galerius had established.[citation needed] He “continued to pay his public honors to the Sun”, until 325, on coins that showed him jointly with Sol Invictus, whereas his later coins showed the Chi-Rho sign.[23] In that year he had the Christian Bishops convene at the First Council of Nicaea, and from then on continued to take an active interest in the affairs of the Church.

    Many historians, including MacMullen, have seen the seeds of future persecution by the state in Constantine’s more belligerent utterances regarding the old religion.[1] Other historians[who?] emphasize that de facto paganism “was tolerated in the period from Constantine to Gratian. Emperors were tolerant in deed, if not always in word.”[24]

    Church restrictions opposing the pillaging of pagan temples by Christians were in place even while the Christians were being persecuted by the pagans. Spanish bishops in AD 305 decreed that anyone who broke idols and was killed while doing so was not formally to be counted as a martyr, as the provocation was too blatant.[25]

    Constantine became the first Emperor in the Christian era to persecute specific groups of Christians, the Donatists, in order to enforce religious unity.[26]

    Legislation against magic and private divination

    Constantine legislated against magic and private divination, but this may have been motivated by a fear that others could gain power through those means.[27] Despite enacting such legislation, he also enacted contradictory legislation that called for the consultation of augurs after an amphitheater had been struck by lightning in the year 320.[28] Constantine explicitly allowed public divination as well as public pagan practices to continue.[29] Constantine also issued laws confirming the rights of flamens, priests and duumvirs.[30] In 321, he legislated that the “venerable day of the sun” should be a day of rest for all citizens. This ambiguous wording is capable of being interpreted as referring to the Christian day of rest or to Sol Invictus. However, in the year 323, he issued a decree banning Christians from participating in state sacrifices.[31]

    He destroyed the Temple of Aphrodite in Lebanon.[32] He ordered the execution of eunuch priests in Egypt[1] because they transgressed his moral norms. According to the historian Ramsay MacMullen, Constantine desired to obliterate non-Christians but lacking the means he had to be content with robbing their temples towards the end of his reign.[33] He resorted to derogatory and contemptuous comments relating to the old religion; writing of the “true obstinacy” of the pagans, of their “misguided rites and ceremonial”, and of their “temples of lying” contrasted with “the splendours of the home of truth”.[2]


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-23 11:54:00 UTC

  • FREEMASONRY CONTEXT —“Free maronry became distorted in the early 1800s. You ca

    FREEMASONRY CONTEXT

    —“Free maronry became distorted in the early 1800s. You cannot place pre 1800s masons in the same basket as post 1800s masons.

    In the early 1800s Free Masonry started using a ritualized form of pseudoscience. This began instructing it’s members in a less empirical method and towards a more hermetic method. Without clear categories, relativism will over time dissolve meaning (nihilism).

    That’s my understanding of what went wrong.”—Andrew M Gilmour

    Freemasonry like many men’s organizations is an attempt to create the loyalty of military organizations in peace time, and on civic matters rather than in war on military matters.

    Western religion evolved from extending the rituals over death into the initiatic brotherhood of warriors where other religions evolved from more abstract supernatural demands.

    The high-cost of required behavior(ritual) in joining mens organizations are a means of filtering out those with low agency so that the organization is least subject to undermining by the weak.

    Anglo/Dutch aristocracy vs

    Germanic (Prussian,Austrian,German) Aristocracy vs

    Spanish Aristocracy vs

    Italian Aristocracy vs

    French Aristocracy vs

    the rest – minor aristocracies as well.

    All faced slightly different problems and opportunities.

    The Anglos relied heavily on technology sail and armies. The French on wealth sail and armies, The germans almost entirely on armies, etc. Each was more or less imprisoned by the corruption of the church. Each had a more or less mobile workforce. Each had a more or less literate workforce. Each had more or less national (communal) aspirations.

    Freemasonry provided a loyalty system other than family and military that was more ‘honorable’ than the corruption of the church and the court.

    There appears to be little meaningful difference between the pre-collapse men’s cults (Mithras, Sol Invictus) and restoration men’s cults (Freemasonry), other than freemasonry was even purer in european physicalism.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-23 08:54:00 UTC

  • CHRISTIAN DESTRUCTION OF THE ANCIENT WORLD Jan 23, 2020, 8:49 AM

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_pagans_in_the_late_Roman_EmpireTHE CHRISTIAN DESTRUCTION OF THE ANCIENT WORLD

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_pagans_in_the_late_Roman_EmpireUpdated Jan 23, 2020, 8:49 AM


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-23 08:49:00 UTC

  • THE FUNCTION OF GODS Gods are just characters we use for kings, or pack leaders

    THE FUNCTION OF GODS

    Gods are just characters we use for kings, or pack leaders that circumvent the need for pack-leaders across families, clans, tribes, and nations, that allow us to express loyalty independent of family clan, tribe and nation. Religions are just a means of embodying rules of temporal and intergenerational behavior between families, clans, tribes, nations in ignorant, pre-literate, verbally transmitted form. False promise is a means of addicting us to following those rules despite our increase in powerlessness as the scale of our social and political orders increases – thereby alienating us. Judaism was and remains a means of constructing a mobile networked, organized crime family under the pretense of a religion. Islam is a means of constructing a universal army that conducts warfare against civilization by undermining from within and continuous raiding and attrition. Christianity was just a means of constructing a universal rebellion against civilization – but one that never managed to be able to govern because the military aristocracy and the enfranchisement of men in the military, and continuous warfare prevented it. Although were it not for the restoration of paganism via the vikings it’s not clear that we would have been able to resist islam or conduct the crusades. Christianity is just another untestifiable, unwarrantable, abrahamic false promise, to keep you ignorant and submissive and open to conquest by jews at the top and muslims at the bottom, and now, marxism, postmodernism, feminism use the same technique of false promise in the REAL world (future) instead of in the UNREAL world (after death).


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-23 08:36:00 UTC

  • CHURCHIANITY VS CHRISTIANITY VS THE PHILOSOPHY OF JESUS. You now, I follow the r

    CHURCHIANITY VS CHRISTIANITY VS THE PHILOSOPHY OF JESUS.

    You now, I follow the religion of my ancestors (Excellence, heroism, sovereignty, and debts that are ‘true’) and the philosophy of Jesus (purchase of cooperation through exhaustion of love, forgiveness, charity), and the philosophy of my civilization (falsification by realism, naturalism, materialism, operationalism, empiricism, sovereignty-volition, reciprocity, and testimonial truth).

    I use the philosophy of Jesus, Aristotle, and our ancestors long lost to history (European Aryanism). I understand that those that lack agency need christianity in exclusivity (monopoly) even if the rest of us use different archetypes for different purposes given that we have more agency (markets).

    So it depends upon the portfolio of control you have over your life.

    Modern life would suggest that the monopoly of the abrahamic deceits is harmful. And that we can see jesus as a philosopher of the personal and social if not the material, economic, political, military, and strategic. This is why I will always and everywhere recommend Markets (our group strategy) and criticize christianity (monpoly), as harmful. We need many saints, demigods, or gods (role models), but each of us may or must, choose the hierarchy of those gods that we will spend most of our time imitating.

    I know who I use: Aristotle, Alexander, Caesar, Arthur, Jefferson and Hayek. And when


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 21:50:00 UTC

  • THE USES OF RELIGION WISDOM, AND SCIENCE AND TRUTH Never use religion to make tr

    THE USES OF RELIGION WISDOM, AND SCIENCE AND TRUTH

    Never use religion to make truth claims – you will always fail.

    Use religion to make wisdom claims. That is the providence of religion.

    In any contest between truth (science) and wisdom (myth) truth reigns.

    It is when we lack sufficient knowledge to determine the truth, that we gracefully resort to wisdom. And we do so because it has survived the centuries, and because others will not blame us if we fail by such a choice.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 19:28:00 UTC

  • YOU ARE NOT IN CONTROL OF TERMS OF THE SOCIAL ORDER Libertarianism SUGGESTS to y

    YOU ARE NOT IN CONTROL OF TERMS OF THE SOCIAL ORDER

    Libertarianism SUGGESTS to you (falsely, by abrahamic false promise) that you are in control of the terms by which people will tolerate… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=559854581278103&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 18:38:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1220053232006942727

  • THE OBVIOUS SIMILARITY BETWEEN ISLAM AND COMMUNISM by Simon Ström The obvious si

    THE OBVIOUS SIMILARITY BETWEEN ISLAM AND COMMUNISM

    by Simon Ström

    The obvious similarity between communism and Islam is the instrumental use of both ideologies by global underclasses to resist the West in the modern era.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 14:02:00 UTC

  • YOU ARE NOT IN CONTROL OF TERMS OF THE SOCIAL ORDER Libertarianism SUGGESTS to y

    YOU ARE NOT IN CONTROL OF TERMS OF THE SOCIAL ORDER

    Libertarianism SUGGESTS to you (falsely, by abrahamic false promise) that you are in control of the terms by which people will tolerate your existence (proximity, participation, survival) – you are not in control of it. They control it. Because the network of promises (habits norms etc) that they cooperate by are what they depend upon for survival, risk mitigation, consumption, comfort, and joy. You are only in control of which polity you choose to participate in on their terms.

    Now, this is a male attempt to adopt a female means of persuasion. But a female is intrinsically valuable and a man is not. So your participation isn’t desirable. In fact, the maximum female, minimum male participation is desirable.

    So no libertarianism is (a) an attempt to claim you have intrinsic value by threat of withdrawal from cooperation (b) except that if you don’t want to cooperate on the groups terms then we don’t want you, and frankly you’re not only dead weight but better off gone or d–d. Ans so if you don’t want to cooperate on those terms the question is why do we let you live?

    Worse, since aryan reciprocity and christian forgiveness are the optimum social economic political and strategic orders – and the only reason you can disagree with them is to parasitically live off the aryan-christian commons, then you are stuck with not only explaining why you should be tolerated, but why anyone living anywhere on earth should tolerate you.

    You don’t have to do anything except NOT impose costs upon others.

    (Again, (((They’re all cognitively Female))) so it makes perfect sense that they would develop libertarianism as if they were intrinsically valuable when they’re intrinsically parasitic.)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 13:38:00 UTC