Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
—“Interesting. What do you think is the purpose of religion?”—@HHBenedictXVII
The training of intuition by Myth, Ritual, and Repetition which as a consequence produces interpersonal Regularity and personal Mindfulness, by reduction of need for comprehension of increasingly complex information where we have increasing limits to agency, in complex polities.
Hence the distribution of religiosity vs rationality by intelligence and agency. Humans, esp women, have vulnerability to neuroticism (‘worry’, stress) if they lack agency.
By demanding their ideal, being unwilling to compromise with secularists, and by being unwilling to use islamic levels of violence, Xians are done. Because it is a philosophy of the weak. Aryanism under the ‘excuse’ of Xianity was how our aristocracy ruled. w/o Aryans, no Xians.
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Xianity will continue to die off with each generation, resulting in the Benedict Option, leaving around a quarter of the population devout, politically and economically powerless while the rest continue with political and material rather than supernatural means of mindfulness.
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
It doesn’t matter. I attempted to discover a means of legal tolerance of christianity with intolerance for other religions and it’s not possible because christians really do need their “woo woo”.The founders were Deists, and Jefferson (like me) saw Jesus as primitive philosopher.
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/53020240_10157000369792264_195392115428032512_o_10157000369782264.jpg —‘TEACHING AS TRUE BY LAW RATHER THAN TRUE BY FAITH’—
CLARIFICATION
Over the past few weeks I have been trying to find a means of limiting abrahamic means of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, and pilpul and critique, from application outside of christian doctrine, thereby ending the ability to pursue marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism and other application of abrahamic persuasion (deceit) in the ongoing war against our people by the globalists (mostly semites and their allies).
The solutions were either prohibit, gain compromise, or give compromise, which is the ancient one that faced the romans when attempting to bring the jews into the empire.
The ‘give compromise’ is an exchange: “spiritual is true by faith, and material is true by law”. This frustrates both parties a bit but is the only truly reciprocal exchange under the law. And it works for christianity alone because the law also requires compatibility with natural law. Judaism and Islam as well as marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and denialism are not compatible with the law.
So the remaining challenge is just to define christianity as some set of existing sects sharing some long standing tradition, limited to compliance with natural law AND the demarcation between the spiritual faith and the material law.
I felt it was not possible even to achieve this compromise, so it was better to state the law as the law, and grant christians a specific license under the law.
The exchange gives christianity peerage with the law. The exemption gives it permission under the law. And legal scholars will have to debate these things for centuries – because I cannot close the loophole of truthful speech because of the christian demand for identity between truth and myth.
So that is where I ended up. To avoid the question by specific license rather than compromising on the question as a difference between faith and law.
-CurtNick DahlheimH/t Dave Martel and John Mark—this is a fascinating response in light of your interview together Sunday….Feb 20, 2019, 1:30 PMDave MartelI have zero issue as a Heathen separating Law from faith/supernaturalism/mysticism.
But, also as a Heathen who lives his life with an understanding of metaphysics and spiritualism, I’m going to be very careful with anything that could possibly want to stifle or persecute what is dearest to me and my family.Feb 20, 2019, 1:38 PMEli Harman”Here, you can have a license to lie as long as you don’t do it in public.”
Something tells me the generosity of that offer will be lost on its intended recipients.Feb 20, 2019, 1:44 PMCurt Doolittlehence the burden of the definition of ‘christianity’Feb 20, 2019, 1:45 PMNick DahlheimAnd it is this attitude I’ve found so INCREDIBLY prevalent among the Heathen (and we are also disproportionately attracted to Propertarianism as opposed to conservative Christians)….and it is this attitude I love. It TOTALLY works with the letter and the spirit of Propertarian Law.Feb 20, 2019, 1:48 PMJohn MarkThank you for this clarification CurtFeb 20, 2019, 1:49 PMNick DahlheimThat’s why Christians must be segregated…..”The Benedict Option being the Only Option” (my official position on Christianity) was designed with this in mind….and they must pay a hefty tax in return for government services and martial protection….Feb 20, 2019, 1:49 PMNick DahlheimOne other option I’ve thought of—make Christian preachers have to have licenses to leave their “Benedict Option” communities…it will discourage evangelization.Feb 20, 2019, 1:54 PMCurt Doolittlenever happen. never have power without christians before the semites win control via underclasses.Feb 20, 2019, 1:55 PMNick DahlheimHmmmm…..Feb 20, 2019, 1:55 PMDaniel Roland AndersonI have a lot of Christian friends on the Right. All of them embrace a sect of Christianity that includes an ethno-nationalist component that puts a hard limit on the universalist, egalitarian aspects of Christianity.
Perhaps start with this ethnic component an identifier of sects that make sense.Feb 20, 2019, 2:30 PMCurt Doolittlethis is smart.Feb 20, 2019, 2:32 PMNick DahlheimChristianity used to be that way—and all of the denominations were remarkably stronger and more confident when that was the case prior to the civil rights and sexual revolutions of the 1960s….also, E. Michael Jones is right on this one point: the breakup of the old urban ethnic enclaves (most of whom were Catholic, but not all were–see the history of the Swedish enclave Andersonville in Chicago as a prime example) had a devastating impact on Catholics and to a slightly lesser degree mainline Protestants—their ethnic identity was weakened FIRST, and then their identification with their Christian denomination FOLLOWED. The data on this is clear when you set the 1960s as a marker and you see the steady secularization from that point forward—as well as civil rights and Hart-Cellar putting European demographics in jepoardy for the first timeFeb 20, 2019, 2:34 PMJesse Charles Tatsuoka FolsomI find the comparison to the Japanese approach fascinating in this situation. The Japanese are 95% (kinda) atheist or some such. At the same time, a large proportion put a huge store in ritual action. It is, so far as I can tell, essentially an amoralist society, less concerned with abstract ideas of “good” and “evil” than with what is functional in their society. While I don’t think being quite so uniform and regimented suits us in the West, I can at least say that in Japan, when, say, a nuclear disaster strikes, there is virtually no looting or rioting. Instead, the old line up to go in to deal with the radiation so the young don’t have to.Feb 20, 2019, 2:40 PMCurt Doolittlethey have the best system. just ‘how to get there’.
They are not amoral. just the opposite.
It’s just that they are homogenous.
So no need for artificial rules.Feb 20, 2019, 2:40 PMJesse Charles Tatsuoka FolsomI mean amoral in the Christian sense. In the sense that it’s not about comparison to some ultimately arbitrary set of rules supposedly set from on high. It is practical. If you don’t fit in to a criminal degree, it’s not because your values are “worse”. It’s just that they are incompatible with the rest of us. We don’t have to condemn you in a shaming sort of sense to remove your disruption by any means necessary. We aren’t absolutely better, there is no absolutely better, just the subjective comparison of values. We just agree and there are more of us than you.Feb 20, 2019, 2:44 PMJohn MarkDaniel Roland Anderson what sect(s) of Christianity are you referring to? (With hard limit on universalism via ethno-nationslism) Does such a thing exist in America? (Genuinely curious)Feb 20, 2019, 2:45 PMNick DahlheimI’m guessing some form of Christian Identity?Feb 20, 2019, 2:46 PMCurt Doolittle(european identity, full scope of our historical traditions)Feb 20, 2019, 2:47 PMDaniel Roland AndersonJohn Mark
Kinists come to mind. Christian Identity as well.Feb 20, 2019, 3:18 PMNick DahlheimCurt Doolittle I’m sure Belloc would prefer that to the Church under Bugoglio, aka FrancisFeb 20, 2019, 3:19 PMCorbus AureliusThe ethics is tied to the practicality of holding to an ethical system for the development of self and society. Action and consequence.Feb 20, 2019, 3:38 PMNick DahlheimCurt Doolittle Ding ding ding….and Black Pigeon Speaks did a great job in his most recent video illustrating thatFeb 20, 2019, 5:13 PMNick DahlheimJesse Charles Tatsuoka Folsom We can’t probably be as uniform as Japan, but we can copy their tight controls and emulate their in-group preferenceFeb 20, 2019, 5:14 PMDaniel Roland AndersonJohn Mark
This is an important topic. There are Catholics like Pat Buchanan and others who are strongly ethno-nationalist. Rik Storey could name some more I’m sure.
Many Protestants are hardcore ethno-nationalists.
I strongly suspect that these non-Universalist Christians would be more than willing to throw a Crusade to purge their religion of what they consider Leftist heresy.
If we could identify specifically which theological issues are inconsistent with Natural Law, that might give us a starting point to inquire as to whether non-Universalist sects might be potential supporters of Propertarianism, and allies against the Christian Left.Feb 20, 2019, 5:15 PMNick DahlheimDaniel Roland Anderson We probably still need a way to do that…we need to market correctly to push our numbers up but without sacrificing qualityFeb 20, 2019, 5:18 PMJohn MarkDaniel Roland Anderson shorthand: “no universalism”Feb 20, 2019, 6:03 PMNick DahlheimJohn Mark Yup….Pope Bugoglio’s church will not be tolerated. That of Pope JFH 1st (James Fox Higgins)….his Christianity will be toleratedFeb 20, 2019, 6:13 PMMichael ChurchillDaniel Roland Anderson It sure seems like searching for non-universalist Christians with a coherent understanding of WHY they are non-unilversalist is like searching for a needle in a haystack no?Feb 20, 2019, 7:43 PMDaniel Roland AndersonJohn Mark
Well, universalism is definitely out. I wonder what else are poison pills that I’m missing.
I’m just mostly glad Christianity is in my rear view mirror personally—but Christianity matters.Feb 20, 2019, 7:44 PMJohn MarkDaniel Roland Anderson another poison pill – kissing rear ends of the chosenFeb 20, 2019, 8:06 PMJohn MarkMichael Churchill that was my initial reaction tooFeb 20, 2019, 8:06 PMDaniel Roland AndersonJohn Mark
I’ll see if I can call in and SME.Feb 20, 2019, 8:07 PMJohn MarkThough I would be willing to bet there are fairly large numbers of Christians that are finished with the whole “being nice to ungrateful/duplicitous nonwhite immigrants” thing. Like JFH. We can tap into them.Feb 20, 2019, 8:15 PMDavid CarrBy a common hindrance we share built into this language we use, our vernacular came to rest on the words we forge as disconnected from the import of the letters that compose them. You might note that Hebrew, Japanese Kanji and Arabic script (as well as most notable historical languages, and all modern asian languages) impart a legend of symbols when teaching their alphabets, a table of definitions. We, the flock of Rome, forewent such a legend in favor of a round of song, re-purposed.
I posit that one or all of the Roman factions of the time purposely installed a vacuum where our symbol definitions would have helped those symbols hold their form over the centuries. Instead they fermented, coming to represent the totality of human sensory experience instead of merely reinforcing cultural assumption. We became daring, creative. We excelled in conquest and discovery. All this at the cost of social cohesion and general discipline in comparison to the speakers of more traditional languages.
Now, we founder. Our societies crumble, lacking the social backbone we don’t even know the need for. Luckily, the ferment is complete, and S’word has been drawn from S’tone. The true study of noetic science can begin.
https://davidiclineage.wordpress.com/2018/09/08/newest-draft-davidic-legend/Feb 20, 2019, 8:29 PMBill JoslinWe cannot grant special license nor peerage equal to law because that is what has gotten us to where we are today. It’s our death sentence.
A strict and impermeable wall between via negativa as well as application of power (law) by that constraint (public) from via positiva production of commons and goods (private).Feb 20, 2019, 9:28 PMJames Fox HigginsMy Christianity belongs in whole to no existing sect. The more I look at Church history from all perspectives the more I see weakness and/or corruption. I walk apart from the Church, though I love those within it.
My kind of heresy would need to be cogently developed to form any kind of institution. Give me ten more years.Feb 20, 2019, 10:01 PMNick DahlheimInterestingFeb 20, 2019, 10:07 PMDavid CarrIt seems to me precise legalism would entail an understanding of such roots, but of course that could just be me.Feb 20, 2019, 10:08 PMAubrey HarperDaniel Roland Anderson et al, the Amish and Quakers haven’t suffered the corruption of other sects and they aren’t even receptive to other outgroup non-kin Whites, let alone 3rd Worlders
They are the perfect model for hearth and kin based Christianity (plus electricity)Feb 20, 2019, 10:54 PMDaniel Roland AndersonChesley MillerFeb 21, 2019, 3:24 AMWilliam L. BengeI’m astonished this group’s framing goes wild, and even brings Christianity into a false dichotomy: presents it as some sort of force or belief-set opposed to heathenism.
Look. The cruelty finds origin not in some sincere quiet souls cast into the Roman circus, torn apart by lions. No, but in the desperation of the state.
A cleric is one bureaucrat in a system of bureaucrats, who at the first served his emperor (state), but later turned. These are not the quiet souls.
Why does this not have meaning to you? This is a problem.
Secondly, power corrupts and behold our chambers of power deliver just as expected. Many Italian names (history) and Latin documents (evidence) testify to the same regards Christendom.
Are there lessons missed? Maybe?
This road can become as smooth or bumpy as we force it to be. Volition.Feb 22, 2019, 10:40 AMNick DahlheimI agree with this—but, we have this huge practical burden of Christianity’s legacy over our culture that represents a practical burden…..even though their numbers are dwindling, the Churches still have a lot of people, even high-quality people (even though most churchgoers tend to come from the lower classes—so they won’ get these arguments). Moreover, Christianity has cast a pall over the way all of us think and “feel” and “intuit.” So, there’s a need to deal with it delicately with normies. Don’t get me wrong I’m one of the loudest voices here for Asatru over Christianity.Feb 22, 2019, 10:44 AMWilliam L. BengeRegards our modern heathens, we ought to respectfully warn:
Be wary of seeking advantage for recourse, prestige. Always bow to the greater rules of the competition. Honor is as important as the contest. The Romans provide ample lessons as to why.
PLEASE NOTE:
Curt goes far to respect the marketplace of ideas, even where the marketplace is the heart and mind of man.
What we recognize as according nature: internal coherence, external correspondence.
What is truthful?
Aye, for the one man to apply this test to self (for self)(for others)(for things) creates his personal journey into his own thoughts, and for which no law could ever restrict him.
God bless such a man.
What the market provides can create upset and surprise, both good and bad, and often does.Feb 22, 2019, 11:10 AMWilliam L. BengeAffirmativeFeb 22, 2019, 11:17 AMWilliam L. BengeThe idea I had in mind was that Christianity = heathenism, but what most feel is Christianity (a modern superstructure) detracts from Jesus grounded sensible ideas. Humble, quiet, effective, healthy and wholesome, a working way.
Did Caesar cast his pompous clergy (state employees) ($$$) into the circus with wild animals for sport, or did he instead feed the lower people of hearth (heathen) and home into his freakish foul machination?
These are aspects of truthfulness the marketplace will have to sort out. If we turn our noses up at any new or old evidence that presents itself anew, we probably wont escape punishment, usually in the way of frustrating progress elsewhere, countering disambiguation.Feb 22, 2019, 11:45 AMNick DahlheimWell, if I were Caesar now—I’d cast the pompous clergy (state employees as well as academics, financiers, media people, and politicians) ($$$) into the circus with wild animals for sport…..:PFeb 22, 2019, 11:49 AMWilliam L. BengeMan, I do like the way your mind works brother! 😀
BOOMFeb 22, 2019, 11:50 AMWilliam L. BengeNASCAR has standards they enforce. They’ll demand to check under the hood and where ever else on the vehicle they want to check. Veracity.
“We’re going to need to check the measurements. Please step clear.”
“C’mon now. Y’all know the drill.”Feb 22, 2019, 12:07 PMBill Joslin(I keep my heathenry at my hearth were it belongs)Feb 22, 2019, 1:15 PM—‘TEACHING AS TRUE BY LAW RATHER THAN TRUE BY FAITH’—
CLARIFICATION
Over the past few weeks I have been trying to find a means of limiting abrahamic means of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, and pilpul and critique, from application outside of christian doctrine, thereby ending the ability to pursue marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism and other application of abrahamic persuasion (deceit) in the ongoing war against our people by the globalists (mostly semites and their allies).
The solutions were either prohibit, gain compromise, or give compromise, which is the ancient one that faced the romans when attempting to bring the jews into the empire.
The ‘give compromise’ is an exchange: “spiritual is true by faith, and material is true by law”. This frustrates both parties a bit but is the only truly reciprocal exchange under the law. And it works for christianity alone because the law also requires compatibility with natural law. Judaism and Islam as well as marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and denialism are not compatible with the law.
So the remaining challenge is just to define christianity as some set of existing sects sharing some long standing tradition, limited to compliance with natural law AND the demarcation between the spiritual faith and the material law.
I felt it was not possible even to achieve this compromise, so it was better to state the law as the law, and grant christians a specific license under the law.
The exchange gives christianity peerage with the law. The exemption gives it permission under the law. And legal scholars will have to debate these things for centuries – because I cannot close the loophole of truthful speech because of the christian demand for identity between truth and myth.
So that is where I ended up. To avoid the question by specific license rather than compromising on the question as a difference between faith and law.
—“Can anyone explain what separates @curtdoolittle’s view of Christianity from someone like Jefferson’s? “Jesus just wants you to love your neighbor. All the miracle stuff is sugar coating to help the medicine go down.” It’s the oldest most milquetoast view ever.”— @HHBenedictXVII
It doesn’t matter. I attempted to discover a means of legal tolerance of christianity with intolerance for other religions and it’s not possible because christians really do need their “woo woo”.The founders were Deists, and Jefferson (like me) saw Jesus as primitive philosopher.
Because of demographics, and incentives, Xianity will continue to die off with each generation, resulting in the Benedict Option, leaving around a quarter of the population devout, but politically and economically powerless, while the rest continue with political and material rather than supernatural means of mindfulness.
By demanding their ideal, being unwilling to compromise with secularists, and by being unwilling to use islamic levels of violence, Xians are done. Because it is a philosophy of the weak. Aryanism under the ‘excuse’ of Xianity was how our aristocracy ruled. w/o Aryans, no Xians.
PEOPLE FOLLOW INCENTIVES NOT SHOULDS.
It is possible to license christianity because of its adherence to natural law under the scholastics. It is not possible to license christianity if we tell people the dogma is ‘true’ rather than inspirational mythology. Ergo it is only possible to grant christianity special dispensation under the law.
This is unacceptable for the devout because they cannot and do not hold to their faith in competition with truth, science, and law despite their claims to strong faith. The christian cannot tolerate separation between faith and truth because his faith is not strong enough to carry him. To the contrary. the truthful can tolerate the faithful when it comes to the commons in which they must act, when action in accordance with existential reality is always in their interests.
There is no difference between Propertarian Natural Law, Moral Intuition, and Christian Morality EXCEPT that christians must show their devotion to this morality by lying (belief in nonsense) and the rest of us show our devotion to this morality simply by NOT LYING.
I’m done with the trial run. It’s really, really, obvious that Xians demonstrate addiction responses to threats to their source of mindfulness (medication).
And given the current state of xianity as not sufficiently desperate to compromise, while at the same time we are invaded by aliens, and under increasing rule by parasites, it appears that christians are the limiting factor on reform.
My position on religion is that my research project is finished and that there is nothing left for me to discuss because no exchange is possible between factions. So please do not waste my time.
MY JOB IS THE LAW
My job is to provide means of decidability in matters of conflict: the law, and to prevent conflict by the incremental suppression of parasitism with the law. And in particular to suppress the semitic and female means of deceit which is baiting into moral hazard with false promise, pilpul, and critique, and the suppression of statements of ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, loading and framing, suggestion and obscurantism, the fictionalisms of idealism/sophism, supernaturalism/occult, pseudoscience/magic, outright deceit, and denialism.
A FUTURE WORK MAYBE
If I live long enough to do a book on religion, then that will be the time for further discussion. But at this point I think none will be necessary. (I have enough problem with the two in progress)
A FORK IN THE RESEARCH
Religion was the only open position where I thought I might have an opportunity to unify groups, but it’s not possible because of the abrahamists. So as far as I know, the last open question is closed. And all that remains is completing the constitution, the first book, and the courses.
RESULTS OF TESTING THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT’S ABILITY TO CONDUCT A TRADE WITH THE GROWING UNAFFILIATED.
Nothing. changed. at. all.
HABITUATED REDUCTIONISM
0. It’s not possible for ordinary people to distinguish between (a) the law proper, and (b) the constitutional implementation of that law as federating contract, and (c) the regional or local law as adaptive to tradition and norm, where local constitutions that differ according to local preference (demand).
So no matter how we preface it, we have a body politic indoctrinated into ideal thought and we are in a position where we must appeal to lowest common denominator in order to have the numbers to obtain power to demand constitutional reform (restoration of natural rights under natural law.)
Disappointing but expected. Means we should continue to selectively include the ‘smart folk’ and work on the solution and disassociate from and ignore the non-intellectual class as the ‘voice of reason’ between left and right “in the interests of the center”.
SPECIFY THE FRAME OF THE ANSWER (Despite frustrating the audience.)
1. I have to be very clear and preface every answer with whether they want the answer according to “the law”, a federal constitution(insurer of last resort limited to real property (private and public), a state constitution or a local constitution not limited to real property (including norms and commons). People think I’m waffling because they want a religion, philosophy, or ideology that isn’t a division of labor and purvey. But no matter what I do I end up with ‘in a propertarian world…?” (which is meaningless), rather than ‘with propertarianism can we construct….?” We can construct anything. There are at least three possible means of running a government given our current condition.
EXPLAIN FROM THE TOP DOWN
2. In explanations I need to start at the top down (vision) rather than bottom up (science) and say that P, at least for european peoples, would recommend, because of our genetics and cultures, that we restore the many states if not city states of europe. And that MOST of the time when I am talking I am recommending that solution. HOWEVER, we can (a) do so and secede, we can (b) simply devolve the federal government and sort without seceding, or (c)we can attempt to take over the federal government and enforce the devolution of the federal scope of responsibilities and devolve non-real-property (everything but insurer of last resort) to the states. In other words, P IS TOOLKIT. With the P TOOLKIT I am proposing one of a nearly infinite number of constitutions for different peoples.
IMPOSSIBILITY OF STANDARDIZATION – Trade Impossible.
3. Religiosity/Rationality/Science and class/intelligence, religious heritage/tradition, training into different sects, There exists no immediate solution to the problem of our religions other than prohibiting alien religions, providing incentives, and letting time continue to run its course. Why? Just as animals imprint we behave similarly thru training that is continuously reinforced and justified. And only significant adaptive opportunity or pressure alters this training. Those of us who are more naturally scandinavian will migrate one way, those more continental another, and those more mediterranean or slavic another, and that will simply mean the preservation of our cults. The problem is not there, but in eliminating further jewish and muslim damage to the civilization.
NATURE TAKE ITS COURSE, ABANDON ATTEMPT AT RESTORING THE CHURCH
4. For my part it is better to truncate the constitutional section on religion, not try to save or reform the religion, expand education, expand festivals and holidays, and let natural evolution take its course in the production of educational differences that are expressible as religious differences. In other words it is not possible to restore the centrality of the church to the polity. Without the compromise of truth, there is no means by which the faithful and the rational can be institutionally unified.
PIVOT MAINSTREAM
5. I think P is better for normies ‘that want to get along’ than for the right wing and left wing fringe. And pivoting away from the fringe to the mainstream is something we should have done a bit earlier, but are now only able to. Even though I think we are not ready.
All of these fringes look for rules by which they can avoid negotiation and compromise with people (monopolies). Each express their bias in method of argument (paradigm and vocabulary) as well as masculine libertarian or feminine application of (eM) Established-Masculine-Threat, (aM)Ascendent-Masculine-Exchange-Boycott, or (F)Feminine-Undermining.
In other words genetics rule and the fringes cannot compromise leaving the mainstream and mainstream incentives as the optimum and letting the fringes drive demand for a viable solution to coming conflict. This disassociates us further from the fringe and lowers resistance to the spread of the movement.
However, this occurs at the expense of an increase in the cost and time of distribution. And alters the pitch somewhat to appeal to the mainstream leaving only the far left as an opponent.
-Curt
(PS: And y’all thought I was just trolling christians…..)
Not only did I read the bible myself, but I went to catechism every saturday, church every sunday, it was required reading in 7th grade, we had it in comparative religion in 12th grade, and I read it multiple times as an adult. The difference is that I thought it was ridiculous.
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
