Political discussion thread, lay out your arguments, for why each one is better, politically speaking
Last thread reached bump limit
Christian Vs Pagan debate - Thread 2
Benjamin Lewis
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Camden Cox
I'll start: christians are literally insane, cut the tips of their dicks off because a pastor told them to, believed the earth was flat for a thousand years while we knew it was a sphere long before they arrived in europe, and killed anyone who disagreed with them for a thousand years
do you want to live in ANY european country between 700 and 1400
I rest my case
Lucas Martin
>Well i say it then "these are the true Gods" exactly like most of the World believed in it under different names before the jews corrupted it.
Your belief comes off as an afterthought. I read these threads alot and literally 99% of people pagans never even discuss their faith- they rely entirely on aesthetics most of the time. Using "religion" as a social program first and a belief secondly, devalues it and arguably blasphemes your "religion". Also dont give me nonsense about all paganism being the same. That's foolish and you dont really have anyway to even know that. I'll bet you there were more sects than you could shake a stick at. You may have chosen the religion of a sect that were mortal enemies with your true ancestors for all you know. You are obsessed with the aesthetics and ancestor worship so you play dress up with their extinct gods and religion. Look I find honoring your ancestors admirable and I do the same, even to the ones I assume were pagans in Europe- but that doesnt mean I'm going to go try and dig up their extinct religions and try to rebuild them like a Frankenstein's monster. Speaking of ancestors- I dont know my ancient ancestors at all- nothing about them. However take my grandfather for example. He grew up poor in the depression, worked on a farm since he was like 12 years old. He built a large farm over his life and did alot for me. He was a devout Christian man- worked hard his whole life- never drank or smoked. He taught me alot and gave me alot... now why should I honor an antiquity I know nothing about over my more recent ancestors who I *do* know? And while I am aware geographically, many of the sects have similarities, you have no way of really knowing because the histories are lost. Which is a point you never really answered to- how do you know you are recreating it correctly? What is your source material? How do you know your ancestors wouldnt call you a heretic if they saw your interpretation of their religion?
William Morales
This is Yahweh, the Jew-god tribal pecker demon. Christians are too afraid to comment on this picture. Christians are too afraid that Yahweh is watching them and their cringing superstition prevents them from expressing any disapproval of this indecent character. Christians believe that any negative comment or opinion could go on their record and come back up against them on judgement day. Christians have to force themselves to like this character so they do not disappoint Yahweh. Christians must admire the great Jew pecker of Yahweh. It's just too risky for them to jeopardize their reservation in eternal heaven. It's actually a sin for them to dislike this picture. It's anti-Semitic for them to dislike this picture.
Isaac Williams
Source , YHWH IS part of a 72 named identity in respects to the God of gods. Show me his other 71 identities and i promise you they will look nothing like this african interpretation you guys keep pushing.
Tldr disinfo shill.
Ian Taylor
>cut the tips of their dicks
Christians are not required to do that(Jews and Muslims are)
>believed the earth was flat
No they didn't
>killed anyone who disagreed with them for a thousand years
That's an arguement against the church rather than the relgion
Grayson Myers
>Source
Zachary Smith
My God: hung like a horse
Your god: drinks horse semen
Zachary Cruz
>Your belief comes off as an afterthought.
I am not the guy you re answering to
but
> I read these threads alot and literally 99% of people pagans never even discuss their faith- they rely entirely on aesthetics most of the time. Using "religion" as a social program first and a belief secondly,
the main reason there s not much arguying is that generally most christians are completely insane or so stupid they cant be made to understand anything, the conversation thus turns into a game where the pagan tries to fuck with the stupîd christian for his own enjoyment while trying to convince the lurkers, not the one he is talking to
nowthere are two aspects to what you said, the first is that things like having a dogma, a written text seen as objective while being in contradiction with reality, theology and mindless worship and superstitions are all exclusively jewish and abrahamic, those things were very minor at best in pre abrahamic europe
secondly, it focussed a lot more on philosophy, ideology, and the societal organisation, so a strong belief system yes, a strong belief in some potential gifts and reward in the afterlife no
>Also dont give me nonsense about all paganism being the same. That's foolish and you dont really have anyway to even know that. I'll bet you there were more sects than you could shake a stick at.
well all of european paganism came from 1 original root, and the central parts, ie the values way of life, philosphy, conception of divinity, remained identical, gods are the incarnations of divine aspects of reality, but which of them figured in a pantheon depends solely on the society, so of course some societies had gods worshipped that were absent of others, this doesnt mean the background isnt the same
Adam Long
>My God: hung like a horse
lol nope
Christopher Campbell
>Your god: drinks horse semen
complete lie, from a jewish pervert, but you guys dont mind using the lies of jewish perverts do you?
Grayson Long
>You are obsessed with the aesthetics and ancestor worship
those things are very imàportant aspects of paganism, aesthetics, beauty, are a divine pursuit, there s a reason everything was so aesthetic in the classical world, people made sure it would be so
as for ancestor worship need I go on
>Look I find honoring your ancestors admirable and I do the same, even to the ones I assume were pagans in Europe- but that doesnt mean I'm going to go try and dig up their extinct religions and try to rebuild them like a Frankenstein's monster.
you seem to be underestimating how much we know, again, remember, the beliefs and conceptions of life are central, the rites, ritual, myths are not, so if we lack a lot of those it doesnt really matter
>Speaking of ancestors- I dont know my ancient ancestors at all- nothing about them.
watch this video, you will understand why it matters
>now why should I honor an antiquity I know nothing about over my more recent ancestors who I *do* know?
you shouldnt
if then you ask why should you not follow his religion instead of the Old One, as an act of honor to him and to them, it is because the justification itself of that act, the firm belief that you should honor those who have given you everything, including a place in this world, all come from the old one, and the knowledge of the natural way, which those values are part of
if you deny it, you deny the very reason for which you chose to do this act, and you forget to even follow the natural way, not only in the respect of your ancestors, or the proper relation with your familly, but also all the other parts, the duty towards one s people, the hardship, the strive to betterment, the incessent fight for life, the control of the self, the detacthment from controlling desires, all of the things that keep you and your people, and the future generation of your children alive, and have kept your ancestors alive, all of it will be gone
Isaac Reed
>How do you know your ancestors wouldnt call you a heretic if they saw your interpretation of their religion?
because its not a thing
there is no word for heretic in pie languages before christianity, ad if there was such a thing it would be someone going agaisnt the natural way, harming himself or the people he relies on
there is no such thing as "you interprented wrongly our retranslated holy text you shall die", or "I disagree in the manner you conduct the worship of our most holy jew"
all of those things are pushed by cowardly fear and baseless superstitions
Cooper Collins
Christian Peterson
Ancestor worship, aesthetics, cultural programs are all fine, but they are not religion. That is a code or a philosophy and it is a lesser thing than a religion. Utility is not belief, whether that is utility in this life or the next. Here is an example I always use- Christianity isnt great because it, for example, produced things like the greatest music in known history (Bach). It is the opposite- Bach's music is so elevated because it is, as an endeavor, created expressly to honor the true creator of the universe. There is a big difference between those two paths.
So you are saying there is no dogma to paganism- no text- then humor me- what is your source? The oral traditions were broken. What you are saying is that we have some general notions and conceptions we like but we dont really know anything about the actual practice. I dont worship the God I do because I'm trying to honor my ancestors or my grandfather because he did alot for me- that's the mentality I am ascribing to you. The point of my bringing it up is to question why you have zeroed in on one particular moment in your history and not others? What about the periods before the "Old Ones" unless you are asserting that belief is eternal? I'll guarantee you there were "Older Ones." Why ignore them? You strike me as a steampunkesque obsession with a certain era- aesthetics. But in your defense you have admitted your interest is vague spiritualism and aesthetics. I would wager your ancestors of the era you focus on were not that way, they most likely actually believed their rituals. They literally believed in those Gods. I would wager they didnt adopt some vague ethic or aesthetic because they thought there was utility in it. I think this literal belief is what you lack- I dont think you really understand faith in a religion, your ancestors did have rituals and they mattered to those people- how can you dismiss them as not mattering all that much is a very telling thing to me.
Liam Young
Most of your argument could be broken down thusly.
>Not knowing very much hard information isnt a big deal because we are interested in vague spirituality, ethics, and aesthetics not belief.
My concern is not aesthetics, my ancestors, or utility and ethics- it is because I legitimately believe the God of the Bible is the almighty creator of the universe. I think not having this hard belief in any deity, but rather a vague ethic, is being essentially Godless.
>We dont like Christianity because its origins in the middle east and association with the Jews.
The story of Christianity in the new testament is literally about the fall of the Jews. That is one of the big themes of the new testament. If your choice of religion is informed by this history however- I would suggest yet again you dont have a true belief- you are choosing an aesthetic which is not a religion in my opinion. It is a different level of conviction. Also out of curiosity- what is the "natural way" and from whence is it derived? Is it subjective or objective? How could one transgress against the natural way?
Jeremiah Cruz
>your ancestors did have rituals and they mattered to those people- how can you dismiss them as not mattering all that much is a very telling thing to me.
you misunderstand what I mean by not mattering
what are rituals for? they are solely dependant on the movements of the individuals within a society
those societies are gone now, I am not saying rituals do not matter, I am saying knowing the specifics of the rituals that have los ttheir meanings does not
>I think not having this hard belief in any deity, but rather a vague ethic, is being essentially Godless.
for a member of an abrahamic faith sure, and this ethic is not vague it is precise
>I would suggest yet again you dont have a true belief- you are choosing an aesthetic which is not a religion in my opinion. It is a different level of conviction.
I think the word you might be looking for is faith, and yes, there is no such thing in the religion I defend
faith, blind faith, faith agaisnt all proof, faith against what you feel is right, faith that pushes you to commit evil is absent
this does not mean fanaticism is absent, or that we are less willing to die for our beliefs, it is quite the contrary
but faith? to us it is nothing but a mind who has gotten stuck, who is beingconned and abused, who is being lied to
the first question when one mention he has faith is why? where does trhta faith come from?
while there is no why we cant answer, christians always find themselves at a loss, because their faith originate from a rejection of this why, an act of faith in the abrahamic sense is closing yourself to all reason why grasping to a hope, and we see this as foolish
youtube.com
if it is what drives us forwards, what dictates our every action, how is it less than what you would consider a religion?
Christian Myers
Your stupid superstition is just as stupid as all the other stupid superstitions.
Easton Mitchell
>Also out of curiosity- what is the "natural way" and from whence is it derived? it is the vedic dharma, the greek logos I have some notions of IE languages, including PIE, but I am by no means an expert in the linguistical manner so forgive me if I do not know how it was called in all of the IE groups firstly the fact that this concept is present in all of our religions with identical meaning is the proof that it was endemic to its root, and central enough not to be altered by any of the branches of the european familly across thousands of years
as for the the word natural way it is the best translation for the meaning I couled find, natural law, eternal law
it represents both the natural order of things, and the morals, vbalues, and expected behiavior of any person, I dont have time to go into it but it is very complete, and it never contradicts itself, it forms a beautiful whole where every teaching follows the others in harmony, I have never seen anyone rebute any part of it without resorting to complete objectivism, ignoring our best intrests, then yes, of course, if you wish to be counterproductive then it becomes a bad model
you should look more into it, but I dont recomend indian sanatara dharma, as you said the oral tradition has been lost and all that we known in written form from india comes from a time vedism had already degenerated severly, losing track of the original meaning of things, so instead of having a nice cohesive and coherent whole you have dissossiated inchoherent parts in modern hinduism
look more into the greek understanding (pre philosphy), the celts and germanics, the scythians of course who probably had one of the purest form of belief, who retained and knew the orginal meaning of all that they believed, and every action they did
they were never conquered, in all of history, all of those who tryed were destroyed, and the women would rather kill their children then themselves than be subjegated and to lose their freedom
Sebastian Martinez
This is the oldest surviving depiction of Christ.
Lucas Brooks
I would argue your take on your ancestors rituals sums up how I view your aesthetic (i wont call it a religion); you have taken the literal and devout belief your ancestors had and reduced it to a vague ethic which has no hard faith or belief in the literal existence of a deity (force, objective rightness or wrongness." With no explicit oral tradition or elders remaining- no religious text, and no faith in the existence of a named overt deity... I would say you meet the definition of Godless. You arent much different, based on what I've heard thus far, from a modern humanist who believes every one's intuition and general sense of "rightness" is their God. Meaning it is completely subjective.
> faith against what you feel is right, faith that pushes you to commit evil.
How do you define this "evil" you speak of? Is it different for every person or there is a definable evil? Wouldnt "what you feel is right" be different for every person?
>the first question when one mention he has faith is why where does trhta faith come from while there is no why we cant answer, christians always find themselves at a loss, because their faith originate from a rejection of this why, an act of faith in the abrahamic sense is closing yourself to all reason why grasping to a hope, and we see this as foolish.
That comment of yours, to be polite, is less than clear. But let's cut to the chase on this topic, no vague ethics and aesthetics....How do you believe the universe came to be?
Brody Myers
>natural law, eternal law.
Is this law the same for everyone or is it subjective? If it isnt subjective, from where is it derived?
Noah Lee
>What about the periods before the "Old Ones" unless you are asserting that belief is eternal? I'll guarantee you there were "Older Ones." Why ignore them?
you dont quite understand the unity and the scale of the one we are talking about, every single group of european, from britany to india to eastern china had only a variant of that belief, and we date it back to probably over 10 000 years, and if there was anything before there was no harsh breakaway, only evolution from one to the other, and fullfillment of the core understandings and beliefs
and it also means it dates as far back as the last ice age, if not much longer, as there are still records of it in every oral tradition
the issue with denying it is that it simply equates denying the understanding of yourself, every principle that was prominent in a society formed by our race is fully undersood once you start to learn it, suddenly everything makes sense, it all falls together, you begin to understand why you value the things you value
as you know every aspect of our society is deeply racial, what is moral and what is not, who is respected, all of those things
you cannot aspire to noble things, you cannot aspire to honor, you cannot aspire to achievements, you cannot aspire to a glory accross your people and accross time, a renoun, you cannot aspire to a familly, and you cannot even aspire without understanding those things, and if you do you would do it in a blind manner, not knowing the reasons behind your decisions, like a ghost lacking a mind, you are not a master of your decisions, you just go with the flow while taking your lead of others
if you consider all those things to be on another level than your faith, then fine, you should learn about them, you will understand just how much you have been missing
again, I do not believe in your creator god and I find this faith completely unecessary
anyways this was my last post, I gtg, I will be back to read your replies but not answer
Benjamin Sanchez
>every single group of european, from britany to india to eastern china had only a variant of that belief, and we date it back to probably over 10 000 years, and if there was anything before there was no harsh breakaway, only evolution from one to the other, and fullfillment of the core understandings and beliefs.
These things you speak of literally predate all recorded information and history- how can you be so certain about them unless it is through... faith? The truth is, you have no idea if, around the time of the ice age, a religious view or group of pagans violently supplanted another or not. You are guessing and it is manifestly foolish. There is no basis for your suggestion that it all evolved one way from the very dawn of mankind... One consensus and agreement? That goes against our entire history as humans in fact.
Leo Barnes
>Meaning it is completely subjective.
your objective morality has no justification, a large part of it is seen as completely imoral and uterely repulsive by everyone who isnt willing to look past their own conscience for their faith, how is what is objectively best so that the human being stays healthy, and so does his society, in any way lesser than morals you have read in a book, and were by all account nothing but the brainstorming of rabbis on the question of social engineering?
> Is it different for every person or there is a definable evil?
it is a mix of what you naturally feel is right, and what is right when you understand the overarching philosphy, again, I do not have time to expend on this
christians need to find quotes, and misinterpret them to justify their beliefs, while to us what is moral in every situation can be deduced, because our understanding is total and, we know why something is right when we claim it is, we are not simply trying to appeal to some supernatural supposed jewish god and his own desires
its an other very weird thing, in christianity whta is seen as objectively moral is simply the will of god, why would that be? is moral for god then subjective? why did he create us to feel some of the things he wants are imoral? none of this makes sense
>How do you believe the universe came to be
well I certainly dont know
the orgin myths relate what happened and how it happened, not why
the greek myth for example perfectly mirrors our current understanding of the universe, and it is where I stand
this doesnt answer the question of "wtf are we in"
"what even is a universe"
"why is it there"
"why does anything exist"
and a creating force in no way solves those question, this is simply a regression, if it came from something, as christians sometimes try to claim through their flawed causality argument, then god and his creation would be part of this causality, thus the question is asked, "where did he come from" "why does it exist"
Austin Garcia
>These things you speak of literally predate all recorded information and history- how can you be so certain about them unless it is through... faith?
nope, because groups split off even at that time, and their beliefs are similar when they were first recorded, dont try to accuse me of your faith
all whites, all indo europeans, came from a single group that flourished, and then split off to conquer all of the lands it now inhabits
>There is no basis for your suggestion that it all evolved one way from the very dawn of mankind...
absolutely not and I do not imply that, what I imply is that this was the system of belief that was created by the highest members of the humand clad to ever exist, and that it allowed them to overpower all oposition
they probably date from 30000-20000 high estimate to 15000 low estimate, basically steming during the ice age, and cristalizing shortly after the begining of the interglacial period, so 10000 years ago
this way of life was really durable, we know for a fact that it survived almost unchanged after different groups of IE had split off for more than 4000 years, so if there is next to no difference between two groups after 4000 years of isolation, it is not foolish to assume it remained unchanged since the begining of the time it records, after all, the rituals that passed down the oral tradition had to at least survive this long
Nathaniel Ross
in addition, no one had to ever enforce those beliefs by force, and our race always gravitated back towardfs them, today we are simply lackign the thousands of years of wisdom that allowed us to understand it
Ayden Campbell
I hate to break it to you- you dont have a religion. You don't have morals either- you have instinct which is completely different than morality. I have more respect for an empiricist and admitted atheist because they would say there is no such thing as morality. Whilst you, take what is individual instinct about some subjctive "rightness" and are parading it around as morality- which it isnt. Your view of the universe is essentially agnostic. Just read your post. You believe in subjective morality and likes the aesthetics of ancient largely extinct religions. You are like a poet taster... a religion-taster.
Isaac Edwards
chad agnostics still prefer paganism because of the ethnic connections. Christians reject ethnicity and prefer any shitskin with a cross necklace over their own people
Blake Flores
I like the Christian concept of One God, One Good to fight for. It's a lot less divisive than the multiple gods in paganism. Christianity, and the other Abrahamic religions, is a lot better than paganism at mobilizing and uniting a group of people together. The only reason why people are leaving it and starting to larp as pagans is because the institution that represents Christianity, the Church, is getting Jewed along with the rest of Western Civilization. As soon as everything collapses, I don't think any of you will care about pagan aesthetics enough to fight for them, but many Christians will, because they have faith that their efforts will be rewarded in the afterlife.
Benjamin Bailey
would christianity stop mattering to you if you couldn't quote a text? What if you were put into an environment where you couldn't access a bible, and could only tell others about your religion via what you remember? Would christianity stop being true to you, or stop existing altogether? food for thought. Of course ancient pagans believed in religious deities as existing, but their knowledge what that meant was not as explored as the dogmatic christian church over the centuries of its existence. It's extremely telling that the more questions were asked of christianity, the less people were true christians. Secularism is a consequence of pursuing truth
Luke Howard
>I like the Christian concept of One God, One Good to fight for. It's a lot less divisive
complete retarded right there