[Janus]

@Ted
Thank you for your reply, that’s an interesting observation and I think you’re probably right on the money. I look forward to the possibility of first meeting people at an AFA location, it seems the best fit for me.

@Oscar
TBH I’m not so sure Christians were a persecuted minority, that seems to be part of the game they play. I say this as someone who was raised Christian but slowly over time got tired of the guilt and the lie that if you don’t do this or that, you’re going to go to that bad place. My research indicates the fear game was introduced by the Roman Catholic church. Catholic means Universal in Latin, with the previous Universal church of the Empire being Pagan.

Many here might not like one particular researcher because he’s a black man, however he says that he’s been to underground tunnels beneath the Vatican, where many of the stolen books said to be lost either in the fires which burned down the main library of Alexandria, Egypt, or possibly when the Christians destroyed the other library.

“The daughter library, protected by the Serapeum, subsisted up to the 4th century as long as paganism survived. But when Christianity became the one and only religion acknowledged throughout the empire, Emperor Theodosius I in his zeal to wipe out all vestiges of paganism issued a decree in 391 sanctioning the demolition of temples in Alexandria. Empowered by the imperial decree, Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, led an attack on the Serapeum, and he himself gave the first blow to the cult statue of Serapis. His frenzied followers ran amok in the temple, destroying and plundering. When the destruction was complete, Theophilus ordered a church to be built on the site.”

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Library-of-Alexandria/The-fate-of-the-Library-of-Alexandria

An ironic reality is the vast majority of Christians not only eat meat when Jesus and his disciples did not, they also keep Pagan holidays. My understanding is that Jesus was born in the summer. That did not fit with the plan to get more converts, as mentioned above.

Judaism originally had many gods and over time became monotheistic. This video explains it pretty well. One god was Asherah a female deity, who is known as Venus in Paganism.

[Ted]

@Janus
Having only read the Wikipedia entry for Asatru Folk Assembly, I see the main difference between them and Cosmothesism as past focus vs future focus. AFA looks back to Germanic Paganism and White racial heritage with reverence, Cosmotheism looks forward to glorious potential futures the White race could achieve. I’d think positively of someone for adhering to either.

@Oscar
I like the re-frame you provided. Loyalty to White well-being is all that really matters in times like this. It seems unlikely a new belief system for White people will spread like wildfire and change our fortunes.

Christianity may have taken 3 centuries to conquer Rome, but Wokism only took about 4 generations. Noahidism could come at us fast.

[Oscar]

Hi people,

when I was a kid and we were still learning the history of nations instead of oppressed dildos, I was told the story of those monks in Constantinople, besieged by the Turks, who gravely discussed the sex of angels as if it were a central issue that would determine the survival of this last European bastion against an Islamized Asia.

I’m sure the most astute among you will have grasped the parallels between the situations.

The demographic data is clear and they are broadly the same whether you live in Paris, Berlin, London, or Detroit.

(Just kidding about Detroit, you’re already a memory.)

Within 40 years, the greatest civilizational rupture ever seen since the barbarian invasions that brought an end to the decadent Roman Empire will occur, and those of us still alive will be astonished and enraged to live in societies in which we have become a minority on the very soil of our ancestors, a situation so staggering and unimaginable for those of us old enough to have known our respective countries intact that a part of our brain, even for those of us who are supposed to be the most lucid part of our respective populations, still refuses to really consider it, in the way that the human mind – or its animal instincts – rejects the idea of the certainty of the end even when contemplating an atomic mushroom cloud.

40 years is tomorrow, so the idea that all we need to do is create a new “common civic religion/belief” to win back the minds of the White masses, lobotomized by the Blob, and begin the process of regaining control is the stuff of magical thinking and political procrastination.

procrastination doesn’t consist in doing nothing, contrary to popular belief: it consists precisely in multiplying anecdotal and uninteresting actions to avoid having to confront an unpleasant but particularly important problem.

Christianity took three centuries to evolve from a persecuted fringe ideology to a central value reference for the entire West, and we don’t have 3 centuries ahead of us.

this kind of perpetual micro-civil warfare (Christian/Paganist, Royalist/Fascist, pan-European identitarian/ethno-nationalist) is a sure ticket to defeat.

we’re fighting a war, a muted but merciless war aimed at nothing less than our own annihilation, so we have to face it as an army, and my modest experience in this field – but experience nonetheless – leads me to say that in an army, what counts is not the similarity of profiles and opinions, but the certainty that the guy next to you will hold his ground and cover your backs

let each man hold his own part of the trench, fight where and how he can, and who cares if he does it for Christ the King, for Odin, or out of a personal taste for his heritage.

we can always become Byzantines after we’ve won, if we ever do.

[Janus]

@Paleo-aryan Wonder if you would try to justify the torture and murder of Cathar’s by the Catholic authorities?

In defense of Christians, what makes or breaks a church, IE a “body of Christ” is the Pastor and the leadership of the church, which determines the direction. Because Christianity is so widespread in the USA and Europe, there needs to be a willingness by Pagans and others to communicate with them.

https://www.cathar.info/cathar_inquisition.htm

• This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Janus.

[Janus]

Charlemagne’s Reign of Terror: The Brutal Methods of Forced Pagan Conversion

[Janus]

@Ted What about Asatru Folk Assembly? Have you ever been to one of their meetings? How do they compare to Cosmotheism?

@Paleo-aryan A funny yet accurate book about Christianity is The Naked Bible by Andrew Bernardin which shreds “god” to pieces. Verses which Preachers conveniently avoid are exposed. The OT god in particular is jealous and violent, hardly a God of love. “Obey me or I’ll kill you”.

[Janus]

@Hunter So we need sharia for White women? LOL! Seriously though, they need something similar. They need authority, firmness, resoluteness and to be shown that the man isn’t going to take any BS after a certain point.

[Janus]

According to a lost interview by Edgar Cayce just before his death, we risk becoming part of a soulless technocracy or returning to the source. It’s very important to say the source is different from what many believe it is.

This video discusses the point of view from the Pagan side and how early Christians forced Pagans to convert. Certainly Christians have evolved since the beginning and they still must evolve further.

• This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by Janus.
• This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by Janus.

[Ted]

@Leo
Highly excellent post. I’d like to take this moment to promote Cosmotheism as a pro-White religion alternative.

@Hunter
While I think leo is correct, and we have very good basis to assume what happens when a brain stops metabolizing, maybe some form of emotional manipulation system could be useful for inducting the less intelligent. A movement needs numbers, and reasoning and large posts will lose you 95% of the public.

[Administrator]

Very interesting. I added the PDF of Ferdinand Bardamu “Why Europeans must reject Christianity” to a WD page https://wd.easytodo.in/books-about-christianity

[Anglo-Saxon]

@EhDude

Christians were hunted … or Europeans were, you mean? You cannot hunt something that exists only in the mind, that can be changed at any moment, as is true of a religious belief. I could tell you I’m a Christian, or I could tell you I’m an atheist, and none of you would be any wiser as to what I actually am or believe in. It’s all imaginary, in the mind, and doesn’t exist in the world around us. You can only hunt what exists in the real-world, as biological race does. Ask any crypto-Jew all about the enormous failure to annihilate Judaism, thanks to false “conversions;” and then ask them about the widespread success in disabling, persecuting, and expelling the Jewish race all throughout history. The Jews have had to learn and master deceit, to protect their race. The basis of human history has always been about race, not religion, and that remains true to this very day.

Jews want the rest of the world to think that races don’t exist; with groups like Anglo-Saxons and Caucasians now considered “obsolete” as part of a now-“disproven” theory of race as a biological reality. Instead, Jews want people to think that race is a harmful social construct that needs to end, until nobody except the Jews themselves care to preserve their ethnicity, race, or genetic heritage, while the rest of us miscegenate ourselves out of existence. Why do you think we’re “disallowed” from discriminating on the basis of all these things? Because Jews want us to all mix together, until the world becomes a brown, dumbed down mass of low IQ halfwits, clueless that purebred, high IQ Jews have come to dominate everything. That’s what we’re not supposed to know anything about, and that’s why it’s taboo for any of us to discuss human races, White genocide, or the Jewish problem.

Meanwhile, Christianity is alive and well; everybody and their mother is aware and allowed to believe in this self-destructive religion. What’s affordable to the masses is always what’s worst for you. Christianity is promoted by so many people, in countless ways, across a wide geographical range that welcomes everybody into it. All the nations of the world are invited to believe in or accept Christianity, to come together, to love everybody, and all that matters in whether a person is suitable is if he or she believes or doesn’t believe in God. What does that matter? You’re welcome and tolerated because of some fairy dust between your ears? I’m an atheist who attends Christian group activities, who was raised by Christian parents (which should shutdown your silly claim that I’m ignorant of the Bible’s content, when I quite literally grew up reading and studying it), and I can easily lead other Christians to believe that I’m also a Christian, when I’m not. But you know what I cannot do? I cannot deceive people into thinking I’m not White and of the European race. The part that matters, is the permanent reality, not the ever-changing nonsense in people’s brains, that have led many into a delusional falsehood that everybody belongs and that everybody is equal to each other (sounds a lot like immigration and civil rights, doesn’t it?). Jews wants us all thinking that everybody is equal, that we set aside our differences, we’re all the same, and we no longer prize or preserve our racial identities. Meanwhile, the Jews make no mention about how they consider themselves superior, as a race, to the rest of the “inferior” world. Instead, they’d much rather label and highlight us Whites as the supremacists, to help further our demise rather than their own, as they prefer to keep themselves very well hidden and censor or disable whoever speaks against.

What gives us our character and our intelligence, and so much more about who we are and what we care about, is actually not religion, but our race, specifically our bloodline. Much of these are hereditary and have genetic components, and that is why children tend to be similar to their own parents. The point being made here is that personal beliefs are damn-near meaningless, they’re ever-changing, compared to our permanent genetic makeup, that assigns so much of our identity and capability. We need to learn to accept reality for what it is, and not what we want it to be. There is no such thing as an afterlife – that’s just an idea for people hopelessly afraid of and unable to cope with the inevitability of death. Our world is hostile, and for our own survival we need to learn to accept the truth no matter how attractive the delusions are instead. We cannot succumb to the pressure to love and be kind towards everybody, when there are people who want to wrong us at every opportunity. We need to be strong, fiercely independent of anti-White systems, and refuse to cooperate with what destroys us – whether religion, taxation, miscegenation, vaccination, or whatever else. Don’t be a fool, be the intelligent White man or woman you’re destined to be, just as I am. You’re only blurring your vision with a nonsensical religion brought about by your enemies, who recognize that humans are the greatest natural resources to control – and are achieving that. Put the Bible down, and stop letting other people think for you, assigning you all the opinions and thoughts you have. Your entire belief system is based on someone else’s bullshit, written hundreds and thousands of years ago; you are so far removed from any original idea that belongs to you, but it doesn’t have to be that way. Think for yourself.

Take offense if you wish, but try to recognize that I’m repelling the Christian cancer – the Jewish virus – from the polluted minds of my White brothers and sisters, because I recognize it as being harmful. This has nothing to do with ego. I don’t concern myself with what other people may or may not think of me; I prioritize what is good for our race, over what is good for an individual – me or any other. I do this out of love for my own kind, the White race, that deserves, must, and shall exist in perpetuity, only if more of us come to our senses. We cannot do that with Jewry’s anti-White religion, Christianity.

[Dude]

@Leo

Christians have been hunted by certain middle eastern groups for hundreds if not thousands of years. Catholics used to have a particular prayer indirectly related to this topic, “Oremus et pro perfidies Judaeis”. You are also confusing what you perceive Christians today believe with what Christianity actually teaches. If you read through the bible, Christianity teaches that there was not a prophet who the Israelites did not persecute. Christianity (the bible) doesn’t teach worshipping Israelites. Any worship has been added in. What you believe is your choice, but please do not straw-man Christianity.

Also, a brief read of small parts of your original (and lengthy) first post indicates a lot of assertions that require the reader to already accept similar presuppositions that you have. Who are you convincing with that? For example: You state there are no eye-witness accounts. Merely texts written 40 years later. The 4 gospels are eye-witness accounts written by the eye-witnesses.

@Pheonix

If you are so tired of talking to Christians about Christianity, why are you here commenting on this thread? I didn’t start a post or thread to try and shoot down whatever your beliefs may be.

• This reply was modified 10 months ago by Dude.

[Ted]

@Leo
You tell’em Leo. Christianity got the Europeans worshiping the god of the Jews, next step is full blown Noahidism.

[Anglo-Saxon]

@Paleo-aryan

Would you like to explain to us why Christianity spawned in the Middle East (not in Europe, mind you), which is precisely where Judaism also has its origins, with Armenia being the world’s first Christian nation, and it’s takeover in a northwestly direction into Europe, but not southwest into Africa nor eastward into Asia? Or, would you like to explain why Christianity and Islam are both categorized as Abrahamic faiths, just as Judaism is? These 3 religions are deeply similar, interconnected, and for you to suggest otherwise is absurd. Christianity is not a religion that Europeans created, and Europe was Christianized through bloodshed and tyranny over the course of 1,000+ years of resistance to that occurring.

Most Christians today highly respect and admire the Jews as “God’s chosen people,” even thinking that Jesus Christ, their Messiah and the Creator of the universe, was a Jew himself. Few Christians realize that Jews are a race/ethnic group and not only a religious group, and that is evident enough of Jewish design. How clever it is of Jews to make their own enemies worship them. Christianity is not an ethno-religion, while Judaism is. Jews are preserving their race/ethnic group, while Christians are multicultural, with missions all around the world supporting non-Whites, helping them have civilized communities and grow their populations to outnumber us Whites, and the encouraging or tolerating race-mixing. Visit a synagogue, and you will find only Jews. Visit a church, and you will find all the nations of the world.

Regardless of whatever opinions you want to uphold, the reality is that today’s Christians are being deceived, and most Christian teachings have failed to instill into many any sense of self or racial preservation whatsoever. I know of countless Christian families that were formerly White, that have become multiracial in this or the last generation. Most American Christians are Zionists and/or supporters of Israel, their views have been completely perverted into supporting their enemies. Why White Europeans would dare support non-White Israelis/Jews, especially the ethnostate of Israel that was brought into existence through the genocide of millions of White Europeans (both World Wars, Balfour Declaration, etc), is appalling and evident of how Jewry controls Christendom.

Why would any of that be, that adherents to the Christian faith, are delivering the White race to the Jewish cause and desire of our racial extermination? Jews are sucking the life out of our White nations, taking our wealth (are you not aware of how much money the United States sends over to Israel? Not to mention how Jews created and control the Federal Reserve), enslaving us into perpetual debt, depriving us of our genetics and fertility rates, and so much else. Jews are behind all the movements that are anti-White and against life (abortion, birth control, homosexual/transgender nonsense, gun control/buybacks, etc). And you’re going to sit there and pretend that the Jews love us, that Christianity is somehow healthy for our White race? Christianity teaches people to turn the other cheek, to be kind to their enemies, to give earned possessions to others, and all kinds of ridiculous self-destructive insanity. Try explaining how that is good for any White man, woman, or child, with any amount of honesty.

Keep looking to your old Bible’s Jewish authors for answers, and I will look at reality today.

[Paleo-aryan]

Your problem, Hunter, is that you refuse to engage with the real question: Whether Jesus Christ is Who He claimed to be: the true God Who created Heaven and Earth, the sea, and all it contains. Hilaire Belloc is the one who quipped, “How odd of God/To choose the Jews.” If Jesus is God, then He is free to do things as He wills, so long as He does not contradict His Own Nature (an impossibility). Perhaps God chose to become incarnate through the Hebrew race in order to show that He is omnipotent and can save all of us from our sins, including those whom we find the most objectionable and distant from Him and us. I don’t profess to understand God’s thinking about the matter. But that does not give me the freedom to reject facts as though they did not exist.

And by the way, it was race-mixing and the personal moral corruption of both rulers and people, as well as the intrinsic economic limits of supporting an empire, which led to the eventual collapse of the originally pagan Roman Empire, not Christianity.

As a side note, I find it amazing that my Aryan brethren who reject Christianity (by which I mean traditional Catholicism, which is the only true Christianity) seem blind to the fact that they have swallowed whole two monstrous Jewish lies: evolutionism and comparative religion.

Even Hitler was duped by the ridiculous and patently false epistemology and logical fallacies underlying the myth of evolution, which was invented in modern times under the influence of the Jews as a weapon to destroy Christianity and the White race. I had a college professor–an agnostic and lapsed Catholic, thanks to the Jesuits, at a public university–who spent weeks explaining and defending evolution in class, only then to stun the class by demolishing that phony theory in 30 minutes solely by demonstrating its impossibility using purely philosophical principles taught by our pagan ancestors among the Greeks.

The idea of Christianity as an “Abrahamic” religion is so absurd that a high school student ought to be able to see it. The religion itself only claims Abraham as a father in an applied spiritual sense, not in the literal sense of the Hebrews and Arabs. Read St. Paul. Mircea Eliade–a Jew–is the one who pioneered comparative religion and established its principles. The fundamental principle is that, if a religion follows historically after another religion, and the two have any similarities, then the latter obtained those elements from the older religion. That is the logical fallacy of “post hoc, ergo propter hoc.” Just because it came later, doesn’t mean it arose from the historical antecedents, especially when we realize that any Being who can claim to be the true God must of His Nature be outside of and sovereign over Time. We must remember that there are purely spiritual beings in the Universe who are creatures, but who then chose to reject their Creator, and who have the ability to have created for men in the temporal past a caricature or perversion of the True Religion they knew would arise through God’s actions in the temporal future.

It is my personal opinion that Eliade was ordered by the Tribe to develop his philosophically false and bankrupt theories, in order to have yet another weapon with which to attack Christianity and the White race. One anecdotal piece of evidence for this is that comparative religion principles are never applied by adherents to an analysis of the Hebrew religion. It is always treated as something unique, even when its self-proclaimed history is doubted at the same time–and that goes for pagan and atheist Aryans who espouse the concepts, too. Jesus condemned the “Abrahamic” false religion(s) of the Jewish priests and pharisees–religion that was really a perversion derived in no small measure from (Aryan) mystery religions, particularly those found among the Babylonians (what became the Kabbalah).

So, again, rather than beating down a straw man, why don’t you first learn the truth of what Christianity (Catholicism) teaches, before you try to condemn a caricature of it, which you falsely identify as the actual religion. I’m not saying you must embrace the Catholic religion–although you ought to. You have free will (“liberum arbitrium”–literally, “free choice”). But learn what Christianity actually teaches, before you decide to reject it. Rejecting a caricature of it is the intellectually lazy approach of an inferior race, not what a true Aryan and heir of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle should be doing.

• This reply was modified 10 months ago by Paleo-aryan.

[Paleo-aryan]

Well, it would require an essay two or three times as long as the one you present to refute the massive number of factual errors and falsehoods, historical, scientific, and theological, which it presents. While I am up to the task, I do not have the time, unfortunately. (“That’s convenient!” I hear you say sarcastically.)

Your post is the classic example of the straw-man logical fallacy. You build up a straw man, in order to beat him down. Then there is the neurotic wishful thinking of the last section. It is difficult to take the post seriously, when it is not even well-researched.

Let’s take just two examples, briefly.

1-The reality is that Jesus Christ, whether or not you accept his Divinity, is a real, historical person. We have more literary and archaeological evidence for His existence than for almost any other person in antiquity. His detractors, as much as his devotees, testify to that existence, which is in part established by Roman legal records. Consequently, it is necessary to have a serious investigation into and evaluation of the belief system Jesus established–not simply ridicule it through caricature.

2-Anyone who thinks that Christianity is simply some hashed-over Semitic silliness or Jewish shuck-and-jive is not just ignorant, but grossly ignorant, and has never read (at least not with anything approaching objectivity) anything substantial from believing Christians or the Jews themselves on the subject. The Jews rejected Christ and Christianity from the first moment. The notion that Christianity is their creation is a bald assertion with no evidence to support it. In fact, Christianity has been in conflict with those “whitened sepulchres” among the former “Chosen People” since the beginning. In reality, the Jewish hive mind views Christianity and Christendom as a foreign entity to be destroyed, not least because our hereditary enemy (Erbfeind) rightly associates the Christian religion with the White race who were responsible for carrying its message to the ends of the earth and giving it, on the human side of the equation, the cultural underpinnings which enabled Christianity to spread to the entire globe and transform all cultures into something higher.

Anyone who thinks Christianity is just some offbeat Jewish sect has never read either the New Testament or any of the Church Fathers and theologians of the first centuries after the birth of Christ. Please read the New Testament, the Didache, or St. Justin Martyr, or any of the numerous apologists of the Second and Third Centuries A.D., along with the early accounts of the first Christian martyrs–which were drawn often from official Roman court proceedings. Then come back, and we can have the beginnings of a real discussion about the merits of Christianity.

I wouldn’t expect someone to be able to have an intelligent discussion about Hinduism, who had not read the Upanishads, for instance. Yet our atheistic and pagan Aryan brothers and sisters all too often try to ridicule Christianity, when all they are really attacking is a false notion of Christianity. Go learn the truth, and then come back.

[suprematist_Bookworm]

See, this text which you’ve written yourself is much more respectful. I don’t think that I’m easily offended, and I would protect your freedom of speech by all means. So I’m going to call you a non-believer, for lack of another word, hope that’s fine with you. Say I posted a text now, which states that non-believing is for the simply -minded, is a disease which elevates ignorance and stupidity – would you say alright, or would you just maybe feel a bit offended and the need to advocate your faith (or non-faith)? I feel as if its just hatred disguised as intellectual arguments.
Funnily enough, I’m not offended by your saying that my first post contains sillyness, because I’m well aware that it sounds a bit (or a lot) like crazy talk.

[Anglo-Saxon]

@Suprematist_Bookworm

Don’t equate atheism with the ‘theory of evolution’ – those are entirely separate concepts. Atheism is the rejection of, or lack of belief in, the existence of all gods and/or religious dogma. Atheism does not mean that we “trust the science,” or any other nonsense you are assigning to atheists’ worldviews. Atheists are humans; most of our outlooks and attributes vary and are as unique as any other human’s.

Personally, I do find there is some validity to the ‘theory of evolution,’ but that doesn’t mean I believe in the ‘big bang theory,’ that I think all us humans evolved from some monkey, or think it’s necessary for us to answer the age-old question of where and how everything came to be. What matters is, I know some god didn’t create any of it. I am comfortable with the reality that we do not know and cannot currently know how our universe and all life on Earth came to be, just as I also know that explaining away our origins with some fairy tales is extremely delusional and dishonest.

I am entirely opposed to the blind ‘trusting the science’ propaganda. Why I refused the COVID-19 vaccine had nothing to do with science – it was all about my own logic and personal experience. I detected how desperate the powers that be wanted to inject that “vaccine” into us, and I was already well-aware that no government cares whatsoever about our health. When we are being coerced to put something into our bodies against our will, or if we are not even allowed to decide what does go into our bodies, that’s a huge societal problem. I took a stance of self-defense and preservation of our bodily autonomy as living beings, by refusing to take a COVID-19 test, ever wear a mask, or get the jab. That has nothing to do with religion or science.

Climate change, global warming, and all that nonsense is mere propaganda. Again, that has nothing to do with science or religion. NASA also has nothing to do with this conversation, nor does Katy Perry, 666, or any of this other superstitious silliness you’ve commented about. I’m not sure where your mind wandered off to, but a lot of these subjects are entirely unrelated to the idea of this reading, that Europeans must reject Christianity …

For the record: I have nothing against Christians. What I am opposed to is Christianity, the faith itself, not the people who believe in it. I like Christians, my ancestors were Christians, some of my friends are Christians, many of the most kind-hearted people I’ve ever known are Christians (especially Mormons), and almost all my former lovers were Christians. Even as an atheist, I go to Christian churches in my local area, even a Bible study on Sundays, and young adults group on Tuesdays and Fridays. I do all that as an atheist, because I want to learn about, preserve, and participate in my Christian heritage. I want to be knowledgeable about the Christian teachings, stories, values, and people who embrace this faith. I want my children to be aware of them (not necessarily to believe in it, however), too, maybe even my wife if she prefers that or already is a Christian herself, because the Christian faith is very much part of our European history and our White, European race. But that doesn’t mean that I support Christianity. And it doesn’t mean that I hate Christians or any nonsense like that either.

I also want to point out that you’re not wanting Christianity to be attacked, while simultaneously attacking atheism. Let’s not be hypocrites with double standards. The reality is that we’re all free to express ourselves, no matter how sensitive anyone may feel about what’s expressed. That is, after all, the entire idea behind the First Amendment of the United States’ Constitution – part of the so-called Bill of Rights, themselves appropriately named.

Let’s also not be victims, when we are on the same team, as Whites. Race over religion.

You’re welcome to believe whatever you wish, I have no interest in controlling what you think; but I am a truthseeker and a truthteller, and that is why I was compelled to share on this forum some rare content that I found extremely important to review. I do not base my worldview on my emotions, but rather on the historic facts and the reality that I encounter daily.

We were all born as atheists. Some of us decided to remain that way, by our own observations, analysis, and choosing. Others allowed themselves to become indoctrinated with ideas prescribed to them by pressures foreign to their own thoughts.

[suprematist_Bookworm]

“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight” – from the bible.

And then we look up in the protocols, where we read: The goyim’s intellectuals will praise each other with their knowledge. They will put all of science’s findings into action without their logical verification. However these have been smartly brewed up by our government’s experts […] Don’t think, that these statements are nothing but hollow words: Think of the successes we have achieved with Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzschiesm”!!

Since as atheists your world view is (correct me if I’m wrong) fundamentally based on the Freemason Darwin and you quoted Nietzsche in your post above already yourself, I feel as if there is little need for me to add anything else here…

[suprematist_Bookworm]

So has anyone of you super smart atheists ever looked into evolution after he was the size of a toddler? You can say millions of years all you want, at some point in time there must have been a first fish, that decided, hey, I’m gonna jump on land today. It decided to do so without having a lung. Our fish was a very special fish, because it didn’t just miserably croak, but prospered, probably it kept jumping in and out of the water, until it developed a lung, right. And why did this single fish back then decide to do so, shouldn’t we see this behaviour today still then, among fish? This adventure seeking spirit? Where did it go? Ridiculous. What do you think why they teach it to you before you can think critically? They teach it to us when we believe in Satan, oops, I meant Santa. And “science” decided that one is a fairytale and the other is reality. That’s the same ‘science’ which told you to take the jab and that the vaccines are safe, and we know they are, right? The same science which talks about climate change and talked about the death of the forests 40 years ago. The same science which says that there is no gender (or was it 60?), that “earth is pear-shaped” (that being a quote from one of your leading negro scientists Neil deGrasse Tyson), the same science who says Neil Armstrong was the first man on the moon, who punches a man in the face, when asked to swear on the bible that he walked on the moon (probably also an ardent anti-Christian?), the same science…
Do you know that Nasa is the Hebrew word for deceit? Or that w and v, pronounced wav, is the 6th letter in the Hebrew language, so that whenever you type www, to a Hebrew the meaning is 666? Funny, huh?
And then our great entertainment industry! Anyone ever busied themselves with satanic symbols? The industry is saturated with it. No music video without satanic imagery. And then the stars like Katy Perry, Jay Z, etc say that they sold their soul to the devil, Bob Dylan said that he made a bargain with “the chief commander, in this world and in a world you can’t see” (YT) , whereas movie stars like Jack Black thank Satan for winning an award and last but not least Nicki Minaj, who says in an interview that her alter ego (named after Roman Polanski) has been “conjured up” by “them” (YT)….
You can go ahead and laugh at me, mock me, I don’t care. Nothing is as easy as bashing Christianity today, it’s like being a feminist, you have the comfort of having the masses behind you. I don’t even understand why anyone would feel the necessity to attack somebody of a Christian faith, I don’t feel like hey, today I’m going to bash pagans. Why can’t you just let others have their own faith and mind your own business? Or at least try to formulate a non offensive post, if it regards a sensitive topic? I hope the sheep hasn’t elevated your ignorance and stupidity too much! I’m not going to reply after this post, because my time is too valuable to me.

[Anglo-Saxon]

The Disease of Christianity

The classical philologist Revilo P. Oliver once described Christianity as a “spiritual syphilis.” The musician Varg Vikernes said Christianity was a “problem to be solved by medical science.” He described it as an “HIV/AIDS of the spirit and mind.” Only the
paradigm of sexually transmitted disease can shed light on the true nature of the Christian religion. In the case of syphilis, there is a latency period. This is analogous to the growth and spread of Christianity across the Roman empire, until the reign of Constantine in the early 4th century. The symptoms of syphilitic infection increase in severity, leading to a plethora of life-threatening consequences. The neurological and cardiovascular degeneration caused by syphilis weaken the body of the host. If the infection continues without medical intervention, death ensues. In similar fashion, Christianity weakens and then destroys the state through proliferation of its most degenerate Christian- derived ideologies, such as liberalism, socialism and feminism.

Christianity is a perversion of the instinct for self-preservation. This makes it a destroyer of entire civilizations and peoples. Embracing Christianity is no different from tying a noose around your neck and leaping off a tall building. It is suicide for all those who stupidly allow themselves to be influenced by its poisonous doctrines. Western culture would have been lost forever if not for the rediscovery of pagan science and philosophy during the Renaissance. Unfortunately for us, the West has once again succumbed to this spiritual plague. The heavenly city of God now sits in judgment of the West. The crucified Jew has spoken: the West has been judged and found wanting! The church has always regarded the earthly city of Rome with contempt; the host culture that incubated the religion for so long means nothing to this harlot of Babylon, who has prostituted herself before all the nations of the world. If all Western science and technology were to disappear overnight, the church would not be affected in the slightest; what matters is that the preaching of the gospel continues without pause, nothing else. Christianity and racialism are fundamentally incompatible ideologies. The Christian religionist is at a crossroads; he must choose between the gospel or the survival of Western civilization and the European race. He cannot choose both. A genuine Christian religionist can only side with the survival of Christian orthodoxy, otherwise he would be an apostate, forever denied eternal salvation. In a world where evolutionary survival is a zero-sum game, Christianity is the great enemy of the European race and Western civilization.

The Gospel of Semitic lies?

Jesus Christ is a mythological figure. The gospel narratives, his personal “biographies,” are not based on any underlying historical reality. What we know of Jesus comes not from eyewitness testimony, but largely contradictory hearsay written some forty or fifty years after his supposed death. Unlike the mythical Jesus with whom he is often compared, the philosopher Socrates is significantly more well-attested in the historical record. Contemporary eyewitnesses like Plato and Xenophon wrote detailed accounts of the life and death of Socrates. The discovery that the first Christology was a “high” one provides additional evidence
substantiating the mythological origin of Jesus. This is contrary to the position maintained by the older 19th century biblical scholarship, chiefly represented by Wilhelm Bousset’s “history-of-religion” school. This approach is best exemplified in the now forgotten Kyrios Christos. In this work, Bousset argued that cultic veneration of Jesus only became a reality when the
original Palestinian faith community was exposed to Hellenistic and Oriental influence. In contrast to Bousset’s “history-of-religion” approach, modern biblical scholars argue that the original Palestinian faith community began with a “high” Christology. Maran atha was an Aramaic prayer transferring the title lord (YHWH) to Jesus, asking him to establish his kingdom on earth in fulfillment of Old Testament eschatological hopes of a coming Messiah. The “high” Christology embraced by the first Palestinian believers paved the way for Gentile views of Christ as an object of religious devotion. Among the earliest Gentile believers, Jesus
was worshiped, placed on an equal footing with God himself and designated Kyrios, the Greek form of the tetragrammaton in the Septuagint. He was even the object of prayer. This makes Jesus no different from any other mythological figure venerated in the ancient world, such as Dionysus or Hercules.

The inescapable conclusion is that Jesus is a figment of the imagination, like the gods of the ancient Greeks. To those who argue that Jewish monotheism was a barrier to the immediate divinization of some mortal, it must be pointed out that the Logos theology of Hellenistic Judaism first presented the word of god in semi-anthropomorphic terms, laying the groundwork for the explicit “binitarian” character of primitive Christianity. The quintessential Middle Eastern religion Christianity is, first and foremost, the invention of mostly illiterate 1st century Palestinian Jews, among whom Saul of Tarsus was the most influential. He later changed his name to Paul. He was the prototypical “ugly little Jew” of the ancient world. Even Paul was forced to admit that he was often denigrated by his opponents as “weak” or “unimpressive” in person. A 2nd century extra-canonical source reinforces this impression, describing the apostle as short, bald, “bandy-legged,” with long unibrow and hooked nose. He was the living embodiment of the stereotypical Jew. If Paul was merely a caricature, he would have been right at home with the Jews of Streicher’s Der Stürmer. Paul was the first to spread Christianity across the Mediterranean, imbuing the new missionary religion with a thoroughly expansionist character. He laid the groundwork of Christian theology, serving as the original catalyst for the “syphilitic” infection that has now ruined Europe.

Christianity is the quintessential Middle Eastern religion. Just because the language of the New Testament is koine Greek does not make this religion any less of a Semitic invention. To claim otherwise would be like translating the Analects of Confucius into English and then claiming that Confucianism is a Western religion because the medium used for its transmission is the English language. Even the few pagan elements in the religion, such as the Johannine prologue’s use of the Stoic Logos, is filtered through the lens of Old Testament Judaism. The Gospel narratives are Jewish legends based on Jewish ideas of Messiah, resurrection, kingdom
of god and so on. Not only is Christianity thoroughly Jewish in origin, but the major theological doctrines of the New Testament are derived from the Old Testament and the intertestamental Judaism of the Greek and Hasmonean periods. The spread of Christianity
across the Mediterranean was the work of enterprising, itinerant Jews.

As Christianity developed an established institutional framework within the empire, theologians began to find themselves in dialogue with Jews and pagans who were hostile to the new religion. These discussions necessitated the borrowing of Greek and Latin philosophical terminology to better express orthodox teaching with greater precision and clarity. This was done not only for apologetical purposes, but to win over cultured pagans by applying a thin veneer of intellectual respectability to the Semitic doctrines of primitive Christianity. Despite these cultural borrowings, Christianity remains a fundamentally Semitic religion.

A religion for simple-minded folk

Scholars have long noted the great appeal Christianity has always had for the lowest dregs of humanity. Few intellectuals were ever attracted to the religion; those who converted became anti-intellectual extremists who turned their back on Western culture and civilization. The 2nd-century Latin theologian Tertullian, one of the most bigoted Christian anti-intellectuals to have ever lived, famously asked: “What indeed has Athens got to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church? … We want no curious disputation after possessing Christ Jesus, no inquisition after enjoying the gospel! With our faith, we desire no further belief.” Contemporary pagan philosophers frequently observed that the earliest converts were drawn from the ranks of stupid, ignorant people. Celsus, an early pagan critic of the new religion, wrote that it was Christian policy to turn away the wise and the educated; only boys, fools and slaves were considered as potential converts. “Their favorite expressions,” wrote Celsus, “are ‘Do not ask questions, just believe!’ and: ‘Your faith will save you!’ ‘The wisdom of this world,’ they say, ‘is evil; to be simple is to be good.’” The educated pagan was contemptuous of folk belief. To be worthy of belief, religions had to be logically consistent and empirically grounded. They had to have some basis in science and philosophy. Anything else was “superstition.” In classical antiquity, superstition was defined as fear of “daemons” and belief in the supernatural causation of natural and physical phenomena, such as disease. To the pagan intellectual, Christianity embodied everything they hated about superstition. What made Christianity especially reprehensible was that it had inherited all the worst features of Judaism, namely intolerance and bigotry. The religion also spread like a contagious disease. As the pagan intellectual saw it: Christianity was
devised and spread by ignorant men for the benefit of ignorant men, especially because of its close resemblance to the superstitious beliefs of the masses.

The triumph of Christianity led to a complete reversal of elite pagan values in late
antiquity. The educated man now embraced wholeheartedly the beliefs of the semi-barbaric
multitudes. St. Augustine, originally educated in the classical curriculum and trained in rhetoric,
could state with confidence that all diseases were of supernatural origin, in open defiance of
well-established Greek medical practice. Whereas before Constantine, there existed a
significant gap between the beliefs of the educated pagan and the hoi polloi, after Constantine,
there was no such gap. For the first time in classical antiquity, the elite and the masses were
indistinguishable in terms of belief, with all naively subscribing to veneration of saints, their
relics and miracles. The triumph of Christianity in the West was the triumph of a profound ignorance that
lasted centuries.

Christianity: destroyer of empires

Christianity was a key factor in Rome’s decline. When the church became the dominant institution of late classical antiquity, it became a significant drain on the economic resources of the empire. This was not a simple wealth transfer; funds for pagan temples and shrines were not simply diverted from secular coffers to finance ecclesiastical growth. Unlike the pagan cults, the Nicene state religion was administered by a vast centralized bureaucracy, whose reach was empire-wide and whose officials were more numerous and more highly paid than those of the state. Revenue that could have been used to improve infrastructure, such as the building of roads, bridges, aqueducts and theatres went towards the building of useless structures like churches and monasteries and the feeding of “idle mouths”: monks, priests and bishops, who contributed nothing of material or economic value to the state. This tremendous waste of resources becomes even more staggering when one considers the relatively low level of technological and scientific development in the empire. Actual labor-saving devices were rare, so productive labor was done by hand or with the help of oxen. The amount of manpower needed to feed, clothe and house the “idle mouths” of the Christian church was considerably
more than what was needed for a typical official of the Roman civil service. The enormous talents of men like Athanasius and John Chrysostom, who would have been better employed defending the empire as able generals and rulers, were instead wasted on expanding the power and influence of the church in daily life. Indeed, valuable manpower and material resources squandered in the service of “idle mouths” is a recurring theme in the history of Christianity. The Christian concern for “idle mouths” exerted a profoundly dysgenic effect on the European gene pool. Europe’s cognitive elite, instead of passing on their genes, were encouraged to withdraw from society and embrace the spiritual discipline of perpetual chastity or virginity. This negatively affected average population IQ, leaving the church with an abundance of easily controlled and docile serfs less able to maintain the civilization around them with each passing generation. Thomas Aquinas is the prime casualty of this destructive waste of human talent. His genius would have been more profitably employed in the field of medicine or experimental physics; instead, it was foolishly squandered on angelology and other medieval superstitions.

The worst destruction inflicted on the western empire was, of course, perpetrated by Christians. The great sack of Rome in 411—considered a decisive moment in the decline of the West—was perpetrated by an Arian Christian. The sack of Rome in 455, even more devastating than the first barbarian rampage through the eternal city, was perpetrated by another Christian, who had earlier weakened the empire by seizing the province of Africa as his own personal fiefdom. And of course, the person who delivered the final coup de grace, effectively ending Roman imperial rule in the West and inaugurating the Dark Ages in western Europe, was also a Christian. Apologists typically deny Christianity’s role in imperial decline, retorting that Byzantium survived the fall of the Latin West. Our Christian excuse-makers fail to realize that the east was richer and more populous. This allowed the Byzantine state to better absorb the tremendous internal damage caused by the depredations of the parasitical Nicene state religious cult. There are also geographical reasons for Byzantine survival. The eastern emperor had a much shorter frontier to defend. Constantinople, the imperial capital, was surrounded by a series of massive fortifications begun by Constantine and completed in the early 5th century. These were virtually impregnable to barbarian invaders. Unlike the east, the west had no second line of defense. The Nicene state religious cult forced Rome to her knees, drawing the curtain over classical antiquity. The civilizational collapse that followed is known as the Dark Ages, when post-Roman Europe underwent a significant decline in living standards. When Christians were at their most powerful, the roads and highways that covered the empire fell into disrepair; use of bridges and aqueducts virtually ceased; knowledge of building in stone and mortar almost disappeared; literacy, such as it was, disappeared, with the exception of the clergy; personal standards of hygiene disappeared; indoor plumbing disappeared; large areas of the former
empire were depopulated, and lastly; use of coinage nearly ceased, signifying an end to the complex monied economy of Roman times. Christian hegemony in Byzantium led to centuries of scientific and technological stagnation. There was even a Byzantine Dark Age that lasted for hundreds of years. During this period, borders shrank, cities were reduced to fortified enclaves, money gave way to barter, and Byzantine literature consisted of reams of insipid hagiography. This was the world of Christianity: a world of profound ignorance and stupidity, where brutal men, under the guise of religion, tyrannized over a weak and helpless populace. The
Dark Ages were Christianity’s gift to Europe. They were ushered in by Christians, presided over by Christians and prolonged for centuries by Christians. Europe endured one of its darkest hours when Christians were at the apogee of their power and influence.

Christianity: bringer of ignorance

Christianity is dangerous because it elevates ignorance and stupidity over reason. In the gospel, Jesus encourages his followers to be like “sheep,” the stupidest and most docile of animals. Here, the ideal Christian is a character of low intelligence and little education. Jesus said that unless one becomes a child again one cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. In response to doubting Thomas, Jesus said: “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” The apostle Paul echoed this point of view when he wrote “the wisdom of this world is foolishness in the eyes of god.” Through a program of religious indoctrination from cradle to grave, the church forced Europeans to accept these beliefs as so many divinely revealed truths from heaven. Widespread acceptance of these beliefs helped retard scientific and technological progress in Europe for over a thousand years. The fathers of the church promoted “holy ignorance” as an ideal to be emulated. Tertullian is noted among patristic writers for his militant anti-intellectualism. Although one of the most prominent despisers of classical philosophy and science, he was by no means in the minority. His attitude is typical of ecclesiastical officials during the patristic and medieval periods. This long list of Christian bigots includes Tatian, a noted apologist who regarded all pagan scientific and philosophical achievement as worthless, even harmful to the Christian faithful. Clement of Alexandria, another prominent ante-Nicene writer, argued that education was not necessary for salvation. Origen donated his extensive collection of pagan literature because of the fundamental incompatibility between secular learning and Bible study. The 4th century Apostolic Constitutions, an early work of canon law considered authoritative in the east, commands the Christian believer to shun all pagan learning as “strange” and “diabolical.” Basil of Caesarea advised the faithful: “Let us Christians prefer the simplicity of our faith to the demonstrations of human reason … For to spend much time on research about the essence of things would not serve the edification of the Church.” Ironically, Basil is considered an example of moderation by apologists for Christianity. He believed that the usefulness of
pagan literature should depend on level of scriptural agreement, making philosophy and science a kind of second- or third-rate handmaiden of theology. Writings least in accord with the Bible, almost all secular philosophy and science, were to be consigned to the trash bin. Athanasius of Alexandria scorned all secular wisdom as blasphemy against the crucified god. In his famous hagiography of St. Antony, the illiterate monk is portrayed as a wise man. Despite his illiteracy, Antony’s hermit-like existence is considered the “perfect pattern of anchoretic life.” Antony even asks visiting pagan philosophers to become just like him in his
“wisdom,” even though he is ignorant of all worldly learning. The homilies of John Chrysostom, a noted anti-intellectual of the 4th century, are filled with vile denunciations of philosophy and science. He even periodically exhorted the Christian faithful to empty their minds of all secular wisdom. John routinely spewed vitriol against the classical heritage, advocating its systematic eradication, but only to magnify the power and influence of the gospel in daily life. Preaching before an elite audience in Constantinople, John’s vision was of a radically pure and ascetic Christianity, one stripped of all pagan influence. Given his oratorical ability and considerable powers of invective, as well as high standing in the patristic canon, there can be no doubt that John’s great hatred of secular knowledge played an influential role in the church’s decision to censor and suppress the
writings of classical antiquity. John Cassian, the great spiritual guide of Latin Christendom, advised the monk to seek
out the company of uneducated peasants for his own personal edification. The abbot Arsenius, a former imperial tutor, regarded his education in classical Greek and Latin as inferior to the “wisdom” of illiterate Egyptian monks. The 4th century Christian ascetic and theologian Evagrius Ponticus declared: “Blessed is the man who has attained infinite ignorance.” The 5th century Statuta Ecclesia Antiqua banned the clergy from reading pagan books, unless their anti-Christian and heretical opinions needed to be refuted. This was incorporated into the 12th century Decretum Gratiani, a source of canon law for the Roman church until 1918.
Although considered a text-based religion, Christian teachings were orally transmitted until Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press in 1440. Patristic and medieval Christianity viewed literacy in a negative light. Church tradition had always maintained that the first apostles lived in a state of “blessed ignorance.” In imitation of these men, Christians refused to teach their congregations how to read and write, especially during the first three centuries of the church’s existence. The ante-Nicene church produced no translations of the bible for the indigenous populations of the provinces and frontiers, even though these populations were in regular contact with itinerant missionaries since the earliest days of primitive Christianity. The few patristic exhortations to Bible reading were aimed at a small minority of educated Christians. Centuries of theological controversy contributed to a view of Bible reading as a subversive undertaking. It was actively discouraged by the clergy, who ensured that the
common people under their pastoral care would remain illiterate for generations. During the Middle Ages, church councils were convened to forbid the laity from having in their possession the Bible in Latin or any of the Romance languages. The penalty was burning at the stake for anyone caught translating the Bible into the vernacular. Paideia suffered under the new ecclesiastical and Christian imperial bureaucracy. Officials of church and state had more important things to do then educate little children in
the rudiments of Latin grammar and arithmetic. Illiteracy deepened and became more widespread under Christian influence. The anti-educational priorities of the church, increasing in virulence with the passage of time, discouraged more and more people from getting an education. This continued until literacy vanished from entire regions of post-Roman Europe. The Christian church’s deep-seated hostility to learning and scholarship, besides its positive estimation of ignorance and illiteracy, maintained western Europe at a prehistoric level of development for centuries. The 4th century, which saw the triumph of Christianity, was a period of significant intellectual decline. There were no great figures in science, architecture or medicine. The 4th century could boast of no philosophers of the same caliber as Plotinus; there were no great writers or dramatists. Schools were closed, higher studies were abandoned, and the pagan libraries were sealed shut. The intellectual and artistic productions of the age were of little
depth and substance. The all-pervasive Christian hostility to the life of the mind brought about this age of sterility.

The Christian destruction of Europe’s artistic heritage

Theodosius was the first Christian emperor to systematically legislate paganism out of existence. He began by enacting a series of draconian measures, soon after his declaration that Nicene Christianity was the official state religion in 380 AD. Towards the end of his reign, legislation proscribing Hellenistic religion – the so-called Theodosian decrees – became increasingly harsh. This imperial program of cultural genocide descended into an orgy of violence and destruction in the final decades of the 4th century. The coming storm was foreshadowed by the Christian fanatic Maternus Cynegius, appointed by Theodosius as praetorian prefect in 384. Under imperial orders to suppress pagan sacrifice and divination, he launched his own personal crusade against the Hellenistic religion. With the help of bishops, priests and an army of rampaging monks, Cynegius demolished some of the holiest sites in the Greek east. Many of these buildings housed antiquity’s greatest artistic treasures. Archeological evidence, gathered from eastern Mediterranean sites, reveals significant temple destruction and desecration. This can be dated to the period of Cynegius’ activity in the east. Contemporary hagiographical sources, like the Vita Porphyrii, bear witness to the spectacular religious violence directed against the pagan shrines and temples of the Levant. In 386, the pagan orator Libanius, an outspoken critic of Christian iconoclasm, begged Theodosius to preserve the temples and shrines of the empire. He spoke of armies of “black-robed monks,” gluttons and drunkards, who would “hasten to attack the temples with sticks and stones and bars of iron, and in some cases, disdaining these, with hands and feet. Then utter desolation follows, with the stripping of roofs, demolition of walls, the tearing down of statues and the overthrow of altars, and the priests must either keep quiet or die. After demolishing one, they scurry to another, and to a third, and trophy is piled on trophy, in contravention of the law. Such outrages occur even in the cities, but they are most common in the countryside. Many are the foes who perpetrate the separate attacks, but after their
countless crimes this scattered rabble congregates and they are in disgrace unless they have committed the foulest outrage…”
Christians not only vandalized temples, they also mutilated pagan statuary and defaced inscriptions. Violent destruction of pagan religious artifacts is archeologically well-attested in the Levant and Africa, where Christian iconoclasts were at their most active. This pattern of destruction was empire-wide and can be seen in places as far away as North-western Gaul and
Britain. Far more destructive than the temple destruction carried out by Christian zealots was the imperial anti-pagan legislation ending all subsidies to the once thriving polytheistic cults of the empire. Without subsidies from the imperial treasury, pagans were unable to maintain and repair their religious monuments. This was reinforced by additional legislation ordering the
closure of all shrines and temples, threatening pagans with death if they continued to practice haruspicy and animal sacrifice. This condemned the empire’s major structures and artistic monuments to permanent disrepair and eventual ruin. The widespread Christian vandalism of late antiquity was the largest campaign in world history to destroy an entire civilization’s artistic and architectural heritage. This campaign to erase the great monuments of antiquity from memory was significantly more destructive than the barbarian invasions of the 5th century. The Christians of the late empire were the ISIS or the Taliban of their day, although this may be an understatement as Christians were many times more destructive. Without this added ingredient of ritualized violence, Christianity would never have become the dominant religion of the ancient world.

Christian book burning and literary vandalism

There was widespread, active destruction of heretical and pagan writings through book burning. Although sometimes used by pagan magistrates to destroy subversive literature, it was only during the imperially coerced Christianization of Rome that book burning increased significantly in volume and frequency. Under the Nicene state religion, book burning became a prominent form of ritualized violence against heresy and paganism. The literature that was burned was chiefly of the magical, astrological, religious, philosophical or anti-Christian variety. People had their limbs amputated for copying heretical and other banned books.
According to the book of Acts, Christianity began its campaign of active literary destruction as early as the 1st century. A group of Ephesian converts, in response to a Jewish sorcerer’s failed exorcism, gathered together their religious and prophetic books and had them burnt. This act of religious violence is spoken of with approval as an example of how god’s word spread widely, gaining influence among the people. This served as one of the chief theological justifications for the many book burnings that were carried out in Christian Rome. Legislation that prescribed the burning of heretical and pagan, especially magical and astrological, books was enacted by Constantine in the early 4th century. These included books by Arius, the priest who denied that Christ was consubstantial with the father, and the Neo-Platonist philosopher Porphyry, who wrote a book attacking the Christian religion. The pagan Library of Antioch, which contained Julian’s extensive collection of Greek and Roman classics, was burnt to the ground in 363 by the Christian emperor Jovian, an act of retaliation against Julian for replacing Christianity with Hellenistic paganism. Imperial legislation prescribing the burning of pagan books, specifically by magicians and astrologers, is found in the Codex Theodosianus. The burning of pagan books continued into the 6th century, where it is well-attested in contemporary sources associated with the reign of Justinian. Not only were the books of heretics such as Nestorius and the Manicheans to be consigned to the flames, but also books by the hated Porphyry and other pagan critics of Christianity. The laws of Theodosius II and Valentinian, ordering their inquisitors to burn the writings of Porphyry and any pagan work judged anti-Christian, was maintained by the Codex Justinian. The Digest grants the inquisitor considerable latitude in deciding which books were sufficiently heretical, magical or anti-Christian enough to warrant being consigned to the flames. There was a systematic and empire-wide destruction of pagan literature through book burning under Justinian. The most spectacular book burnings were carried out by Christian
officials in Constantinople and Asia. Amantius, the Byzantine inquisitor, ruthlessly hunted down pagans in Antioch. He smashed their idols, burned their books and confiscated their wealth by imposing exorbitant fines. Justinian even found it necessary to ban pagans from all teaching positions in the empire. This legislation is associated with Justinian’s closing of the Neo-Platonic Academy in 529, a great deathblow to secular education in philosophy and the sciences. How successful was the church’s war on Western culture through incineration of pagan texts? The entire ancient corpus of magical, astrological and religious literature was so thoroughly destroyed that nothing has managed to survive. We have none of the many scholarly writings that could have shed light on traditional Greco-Roman polytheistic worship, such as Varro’s monumental Antiquitates rerum humanarum et divinarum. Christian officials diligently rounded up and burnt any work of philosophy written from a materialist perspective, like those by Epicurus and his followers. The fragmentary literary remains of Epicurus, a voluminous author who published over 300 books, is due to the zealous efforts of Christian book burners. Christians also successfully eradicated all pagan literature that openly criticized the Nicene state religion on both rational and philosophical grounds. Of the most famous anti-Christians, only fragments of their prolific literary output survive. Pagan anti-Christian writings were considered so dangerous that even their Christian refutations had to be incinerated along with them. Of the anti-Christian works that bothered Christians the most, Porphyry was
repeatedly singled out by imperial legislation for burning, followed by Julian’s diatribe against the “Galileans.” We know that many pagans wrote against Christianity, but the fact that barely any of this literature survives is a clear indication that what Christianity could not dispel through reasoned argument, it silenced through brute force. The monastic scriptoria played a major role in the church’s eradication of all secular knowledge. The monks would recycle parchment from secular manuscripts by scraping off the ink with a mild acidic solution; a “washed” parchment was then re-used for the copying of Christian manuscripts. This was subsequently known as a palimpsest. For centuries, manuscripts overwritten with patristic, biblical and liturgical texts were almost always of pagan origin. The systematic destruction of classical literature somewhat abated by the eve of the Carolingian “Renaissance,” but the secular writings of antiquity were still far more likely to be destroyed by Christians than any other body of literature. That this was the case is further demonstrated by examination of the ratio of classical to Christian manuscripts. When extant manuscripts are considered, the ratio is 1:25 or 4%. A 7th century copy of the Vulgate, for example, is listed by Codices Latini Antiquiores (CLA) as a palimpsest with sheaves pilfered from the manuscripts of 9 different classical authors, including Livy, Cicero, and Seneca. Given the 4% ratio, the statistical likelihood of so many classical authors being used for a single manuscript because of fortuitous circumstance is so remote it borders on the impossible. This is made even more improbable given the fact that the libraries of the late antique and medieval periods were typically stocked with patristic, biblical and liturgical writings. The Vulgate manuscript would never have been assembled unless the church was deliberately targeting the
ancient cultural patrimony of an entire civilization and people for systematic eradication. The most notorious—and the most destructive—act of Christian cultural genocide was the deletion of Archimedes’ mathematical treatises. In their place was found a Byzantine liturgical manual. This is known as the famous Archimedes palimpsest. The most important of these manuscripts, the Method of Mechanical Theorems, reveals that Archimedes had a rudimentary understanding of the integral calculus; he was the first to calculate the area and volume of solid geometric figures using infinitesimal magnitudes. This was some 2000 years before Newton
and Leibniz, the modern discoverers of the integral and differential calculus. If Christianity had not retarded scientific and technological development in ancient and medieval times, mankind would be far more advanced than he is now. Christianity was the single greatest impediment to material progress in the history of Europe. Christians actively destroyed the writings of classical antiquity under the delusion that they were sanctifying a text formerly under demoniacal influence and reclaiming it for god.
They believed that everything that had happened in the past was a mistake. Eradicating ancient civilization would reduce Europeans to a prehistoric existence, but it would free them from all worldly attachment. It would allow Europeans to focus exclusively on the redeeming work of god in Christ, the crucified Jew whose triumph over reason ushered in the Dark Ages.

Censorship and the Christian War on Western Culture

The ecclesiastical decision to censor and suppress classical literature was influenced by
militant Christian “fundamentalists,” bigoted anti-intellectuals like Ambrose and John
Chrysostom. These men, because of their prominence in ecclesiastical affairs and importance
for the patristic canon, were able to aggressively push for an agenda calling for the eradication
of all pagan artistic, cultural and scientific achievement. The patristic attack on the intellectual
foundations of the ancient world was continued by the medieval church. Isidore of Seville, the
most influential and widely read author of the Dark Ages, repeatedly warned his flock of the
spiritual dangers posed by reading secular philosophy and science. The canon law of the
church had long prohibited Christians from reading secular literature, excluding clergy who
consulted these writings to combat heresy and paganism. The Christianization of 4th century Rome made the church sole inheritor of the great storehouses of ancient wisdom that had been accumulated throughout the centuries. As pagans dwindled in numbers and influence, the monastic scriptoria came to dominate textual transmission, especially after 400. Guided by ecclesiastical censure and canon law, the scriptoria, with few exceptions, ceased copying secular writings for over 300 years, severing
medieval Europe from the great scientific and technological achievements of the ancient past.
During the Dark Ages, nearly all Greco-Roman literature was removed from circulation and
replaced with patristic, biblical and liturgical writings. Works of science and philosophy, some
well ahead of their time, were discarded by ecclesiastical officials as rubbish. Sometimes they
were re-used for mundane purposes; relics were once found wrapped in the pages of Livy’s
Histories. Italian Renaissance scholar Pietro Bembo estimated that less than 1% of all Greek
literature survived the turmoil and chaos of the Dark Ages. Modern scholars have made similar
estimates for the survival of Latin literature. Christian religionists allege barbarian invasion as a significant factor in the loss of Western scientific and technical knowledge; they neglect to mention that the barbarians who terrorized the western half of the empire were also Christians. At any rate, barbarian invasion played virtually no role in the destruction of the West’s literary heritage; the majority of Greek and Latin literature was still extant by 500 AD, as the age of Germanic migration was drawing
to a close. Although there is no evidence of barbarians burning books or libraries, there is an abundance of evidence implicating Christians in the active destruction and censorship of an entire civilization’s repository of secular knowledge. After the Christian destruction of the Library of Alexandria, the second most destructive act of Christian literary vandalism was the burning of over 120,000 manuscripts by crusaders during the sack of Constantinople in 1204. Apologists for Christianity emphasize the role of economic and material factors in the disappearance of Western culture during the Dark Ages. In their view, most pagan works simply disintegrated because they were written on papyrus, a fragile material. But this is a myth;
papyrus is a highly durable medium, able to withstand the centuries under the right conditions. They cannot explain why the fragility of papyrus was never an issue for the transmission of classical texts until after late antiquity, when the Christian church was at the apogee of its power and influence in Europe. Other religionists speculate that the transition from papyrus to
parchment in late antiquity made the copying of pagan literature a costly enterprise. This argument fails because the relative cost of papyrus and parchment cannot be ascertained from the available sources; cost is irrelevant anyway because parchment replaced papyrus in Egypt. The Christian religionist unwittingly reveals another mode of ecclesiastical censorship and suppression: the refusal to recopy pagan works from papyrus to parchment, which happened during the large-scale replacement of papyrus with parchment in the early medieval period. Still, and embarrassingly enough for the Christian religionist, he cannot explain why
Christian writings, whether patristic, liturgical or biblical, outnumber pagan writings by a staggering ratio of 25 to 1. Only widespread Christian censorship and suppression of pagan science and philosophy can adequately account for these glaring statistical discrepancies. Apologists say Islamic conquest of Egypt in 642 disrupted trans-Mediterranean shipments of papyrus, which resulted in the loss of much ancient literature. However, the historical record reveals that the West’s barbarian rulers, as well as the Byzantine emperor, always had access to a steady supply of Egyptian papyrus. Although Egypt came under Moslem rule, papyrus manufacture remained a Christian enterprise, with Moslems now exporting it to Europe. The irony is that, although Byzantine rulers always had access to an abundant supply of papyrus, the Greek and Roman literature in their possession still gradually dropped out of circulation and vanished from library shelves. In the Latin-speaking West, decline in papyrus as a writing material is related to large-scale abandonment of Roman forms of government. For example, the Code Justinian contains legislation mandating the use of papyrus for government documents. In keeping with Roman bureaucratic norms, the Merovingian chancery used papyrus until the late 7th century. This practice disappeared under the Carolingians, a dynasty originating in the Germanic east. Unlike
the Romanized west, which was more urban and centrally administered, the Germanic east was decentralized and rural. For these reasons, parchment gradually supplanted papyrus in Europe. In the Christian religious mind, Irish monasteries played an instrumental role in the “preservation” of Western scientific and technical knowledge, but this is a risible claim. What
work of preservation was there when over 99% of all secular writings were either destroyed or suppressed by the Christian church? There was no preservation. What did manage to survive, did so in spite of Christianity, not because of it. That almost nothing of this literature managed to survive shows that the Christian church conducted a remarkably successful campaign of censorship and suppression, the most successful in all history. This is further reinforced by statistical data on book production from 400 to 800 AD. In the fifth century, 27% of extant manuscripts copied were pagan, with the rest being works of a largely patristic, biblical or liturgical nature; this declined to 7% in the sixth century, 2% in the seventh century and 1% in the eighth century, out of a grand total of 834 extant Latin manuscripts. Over a 400-year period, we see classical works being gradually removed from circulation. This is a pattern indicative of widespread and systematic literary censorship and suppression. If the steep
decline in the number of classical texts copied had continued uninterrupted, all pagan scientific, technical and philosophical knowledge would have vanished from memory. Contrary to the bigoted claims of Christian religionists, we do not see “preservation.” Careful examination of the historical record reveals that the Christian church bears sole responsibility for the destruction and suppression of over 99% of Greek and Latin literature. Christianity’s eradication of the accumulated wisdom of the ages is one of the greatest crimes ever committed against the West. No act of censorship has been more destructive in world history than the one carried out by this institution. Without the life-giving knowledge of the ancient world, maintaining an advanced pre-industrial civilization became virtually impossible. Christian censorship and suppression of secular knowledge is the main reason behind Europe’s descent into the Dark Ages after the collapse of imperial rule in the West. Apologists foolishly condemn all criticism of the church for suppressing the technical and scientific knowledge of antiquity as anachronistic. The fact of the matter is that progress, curiosity and reason are among Europeans’ most important inheritance from the classical
world. Modern Western civilization would cease to exist without these values. The decision of the scriptoria to discard works of science, mathematics, engineering and philosophy was a complete rejection of progress, intellectual curiosity and reason. It was the rejection of civilization in favor of a prehistoric existence as the Christian ideal. As a direct result of Christianization, the scriptoria nearly ceased copying the writings of antiquity for centuries; for the first time in history, Europe was in danger of losing her ancient storehouse of scientific, technical and philosophic knowledge that would be so crucial for the Renaissance and the Scientific Revolution.

Christianity and the narrowing of the Western intellectual horizon

Christians declared all-out war on the secular foundations of the Roman state. In doing so, they inevitably attacked Rome’s tradition of great art and architecture, as well as the vast storehouses of scientific and technical knowledge that had been accumulated over the centuries. Christians who desired the total eradication of paganism had nothing viable with which to replace the secular culture of the late antique world. Many Christians, conscious of the inferiority of their own religious traditions when compared to the majestic scientific and philosophical achievements of Western culture, attacked secular learning out of envy and spite. This intellectual poverty of the Christian religion induced a significant narrowing of Western intellectual horizons. The entrenchment and consolidation of the Nicene state religious cult obviated the necessity of a classical education for worldly success. Many pursued a religious vocation instead, an option that suddenly became attractive as the Christian church increased
in power and influence. The 4th century witnessed the dismantlement of the public education system by zealous Christians, who were disgusted with the paganism of the classical academic
curriculum. The Christian emperors, unlike their pagan antecedents, did not patronize secular
philosophy and science; the administrative apparatus responsible for disbursement of state
funds, now controlled by an ecclesiastical bureaucracy, withheld them in the case of teachers
who specialized in the classics. This angered many of the last remaining pagans of late
antiquity, who bitterly complained about the role of Christianity in spreading a general lack of
interest in pursuing a secular education.

A man with a classical education was no longer as highly esteemed as he once was
before the age of Constantine. The leaders of the empire’s most powerful institution, the
church, contemptuously dismissed their learning as mere “worldly wisdom.” In the eyes of the
church, reliance on the faculty of reason alone was the mark of demonic possession, a path
fraught with snares for lost souls on the way to eternal damnation in the fires of hell. This
made the educated man condescending and arrogant, as well as too sophisticated for the
simple message of the gospels, which he derided as a collection of childish fables. An educated
man would also question Christian doctrine, even embrace heresy, making him especially
dangerous from an ecclesiastical point of view. The existence of the classical curriculum posed
a significant obstacle to the imperial policy of Christianization. By downgrading and
marginalizing the pursuit of a secular education, the church was able to gradually eliminate this
threat, producing a more docile public, like the sheep in the parables of Jesus. From now on,
Christians like Martin of Tours would have more important things to do than learn how to
read and write.
The final triumph of orthodoxy over reason is enshrined in the church’s canon law,
which forbade clergy and laity from reading the secular literature of antiquity. This canonical
prohibition was famously enforced by Pope Gregory I, who severely reprimanded his bishops
for instructing students in classical literature. “One mouth cannot praise both Christ and
Jupiter at the same time,” thundered Gregory from the Papal See in Rome. The Church
controlled all medieval scriptoria in Europe. Advice to monks from church leadership,
ordering them to despise all secular knowledge as “foolishness in the eyes of god,” exercised a
damaging influence on the scribal transmission of classical literature, merely strengthening the
clerical refusal to not copy works of pagan origin. What followed was the inevitable loss of the
knowledge needed to run an advanced pre-industrial society. This only worsened and
prolonged the Dark Ages, reducing Europeans to a Neolithic existence in the process.
Gregory’s hatred of Rome’s secular past was so fierce he was rumored to have personally
hunted down and burnt every copy of Titus Livy’s History he could get his hands on. The
Library of the Palatine Apollo, first established by Augustus in Rome, was burnt to the ground
on his orders. This was to protect the faithful from being contaminated by the “poison” of
secular Greek and Latin literature.
Isidore of Seville was the only real “intellectual” for 200 years of western European
history. His Etymologies, the most popular and widely used textbook of the Middle Ages, was
written in support of Christian “fundamentalism.” Although unsurpassed in topical
comprehensiveness, Isidore’s intellectual depth and range of knowledge are considerably
inferior to the Roman encyclopedists who preceded him. Isidore lived in a geocentric universe
enclosed within a rotating star-studded sphere, not unlike the cosmology of the ancient
Hebrews. Between the flat earth and the outer sphere are seven concentric inner spheres. The
concept of infinite space was completely alien to Isidore’s way of thinking; the universe is a
small place with definite boundaries. The fact that all knowledge could be summarized in a
single volume shows how drastically intellectual horizons had narrowed under Christian

influence. Isidore regarded all pagan science and philosophy as heresy anathema to right-
thinking Christians. The church, using the Etymologies as a guide, censored and suppressed the

pagan literature quoted in its pages. Isidore further denigrated intellectual curiosity as
“dangerous” and “harmful.” Isidore’s widely influential Monastic Rule warned monks of the
dangers of reading pagan literature; the rule stated that ideally monks should be completely
ignorant of all secular knowledge. Isidore’s condemnation of secular knowledge reinforced the
prevailing “fundamentalist” orthodoxy of the church, which demanded the censorship and
suppression of all pagan science and philosophy.

More Christian excuses

Christian religionists tout Aquinas and Bacon as exceptions to the anti-scientific world-
view of the church, but these men were writing in response to Aristotle, who had just been

rediscovered in the 12th century. Even in antiquity, Aristotle was considered outdated. Neither
Aquinas nor Bacon were scientists, none of them performed any real scientific experiments
and none of them advanced science in any real or tangible way. Their achievement was to
reconcile the Semitic doctrines of Christianity with the superior pagan ways of Aristotle, but
the results of this were highly unsatisfactory. Aquinas was also the father of medieval
scholasticism, which proved highly detrimental to the rise of modern science in Europe.
Scholastic methodology was eventually mocked for its absurdities by Renaissance writers like
Francois Rabelais. Because of the Christian emphasis on scripture and tradition as final source
of authority, the church was opposed to the pagan epistemic values of public verifiability of
evidence and empirical rationality. To the church hierarchy, the search for knowledge in
accordance with such principles was both arrogant and dangerously heretical. Even with the
reintroduction of pagan science and philosophy in the 12th century, there was still significant
ecclesiastical opposition to the unaided reason as guide to truth.
The Christian church persecuted those who chose to question Christian religious
orthodoxy with impunity. This fostered an environment in which pursuit of scientific and
technical progress became a virtual impossibility. For example, the posthumous condemnation
of the 6th century Alexandrian philosopher John Philoponus as a heretic ensured that his
principled rejection of Neo-Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy would remain unknown for
centuries to come. This organized ecclesiastical persecution of free thinkers ruled out any
possibility of material progress until the Scientific Revolution.
Despite what the facts reveal, Christian religionists have tried to distort the historical
record by pretending otherwise. They believe that Christianity was a necessary ingredient, the
“spark” that began the Scientific Revolution of the 17th century. This ignores the fact that
science and religion, specifically Christianity in this case, are fundamentally incompatible.
Christianity is about blind faith, with revelation and authority serving as the only valid criteria
for the evaluation of truth. In contrast, science is the accumulation of knowledge through
logical reasoning, empirical observation and measurement. Christianity is a form of magical
thinking; it is not open to revision. Science, on the other hand, is continuously in search of
new ideas with ever greater explanatory power. Though scientific and technological progress
occurred between 400 BC to 300 AD, leading to the development of ideas that would not be
surpassed until the Scientific Revolution, there was virtually no progress from 300 AD to the
12th century, the apogee of Christian power and influence in Europe.
Even Christian Byzantium, which was more successful than the post-Roman successor
states of the Latin West, never made any significant progress in science and technology. Under
Christian influence, Europe regressed to a Neolithic stage of existence. This is well-supported
by recent archeological evidence revealing numerous medieval simplifications of the earlier
Roman material culture. Trade, industry and agriculture all witnessed significant declines in
technical sophistication, economic productivity and output. Population size also decreased
because of overall declines in prosperity and comfort.
Christianity: bringer of filth and disease
Ecclesiastical censorship and suppression of Western scientific and technical
knowledge facilitated the spread and transmission of disease across Europe. This operated in

tandem with the Christian denigration of the human body as a vehicle for sin. Instead of
searching for the natural causes of disease, as the Hippocratic writers once did, the official
doctrine of the church discouraged the practice of medicine by attributing all bodily ailment to
the results of sin and diabolical possession. This retarded progress in the healing arts, leaving
Europe at the mercy of disease for hundreds of years.
The negative influence of Christianity in Europe is revealed by the estimated mortality
rates from the 14th century Black Death, one of the most devastating pandemics in human
history. This was always significantly higher in regions and among populations where
Christianity happened to be the dominant religion. For example, although plague reduced the
population of the Moslem world by one-third, this was still less than the estimated two-thirds
for Europe. These macroregional differences in mortality are also reflected on much smaller
geographic scales. England under the Plantagenets lost one-half of her population to plague,
whereas Mamluk Egypt lost only one-third.
Among populations, Jews had lower death rates than Christians. Their apparent
immunity to the disease aroused the suspicions of their European contemporaries, who
implicated them in a clandestine plot to kill Christians. They were viciously persecuted as a
result.
Why the differential rates in mortality between Moslem, Jew and Christian? Judaism
and Islam have long maintained personal hygiene as an integral part of daily ritual practice;
Christianity, because of its hostility to the body, shunned personal hygiene as worldly and
materialist. The church in Spain, for example, regularly encouraged believers to avoid bathing
to better distinguish themselves from the hated Moors and Jews. Differences in physical
cleanliness between entire geographic regions and whole populations either mitigated or
exacerbated the ravages of the bubonic plague.
The triumph of Christianity in late antiquity devalued human physical existence in the
eyes of Europeans. Human sexuality was regarded as a necessary evil, to be avoided except for
procreation in marriage. The church also discouraged Christians from bathing because concern
for the body was viewed as an obstacle to salvation. Although it came very close, the church
did not officially ban personal hygiene. Instead, the Christians who ruled Europe allowed the
great network of public baths that once dotted the empire, including the aqueducts that
supplied them with water, to fall into a state of permanent disrepair.
St. Jerome once said: “He who has bathed in Christ has no need of a second bath.”
This injunction was taken seriously by Christian ascetics. They practiced ritual mortification of
the flesh by refusing to wash themselves. They wore the same garments every day until they
were reduced to rags. The stench that was produced was known by Christians as alousia or the
“odor of sanctity.” Saints like Agnes and Margaret of Hungary were revered by Christians
because of their rejection of physical hygiene.
In the Rule of St. Benedict of Nursia, only those monks who were sick and infirm were
granted permission to bathe. Monks in good health and the young were encouraged to wallow
in their own filth and excrement. Benedict’s rule was the most influential in the history of
Western monasticism. It was embraced by thousands of medieval religious communities as a
foundational monastic text.
Christianity: bringer of violence and bloodshed
Word of mouth is notoriously ineffective as a means of spreading religious propaganda.
This explains why Christianity’s growth remained largely unspectacular until the early 4th
century. Of course, the primary reason for the Christianization of the empire was the

conversion of Constantine to the new religion. The influence of Christianity in the empire was
continuously reinforced and strengthened by the imperially coercive legislation of his
successors. Christianization also sanctioned acts of religious violence against pagans, which
contributed significantly to the religion’s spectacular growth in numbers and influence.
Christianity unleashed a wave of violence that nearly drowned Europe in an ocean of blood.
Without Constantine, and the religious violence of his successors, Christianity would have
remained just another competing religion in the provincial backwaters of the empire, like
Mithraism or the Eleusinian Mysteries.
The imperial policy of Christianization was further aided by the religion’s intrinsic
advantages over rival philosophical and religious belief systems, making it more palatable to
the ignorant masses. This facilitated its rapid spread across the empire until, by the reign of
Theodosius in the late 4th century, most urban areas were predominantly Christian. These
advantages included the egalitarian ethos of the Christian church. Unlike Mithraism, which was

elitist, Christianity accepted all potential recruits, regardless of ethno-linguistic or socio-
economic difference. The Christians of the first three centuries practiced a form of primitive

communism. This attracted the chronically indigent, as well as freeloaders. Another advantage
was the child-like simplicity of Christian doctrine.
The Crisis of the 3rd century, where rival claimants fought each other for the title of
Caesar, was an internecine conflict lasting for decades. It produced widespread economic
instability and civil unrest. This disruption of daily life encouraged men and women to seek
refuge in the mystery religions, but also Christianity, which offered easy answers in an
increasingly chaotic and ugly world. The Christian religion promised life everlasting to those
who successfully endured tribulation on earth.
Passage of the edict of Milan in 313 meant that Christians would go from being a
persecuted minority to a persecuting majority. Although persecution of religious dissidents had
occurred before Constantine, such events were comparatively rare. Roman “persecution” of
Christianity was mild and sporadic. It was not even religious in nature, but political; Christians
refused to swear loyalty to the state by offering the pinch of incense to the emperor’s genius.
Christians were not so much persecuted as they were subjected to Roman police action for
disobeying the laws of the land. In contrast, Christian persecution of pagans and heretics was
entirely motivated by religious hatred. It combined the authoritarian anti-pagan legislation of
the emperors with the bigotry of the clergy and the violence of the Christian mob.
The first repressive laws against paganism were passed by Constantine. In 331, he
issued an edict that legalized the seizure of temple property. This was used to enrich church
coffers and adorn his city of Constantinople. He redirected municipal funds from the curiae to
the imperial treasury. The curiae used these funds for the construction and renovation of
temples, as well as for pagan banquets, processions and festivals. The redirection of municipal
funds significantly diminished the influence of paganism in the public sphere. Constantine also
showed preference for Christians when considering prospective candidates for government
posts. For the first time in the empire’s history, conversion to Christianity was considered an
attractive proposition.
Pagan temples and statuary were first vandalized and destroyed under Constantine.
Christians believed that this first wave of iconoclasm was in fulfillment of scriptural command:
“Ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves; . . . for the Lord,
whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God” (Exod. 34.13f). The earliest Christian iconoclasm
included the partial destruction of a Cilician temple of Asklepios and the destruction of
temples to Aphrodite in Phoenicia (ca. 326 AD). Constantine’s sons, Constans and
Constantius II, followed in their father’s footsteps. In 341, Constans issued an edict banning

animal sacrifice. In 346, Constans and Constantius II passed a law ordering the closure of all
temples. These emperors were egged on by the Christian fanatic Firmicus Maternus who, in an
exhortation addressed to both emperors in 346, called for the “annihilation of idolatry and the
destruction of profane temples.” The fact that pagans continued to occupy important posts in
the imperial administration made it difficult to legislate the active destruction of temples,
statuary and inscriptions without alienating a large segment of the empire’s population.
Nevertheless, Constantine’s sons turned a blind eye to private acts of Christian vandalism and
desecration.
After the death of Constantius II, Julian was made emperor in 361. Having succumbed
to the influence of pagan tutors in his youth, he developed a deep hatred for the “Galilean
madness.” Accession to the throne allowed him to announce his conversion to Hellenism
without fear of retribution. Julian set about reversing the anti-pagan legislation first enacted by
his uncle. He re-opened the temples, restored their funding and returned confiscated goods; he
renovated temples that had been damaged by Christian vandals; he repealed the laws against
sacrifice and barred Christians from teaching the classics. Julian’s revival of pagan religious
practice was cut short in 363, when he was killed in battle against the Persian Sassanids.
His successor Jovian revoked Julian’s edicts and re-established Christianity as most
favored religion in the empire. The emperors who came after Jovian were too occupied with
barbarian invasion to be concerned with internal religious squabbles; it was more expedient to
simply uphold the toleration imposed on pagans and Christians alike by the Edict of Milan.
Anti-pagan conflict again came to the forefront with Gratian. In 382 he angered pagans by
removing the altar of Victory from the Senate. In the same year, Gratian issued a decree that
ended all subsidies to the pagan cults, including priesthoods such as the Vestal Virgins. He
further alienated pagans by repudiating the insignia of the pontifex maximus.
In 389, Theodosius began his all-out war on the old Roman state religion by abolishing
the pagan holidays. According to the emperor’s decrees, paganism was a form of “natural
insanity and stubborn insolence” difficult to root out, despite the terrors of the law and threats
of exile. This was followed by more repressive legislation in 391, which re-instated the ban on
sacrifice, banned visitation of pagan sanctuaries and temples, ended imperial subsidies to the
pagan cults, disbanded the Vestal Virgins and criminalized apostasy. He refused to return the
altar of Victory to the Senate house, in defiance of pagan demands. Anyone caught performing
animal sacrifice or haruspicy was to be arrested and put to death. In the same year, the
Serapeum, a massive temple complex housing the Great Library of Alexandria, was destroyed
by a mob of Christian fanatics. This act of Christian vandalism was a great psychological blow
to the pagan establishment.
Pagans, dissatisfied with the imperially-sponsored cultural revolution that threatened to
annihilate Rome’s ancestral traditions, rallied around the usurper Eugenius. He was declared
emperor by the Frankish warlord Arbogast in 392. A nominal Christian, Eugenius was

sympathetic to the plight of pagans in the empire and harbored a certain nostalgia for pre-
Christian Rome. He restored the imperial subsidies to the pagan cults and returned the altar of

Victory to the Senate. This angered Theodosius, emperor in the east. In 394, Theodosius
invaded the west and defeated Eugenius at the battle of Frigidus in Slovenia. This ended the
last serious pagan challenge to the establishment of Christianity as official religion of the
empire.
Apologists for Christianity argue that imperial anti-pagan legislation was more rhetoric
than reality; their enforcement would have been difficult in the absence of a modern police
state apparatus. This objection is contradicted by archaeological and epigraphic evidence. First,
based on stratigraphic analysis of urban temples, cult activity had virtually ceased by the year

400, after passage of the Theodosian decrees. Second, temple construction and renovation
declined significantly under the Christian emperors. In Africa and Cyrenaica, temple
construction and renovation inscriptions are far more common under the first tetrarchy than
the Constantinian dynasty, when pagans still constituted a significant majority of the empire’s
citizens. By the end of the 4th century, the authoritarian legislation of the Christian emperors
had seriously undermined the strength and vitality of the old polytheistic cults.
The emperors did not stop with the closure of pagan religious sites. In 435 AD, a
triumphant Theodosius II passed an edict ordering the destruction of all pagan shrines and
temples across the empire. He even decreed the death penalty for Christian magistrates who
failed to enforce the edict. The Code Justinian, issued between 529 to 534, prescribes the death
penalty for public observance of Hellenic rites and rituals; known pagans were to seek
instruction in the Christian faith or risk property confiscation; their children were to be seized
by officials of the state and forcibly converted to the Christian religion.
Imperially mandated closure of all urban temples resulted in the privatization of
polytheistic worship. This further exacerbated the decline of the pagan religious cults because
of the object-dependent nature of ritual practice, which could not be fully realized in the
absence of statuary, processions, festivals, lavish banquets and monumental building. In urban
areas, imperial legislation was clearly effective. This was ruthlessly enforced by professional
Christians and zealous magistrates, who used the additional muscle of the Roman army to get
their own way, especially when preaching and public example failed.
Pagan rites and rituals were still observed at rural sanctuaries and temples for some
time after the closure of urban centers of worship. These remained off the beaten track, so to
speak, and were harder to shut down. Churchmen like the fiery John Chrysostom, cognizant of
this fact, exhorted the rich landowning class of the east to convert the heathen on their
country estates. Those who allowed pagan worship on their rural properties were just as guilty
of violating imperial anti-pagan legislation as the pagans themselves. Itinerant Christian
evangelists, like Martin of Tours, fanned out across the countryside, winning souls for Christ
through a campaign of intimidation, harassment and violence. In the end, aggressive
evangelism, privatization of pagan religious practice and social marginalization ensured the
death of paganism in rural areas. Christianization of the empire was complete by 600 AD,
although it is unclear to what extent Christ was considered just another deity to be worshipped
alongside the old pagan gods.
Christianity is a form of magical thinking. It cannot be disseminated on a large scale
through rational persuasion. No one can explain how Christ rose from the dead, how god
subsists as three persons in one or how a bible that teaches a geocentric, flat earth cosmology
is an infallible guide to universal truth. These are “mysteries.” This is what makes Christianity
such a dangerous and destructive cult. Conversion, unless done for gain or under threat of
force, is an emotional affair. No one is “reasoned” into Christianity. Either that person must
be gullible enough to accept the teachings of the Christian faith without question or he must
be forcibly converted using the sword. It was through the latter that Christians were able to
spread their gospel beyond imperial frontiers, nominally converting all Europe by the 14th
century.
The spread of Christianity cannot be understood apart from the use of force. The
barbarians who invaded the western empire had to convert to Christianity as soon as they set
foot on Roman territory. Conversion to the religion was a condition of their migration and
settlement on imperial soil. They would not have been allowed to participate in Roman society
as pagans. Christian missions located beyond the imperial frontiers would typically focus on
converting barbarian rulers and their courts. Once the king was made to accept the new

religion, he would then compel his followers to convert along with him. This pattern emerged
early in the Christianization of Europe. These kings were the “new Constantines,” because
they embraced Christianity, often after invoking Christ for victory in battle, like Constantine
during the battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312, and then imposed the religion on the aristocracy
and the common people. The earliest of these new Constantines included Caedwalla, the 7th
century king of Wessex. He invaded the island of Wight and exterminated most of the Jutes
who lived there. Caedwalla replaced these with Christian West Saxons and forced the survivors
to convert to Christianity at sword point. Another was Edwin, the 7th century king of
Northumbria, who used a mixture of bribery and threats to convert aristocracy and common
people to the new religion.
After the collapse of the West, Christianity remained confined between the river Elbe
in the north and the Danube in the south on continental Europe, until 1000. Barbarians
motivated by greed and lust for power were the driving force behind the renewed territorial
expansion of medieval Christendom. They were impressed by the wealth, opulence and might
of Constantinople and the Frankish dominions and wanted it for themselves. For the pagan
warlord, Christianity was akin to the cargo cults of Melanesia. If only his barbarian court
displayed all the trappings of the Christian religion, he would be as rich as the emperor in
Constantinople!
In an illuminating anecdote, medieval chronicler Notker the Stammerer accurately
captured the mentality of barbarian converts to Christianity. In the 9th century, Danes would
flock to the Frankish court of Louis the Pious to undergo baptism. In exchange for
conversion, Louis would give each man a set of brand new garments and weapons. Once,
when Louis ran out of these articles to give prospective converts, he had a few rags stitched
together into a coarse tunic and gave it to an old Dane who had been baptized some twenty
times before. “If it was not because I was ashamed of my nakedness, I would give you back
both the clothes and your Christ,” the Dane snapped back angrily. The “rice bowl” Christians
of the 19th and 20th centuries make it difficult to dismiss this story as just another monkish
fable.
The power-mad King Stephen of Hungary forced his subjects to convert to
Christianity. He believed that Christianization of his kingdom would make it as powerful and
as influential as Byzantium. Laws were enacted forbidding pagan ritual practice. Stephen
ordered all Magyars to attend church on Sunday and observe Lent and fast days. Failure to
obey this draconian legislation was dealt with harshly. Eating meat during Lent was punished
by imprisonment; working on a Sunday was punished by confiscation of one’s tools and beasts
of burden. The legal penalty for murmuring during a church service was having one’s head
shorn, accompanied by a severe flogging. The “Black” Magyars who resisted Stephen’s forced
conversion of Hungary were cruelly suppressed. Many were tortured and then blinded by
Stephen’s Christian soldiers, who were angered by the intransigence of their pagan foes. These
men preferred death to the shame and dishonor of being forcibly baptized into an alien Semitic
religion and culture.
Christianization in Poland unleashed a similar wave of violence. Mieszko I forcibly
Christianized Poland to strengthen his grip over the country and avoid forced conversion by
the East Franks. Idolatry was suppressed by smashing pagan idols and sanctuaries, confiscating
estates and beheading those who refused to convert. Although very little Christian legislation
survives from Mieszko’s reign, his successor Boleslaw I, prescribed knocking a man’s teeth out
upon refusal to observe Lenten fasting. Fornication was punished by nailing a man’s scrotum
to a bridge and giving him the choice between death and castration.

The brutality of these methods led to a great pagan reaction to the Christianization of
Poland. Pagans retaliated by killing Christian priests and destroying churches. By the middle of
the 11th century, the land was plunged into chaos, the Christian church in Poland nearly wiped
out, and Mieszko’s dynasty temporarily driven from power.
The Saxon Wars of Charlemagne, lasting from 772 to 804, was the first time in history
that Christianity was used as an instrument of imperialist conquest. Charlemagne initiated
formal hostilities by destroying pagan monuments in Saxony. In 782, Charlemagne promptly
avenged a Frankish defeat at Saxon hands by massacring 4,500 Saxons in savage reprisal. The
Saxon Capitulary of 785 ordered the death penalty for any Saxon caught resisting baptism or
observing heathen practices.

Rulers forcibly converted pagans to Christianity for reasons of personal self-
aggrandizement. Michael III, emperor at Constantinople, forced the Bulgarian Khan Boris to

accept the eastern orthodox rite in 864, after he was defeated in battle. Forced Christianization
allowed Michael to expand his sphere of influence in the Balkans. Bulgaria was then flooded
with Byzantine clergy who, with the help of Boris’s army, began a nationwide campaign to
demolish all pagan holy sites. The boyars accused the Khan of accepting laws that threatened
the stability and autonomy of the state. In 866, they revolted against the khan’s forced
Christianization of the country but were suppressed with great cruelty. In the final decade of
the ninth century, Boris’s eldest son Vladimir, who became ruler of Bulgaria, tried to eliminate
Christianity and restore paganism. In this endeavor, he was supported by the boyars. Vladimir
ordered the killing of Christian priests and the destruction of churches. Boris was compelled to
leave his monastic retreat and suppress the revolt. Vladimir was deposed, blinded and
imprisoned in a dungeon, never to be heard from again.
By the 12th and 13th centuries, crusades were launched to convert the indigenous
peoples of Scandinavia and the Baltic region to Christianity. There were crusades against the
Wends, Finns, Livonians (Latvians and Estonians), Lithuanians and Prussians. St. Bernard of
Clairvaux, a monastic reformer, called for the cultural and physical extermination of northern
Europeans who resisted forced conversion to the Christian religion.
What has Christianity done for Europe?
Christianity is a violent, destructive, murderous cult. It is dangerous for the following
reasons: 1.) the religion promotes the survival of the sick, the weak and the stupid at the
expense of good racial hygiene. This drastically lowers population IQ and capacity for
civilizational attainment, and; 2.) the cult relies on blind faith instead of rational persuasion,
which has resulted in long periods of widespread chaos and bloodshed, especially during the
Christianization of Europe. These dangers were even noticed by contemporary pagan writers,
who immediately recognized the threat a triumphant Christianity would pose to the survival of
Western culture.
Christianity never “civilized” or “domesticated” Europeans. On the contrary,
Europeans were forced to endure a Neolithic existence when Christians were at the apogee of
their power and influence. The church sent men of genius to monasteries or had them
consecrated to the priesthood. This prevented them from passing on their genes, a significant
dysgenic effect that lowered the collective European IQ. Only the pagan science and reason of
classical antiquity could re-domesticate Europeans after 500 years of total intellectual darkness.
The church successfully defended Europe from invasion, argue some apologists, but
nothing could be further from the truth. Charles Martel’s confiscation of church property to
defend Europe from Moslem intruders was met with significant ecclesiastical opposition. If the

church had succeeded in withholding the necessary funds, all Europe would have been
reduced to a province of the Umayyad caliphate. Nevertheless, Martel was unable to pursue
the Saracens across the Pyrenees and dislodge them from their Andalusian stronghold. The
Moslems would continue their occupation of the Iberian Peninsula for 800 years, until their
final expulsion by Ferdinand and Isabella in the late 15th century. Southwestern France and
Italy were periodically raided and sometimes controlled by Moslem invaders. The emirate of
Sicily endured for over two centuries. Even after Norman conquest, a significant Moslem
presence remained on the island. The Moslems of Sicily were finally expelled by the middle of
the 13th century. The crusades to retake the Holy Land from the Saracens (1095-1291), a series
of large-scale military operations under the joint leadership of papacy and feudal aristocracy,
failed to achieve its primary objective. In 1204, Christian crusaders sacked Constantinople in
an orgy of rape, pillage and murder. The crusaders caused so much damage that the Byzantines
were unable to resist their Ottoman conquerors in 1453.
Christianity provided no adequate defense of Europe. The church only did enough to
maintain herself as a viable institution. In the process, the church weakened Europe, making
her ripe for conquest by the Umayyad and Ottoman caliphates.
Apologists tentatively acknowledge that although Christianity hindered scientific and
technological progress, it still made “contributions” to fields as diverse as architecture and
philosophy. On closer examination, these “contributions” are neither “Christian” nor worthy
of being considered “contributions.” The great churches of the Middle Ages are frequently
trotted out, but these have their origin in Roman building methods. The dome, the arch and
the vault, the typical features of the medieval Romanesque style of architecture are all
borrowed from the imperial Roman architecture of pre-Christian times. The basic architectural
plan of most medieval churches is the Roman basilica, a public building reserved for official
purposes. Even the Gothic style that supplanted Romanesque still employed architectural
features of Roman origin. The ribbed vaulting that was typical of Gothic architecture was
originally used in Vespasian’s Roman colosseum and by Hadrian in the construction of his
Tibertine villa.
While acknowledging Romanesque as an “accomplishment,” the Christian religionist
will conveniently ignore the almost total disappearance of Roman building methods from
western Europe for almost 300 years. This was a direct result of the church’s active
suppression of Western scientific and technical knowledge. From the completion of
Theodoric’s mausoleum in Ravenna to the consecration of Aachen in 805, nothing of
monumental significance was built in western Europe. During the intervening period,
Europeans, like their Neolithic ancestors, had returned to the use of perishable materials for
use in building.
Apologists for Christianity will mention Aquinas and scholasticism as the highpoints of
not only medieval, but European intellectual development, even though Aquinas set European
scientific and technological progress back by hundreds of years. Scholasticism was an object of
ridicule and mockery during the Renaissance. Religionists mention the Christian
“contribution” of the university, oblivious to the many institutions of higher learning that
existed and even flourished in the ancient world. The first universities taught scholasticism, so
they were the frontline in the Christian war against the pagan values of intellectual curiosity,
love of progress for its own sake and empirical rationality.
In the Christian religious mind, science and technology are of Christian origin because
the men doing the discovering and inventing during the Scientific Revolution were nominal
Christians, like Galileo and Newton. This argument is just as absurd as arguing that the Greek
invention of logic, rhetoric and mathematics were the result of Greek pagan theological beliefs

22
because Aristotle and other ancient scientists and philosophers were pagans. No, these men
were “Christians” because public avowals of atheism were dangerous in an age where even the
most innocuous theological speculation could smear reputations and destroy careers. It is a
glowing tribute to the courage and honesty of these men that they were able to abandon

Christianity’s reliance on blind faith, often in the face of public censure, and consciously re-
embrace the pagan epistemic values that produced the “Greek miracle” 2000 years before the

Scientific Revolution.
Christian religionists claim that the New Testament, a collection of childish scribblings
penned by semi-literate barbarians, is a great contribution to Western civilization. As has been
pointed out for generations, even by other Christian religionists, the work is notorious for its
use of bad grammar and unrefined literary style. Much of it was composed by Jews who were
not even fluent in koine Greek. Overall, the New Testament is an inferior production
compared to the meanest writers of Attic prose. Even St. Jerome, the translator of the Vulgate,
expressed contempt for the crude, unsophisticated literary style of the Bible. He preferred the
elegant Latin of Cicero instead.
What has Christianity contributed to Europe? The answer is nothing! No art, culture,
architectural monuments, science or technology. Christianity was a massive waste of European
intellectual and physical potential. Furthermore, Christianity almost destroyed Europe.
The church discarded over 99% of ancient literature, including works on science,
mathematics, philosophy, engineering and architecture. This was the largest campaign of
literary censorship and suppression in history, an act of cultural and physical genocide that
nearly severed medieval Europe from the great achievements of classical antiquity. This was
cultural genocide because the church nearly wiped out an entire civilization and culture; this
was physical genocide because the church’s deliberate eradication of secular knowledge placed
millions of lives in danger, unnecessarily subjecting them to the ravages of disease, war, famine
and poverty. Far from being largely benign, the Christian church is a power-mad religious
mafia. It bears sole responsibility for perpetrating the greatest crimes in history against
Europeans. How long shall the Christian church escape punishment for this criminal
wrongdoing? No other religion has caused as much suffering and as much damage to Europe
as this spiritual syphilis known as Christianity.
Christianity: the grandmother of Bolshevism?
In 1933, the German historian Oswald Spengler wrote: “All Communist systems in the
West are in fact derived from Christian theological thought… Christianity is the grandmother
of Bolshevism.” This alone makes Christianity one of the most destructive forces in world
history, a force so radioactive it destroys everything within its immediate vicinity. But how is
this even possible?
Equality is such a fundamental aspect of the church’s kerygma that if it were removed
the entire ideological structure of Christian orthodoxy would collapse like a house of cards.
The “catholicity” of the church signifies that membership in the body of Christ is open to all
men, regardless of ethno-linguistic or socio-economic differences. Salvation, because it is
equally available to all, means that all men possess the same innate capacity to achieve it. There
is also universal equality in sinful depravity, as well as in the possession of unmerited divine
grace. Jesus’ commandment to love one’s neighbor as oneself is merely the application of
universalist and egalitarian principles to human social life. In the New Testament, believers are
asked to serve one another, with the aim of achieving social equality within an ecclesiastical
setting.

Assimilation of Platonic idealism by Ante-Nicene theologians added a metaphysical
dimension to the egalitarian pronouncements of the New Testament. When God created man,
he imparted the breath of life through his nostrils. This “breath,” psyche, or anima, translated
“soul,” served as the life-principle of the animate body. The equality of souls before god
obtains because all bear the same imago dei or image of god. In the Garden of Eden, man lived
in circumstances of natural equality. St. Augustine writes that before the Fall, no one exercised
dominion or lordship over anyone else, but that all ruled equally and indifferently over the
inferior creation. The natural equality that once existed in this mythical prehistory was lost
because of sin, which corrupted human nature. This brought slavery and other inequalities into
the world. The church believed that the kingdom of god would restore Edenic conditions at
the end of time.
To the Ante-Nicene church, belief in spiritual equality was not some ossified formula
to be recited by rote like the Apostle’s Creed, but an ever-present reality with real-world,
“anticipatory” consequences. Gospel narratives that incorporated elements of primitive
communism were received favorably by the church and declared canonical. In Luke 3, John
the Baptist, a member of the communist
Essenes, exhorts his followers to share their clothing and food with those who are
destitute. The communist pronouncements of John foreshadow the more explicit primitive
communism of Jesus.
In Luke 4, Jesus begins his ministry by inaugurating an acceptable “year of the Lord’s
favor.” This is a direct reference to the Hebrew Jubilee, which came every fifty years after the
completion of seven sabbatical cycles. The proclamation of Jubilee signified manumission of
slaves, absolution of debt, redistribution of property, and common ownership of the land’s
natural produce. According to Leviticus, no one owned the land, except YHWH; only its
usufruct could be purchased. This was not a literal year of Jubilee inaugurated by Jesus. The
passages being quoted in Luke are from Isaiah, not Leviticus which contains the actual Hebrew
legislation. The imagery associated with the Jubilee is used to describe the realized
eschatological features of the new age inaugurated by the coming Messiah. His return
symbolizes the complete reversal of the old order. The new age will bring about communistic
social relations through the ethical transformation of believers. From a biblical hermeneutic
standpoint, the Torah Jubilee foreshadows the greater Jubilee now realized in Jesus’ ministry.
Jesus’ economic teachings go far beyond Levitical communal sharing. They necessitate
large-scale re-organization of society along egalitarian and communist lines. In Luke 6, Jesus
commands his audience to give to all those who beg from them, without distinction as to
friend or enemy. His condemnation of violent retaliation is closely linked to this ethic of
universal sharing; the communist social arrangement envisaged by Jesus cannot flourish in an
atmosphere of violence and suspicion. The eschatological age inaugurated by the Messiah is
one where lending without expectation of financial reward has become a new moral obligation,
one that must be carried out if one wishes to obtain treasure in heaven.
That early Christian communist practice was morally obligatory is supported by
numerous passages from the New Testament. According to 1 John 3:16-17, true believers will
sacrifice their lives for the good of others, especially by giving to those in need; anyone who
refuses to do this cannot claim to be a Christian in good moral standing.
In the Ante-Nicene church, fellowship was not only spiritual, but included mutual aid
in the form of concrete material and economic assistance. The canonical epistle of James
defines true religion as caring for “orphans and widows,” an ancient Hebrew idiom for the
economically disadvantaged. Those who favor the rich over the poor, instead of treating both
equally, are sinners in need of repentance. They have transgressed Jesus’ great commandment

to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” James says that “faith without works is dead.” What do these
“works” consist of? We are informed that true faith is shown by those who feed and clothe the
wretched of the earth. If one refuses to do this, one’s very identity as a Christian is placed in
jeopardy.
In 2 Corinthians, Paul provides additional theological justification for early Christian
communist practice using the “kenosis” of Christ as a reference point. Christians were
expected to follow the example of Jesus, who was “rich” in his pre-existent state, but willingly
“impoverished” himself so that believers could become “rich” through his “poverty.” This
meant that wealthier Christian communities were morally obligated to share their abundance of
riches with poorer ones. The purpose of re-distributing wealth from one Christian community
to another, writes Paul, was the achievement of economic equality between believers.
The apostolic identification of “true faith” with material re-distribution led to the
establishment of the world’s first welfare system and centrally planned domestic economy.
While some form of primitive communism existed before the institutionalized Christian
communistic practices of the first three centuries AD, these were reserved for small
communities of Greek-speaking intellectuals or Jewish religious fanatics. What made Christian
communism unique was its moral universalism and non-ethnocentric orientation. Given the
egalitarian thrust of early Christian communist ideology, it should come as no surprise that the
central organizing principle of classical Marxist economics, “From each according to his ability,
to each according to his need,” was lifted verbatim from the pages of the New Testament.
Marxism-Leninism, a murderous 20th century ideology that led to the deaths of over
100 million individuals worldwide, was directly inspired by the ethical pronouncements of the
New Testament. This is a source of great embarrassment to the Christian religionist. In
defense, apologists emphasize the voluntary nature of communist practice in early Christianity.
Yet this apologetical evasion is clearly anachronistic. Freedom defined as the ability to choose

in the absence of external coercion is a uniquely modern idea inherited from post-
Enlightenment philosophies of liberalism. This idea of freedom affirms the sovereign will as

one obedient to itself, but also reducible to the basic laws of the free market. However, this
understanding of freedom is diametrically opposed to the one encountered in the ancient
Greek philosophical tradition. In this context, there is no sharp distinction between voluntary
action and involuntary obligation; individuals are not conceptualized as autonomous agents
with a multitude of options to choose from. Instead, freedom is the ability to pursue the Good
without impediment; only a properly functioning will, in which the subject has fully realized his
true essence, can do this. To do evil goes against the proper functioning of the will; it is not an
expression of one’s individual capacity for freedom. No one willingly or voluntarily refuses to
pursue the Good; rather, they lack sufficient moral training or the appropriate self-restraint.
The Christian in the ancient world was free to not worship or consume meat sacrificed
to idols; he was not free to do the opposite because he was no longer pursuing the Good. A
Christian who violated the prohibition against idolatry was not legitimately exercising his
capacity for free will, even though the prohibition had been violated in the absence of external
coercion. Instead, such an action was the result of moral ignorance or error. The same could
be said of the early Christian practice of communism. This was only “voluntary” in the sense
that Christians were freely pursuing a morally acceptable outcome. If freedom is pursuit of the
Good without obstruction, Christians were morally obligated to participate in the communist
socio-economic practices of the church, otherwise they would not be considered righteous
before god.

The Christian origins of modern liberalism and socialism
The “anticipatory” consequences of spiritual equality meant social and economic
equality for the church, leading to the establishment of formal communism in the early
Christian communities. This was not just philanthropy, but a highly organized social welfare
system that maximized the redistribution of wealth. Early Christian communism was
widespread and lasted for centuries, crossing both geographical and ethno-cultural boundaries.
The communist practices of the ante-Nicene church were rooted in the Jesus tradition of the
1st century. The existence of early Christian communism is well-attested by the Ante-Nicene
fathers and contemporary pagans.
After Christianity became the official state religion, the church became increasingly
hierarchical as ecclesiastical functions were merged with those of imperial bureaucracy. The
communist socio-economic practices of the early church were abandoned by medieval
Christians. This was replaced by a view of inequality as static, the result of a “great chain of
being” that ranked things from lowest to highest. The great chain was used by theologians to
justify cosmologically the rigidly stratified social order that had emerged from the ashes of the
old Roman world. It added a veneer of ideological legitimacy to the feudal system in Europe.
In the great chain, Christ’s vicar, the pope, was stationed at the top, followed by European
monarchs, clergy, nobility and, at the very bottom, landless peasantry. This entailed a view of
spiritual equality as “antipathetic.” St. Thomas Aquinas provided further justification for
inequality along narrowly teleological lines. In the Summa Contra Gentiles, diversity and variety in
creation reflect the harmonious order established by god. If the universe only contained equal
things, only one kind of good would exist and this would detract from the beauty and
perfection of creation.
The antipathetic view of Christian equality was the dominant one until the Protestant
Reformation of the 16th century. Martin Luther’s iconic act – the nailing of the 95 Theses to
the Wittenberg Castle door in 1517 – began an ecclesiastical crisis of authority that was to have
tremendous repercussions for the future of Western history. The pope was no longer the
supreme representative of Christ on earth, but an irredeemably corrupt tyrant, who had
wantonly cast the church into the wilderness of spiritual oblivion and error.
Access to previously unknown works of ancient science and philosophy introduced to
an educated public the pagan epistemic values that would pave the way for the Scientific
Revolution of the 17th century. The humanist cry of ad fontes! was eagerly embraced by
Reformers. It allowed them to undermine scholastic hermeneutical principles (i.e. the
Quadriga) and the major doctrines of medieval Christianity. The rediscovery of more reliable
manuscripts of the Bible served as an important catalyst of the Reformation.
Reformed theologians, armed with humanist textual and philological methods, studied
the New Testament and the Ante-Nicene fathers in the original languages. This led to a
Christian “renaissance,” a rediscovery of the early Christian world. Compared to the lax
morality and spiritual indifference of late medieval clergy, the first 4 or 5 centuries of the
primitive church seemed like a golden age, one that maintained the doctrinal purity of
Christian orthodoxy until Pope Gregory I, unencumbered by the gross distortions of scholastic
theology and ecclesiastical tradition. Early Christian teachings and practices, forgotten during
the Middle Ages, became popular once again among Protestants.
Reformers sought to recapture the spirit of primitive Christianity by incorporating
egalitarian and majoritarian principles into an early modern ecclesiastical setting. Egalitarian
thought was first enunciated in Luther’s teaching on the universal priesthood of all believers.
In contrast to medieval Christian teaching, which viewed the clergy as members of a spiritual

aristocracy, Luther proclaimed all Christians equally priests before god, with each one having
the same capacity to preach and minister to fellow believers. On this basis, Luther demanded
an end to the differential treatment of clergy and laity under canon law. He also defended the
majoritarian principle by challenging the Roman ecclesiastical prerogative of appointing
ministers for Christian congregations. Calvin, the other great Reformed leader, acknowledged
the real-world consequences of spiritual equality, but approached it from the perspective of
universal equality in total depravity.
Protestant radicals viewed the egalitarian policies of the mainstream Reformed
churches as fundamentally inadequate; any concrete realization of Christian spiritual equality
entailed a large-scale revival of the communistic socio-economic practices of the primitive
church. Muntzer, an early disciple of Luther, is representative of this more radical egalitarian
version of the gospel. In 1525, a group of religious fanatics, including Muntzer, seized control
of Muhlhausen in Thuringia. During their brief rule over the city, they implemented the
program of the Eleven Articles, a revolutionary document calling for social justice and the
elimination of poverty. Idols were smashed, monks were driven out of their convents and
monastic property was seized and redistributed to the poor. From the pulpit, Muntzer
delivered fiery sermons ordering his congregation to do away with the “idol” of private
property if they wished the “spirit of God” to dwell among them. A leader of the Peasant’s
War in Germany, he was captured in May of 1525 after his army was defeated at
Frankenhausen. He was tortured and then executed, but not before his captors were able to
extract the confession: Omnia sunt communia. Whether the confession represents the exact

words of Muntzer is controversial; nevertheless, it accurately reflects Muntzer’s anti-
materialistic piety and view that the teachings of the gospel were to be implemented in full.

The Munster Rebellion of 1534-1535, led by Jan Matthys and Johann of Leiden, was
far more extreme in its radicalism. After the Anabaptist seizure of the city, Matthys declared
Munster the site of the New Jerusalem. Catholics and Lutherans were then driven from the
town, their property confiscated and redistributed to the poor “according to their needs” by
deacons who had been carefully selected by Matthys. They set about imposing the primitive
communism of the early church upon the town’s inhabitants. Money was abolished; personal
dwellings were made the public property of all Christian believers; people were forced to cook
and eat their food in communal kitchens and dining-halls, in imitation of the early Christian
“love feasts.” Ominously, Matthys and Johann even ordered the mass burning of all books,
except the Bible. This was to symbolize a break with the sinful past and the beginning of a new
communist era, like the Year One of the French Revolutionary National Convention. In the
fall of 1534, Anabaptist-controlled Munster officially abolished all private property within city
limits. But the Anabaptist commune was not to last for long. After a lengthy siege, the
Anabaptist ringleaders, including Johann of Leiden, were captured, tortured and then executed
by the Bishop of Munster.
The Diggers (or “True Levellers”) and the Levellers (or “Agitators”), active during the
English Civil Wars (1642-1651) and the Protectorate (1653-1659), were strongly influenced by
primitive Christian teaching. The Diggers, founded by Gerard Winstanley, were inspired by the
communist socio-economic practices of the early Christians. They tried to establish agrarian
communism in England, but were opposed in this endeavor, often violently, by wealthy
farmers and local government officials who dismissed them as atheists and libertines. The
more influential Levellers, a radical Puritan faction, tried to thoroughly democratize England
by introducing policies of religious toleration and universal male suffrage. Their rejection of
the arbitrary monarchical power of King Charles I in favor of egalitarian democracy was
ultimately informed by Christian theological premises. Prominent Levellers like “Freeborn”

John Lilburne argued for democratic egalitarian principles based on their exegetical
interpretation of the Book of Genesis. All men were created equal, they said, with no one
having more power, dignity and authority than anyone else in the Garden of Eden. Since no
man had the right to exercise authority over others, only popular sovereignty could legitimately
serve as the underlying basis of civil government. Many Leveller proposals, as written down in
the Agreement of the People, were incorporated into the English Bill of Rights of 1689. This
document later influenced the American Bill of Rights of 1791.
John Locke was the founder of modern liberalism, a political tradition soaked in
Christian religious dogma. He drew many social and political implications from Christian
spiritual equality. His belief in equality was rooted in the firm conviction that all men were
created in the image of god, making them equal by nature. Church fathers and medieval
theologians had long argued that all men, whether slave or free, were “by nature equal,” but
that social inequality among men was god’s punishment for sin. John Locke agreed with the
patristic and medieval authors on natural equality but repudiated their use of original sin to
justify the passive acceptance of human social and economic inequality. Like the Protestant
reformers before him, he believed that spiritual equality was not merely eschatological, but
entailed certain real-world implications of far-reaching political significance.
Locke’s argument for universal equality was derived from a careful historical and
exegetical interpretation of the biblical narrative. The creation of man in god’s image had
enormous ramifications for his political theory, especially as it concerns his views on the nature
of civil government and the scope of its authority. From his reading of Genesis, Locke argued
that no man had the right to dominate and exploit other members of the human species. Man
was created by god to exercise dominion over the animal kingdom. Unlike animals, who are by
nature inferior, there can be no subjection among humans because their species-membership
bears the imprint of an “omnipotent and infinitely wise maker.” This meant that all men are
born naturally free and independent. Locke’s view of universal equality further entailed the
“possession of the same faculties” by all men. Although men differed in terms of gross
intellectual endowment, they all possessed a low-level intellectual ability that allowed them to
manipulate abstract ideas and logically reason out the existence of a supreme being.
In Locke’s view, all government authority must be based on the consent of the
electorate. This was an extension of his belief in mankind’s natural equality. Any abuse of
power by elected representatives, when all judicial and political avenues of redress had been
exhausted, was to be remedied by armed revolution. This would restore men to the original
liberty they had in the Garden of Eden. Freedom from tyranny would allow them to elect a
government that was more consonant with the will of the people.
Locke’s theory of natural rights was based on biblical notions of an idyllic prehistory in
the Garden of Eden. Contrary to monarchical theorists like Filmer, man’s earliest social
organization was not a hierarchical one, but egalitarian and democratic. If all men were created
equal, no one had the right to deprive any man of life, liberty and private property. In Lockean
political philosophy, rights are essentially moral obligations with Christian religious overtones.
If men were obliged to surrender certain natural rights to the civil government, it was only
because they were better administered collectively for the general welfare. Those rights that
could not be surrendered were considered basic liberties, like the right to life and private
property.
Early modern Christian writers envisioned in detail what an ideal communist society
would look like and how it would function. The earliest communist literature emerged from
within a Christian religious context. A famous example is Thomas More’s Utopia, written in
1516, which owes more to patristic ideals of communism and monastic egalitarian practice

than Plato’s Republic. Another explicitly communist work is the Dominican friar Tommaso

Campanella’s 1602 book City of the Sun. These works form an important bridge between pre-
modern Christian communism and the “utopian” and “scientific” socialism of the 19th

century. For the first time in history, these writings provided an in-depth critique of the socio-
economic conditions of contemporary European society, indicating that only through

implementation of a communist system would it be possible to fully realize the humanist ideals
of the Renaissance. They went beyond communalization of property within isolated patriarchal
communities to envisage the transformation of large-scale political units into unified economic
organisms. These would be characterized by social ownership and democratic control. Implicit
in these writings was the assumption that only the power of the state could bring about a just
and humanitarian social order.
“Utopian” or pre-Marxian socialism was an important stage in the development of
modern leftist ideology. Its major exponents, Blanc, Cabet, Fourier, Saint-Simon and Owen,
were either devout Christians or men profoundly influenced by the socio-economic and ethical
teachings of primitive Christianity. They often viewed Jesus of Nazareth as a great socialist
leader. They typically believed that their version of communism was a faithful realization of
Jesus’ evangelical message. In the pre-Marxian vision, the primitive communism of the early
Christian church was an ideal to be embraced and imitated. Many of these writers even
defended their communist beliefs through extensive quotation from the New Testament.
Louis Blanc saw Jesus Christ as the “sublime master of all socialists” and socialism as
the “gospel in action.” Etienne Cabet, the founder of the Icarian movement, equated true
Christianity with communism. If Icarianism was the earthly realization of Jesus’ vision of a
coming kingdom of god, it was imperative that all communists “admire, love and invoke Jesus
Christ and his doctrine.” Charles Fourier, an early founder of modern socialism, viewed Jesus
Christ and Isaac Newton as the two most important figures in the formative development of
his belief-system. He grounded his socialist ideology squarely within the Christian tradition. As
the only true follower of Jesus Christ, Fourier was sent to earth as the “Comforter” of John
14:26, the “Messiah of Reason” who would rehabilitate all mankind along socialist industrial
lines.
Henri de Saint-Simon, another important founder of modern socialism, believed the
true gospel of Christ to be one of humility and equality. He advocated a “New Christianity”
that would realize the practical and economic implications of the just world order preached by
Jesus. Saint-Simon was also an early precursor of the Social Gospel movement, which sought
to ameliorate social pathology through application of Christian ethical principles. The early
Welsh founder of modern socialism, Robert Owen, although hostile to organized Christianity
and other established religions, regarded his version of socialism as “true and genuine
Christianity, freed from the errors that had been attached to it.” Only through the practice of
socialism would the “invaluable precepts of the Gospel” be fully realized in contemporary
industrial society.
The earliest pioneers of socialism, all of whom maintained socio-economic views
grounded upon Christian religious principles, exercised a profound and lasting influence on
Marx. His neo-Christian religious beliefs must be regarded as the only real historical successor
of orthodox Christianity, largely because his ideology led to the implementation of Christian
socio-economic teachings on a scale hitherto unimaginable. Muntzer, the radical Anabaptists
and other Christian communists are considered important predecessors of the modern socialist
movements of the 19th and 20th centuries. For example, in Friedrich Engels’ short
monograph The Peasant War in Germany, Muntzer is immortalized as the man whose religious

and political views were way ahead of his times. He even possessed a far more sophisticated
“theoretical equipment” than the many communist movements of Engels’ own day.
The primitive communist transformation of the socio-economic order under
Christianity is based on 1.) the elimination of all ethno-linguistic and socio-economic
distinction between men (unity in Christ) and; 2.) the fundamental spiritual equality of all
human beings before god; it is the mirror image of the modern communist transformation of
the socio-economic order under classical Marxist ideology, which is based on 1.) elimination of
all class distinction between men and; 2.) a fundamental “equality” of access to a common
storehouse of agricultural produce and manufactured goods. The numerous similarities
between Christian communism and Marxism are too striking to be mere coincidence. Without
the dominant influence of Christianity, the rise of modern communism and socialism would
have been impossible.
The Protestant Reformation of the 16th century links the socio-economic
egalitarianism of the early Christian communities with the socio-economic egalitarianism of the
modern West. As a religious mass movement beginning in late medieval times, it profoundly
affected the course of Western civilization. The Reformation played an instrumental role in the
initial formulation and spread of liberal and socialist forms of egalitarian thought that now
serve as the dominant state religions of the modern Western “democracies.” Without Luther
and the mass upheaval that followed in his wake, Christian spiritual equality would have
remained an eschatological fact with no direct bearing on the modern secular world.
Spengler’s observation that “Christian theology is the grandmother of Bolshevism” is a
truism. All forms of Western communism are grounded in the Christian tradition. The same
applies to liberal egalitarian thought, which was also formulated within a Christian religious
milieu.
Karl Marx, chief interpreter of the “Protestant Aquinas”
Marxist ideology is neither rationally explicable nor empirically verifiable. This means
that Marxism is not subject to revision when its prophecies fail to materialize, or its cardinal
doctrines are disproven; instead, like the Christian religionist, the Marxist ideologue is forced
to engage in mind-numbing apologetics to maintain a thin veneer of ideological respectability.
Despite claims of being “scientific,” Marxism requires a rigid doctrinal orthodoxy that
demands excommunication of heretics who deviate from the established creed. Marxism is, in
fact, a neo-Christian religious cult with its own prophets, saviors, holy books, holy days, and
holy sites, as well as sacred rituals and devotional music.
Marxism shares the same basic doctrines as Christianity, albeit in materialist garb. The
Garden of Eden finds its Marxist counterpart in the egalitarian social arrangement preceding
the rise of civilization. The Fall from paradise occurs with Adam and Eve’s disobedience; in
the Marxist worldview, the Fall occurs with the introduction of the division of labor. In
Christianity, there is the devil; in Marxism, the villain is the capitalist. Marx’s historical
materialism is merely the eschatological framework of Christian orthodoxy in secularized form.
In Christianity, god works through history to redeem the elect. This leads to an apocalyptic

showdown between the forces of good and evil, the millennial reign of Christ, and the re-
establishment of utopian conditions on earth. The same teleological view of history is found in

Marxist ideology. The internal contradictions within the flow of capital resolve themselves in
favor of proletarian liberation from capitalist exploitation. The continuous valorization and
concentration of financial resources in the hands of the capitalist, combined with the
“immiseration” of the proletariat, generate apocalyptic conditions or “revolution.” This leads

to the overthrow of the capitalists, seizure of the means of production, dictatorship of the
proletariat and finally, the establishment of communist paradise at the end of history.
Marx’s vision of history is so deeply rooted in Christianity that his philosophy would be
more accurately classified as a branch of liberal Protestantism. This would situate Marx within
a Christian theological tradition beginning with the Jew Saul of Tarsus. Even Marx’s atheism
does not exclude him from the Christian tradition; the dialectic in Marx’s philosophy of history
possesses the same function as the triune godhead of Christianity; both are abstract agencies
whose purpose is to bring the salvation plan of history to its final consummation in apocalyptic
conflict, returning all humanity to an imagined golden age that once existed in the remote past.
Marx, like the primitive Christians and their Reformed inheritors, takes the anticipatory view of
human spiritual equality to its final logical conclusion.
From whence does Marxism acquire its character as a secularized version of the
Christian gospel? The philosophical method of dialectical materialism, the cornerstone upon
which the entire edifice of “scientific” socialism was constructed, is derived from Hegel’s use
of dialectic in Phenomenology of Spirit. Hegel, called the “Protestant Aquinas” because of his
systematization and unification of a wide variety of topics in philosophy and Christian
theology, first conceived of dialectic in his early theological writings. According to the
philological and historical evidence, Hegel, after having spent years immersing himself in St.
Paul’s Letters as a Protestant seminarian, appropriated the term Aufhebung from Luther’s
commentary on Romans. This was Luther’s translation of the messianic term katargesis in the
Pauline epistles. Hegel made the term the fundamental axis of his dialectic because Luther’s
use of Aufhebung had the double meaning of abolishing and conserving, like its koine Greek
equivalent katargesis.
Of greater significance is Hegel’s use of Protestant trinitarian theology to elucidate the
underlying structure of objective reality. For Hegel, the Absolute is the complete totality of

everything in existence; if this is considered as a unity, the Absolute is god, or the self-
consciousness of the universe. The world of sense and experience is necessarily triadic because,

as Absolute Mind, it reflects the trinitarian structure of the Christian godhead. This makes
everything in the known universe amenable to rational explanation. “Mystery” has no place in
Hegel’s version of Protestant theology because faith has been replaced with knowledge.
Hegel’s logical system is divided into three parts, each corresponding to the three
persons of the trinity: I. Logic II. Nature III. Spirit. These are each further subdivided into
three more categories and so on, reflecting Hegel’s belief that any systematization of
philosophical and theological knowledge must faithfully mirror the underlying triadic structure
of objective reality to achieve some degree of rational coherence. Even Hegel’s dialectical
method, the cornerstone of his philosophy, is triadic in structure. The dialectic has three
“moments”: (1.) a moment of fixity; (2.) a dialectical or negatively rational moment and; (3.) a
speculative or positively rational moment.
In Hegel’s dialectic triad, a fixed concept (first moment) becomes unstable because of a
one-sided or restrictive character (second moment). In the process of “sublation” (or
Aufhebung), the concept of the first moment is overcome and preserved, but an inherent
instability within the concept leads to the creation of its direct opposite. In the third moment, a
higher rational unity emerges from the negation of the original negation. Hegel’s teleological
vision of the historical process unfolds according to this three-stage dialectical process of
contradiction, sublation and unity of opposites.
This system is by no means strictly deterministic; in Hegel’s view of history, the
trinitarian god is revealed as transcendent in the dynamic relationship between historical
necessity and contingency, which subsist as overarching unity on a higher rational plane of

existence. Without this crucial ingredient of contingency, the telos of history would remain
outside humanity’s grasp, frustrating the divine plan of a trinitarian god who reveals himself
through the logic of the historical dialectic. The Hegelian telos is the universal self-realization of
freedom through the historical development of man’s consciousness of the divine, attaining its
highest stage of fulfillment in the elimination of all Christian “mysteries” through complete
rational self-knowledge of god. Given the role of freedom in this dialectical view of history, the
pivotal significance of the Protestant Reformation for Hegel is easily comprehended. Luther’s
iconic enunciation of the doctrine of universal priesthood, combined with his repudiation of
medieval ecclesiastical authority, meant that freedom was on the threshold of achieving full
actualization within the historical process as a universal phenomenon, bringing us further
toward the telos of history in modern times.
Like St. Augustine’s linear view of history in City of God, Hegel’s view is also
fundamentally Christian, permeated by the eschatological and soteriological elements of
Protestant orthodoxy. The central miracle of Christianity, the Incarnation or Logos made flesh,
is further reflected in the unfolding of the historical dialectic. The dialectical overcoming of
particularity and universality, finite and infinite at the end of history, when man achieves
rational self-knowledge of the absolute, is patterned on the Incarnation, or the dialectical
overcoming of the opposition between god and man. The self-manifestation of god in the
historical process makes man co-agent in the divine plan of post-historical redemption. This
occurs despite man’s alienation and estrangement from god. The “unhappy consciousness,”
yearning for god, finally becomes aware of his individual co-agency in god’s plan of universal
salvation and achieves liberation from despair. This realization, which is really a collective one,
ushers in the end of history by ensuring man’s salvation through the establishment of god’s
kingdom on earth.
For Marx, the Hegelian dialectic suffered from an internal contradiction. The logic of
dialectic presented human history as an evolutionary process, one of constant motion and
change, with no final, absolute form. Yet paradoxically, the laws of dialectic that structured
historical development within Hegel’s idealist system were absolutes in a system that was itself
final and absolute. How was this contradiction to be resolved? “With [Hegel],” Marx wrote in
Das Kapital, “[the dialectic] is standing on its head. It must be inverted, in order to discover the
rational kernel within the mystical shell.” Inversion of Hegel’s speculative idealism resolves this
internal contradiction by recasting the logic of evolution as an open-ended process. The
materialist dialectic replaces the idealist teleological-conceptual framework of Hegel’s system
with an evolutionary form of human social and biological development. Nothing is absolute in
Marx’s system, except the need for continuous dialectical progression through contradiction
and unity of opposites. If all substantial being is relative and transitory, it follows that the laws
of dialectic can only be applied to it in a relative fashion. If evolution is a continuous and
open-ended process, no idealist resolution of its objective material contradictions is possible
without fetishizing them as part of some hermetically sealed, closed system. Thus, Marx’s
inversion of the dialectic rescued it from Hegel’s absolute Christian idealist framework, giving
it a thoroughly natural, anthropological foundation within an evolutionary materialist
framework. With a materialized dialectic, Marx was able to formulate a philosophical
methodology that could analyze capitalist economic relations from a scientific perspective.
The eschatological conceptualization of history as both linear and teleological is a
uniquely Judeo-Christian “contribution” to Western culture. This replaced the earlier Greek
view of history as a cyclical process. Hegel translated the eschatological framework of Lutheran
Protestant theology into a well-organized philosophical system. The laws of dialectic were
simply contradictions within the Christian narrative of redemption. The Marxist theory of

historical materialism assimilated this Christian eschatological framework, in “demystified” and
rational form, precisely because its philosophical methodology incorporated Hegel’s dialectic as
the motor force of historical development. Thus, we have primitive communism for the
Garden of Eden, capitalist oppressors for the devil, man’s self-alienation for the effects of
original sin, a classless society for the kingdom of god and so forth. In Marx’s secularized
Protestant theology, historical evolution proceeds by way of class conflict, leading to

proletarian emancipation and communist paradise. In Hegel, man achieves rational self-
knowledge of god, whereas for Marx, man achieves rational self-knowledge of himself at

history’s end, which is really the beginning of man’s “true” history according to the Marxist
plan of salvation.
Marx’s philosophy, when stripped of all socio-economic elements, is the trinitarian and
Christological dimension of Hegel’s speculative Protestant rationalism in materialist form. The
eschatological and soteriological framework of orthodox Christianity remains intact, although
secularized and inverted. Like every good Protestant, Marx acknowledged the influence of the
Reformation upon his own ideas, tracing his revolutionary pedigree through Hegel to the
renegade monk Luther. The global dissemination of Marxism has revealed Karl Marx as one of
the most influential Christian theologians after St. Paul. This neo-Christianity is potentially
even more destructive than the patristic Christianity that infected and nearly exterminated the
Western civilization of antiquity. Economic Marxism has killed an estimated 100 million
people in the 20th century; if trends continue, cultural Marxism will lead to the civilizational
and cultural extinction of the West.
Most destructive force in European history? World’s most dangerous religion?
Among the great religions, only Christianity contains within its shell an unlimited
capacity for self-destruction. Nihilism lies at the core of the Christian gospel; in pure form, the
religion demands the total renunciation of all worldly attachment for the greater glory of the
kingdom of god. Christianity is the negation of life because it sets goals that, when attained,
lead to the annihilation of the individual. As far as Western survival is concerned, this can only
mean one thing: civilizational collapse and ethnic suicide. This is exactly what happened during
the Dark Ages, when Christians were at the apogee of their power and influence in Europe.
This decline was reversed by courageous intellectuals who had rediscovered the glories of the
ancient civilizations, using this past achievement as the basis for new achievements and
discoveries.
Christianity is a dangerous religion. It maximizes the survival and reproduction of the
genetically unfit at the expense of society’s more productive members. It promotes the mass
invasion of the West by foreigners of low genetic quality, especially from the Third World. By

lowering collective IQ, Christianity has accelerated Western civilizational decline. Neo-
Christianity, in the form of liberalism and cultural Marxism, has inherited the orthodox

Christian high regard for Lebensunwertes Leben. Christians and neo-Christians have even
provided the necessary economic and political means, i.e. welfare statism and human rights, for
ensuring that the genetically unfit breed large numbers of offspring with each passing
generation. This has created an “idiocracy,” one that threatens the sustainability of all Western
institutions. With each passing year, an enormous fiscal burden is imposed on the state for the
support and daily maintenance of this growing class of dependents.
The Christian belief in the sacredness or intrinsic worth of all human life means that
the religion is best regarded as an inherently anti-eugenic force. This Christian hatred of race
improvement has manifested itself throughout European history. Christian monasticism and the priesthood, which removed Europe’s most gifted men from the gene pool, helped prolong the Dark Ages by hundreds of years. Christian opposition to eugenics may also be driven by a recognition that actual religious belief is correlated with genetic inferiority. The negative
correlation between intelligence and religiosity has been known since the mid-1920’s. Recent
findings include a 2009 study revealing that atheists have average IQ’s 6 points higher than
religious believers. This more than exceeds the threshold for statistical significance. The study
further explored the relationship between national IQ and disbelief in god, finding a
correlation of 0.60. This negative correlation, replicated across multiple studies, is the main
reason why Christianity has experienced such explosive growth in the underdeveloped regions
of Africa and Latin America. In this context, Christian opposition to eugenics is a defensive
maneuver. A more biologically evolved population would abandon Christianity for a rational
belief-system. This would bankrupt the Christian religion by emptying church coffers and
forcing its clergy to find an alternative source of employment.
Christianity is a threat to global peace and security. This makes it the world’s most
dangerous religion. The Roman Catholic Church, the largest Christian denomination in the
world at almost 1.3 billion members, is opposed to abortion and all other forms of
contraception. Protestants are also against abortion, although many support voluntary
contraception. Neo-Christians, which include modern liberals and cultural Marxists, although
not opposed to the free availability of abortion and contraception in the West, are opposed to
population stabilization and reduction in Third World countries.
Although modern research has demonstrated the existence of a significant positive
correlation between foreign aid and fertility, Christian organizations continue to actively send
aid to Third World countries. The continuous flow of money from the global north to the
global south has led to explosive population growth in the developing regions of the world.
This problem is most acute in Africa, where the demographic situation has been significantly
exacerbated by foreign aid from the liberal governments of developed countries and Christian
charities. The population increases through a continuous stream of charitable donation, which
places great strain on available resources as the local carrying capacity of the land is exceeded.
Competition for scarce resources intensifies, bringing violent conflict in its wake; large-scale
famines occur with increasing frequency and severity. The destabilization of entire regions
leads to increasing numbers of Africans desperately trying to escape worsening conditions in
their own countries, accelerating the destruction of Western civilization through the
demographic time bomb of Third World migration. After the West has been utterly destroyed
by rampaging migrant hordes, the populations that once survived on Christian charity and
foreign aid return to subsistence-level conditions after Malthusian catastrophe. This results in
widespread depopulation of Africa south of the Sahara Desert.
Like the patristic Christianity that once menaced the world of classical antiquity, the
“neo-Christianity” of social welfare liberalism and cultural Marxism threatens to bring about
the complete destruction of modern Western civilization. Political doctrines like equality and
human rights, forged within a Christian theological context, are now used as tools for the
dispossession of Europeans in their own homelands. Not only is neo-Christianity represented
by liberal-leftist ideology; it is also an intrinsic element of modern Christian teaching that has
rediscovered its primitive Christian roots. All Christian churches, both Protestant and Catholic,
support racial egalitarianism; they actively promote the ethnocide of the West through massive
and indiscriminate Third World immigration. This resurgent neo-Christianity gathers
momentum with each passing decade. Time will only tell whether the neo-Christian recreation
of god’s kingdom on earth is successful, but the current prognosis for Western civilization
remains a bleak one.

The multiculturalist state religion was implemented during the cultural revolution of
the 1960s. Reversal of course is not possible in this current atmosphere of state-sanctioned
political correctness. If the liberal-leftist regimes of the West maintain their grip on power, the
dystopian conditions they have socially engineered will continue without interruption into the
foreseeable future. The totalitarian nature of multicultural ideology is further reinforced by the
systematic brainwashing of Western populations and Jewish elite control of politics, the media,
all major financial institutions and the academic world.

European civilization is in danger of being permanently eclipsed by the specter of neo-
Christian influence, which hangs over the continent like the sword of Damocles. We will

always have the Bible and the church, but Western scientific and technological advancement
will not be with us forever. It is obvious that Christianity offers nothing but endless misery and
suffering for Western man. Unless the remaining vestiges of Christianity in Europe are
extinguished without a trace, European civilization will find itself submerged in a dark age
more long-lasting and calamitous than the one that engulfed Europe after the Christianization
of the Latin-speaking West in the 4th century.
For the first time in history, Western man must choose between Christianity or the
survival of his own civilization. We can only hope that he chooses wisely as the “hour of
decision” fast approaches.
The Christian apologetics of Prof. Kevin MacDonald
Sociobiological accounts of Western pathological altruism are based on inferences not
supported by the available empirical evidence. For example, if the individualism of European
societies is the result of evolutionary adaptation under ecologically adverse conditions, a similar
tendency would be found among other ethno-racial groups that evolved in the same
environment. However, Eastern Europeans and Northeast Asians evolved in the same North
Eurasian and Circumpolar region but remain strongly ethnocentric and collectivist.
Those arguing in favor of a European genetic basis for pathological altruism face
another serious problem: for thousands of years of recorded history, there isn’t a single
instance of collectively suicidal behavior among Europeans until the Christianization of Rome
in the 4th century. Why this is the case requires the following explanation.
Ancient ethical norms diverged considerably from modern ones. Pity was condemned
as a vice; mercy was despised as a character flaw. Mercy was viewed as the antithesis of justice
because no one deserved help that had not been earned. The rational man was typically
expected to be callous towards the sufferings of the less fortunate. His philosophical training
in the academies had shown him that mercy was an irrational and impulsive behavior whose
proper antidote was self-restraint and stoic calm in the face of adversity. In the Roman world,
clementia was reserved exclusively for the vanquished in battle or the guilty defendant at trial.
Weaklings and the economically disadvantaged were beneath contempt.
Life in the ancient world was quite brutal by modern Western standards. The
punishments meted out to criminals—blinding, burning with coals, branding with hot irons
and mutilation—were exceedingly cruel and unusual. Public entertainment was noted for its
brutality. Scratching, biting, eye gouging and mauling an opponent’s genitals were accepted as
legitimate tactical maneuvers for boxers and wrestlers alike. In the naumachia, armies of

convicts and POW’s were forced to fight each other to the death in naval vessels on man-
made lakes. Gladiatorial combat remained immensely popular for centuries, until the monk

Telemachus tried to separate two gladiators during a match in the Roman coliseum. He was
promptly stoned to death by the mob for his efforts. Slavery was considered a non-issue in the

ancient world. Aristotle rationalized the institution by dividing men into two classes: those by
nature free, and therefore capable of assuming the responsibilities of citizenship, and those
who were by nature slaves. A slave was defined as chattel property bereft of the capacity to
reason. This meant that he could be sexually exploited, whipped, tortured and killed by his
master without fear of legal reprisal.
Racism or, more accurately, “proto-racism” was more widespread and more accepted
in the ancient world than in our politically correct modern Western “democracies.” As revealed
by in-depth examination of classical literary sources, the Greeks were typically ethnocentric
and xenophobic. They were given to frequent generalization, often negative, about rival
ethnicities. The Greeks casually and openly discriminated against foreigners based on deeply
ingrained proto-racial prejudices. Ethno-racial intermarriage, even among closely related Greek
ethnic and tribal groups, was universally despised. It was even regarded as a root cause of
physical and mental degeneration. The absence of terms like “racism,” “discrimination” and
“prejudice” in the ancient world reveals that proto-racist attitudes were not generally
condemned or seen as pathological.
Greek intellectual and biological superiority was determined by their intermediate
geographical position between lazy, stupid northern Europeans and effeminate, pleasure-loving
Asians. The Greeks were the best of men because they had been exposed to the right climate
and occupied the right soil. The Greeks looked down upon foreigners, pejoratively referring to
them as “barbarians.” This was an onomatopoeia derived from Hellenic mockery of
unintelligible foreign speech. Barbarians were viewed as the natural inferiors of the civilized
peoples of the Mediterranean basin. Prejudice was not only directed at foreigners. Significant
interethnic rivalry also existed among fellow Greeks, as demonstrated by the history of the
Peloponnesian Wars. Greek patriots despised their Roman conquerors, even referring to them
contemptuously as barbarians. After the conquest of Macedonia, the Romans embraced the
prejudices of their Greek subjects as their own.
How do contemporary sociobiological accounts of Western pathological altruism
explain this?
It has been alleged that pathological altruism was always a deeply ingrained European
character flaw. The Pythagorean communism of the 5th century BC is frequently mentioned as
corroborating evidence, but these practices were reserved for the intellectual elite. Much the
same could be said for Stoic cosmopolitanism, which bears no similarity to the deracinated
cosmopolitanism of the modern West. In the Greek variant, the intellectual gains world
citizenship by living in accord with the cosmic law of universal reason; in the Roman variant,
the cosmopolis is identified with the Roman patria. The Hellenistic empire of Alexander the
Great is believed by some to have been established on a morally universalist foundation. These
accusations have their basis in the rhetorical amplifications and literary embellishments of
chroniclers who wrote long after the exploits of Alexander. The expansion of the Greek
sphere of influence in Asia was romanticized by some as implying a new world order based on
an imagined brotherhood of man. This is contradicted by the historical record. In actuality,
Alexander and his generals promoted a policy of residential segregation along ethno-racial lines
in the conquered territories, with Greek colonists on one side and natives on the other. In the
Greek view, Hellenized Egyptians, Israelites, Syrians and Babylonians were racial foreigners
who had successfully assimilated Greek culture; clearly then, cultural and linguistic
Hellenization was not enough to make one “Greek.” Ancestral lineage was an important
component of ancient Greek identity. Herodotus observed that the Greeks saw themselves as
a community “of one blood and of one tongue.” Caracalla’s extension of the franchise to
Roman provincials in 212 AD was not an act of universalism per se, but occurred after

centuries of Romanization. It was done for purposes of taxation and military recruitment. This
imperial legislation, known as the Antonine Constitution, did not abolish ethnic distinction
among Roman citizens.
The conventional sociobiological explanation of Prof. MacDonald and others is
contradicted by the pervasive brutality and ethno-racial collectivism of ancient societies. Given
Christianity’s role as an agent of Western decline, no explanation will be fully adequate until
this is finally acknowledged and taken into consideration. Prof. MacDonald, in an essay for The
Occidental Observer, “Christianity and the Ethnic Suicide of the West,” ignores this major
obstacle to his own detriment, arguing that from a Western historical perspective, Christianity
was a relatively benign influence. Despite MacDonald’s eminence as an authority on 20th
century Jewish intellectual and political movements, his defense of Christianity reveals a
superficial understanding of history, contemporary political theory and Christian theology.
Prof. MacDonald whitewashes Christianity throughout, denying that the religion has
ever been “a root cause of Western decline.” He observes that Christianity was the religion of
the West during the age of European exploration and colonization, but not once does he
mention that Christianity was a spent force by the late Middle Ages, having undergone a
serious and irreversible decline in power and influence. Prof. MacDonald does not mention
that after 1400, Christendom was no longer unified because the legitimacy of medieval
ecclesiastical authority had been shattered; first, by the rediscovery of classical science and
philosophy, which shook the Christian worldview to its very foundations, and second, by the
Protestant Reformation, which reduced the pope to the status of a mere figurehead. This set
the stage for the large-scale dissemination of atheism and agnosticism in the 20th century.
Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press, combined with the spread of mass literacy,
virtually ensured that the Christian church would never again control European intellectual life.
If the late medieval church had retained the same ecclesiastical and political authority it had
under Pope Innocent III, European colonization and exploration of the globe would have
been virtually inconceivable. For these reasons, it is more historically accurate to situate
European territorial expansion within the context of resurgent pagan epistemic values, i.e.
empirical rationality, intellectual curiosity and the pursuit of scientific progress for its own sake,
during the Renaissance and the Scientific Revolution.
It is argued that the decline of the West has co-occurred with the decline of
Christianity as an established faith, but this is incorrect. The Renaissance and the Scientific
Revolution, as well as exploration and colonization that occurred along with it, were only
possible because of the collapse of ecclesiastical authority in the late medieval period. This
eroded the Christian stranglehold on the spread of knowledge, replacing blind faith with the
pagan epistemic values of classical antiquity. The recent decline of the modern West beginning
in the 1960s has co-occurred with the growing influence of a neo-Christian ethic in the public
sphere, just as the decline of the ancient world co-occurred with the triumph of Christianity
over the forces of paganism.
Prof. MacDonald observes that Christians have not always been consistent moral
universalists in practice, but this is a non-sequitur. Marxists have not always been consistently
anti-racist or multiculturalist, given Stalin’s rabid anti-Semitism, aggressive policy of national
Russification, and deportation of entire ethnic populations to Siberia, but this does not change
the fact that anti-racism and multiculturalism are characteristic features of Marxist orthodoxy.
Since when have the inconsistent practices of a few individuals ever mitigated or excused the
destructive nature of an ideology completely at odds with the biological reality of human
nature? Likewise, MacDonald’s non-sequitur does not affect the central importance of spiritual
equality in the Christian belief-system. Historically, Christians were divided on whether

spiritual equality entailed certain real-world implications or was of purely eschatological
significance.
This hopelessly muddled line of argument revolves around a nebulous definition of
“traditional” Christianity, a term either alluded to or directly mentioned throughout. If
traditional Christianity is supposedly good for Europeans, how can it be universalist and
ethnocentric at the same time, as in the case of American abolitionists and slave-owners? Or is
traditional Christianity whatever form of Christianity MacDonald finds acceptable? If this is
the case, what is the point he is trying to make here? Prof. MacDonald mentions that the
patristic writers frequently criticized Jewry for being obsessed with biological descent. This
placed them at odds with the multicultural and multiethnic ideology of the Christian religion.
But how can the patristic writers, who systematically formulated the official dogmatic
orthodoxy of the church, not be representative of “traditional” Christianity? Paradoxically,
MacDonald acknowledges the ancient origin of the church’s race-mixing proclivities. If he
believes that the patristic writers were corrupted by egalitarian principles at a very early date, he
should at least provide evidence of theological subversion.
According to Prof. MacDonald, the secular left, which initiated the cultural revolution
of the 1960s, is not Christian in inspiration. This statement is egregiously wrong, revealing a
profound ignorance of the philosophies of liberalism and Marxism, especially in terms of their
historical development. These belief-systems originated in a Christian theological context. The
core ideas of liberalism, human rights and equality, have their genesis in the careful biblical
exegesis of 17th and 18th century Christian political theorists. Marxism is deeply rooted in the
fertile soil of the Christian tradition, especially in the speculative Protestant rationalism of
Hegel. It also draws additional inspiration from the Reformed theological principles of Luther
and the communist socio-economic practices of the primitive Christian church.
The hostility between the secular left and “traditional” Christianity is emphasized to
further demonstrate the non-Christian origins of Western pathological altruism. However, his
observation is completely irrelevant, as both traditional and secular Christianity are essentially
rival denominations within the same Christian religious tradition. The mutual hostility that
exists between the two is to be expected. Furthermore, it is foolhardy to maintain that
traditional or mainline Christianity has been corrupted by the secular left; given the origins of
liberalism and Marxism in Christian theology and biblical exegesis, it is more accurate to say
that traditional Christianity has allowed itself to be corrupted by its own moral paradigms after
taking them to their logical conclusion. The Christian theological basis of social and biological
egalitarianism is merely the rediscovery and application of the original ethical teachings of
Jesus and the primitive church.
Prof. MacDonald says the “contemporary zeitgeist of the left is not fundamentally
Christian.” He fails to realize that the liberal-leftist ideas behind Third World immigration and
state-sanctioned multiculturalism have deep roots in the Christian tradition. There is a
common misunderstanding, no doubt propagated by Christian apologists, that one must
embrace the supernatural claims of Christian religious dogma to be considered a Christian.
This contention is not supported by contemporary scholarship. For example, Unitarians reject
traditional Christian orthodoxy but remain well within the Christian fold. Neo-Christianity, like
Unitarianism, is a thoroughly demythologized religion, properly defined as the application of
New Testament-derived ethical injunctions to the management of contemporary social and
economic relations. By this definition, Liberals and Marxists are no less Christian than your
typical bible-thumping “holy roller.”
If Christianity is ultimately responsible for the destruction of Western civilization, asks
MacDonald, why aren’t Middle Eastern Christians destroying their own societies by

aggressively pushing the same universalist and ethno-masochistic agenda? In this case, the
comparison is historically flawed. The medieval Islamic conquest of Byzantine North Africa

and the Near East virtually guaranteed that Middle Eastern Christianity would follow a socio-
historical trajectory differing significantly from the one followed by Latin Christianity. Up until

quite recently, Middle Eastern Christians inhabited a medieval world no different from the one
Europeans had lived in for centuries before the dawn of the Renaissance. Middle Eastern
Christians never experienced any Reformation that allowed them to shake off the tyranny of
ecclesiastical authority and wrestle with the real-world implications of spiritual equality.
Furthermore, none of the conditions for a Reformation ever existed in what remained of
Middle Eastern Christendom. There was no humanist movement, which meant no dramatic
increase in literacy or availability of printed material. There was no rediscovery of the patristic
writers or of the ancient biblical manuscripts in the original languages. Access to the original
source material would have made it easier for religious dissidents to challenge ecclesiastical
authority and refute long-established medieval Christian dogma. In fact, Middle Eastern
Christians were dhimmis, a persecuted jizya-paying religious minority in a larger Moslem world
hostile to their very survival. Given the precariousness of their legal situation in the Ottoman
empire, they had no time for the finer points of biblical exegesis or theological analysis.
Prof. MacDonald states, erroneously, that in Judaism there is no “tradition of
universalist ethics or for empathy with suffering non-Jews.” He is obviously not familiar with
the teachings of the Old Testament: “The foreigner residing among you must be treated as
your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD
your God.” (Leviticus 19:34) Christianity is simply the radical universalization of Hebrew
ethical concern for the plight of hapless foreigners living among them; as such, it is firmly
embedded within the soil of 1st century Palestinian Judaism. Although Christianity has
absorbed Greek philosophical ideas because of its wide dissemination in Europe, it is
obviously not a European invention.
At this point, Prof. MacDonald asks: If the “moral universalism/idealism” that is
destroying Sweden is due to Christianity, how does one explain “how people can lose every
aspect of Christian ideology except the ethics”?
To answer this question, let us inquire into the historical genesis of the Christian
religion and the identity of its earliest followers. Christianity originated in the yearning of
Palestinian Jewry for social justice while having to patiently endure the tyranny of foreign
rulers. Under these harsh conditions, Jewish beliefs in a messiah acquired an unprecedented
sense of urgency, eventually assuming militant and apocalyptic overtones. This sense of
urgency reached a crescendo in 1st century Palestine; self-proclaimed messiahs amassed armed
bands of followers poised and ready to establish the son of David on the throne of Caesar, by
force if necessary. This is the environment in which the Jesus myth originated, woven together
from different strands of Jewish tradition in an atmosphere of deep-seated yearning for the
coming advent of a messiah. This advent symbolized the end of Roman tyranny and the
establishment of the kingdom of god on earth.
Christianity’s earliest followers were drawn from the refuse of the empire. Why?
Because Christianity was the first mass movement in history to give concrete expression to the
inner yearning of the people for freedom from oppression and hunger. What man has not
sought to escape the oppression of his masters or the poverty of his surroundings? With the
rise of Christianity, like the rise of Jewish Messianic belief, the inchoate yearnings of the mob
for deliverance from oppression were replaced with a vision of a new social order that would
inaugurate an age of universal justice and freedom. This new vision would lead to the
establishment of a worldwide communist economic system that would forever solve world

poverty and hunger. In the New Testament was found a blueprint for an ideal society that
would inspire generations of social reformers and leftist revolutionaries. For centuries, it was
the only widely accessible document that demanded social justice for the poor and
downtrodden and the only document to propose a practical solution to the problem of social
inequality: the establishment of a socially egalitarian or communist society on earth. The
religion of Christianity tapped into this deep-seated, age-old psychological yearning of the
masses and, for the first time in history, gave it a coherent voice. This ensured the survival of
ethical Christianity long after the decline of ecclesiastical orthodoxy in the late Middle Ages,
allowing it to flourish, virtually unchallenged, in the ostensibly secular milieu of the modern
21st century Western “democracies.”
As a control mechanism, ethical Christianity was remarkably flexible. It could be used
to justify any social arrangement, no matter how unjust or brutal. Its promise of “pie in the
sky” had a remarkably pacifying effect on the illiterate serfs, who were expected to toil on the
lord’s manor for their daily bread. Feudal landowners encouraged Christian religious
instruction because it produced an easily controlled and manipulated peasantry. Vassals had it
drummed into their heads from the moment of birth that servants must obey their masters.
The church promised them life everlasting in paradise if they faithfully observed this
requirement until death. The great rarity of the peasant revolt against serfdom reveals the
shrewd pragmatism of those who used religion as a means of safeguarding the public order.
Punishment for original sin and the Pauline dualism between body and spirit, among other
things, provided European rulers with additional convenient rationalization for the institution
of serfdom. In the right hands, the ethical pronouncements of the New Testament could be
used as an agent of revolutionary change, capable of stirring up mass revolt and potentially
unleashing forces that could tear apart the “vast fabric of feudal subordination.” This was
demonstrated by the Peasant Revolt of 1381, ignited by the fanatical communist-inspired
sermons of the renegade priest John Ball.
The concept of human rights—Christian ethical injunctions in secularized form—
illustrate in concrete fashion why the morality of the New Testament managed to survive long
after the decline of Christian dogmatic orthodoxy. Rights dominate the field of political
discourse because they are considered by egalitarian ideologues the most effective mechanism
available for ensuring (a) the equal treatment of all persons and; (b) equal access to the basic
goods deemed necessary for maximal human flourishing. This practicality and effectiveness
must be attributed to the ability of rights to fulfill the secret yearning of the common people,
which is to ameliorate, as much as possible, the baneful effects of oppression and want. It
achieves this by demolishing the traditional social and political distinctions once maintained
between aristocracy and peasantry, placing all individuals on the same level playing field. The
concept of rights has allowed the masses to closely realize their age-old utopian aspirations
within a liberal egalitarian or socialist context. The concept’s great flexibility means that it can
be interpreted to justify almost any entitlement. Even those who openly rejected the notion of
rights, such as utilitarian philosopher Bentham, were unable to devise a more satisfactory
mechanism that ensured equal treatment of all.
The Marxist tradition, emerging from under different historical circumstances, never
fully decoupled Christian ethical teaching from traditional orthodoxy; instead, Marxist
philosophical method necessitated an “inverted” Judeo-Christian eschatological and
soteriological framework, largely because dialectical materialism is primarily an inversion of
Hegel’s speculative Protestant rationalism.
In Hegelian Christianity, knowledge is substituted for faith. This eliminated the
“mysteries” of Christian orthodoxy by making rational self-knowledge of god a possibility for

all believers. The trinity as absolute mind, and therefore reason incarnate, means that Jesus of
Nazareth was a teacher of rational morality, although his ethical system had been corrupted by
patristic and medieval expositors. If “the rational is real and the real is rational,” as Hegel said,
history is not only the progressive incarnation of god, but god is the historical process itself.
The triadic structure of the natural world, including human self-consciousness, proves that the
structure of objective reality is determined by the triune godhead of Christianity.
Hegel’s interpretation of Christianity gave Marx the raw material he needed to extract
the “rational kernel” of scientific observation from “within the mystical shell” of Hegelian
speculative rationalism. This liberated dialectical analysis from Hegel’s idealist mystification,
allowing Marx to do what Hegel should have done, before succumbing to Christian theological
reflection: construct a normative science, a Realwissenschaft, analyzing the socio-economic
developments within capitalism that would unleash the forces of worldwide proletarian
revolution.
The secularization of Christianity preserved the religion’s ethical component, while
discarding all supernatural elements. This gave us modern liberalism. In contrast, Marx turned
Hegel’s Protestant theological system upside down, a process of extraction resulting in the
demystification of Hegelian Christianity. In Marxist philosophy, the inversion of dialectic
removes the analytical tool—the “rational kernel”—from within its Christian idealist “shell.”
This is then applied to the analysis of real-world phenomena within a thorough-going
materialist framework, like the internal contradictions of capital accumulation in Marxist crisis
theory.
Prof. MacDonald argues for a genetic basis for moral universalism in European
populations, a difficult argument to make given the historical evidence indicating a total
absence of pathological altruism in the ancient world before Christianization of the Roman
empire. He mentions the systematic brainwashing of Europeans and the major role of Jewish
political, academic and financial influence in the ethnocide of the West, but again forgets to
mention that all these cultural forces rationalize European dispossession using political ideas
like universal human rights and equality, the two fundamental pillars of secularized
Christianity.
Prof. MacDonald’s attempt to exculpate Christianity of being “a root cause of Western
decline” is easily refuted. In the final analysis, Christianity, at least in its organized form, is the
single greatest enemy of Western civilization to have ever existed.
A Europe without Christianity?
The world of classical antiquity shone as a lamp in the dark, filled with a youthful vigor
that ensured its institutions and ideas would endure long after Greece and Rome ceased to
exist as viable political entities. Science and reason were then snuffed out by the darkness and
imbecility that followed in the wake of Christianity. Libraries were destroyed; art treasures were
smashed; building in non-perishable materials almost vanished from memory; personal hygiene
disappeared; ignorance was considered a virtue; chaos ensued. This was the triumph of
Christianity, a syphilis of the mind that nearly wiped out Western civilization. Although
Christian power and influence were shattered long ago by the rediscovery of science and
reason, a resurgent Christianity now dominates the West in the form of liberal egalitarianism
and cultural Marxism. These philosophies serve as the ideological basis of endless mass Third
World immigration and other multiculturalist policies. This neo-Christianity has been imposed
on the West by totalitarian liberal-leftist governments.

Understanding Christianity through the prism of group evolutionary strategy can shed
light on the significant threat the religion poses to Europeans. As a seminal concept originally
formulated by Prof. Kevin MacDonald, it was used with devastating effect in his analysis of
20th century Jewish intellectual and political movements. In a world characterized by in-group
ethno-racial preference, absence of a group evolutionary strategy allowing populations at the
species and sub-species level to survive and replicate is highly maladaptive.
A group evolutionary strategy is defined as an “experiment in living.” This refers to the
establishment of culturally mediated processes or ideological structures that allow humans to
exercise control over natural selection at the group level. The basic characteristics of Jewish
evolutionary group strategy are: 1.) the rejection of both genetic and cultural assimilation into
neighboring populations. Jews in Europe and the Middle East segregated themselves from
gentiles by fashioning a distinct identity for themselves. This was accomplished through
enforcement of strict endogamy and residential segregation. The genetic relatedness between
Jewish groups, such as the Sephardi and Ashkenazi, is higher than between Jews and European
populations because of this age-old resistance to assimilation; 2.) successful economic and
reproductive competition that has driven Europeans from certain sectors of their own societies
(such as finance); 3.) high ethnocentrism; 4.) within-group altruism favoring Jews at the
expense of outgroup members, and; 5.) the institutionalization of eugenic practices that
selected for high intelligence and conscientiousness in Jewish populations.

In contrast, Christianity undermines group survival by suppressing natural ethnocentric
tendencies and maximizing the spread of dysgenic traits. Christianity provides no effective
barrier to the cultural and genetic assimilation of Europeans by surrounding non-white
populations; for example, during the Spanish and Portuguese colonization of the Americas in
the 16th and 17th centuries, the Roman Catholic Church aggressively promoted miscegenation
among the conquistadores. Ecclesiastical officials encouraged the European colonists to marry
and interbreed with their native Indian and African concubines. This resulted in large-scale
demographic genocide, which replaced European genetic homogeneity with mestizaje. That
Christianity is a non-ethnocentric ideology based on moral universalism is another serious
problem with the religion. Europeans will always champion the interests of hostile out-groups
at the expense of fellow Europeans in the name of Christian love and brotherhood.
Christianity also opposes the high aggressiveness directed towards outgroup members; instead,
believers are expected to practice nonviolence and compassion in the face of demographic
replacement. High aggressiveness is a defining feature of Jewish group evolutionary strategy. It
has allowed Jews to outcompete Europeans in their own societies. Lastly, Christianity is
militantly anti-eugenic, which is why it allows weaklings to survive and reproduce. This has
decreased average IQ and the prevalence of other beneficial traits in European societies. In
contrast, Jewish group evolutionary strategy institutionalizes eugenic practices that positively
select for these traits, especially high intelligence. These eugenic practices have allowed Jews to
exercise a degree of influence over Western societies vastly disproportionate to their actual
numbers. Unlike Judaism for Jews, Christianity does not function as a group evolutionary
strategy for Europeans, but as a recipe for racial and cultural suicide on a massive scale.
All aggressively pro-active measures against Christianity are certainly ethically justifiable
in the face of Western decline and European racial extinction. In this essay, a more scientific
approach is recommended. The European intellectual, before he devises any plan of action,
must first acknowledge that no other biological process is as important for humans as
evolution through natural selection. If he is to have any belief-system, it must be the civil
religion of eugenics. Incorporating eugenics into the fabric of civic life would obviate coercion,
making racial hygiene a matter of voluntary acquiescence. He would also do well to embrace the trifunctional worldview of the ancient Indo-Europeans. For many thousands of years,
trifunctional ideology served as an effective deterrent to the pathology of moral universalism.
By envisaging the tripartite caste system as the fundamental pillar of a new order, the iron law
of inequality is exalted as the highest law, the one most conducive to the achievement of social
harmony. In this vision, the highest caste, equivalent to the brahman of Aryan-occupied India
or the guardians of Plato’s Republic, would be absorbed in scientific and technological pursuits
for their own sake. They would be entrusted with the material advancement of civilization.
Their moral system, informed by the principles of evolutionary biology and eugenics, would be
derived from the following axiom:

What is morally right is eugenic, i.e. improves the race biologically;
what is morally wrong is dysgenic, i.e. degrades the race biologically.

The second class of individuals will be bred for war and the third will consist of
industrial and agricultural producers. These correspond to the Aryan kshatriyas and vaishyas or
the “silver” and “bronze” castes of Plato’s Republic. Since these individuals do not possess the
cognitive ability to participate in the highly abstract civil religion of the brahmans, they will
worship their distant ancestors as the racial gods of a new religion founded on eugenic
principles.

Christianity is an irrational superstition, which means that its influence will not be
mitigated through logical argument. The child-like simplicity of Christian dogma is “a feature,
not a bug.” Without an ability to appeal to the lowest common denominator, Christianity
would not have spread as rapidly as it did during the 4th century. An enlightened European
humanity, educated in the principles of Darwinian evolution and eugenics, cannot co-exist side
by side with this ancient Semitic plague. The negative correlation that exists between Christian
religiosity and intelligence simply reinforces this conclusion. Christianity is a seemingly
intractable problem for primarily eugenic and biological reasons. Although a eugenic approach

is clearly needed, other things must be done. If Christianity is to be abolished, all state-
sanctioned programs of multicultural indoctrination must be completely eliminated along with it.

Through a program of rigorous eugenic breeding and media control, Europeans will be
weaned from the neo-Christian ethical system they have imbibed since childhood. They will
come to see eugenics as a necessary form of spiritual transcendence instead. Through a process
of evolutionary development that is both culturally and technologically mediated, the lowest
castes will embrace the brahman civil religion and see themselves as gods; the more evolved
brahmans will move on to a more intensive contemplation of increasingly sophisticated
mathematical and scientific abstractions. This progressive development of European racial
consciousness will ensure the adoption of a successful group evolutionary strategy among
Europeans.

The gradual phasing out of individuals with IQs below 100 will be carried out as an act of religious devotion among the lower castes. Aryan kshatriyas, the “knights of faith” of the new Aryan race religion, will impose a eugenic regime over the entire globe, repopulating the Third World with highly evolved super-organisms that will turn these former hellholes into terrestrial paradises. Wasting precious material resources caring for less evolved members of the human species will be a thing of the past. Humanity, whose scientific and technological progress stagnated during the late 20th century, will once again resume its upward journey toward the stars.

Eugenic breeding will force Europeans to realize the truth of Nietzsche’s core insight: Christianity, a trans valuation of all values driven by resentment, is a slave morality. It is the revolt of the underman against the aristocratic Indo-European virtues of strength and magnanimity, pride and nobility. By repudiating the syphilitic poison of Christianity, Europeans will become a race of value-creators, once again in charge of their own destinies as they affirm the beauty of life in all its fullness.

[Author]

Posts