Is Mainstream Christianity Dead Set on the Destruction of Western Peoples?

Is Mainstream Christianity  Dead Set on the Destruction of Western Peoples?

As Western Christianity merges with the value system of Cultural Marxism, this becomes a real question.  Take these recent news items:

– US Lutheran churches have made $30 million from government grants and contracts in flooding the USA with Third World refugees.

– Brenda Walker: “Conspirators In Cassocks: Catholic Bishops (But Not Laity) Betraying America

– Diversity Chronicle: “Pope Francis Invites The Homeless, Undocumented Immigrants And Prostitutes To Exclusive Catered Vatican Banquet” (Granted, this is somewhat of a satire site, but, like the Onion, it digs at deeper taboos.)

– Pope Francis visits Lampedusa to pray for African invasion of Europe.

– Bishop Mark Seitz prays for mestizo invasion of USA.

– “Conservative” Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission president Russell Moore’s Evangelical Immigration Table is a George Soros front group hell-bent on flooding USA with Third World.

– Dennis Mangan: “The One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Open-Borders Church

– John Derbyshire:  “White Flight from Christianity?


In evolutionary terms, has mainstream Christianity become maladaptive for the West?  What are some solutions?  It’s little wonder that many younger Christians are flocking to Identitarian Christianity or Neopaganism.  Will this trend catch on?  Should Christians break off of mainstream Catholicism and Protestantism and form schism churches?


A new trend: Identitarian Religion

Are Christian Leaders Today a Bunch of Girly Men?

Why the Religious should reject Intelligent Design

Primer on Human Biodiversity and Immigration


43 thoughts on “Is Mainstream Christianity Dead Set on the Destruction of Western Peoples?

  1. Is there a single large mainstream Church/religious org that has come out in favor of immigration restriction? If not, then there’s your answer…

  2. Here is a way to include Christianity, but with changes:

    Ethnopluralism as the new/old conservatism

    Burke’s conservative view that “political institutions grow from customs and conventions cultivated through long generations” needs also to include the long biological origin of much of cultural behavior, or the sociobiology perspective, which can go deepest. Then we can more clearly see that some of the promotions of universal abstract conceptions, for example, by the global desiring neoconservatives, are impossible—impossible abstractions would include not only the quixotic extremes of Marxism but libertarianism, more or less, which has been preferred by many American conservatives. The group remains the central unit of selection, individualism follows.

    The power of history (historicism) can and does limit politics and abstractions, as Burke believed, but biology circumscribes politics even more so. People and their genetic traits are the founders of our cultures, culture doesn’t found people. Biology is more a “universal” element than the Platonic abstractions of Leo Strauss.

    Burke would have opposed the Straussian dominance of universal classical “natural rights”over living Christian morals, but the concept of natural rights can adjust to universal sociobiology without losing Anglo-American Christianity, which many say is at the foundation of the West. To understand Christianity in the face of the biological origin of much of cultural behavior, including religion, requires a theological shifting, not abandonment, from emphasis on the abstract and symbolic Inward God of Christ to the Outward Godhood of material and supermaterial evolution, which is the realization of the Inward God of Christ. Religion can join universal evolution and science this way, then both can embrace the world.

    Our evolution toward Godhood requires the Ordered Evolution of conservatism, because improvements are slow, stable conservative societies are needed, nine-tenths of mutations are unfitting. And we should not bypass the evolution of life for the evolution of intelligent machines, which almost seems to be a sly way of avoiding the touchy but vital subject of human evolution.

    This sociobiological political understanding also revives Southern Agrarian ideas of the land and localism, and shifts the bigger Burkean political and cultural institutions toward the side, but not out of sight. What then appears is Ethnopluralism, many states that are virtual ethnostates, which can live within the classical conceptions of human rights and republicanism, on the Left or the Right, protected by a light federalism, even within the U. S. Constitution.

  3. The real question is this: Are the organizations that claim to be Christian churches, really Christian? The definition of “Christian” is a follower of Jesus Christ, and thus a believer in The Bible as being the literal word of God (rather than something that must first be interpreted and understood only by an illumined theological elite). The mainstream so-called “churches” have become little more than social clubs for nice people and platforms for the social agenda of the Left. To say that the problem is “Christianity” or “church” is to miss the point. Reading The Bible and comparing it to what is being promoted by the mainstream will clearly demonstrate that they are NOT Christian at all – they are merely using the name for their own purposes. There are still Christian churches that believe The Bible. You just have to look long and hard to find them.

    • Go back to Church Patriarchs like Origen and Clement and this ‘book fixation’ and insistence on literal readings of the Bible start to look pretty alien. The way back is to Orthodoxy – the Christianity that never went off the rails in the first place.

      • It depends entirely on what you’re looking for. If your objective is a way to justify your political theories, then “Orthodoxy” is a fine way to accomplish that. Any time you put the clergy between God and the people, you end up with a system where the people are controlled by a central authority, and that central authority is NOT God.

        If your objective is to truly learn of God’s will for His people, then what you call “book fixation” and “insistence on literal readings of The Bible” is the way to achieve that objective. That “book fixation” is my choice because understanding God’s will for my life, and what He did through the shed blood of Jesus, is my prime objective – everything else is secondary to that.

        Religion – including “Orthodoxy” – is just another tool for men to control other men. God has given us His word – His literal word – in written form in the King James Version of The Holy Bible (“Why the KJV” is a full course in the history of The Bible, and far beyond the scope of blog posts or comments. Suffice it to say here that I have taken that course and made my decision based on careful study). The moment that you begin to “interpret” rather than accepting it as literally “What God Said” is the moment that you cross that line.

        “Interpreting” The Bible rather than accepting it as the literal word of God is how liberalism has taken over the churches. Whether a group calling itself a church ends up as a leftist “social justice” group or as an “Orthodox” control group is just a matter of which group of men gain the upper hand. If you truly want God to be in control, then you MUST accept His word as presented, and not twist it around and rewrite it as a “new and improved” version.

      • @Stephen

        The endgame of your philosophy is a bunch of atomized individuals wandering the landscape with KJV Bibles under their arms, cut off from all inter-generational continuity. Protestantized, individualist Christianity is killing the West.

        Do you even know the history of the Bible–who, how, whem it was decided which writings qualified for the Biblical canon? Do you know how long it took and what the process was to hammer out Trinitarian doctrine and make sure it was consistent?

      • Mr. McGehee, if you accept the Bible as the literal word of God (as presented as you say) then the Eucharist is the flesh of Jesus Christ.

      • The Anti-Gnostic, “Do you even know the history of the Bible–who, how, whem it was decided which writings qualified for the Biblical canon? Do you know how long it took and what the process was to hammer out Trinitarian doctrine and make sure it was consistent?”

        1) Yes, as a matter of fact, I DO know the history of The Bible, having studied under James W. Knox – a leading authority on the history of The Bible and author of the three volume series, “The History of The Holy Bible in The United States”, as well as numerous other books.

        2) The issue is not my “philosophy”. The issue is whether one believes that The Bible is, indeed, God’s word to man. There are really only two choices – it is what it claims to be, or it is just a collection of ancient writings subject to whatever one wants to make of it. If you take the approach that it is subject to interpretation and that there are errors in it, then the question of what is true and what is not is entirely a matter of an individual’s private interpretation. Once you cross that line, there is no logical end to how far you go with it.

      • Bruce, “Mr. McGehee, if you accept the Bible as the literal word of God (as presented as you say) then the Eucharist is the flesh of Jesus Christ.”

        Accepting The Bible as the literal word of God does not mean that it can be parsed and divided into individual verses to be taken out of context. While every word of The Bible is truly the literal word of God, those individual words are only parts of the whole.

        Regarding your example of the Eucharist – the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation is a classic example. When Jesus said “Take, eat; this is my body. 27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28 For this is my blood of the new testament” (Matthew 26:26), he was there in human form. He was clearly not instructing them to eat His literal flesh and drink His literal blood. The whole New Testament is change over from dealing with man on an earthly plane to a spiritual plane, and topics like that have to be taken in that context. “The blood” is used throughout The Bible to speak of the sacrifice of complete innocence to pay for the sins of man. While literal blood was shed by Jesus, it is not the plasma and platelets and red cells and white cells that is being spoken of – it is the salvation offered by that sacrifice of blood.

        Can I provide a concise and convincing argument that will cause someone to say, “Ah ha – now I understand”? No. I certainly would not have been convinced of the literal truth of The Bible that way. It took a lot of study to take in The Bible as a whole so that different parts of The Bible are understood within the context of the whole. Please believe me when I say, “I understand the doubt.” People search for quick answers, and coming to the realization that The Bible is literally true – IN CONTEXT – is something that develops over time. At least that’s the way it was with me. I cannot speak for others.

      • Mr. McGehee, I guess my point was that Reformed Protestants, Fundamentalist Protestants, etc. also interpret the Bible.
        While it’s beside the point, I want to point out that the Orthodox (eastern and oriental), Lutherans and many (most?)Anglicans understand the Eucharist as the body and blood of Christ. Not just Roman Catholics.

      • This rant is also beside the point.
        It’s so common for reformed Protestants to name the errors they perceive in the Catholic Church’s theology while ignoring what are basically the same beliefs as they exist in other Churches (e.g. Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican). When’s the last time you heard a reformed Protestant criticize the Lutheran belief in the Eucharist as the body and blood of Christ? Almost never. They always name the RCC in describing this “error.” Transubstantiation, consubtantiation, Real Presence, or the Orthodox mystery of Jesus’ body and blood. Somehow only the Roman belief gets named in their criticisms.
        I think this shows the basic nature of Reformed Protestantism, that it’s a reaction to Catholicism. That, whether it realizes it or not, it defines itself by what it isn’t.

      • Oh, my: whatever in the world did all those poor, pre-KJV soi-dissant Christians DO (nevermind the millions more between the KJV and these clearly Earth-shattering ‘courses’ -oooh~ – you trumpet from the illustrious James Knox)?

        Why, without an authorized version of the Bible jolly old King J, they’d have been lost, wandering … tragic …

        Except that my Jesus (I really have no idea any longer who you’re talking about when you refer to a saviour) imparted to us the Holy Spirit, and our understanding, and the understanding of any Christian – or indeed, LACK of understanding – has always been in the hands of the Holy Spirit, who has a perfect plan for us. Each of us.

        My God has a plan for each man, and the plan He had for the men who wrote the Bible did not include taking over their bodies and forcing them to transcribe what they wrote. Reducing men to mindless automatons is what pagan demons did to their followers. Not my God. Not my Jesus.

        Oooh~ but let’s all pause a moment as we admire Stephen Clay McGehee! He’s armed with his book and his course (from a school where they do book-learnin’ and such!) so what does he need the Holy Spirit for? Who needs a plan from God imparted through the Holy Spirit when you’ve got everything you need? Noooo, you’re SET!

        I guess I’ll just have to ‘settle’ for my God, and accept that even a book with historical inconsistencies is a tool in the hands of a perfect God who knows His creation better than any Baptist (read: heretical) preacher ever will. A God who planted (purposely) what Origen might have called ‘interpretive obstacles’ in Scripture so that we would have to press more deeply for the spiritual meaning – beyond the literal; that we pursue this not as a scholarly undertaking (dear … I hope you didn’t shell out too much on that Knox course…) but as something that involves the spiritual transformation of the reader.

        “In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin” (Proverbs 10:19)

    • Amen to that. West is in decline because it abandoned God, then became immoral and degenerate and we got the leaders we deserve. We vote for the ones that will give us more free stuff.

  4. Pingback: Is Mainstream Christianity Dead Set on the Destruction of Western Peoples? | Reaction Times

  5. Pingback: What are the opportunities and pitfalls for the Catholic Church as its parishoners move toward panpherohoplocracy? | vulture of critique

  6. Not schism churches; that’s where it all started to go wrong in the first place.

    Schisms distract us into infighting, it’s easier to fight with your neighbour than to acknowledge that Sauron is extant in the world, and has been marshalling his forces for 1400 years with the explicit goal of destroying all of us. Fighting with your neighbour is comforting – fighting Sauron is existentially terrifying.

  7. Here we have an exponent of everything that is “wrong” with modern “Christianity”, this Stephen Clay McGehee, obviously a pencil-necked, arrogant ass credentializing himself as having learned the Bible from a Baptist “minister”, a minister representing the same religious group that argues that baptism is “an outward sign if an inward grace” when the Bible he claims to have mastered under the tutelage of this Knox fellow clearly states that baptism is “for the remission of sins.”

    Stephen, you are indeed an ass, so is your tutor, and your “religion” is populated by asses who can’t even get one of the basic premises of Christianity correct even though it’s spelled right out in plain language in the Bible you and your fool of a “teacher” profess to understand so well.

    A mere three hundred years ago, be ye a Catholic or a Protestant and at the same time not a part of some heretical hierarchy, the idea that Christianity was a religious belief system for any other peoples than white Europeans and their descendants would have been met with stunned incredulity amongst its adherents. Mainstream Christianity has been highjacked by these idiotic universalists for so long that there is no true Christianity left in it, just this hybridized empty and destructive husk that claims to be what in truth it destroyed. Out of the destroyed ashes of truth the destroyers created a false god and a bevy of false religions to go along with their new version of “god”, and to a one deserve the worst of what the Inquisition dealt out to the Spanish conversos and marranos. As late as 1921 even the historically learned Catholic Hillaire Belloc plainly stated in almost a plea for a sliver of sanity in a world gone totally mad in every way; “The Church is Europe and Europe is the Church.” Those days are long, long gone. As far off the road as Catholicism had and has gone, at least Belloc knew where the only home where Christianity should be – that being only amongst Europeans and their kin abroad.

    Adam was not the first man and he was a “white guy”, period. He was the “Day Eight” guy and came a long time after the “Day Six” creation of “man.” “Look it up in Strongs Concordance, bible boy. Adam: he who blushes, of ruddy complexion. Look up the word “man” and you will find several different definitions with “Adam” being but one of them. Hell, look up the word “earth” while you drown western civilization with your destructive “great commission” to spread our faith around the earth to those it was not sent to. In Hebrew, the word is “erets” (Strongs O.T. #776). While it is many times translated to “earth”, 140 times it is translated to “country”, 1,476 times as “land” and 96 times as “ground” in the Old Testament alone. There wasn’t a soul alive in the Middle East region in those times who conceived the “earth” as a round sphere, nor the “world”, yet round and round you fools go, making the tale fit your narrative instead of your belief follow the narrative of God.

    As an example of how wrong so-called “Christian” religions can be through misinterpretation, lets examine the following from Genesis 4:14. It reads that Cain was driven “from the face of the earth (erets)”, but we know from further reading that Cain was simply driven from the limited land area where Adam and even remained. Period. We also know that Cain took wives from other peoples, those who God put a “mark” on Cain to prevent him being killed by the “six day” peoples And God Forbid, that would actually make the biblical tale correspond to anthropological evidence. Humans have been here a long time – see Day Six. Never-the-less, Cain was not driven from the face of the earth and sent to space by God, but, rather, he was told to get the hell out of Dodge and stay away from Adam and his descendants.

    If you cannot read the Word in the context of the times you cannot understand it. If you chose to believe fairy tales and the “leaven of the Pharisees”, you cannot understand it.

    The Word states that Jesus came “only for the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel”, and he sent His apostles to “feed my sheep.” They went to the white people, the “sheep” in Europe, Knox-headed “bible boy.” The House of Israel? Kings and Chronicles, Sonny. And if you and tutor Knox read the Prophets you should have been able to figure out that the Savior would come to redeem (buy back) them because His Father said so, therefore you can take that “Spiritual Israel” crap modern Churchianity believes and toss it in the trashcan where it belongs, otherwise you are calling both God the Father and His Son Jesus a pair of liars. Look up Dariel Pass to see where those Israelites went after the Assyrian Captivity, up and over and then into Europe. Follow the archaeological trail and the names of places in Europe that reflect the Israelite roots of those peoples, God’s peoples. Christianity is the faith of white peoples excluding the forever damned Edomite Jews, meant for no other peoples but them.

    So why is “Mainstream Christianity” dead set on the destruction of Western Civilization?
    Because it is no longer “Western” and it is no longer “Christian.” The “Evil Ones” infiltrated its chambers, seducing and beguiling its “leaders” and and from there emerged lying, deceitful whores now begotten to a different power, a “husband” different than our God. Again, they have whored after Baal.

    That’s why so many cannot even get something so simple as baptism right.

    • My apologies to all – I mistakenly thought that Occams Razor was above the “pencil-necked, arrogant ass” name-calling level. Apparently not. Time for me to move on to somewhere with a bit more class.

      • AlfredWClark – My apologies, sir. You are correct. Occams Razor is not the problem here, and I should have let some time go by before replying to “John” rather than Occams Razor. I was wrong. By the way, let me say that I appreciate the fact that you use your full name rather than hiding behind a pseudonym or partial name. The opinions of those who are not willing to “sign their name” to what they write carry very little weight.

  8. Just because the Vatican II generation of priests have gone off the rails, doesn’t mean Catholicism isn’t the Truth. Their teachings on immigration are not matters of faith and morals. Most real Catholics oppose illegal immigration. And Catholicism, unlike almost every other Church including the Orthodox, is not teaching white people to contracept themselves out of existence.

    • ‘Not teaching white people to contracept themselves out of existence.’ Nor is it teaching brown people to contracept themselves out of existence. The problem is that brown Catholics listen to the church and White Catholics don’t. Net effect- more browns. Encouraging Africans not to use condoms wont have a positive effect on the crime rate long term. Condoms cause aids myth.

    • Teaching that contraception isn’t a mortal sin isn’t the same thing as teaching white people to contracept themselves out of existence. The Mormons allow contraception but still have more children than Catholics. And the Duggars. I’m not Roman Catholic but I have seven children.

  9. Cultural Marxism is the ultimate expression of mankind and the most successful religion in human history. It is the cult of Baal from the Old Testament and then some! No Charles Martel will ride to the rescue this time, however.

    From the Frankfurt theorists in the 1930’s, CM has swept Western Civilization and theocracy has been re-established in the West with a fervency unseen since before the Renaissance. Aside from Poland, Russia, and a few others, all Western states are CM theocracies. Virtually all prestigious media, religious, educational and nonprofit foundations have been converted into CM seminaries.

    The idea that mainline Christianity can be some kind of redoubt against CM is preposterous. Christianity is particularly prone to CM because CM outflanks Christians in their appeal to the poor and disadvantaged. Christianity was the CM of the pagan Roman Empire, so it isn’t built to withstand this assault. Further, CM was specifically designed as a thought virus to destroy Christianity (such as destroying father/son relations and fostering female promiscuity). It is not that Christianity is “maladaptive” per se; it is that it is not robust enough to withstand CM. Our civilization was built on sand.

    It was too easy for the Anglican church to be destroyed with only a few atheist / socialist appointees in the 60’s.

    There will be a few brave souls who oppose CM hegemony, but they can expect lots of tax trouble and gov’t persecution until they all fold to establishment theocracy.

    There is some hope in Israel and Russia. Perhaps they present hope for the West, but mainline Protestantism does not appear to be able to ride to the rescue as it has done so gallantly for hundreds of years.

  10. Orthodoxy would be a good candidate for an identitarian Christianity, seeing as how the various national Orthodox churches operate as a family of churches, held together only by a bond of mutual charity and common life in Christ. A Russian Orthodox Christian is thoroughly Russian, as a Greek Orthodox Christian is entirely Greek, and a Lebanese Orthodox Christian is entirely Arab. Thus it avoids both Roman universal jurisdiction and Protestant anarchy.

    The West was Orthodox for a thousand years, from Ireneus of Lyons to Olaf of Norway, before the papacy puffed up to outlandish proportions like a Namibian rain frog, before the Reformation punctured that swollen frog and it exploded into a thousand incompatible pieces.

    We can get back there. We don’t have to go back the tired old beaten demons of Thor and Odin.

    • The West was Orthodox for a thousand years, from Ireneus of Lyons to Olaf of Norway, before the papacy puffed up to outlandish proportions like a Namibian rain frog, before the Reformation punctured that swollen frog and it exploded into a thousand incompatible pieces

      Good metaphor. The arrogance of Italian popes in failing to consider that maybe Germanics, Angles, Nordics, Franks, etc., needed a Church with their own cultural expression. That’s how traditional Orthodox ecclesiology is supposed to be applied: every Nation gets its own Church. The Local Church becomes autocephalous when she is mature and wedded to her people, and takes her place in the Church Universal. This is diversity, folks.

      Universalist Catholics and Protestants will kill Western Civilization, and Lord knows we have plenty of hippy-dippy, spiritual tourists in Orthodoxy as well. (The whole West is sick.) I urge everybody to google James W. Knox and his THE BIBLE Baptist Church to see the appalling, stupefying result.

  11. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2014/04/30 | Free Northerner

  12. Paganism would have been less destructive for White people than Christianity. There is something about its primal energy in contrast to the overly intellectual Christianity that makes it harder to hijack and exploit for universalist/anti-white ends. I also think it has a more ‘natural’ fit, esp for northern Euros. Something effeminate about Christianity.

    • The Founder of Christianity took the worst the Jews [the Church] and the Romans [the State] could dish out to Him, and He bounced right back after three days, and got right back on program without blinking an eye.

      Nothing effeminate about that.

      Ask the Pechenegs how effeminate the Cossacks were,

  13. I’m glad to be a Baptist. With all Baptist churches more or less independent, schism doesn’t enter into the equation. Apostasy can, but not schism.

  14. Pingback: The Sunday Shorts: May 4, 2014 | Struggling with Modernity

  15. “When each distinct people honors their own ancestors, it leads to the empowering of that specific ethnic group in a manner that solidifies their community both spiritually and temporally. Each and every ethnic group should be encouraged to honor and derive inspiration from the divinities of their own folk traditions. This is a crucial spiritual linkage with the past that the Abrahamic onslaught always sought to destroy at the roots. Now each people is, thankfully, reclaiming their own spiritual folk-roots again. Honor your ancestors, and you will deepen you knowledge of yourself”

    “Freedom is one of the most important natural qualities of the human spirit. Without freedom, we cease to be human. And without the right to both personal and national self-rule, human beings are not free. Dharma teaches that all historically defined peoples, linguistic groups, nations, tribes and races have the inherent human right to sovereign self-governance, and to enjoy the benefits of having their own autonomous and independent, culturally homogeneous states if they so choose.”

    Robert Stark interviews Sri Dharma Pravartaka Acharya on The Dharma Manifesto

  16. The Biblical truth is clear enough for those able to read. Put the ‘literalisms’ about evolution, creation, and which Pharaoh exiled the Jews to rest. They are irrelevant to man’s present situation. Was their a literal tree in the Garden of Eden or was this a very effective metaphor? Who cares?
    This is not the ‘active’ part of the Bible. The ‘active’ part is the Moral Law and the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Everything else is too often sophistry.

    Someone mentioned Orthodoxy here, and another commented that they rejected the authority system of the Orthodox in favor of a much more individualistic Bible understanding. I’m not sure why these things cannot be reconciled. The Orthodox patriarchy is nothing like the Vatican. Nobody in Russia sees Patriarch Kirill as ‘infallible’ or someone with a direct link to God. He is a titular head, in charge of managing the congregation’s foreign affairs and the keeping of Christian scholarship and priesthood. If Kirill declared that same-sex marriage was righteous, he would be deposed the next day. If the Pope declared it, one gets the sense that too many would breathe a sigh of relief and say “thank God that controversy is over”. This was not always the case in the Catholic Church, and many neo-reactionary Catholics wish to overhaul the system to rectify it. I commend them.

    However, I stand by an admiration for Orthodoxy, not as concerned with historical arguments, more concerned with salvation and obeying the Moral Law. This is not to say Protestantism has something to be desired, that all people be able to read the word of God for themselves rather than simply hear it from a priest. A Biblically literate Orthodoxy would be a near perfect religious model for a successful society and Christianity. Often from the more racially focused end does the longing for the ‘old Pagan gods of Europe; come. No regard as to whether these entities exist or now, just a hunger for the culture that existed when Europe was ‘racially pure’.

    But religion is not about preferences. Its not a flavor of ice cream. Its about the search for absolute truth, the truths that really matter and cannot be answered by the study of the natural world, however advanced, for these answers lie beyond the natural world. Christianity has the greatest case to make which is why is went from nothing to everything in a meteoric rise without the tactics Islam used. It cuts to the raw elements of humanity. God does not ‘toy’ with you. You are not here for his amusement. He is not limited by other gods. He is never surprised. He is never vulnerable. He has designed this world for you to exist in a very short amount of time and in that time to make a free libertarian decision about the one element of you that is immortal, your soul.
    This decision has only two choices.
    – Judgement
    – Mercy
    Should you fall upon mercy in Jesus Christ, you are saved through God’s love. If you fall upon His judgement you shall be measured to the only moral standard that means anything. His nature. If you fail to meet that standard by one moral iota, you will condemn yourself to eternity without God’s presence.

    The Bible is a long book, but this concept is remarkably simple in comparison to other religions, especially those based in good works. We dod not do good works because we want to be with Him. We do good works because He is already within us.

    If you understand this principle, you will spot fakes and fraudulent mimics of Christianity. You shall know them by their fruits.

  17. “Is Mainstream Christianity Dead Set on the Destruction of Western Peoples?”
    Christianity is essentially pacifist and maladaptive in this world of survival of the fittest.

  18. Pingback: Christianity becoming more left-wing | Occam's Razor

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s