Vox Day offers excellent advice in It won’t be fun, but you must endure:
What isn’t fun is living in a 4GW world which is an obvious reality in the United States of America today. I believe things will get much worse before they get better too, and it will be awful to watch and dangerous as well. One of the best ways to help those around you outside of knowing some basic self-defense is keeping a level head as society frays apart around you. Most of your friends and family will be in a state of near panic as events like these continue on the news cycle, not because they are cop-lovers, or love the government, but because they subconsciously know that civil order is under attack.
If you find yourself becoming extremely angry and wanting to lash out at everyone around you, or find some specific group or person who is suddenly the ultimate evil in at the moment, step back for a bit. Remember that we are living in dark times and there are plenty of evil people around. Cherish the good around you, especially your family and friends. Endeavor to protect them and plan for difficult times, but do not lose hope, wish for violence for the sake of violence, or lose your cool because of the news. Be the rock that people can depend upon in hard times. Be the foundation of a future society which can be better than the one we are currently living in.
Separately, Michael Yon* explains at Breitbart how what Vox describes as 4GW unleashes more than just violence motivated by defined causes:
Amid the chaos of unstructured conflict and war, the always-there lunatic fringe is uncorked. Suddenly the actions of a serial killer look like the work of an insurgent or group. Criminality skyrockets, and what would earlier have been seen as just a bank robbery looks like part of a movement.
…
Wars allow criminals and the insane to fulfill their full their vast potential.
Some people just like to fight. Fighting is their cause, and they will latch onto any cause if it helps them get ammo. Young men with guns, no rules, and a sense of divine authority, are the most dangerous animals on earth.
Yon is referencing what he observed in Iraq, and pointing out the risks we could face in the US. We would be arrogant to ignore this risk, but I also think we have a distinct advantage over Iraq, Syria, etc. The Christian concepts of loving our neighbor, respecting authority, and sexual morality/the family are fundamentally different than the Muslim worldview. Even deeply flawed attempts to live out these values produce a far more successful and peaceful society than what we see in the Middle East.
As effective as the left has been at assaulting Christianity, and as effective as Christians (and everyone else) have been at assaulting the family and fatherhood, we still have a core knowledge of these things as a society. It has taken great effort by Christians and others to make respectability disrespected. To a degree, we can start repairing this damage by simply removing the effort currently applied to destabilize families. While it would be ideal to repudiate the anti father messages taught in the last three** Kendrick brothers movies, we could start moving back towards a Christian family structure simply by not making further anti father “Christian” movies (or making them successful). The same goes for the yearly ritual of denouncing fathers from the pulpit on Father’s Day. It would be ideal to repudiate this, but simply by stopping the effort to tear down fathers we would start to move in the right direction.
It would be profoundly foolish to hope or pray for civil breakdown, as this will inevitably unleash all forms of evil as Yon describes. However, more difficult times are likely to lessen our appetite for familial destruction. We do not need difficult times to reduce our zeal for destroying families, but fortunately for us difficult times should tend to reduce the effectiveness of the forces diligently working to destroy our society.
One thing you will find about life is that the events in your own life will far overshadow the impact of global events. Be generally prepared for difficult times (have some food, water, savings, means of personal/family defense, diversify financially, etc) and vote according to your beliefs; but don’t put your life on hold or worse give up on it because of a bad global prognosis. Keep your head as Vox advises, and focus on being a good husband/father/wife/mother/brother/sister/son/daughter to your family, and a good friend and neighbor to everyone else. Doing this out of love and obedience to God will make a difference at the micro level, and as others follow your lead it will make a profound difference at the macro level as well. May God bless you and your household.
*I’ve written previously about Michael Yon in Chivalry only comes from a position of strength.
**Four if you include Mom’s Night Out.
Pingback: Good advice for interesting times. | Alt-Right View
Endure we must.
And avoid large groups of angry people. The old saying is true people loose their minds in groups, but only gain their minds back individually.
“The Christian concepts of loving our neighbor, respecting authority, and sexual morality/the family are fundamentally different than the Muslim worldview. ”
Please explain
Very wise advice Mr. D. The world is better for your being here.
I tend to remind myself that people like me (like us) are not actually a tiny minority. The decent and polite people don’t make waves, but we are the great majority. Most of the people you meet on the street are good people at heart. Don’t allow the looneys and the nutters to shake your faith in that. It’s true, even if you don’t see it.
Peace!
The moral majority are unfortunately disenfranchised, holding almost no positions of power to turn the tide in (((finance, the media, and politics))).
Leading by example is a great foundation to build on. What next, though? Passive aggression has its limits.
Pingback: Those Sounds You Hear… | Donal Graeme
@ ace says:
July 8, 2016 at 7:28 pm
“Please explain”
Judeo-Christian ethics are universal. For example, “love your neighbor as yourself” applies to your neighbor regardless of race, sex, creed, etc. This is why Western civilization developed concepts like the rule of law and equality before the law, and no other civilization did. It’s also why, as Western civilization abandons its Judeo-Christian roots, we’re losing the rule of law and equality before the law.
Islamic ethics are not universal. Islam contains separate sets of ethics apply differently to Muslim men, Muslim women, dhimi men, dhimi women, pagans, atheists, apostates, etc.
*Islam contains separate sets of ethics THAT apply differently to Muslim men, Muslim women, dhimi men, dhimi women, pagans, atheists, apostates, etc.*
Pingback: Good advice for interesting times. | Reaction Times
Judeo-Christian ethics are universal
There is no such thing as “Judeo-Christian.”
Vox is a racist. He is very sympathetic to the concept of racial nationalism; which as a meritocratist and a Christian, I cannot reconcile with my philosophy and faith. He claims to be a Christian, but his behavior shows his heart is wicked. This is what he had to say about a black woman who criticized him:
https://voxday.blogspot.com/2013/06/a-black-female-fantasist.html
“Jemisin has it wrong; it is not that I, and others, do not view her as human, (although genetic science presently suggests that we are not equally homo sapiens sapiens), it is that we simply do not view her as being fully civilized for the obvious historical reason that she is not.”
Now then… is this what you believe as a Christian? God made some men fully human, and some only partially? I hope that as fellow Christians you would not support this mans heretical madness and wickedness.
Remember Gods words. Remember Gods love.
Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
1 John 2:11
But the one who hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
Vox is blind. If you follow him, you follow him off the cliff to hell.
>>The Christian concepts of loving our neighbor, respecting authority, and sexual morality/the family are fundamentally different than the Muslim worldview. Even deeply flawed attempts to live out these values produce a far more successful and peaceful society than what we see in the Middle East.
While a fine example of exemplary writing I believe it is not entirely correct. Islams world view of sexual morality and the family are very similar to Christianity. Where Islam differs is the issue of individual responsibility and predestination. To a Muslim, anything that happens happens “In’shaAllah” (by God’s will). This preoccupies the Muslim in his daily routine from how he takes a crap to idle thoughts of a dead child. EVERYTHING depends on Allah to the point Muslim troops have to be trained to actually aim their weapons. Muslims tend to “spray and pray” because, you guessed it, whether a bullet hits an infidel depends on Allah’s will so he doesn’t have to aim.
So Islam fails in countries because it promotes a passive, wait for it attitude and combines it with open admiration for a dictatorship (the most powerful leader is he who has been selected by Allah and is therefore owed the full devotion of the Muslim). Combine this with no individual liberties secured and a LOT of freedom being denied peremptorily and you get the Hellhole that is the Middle East and North Africa. Churchill said it best about Muslims.
>>>>To a degree, we can start repairing this damage by simply removing the effort currently applied to destabilize families.
I posted a recent thread in The Red Pill trying to get a consensus on the problem with marriage. In short, what would we have to do to get to a point where marriage could become a viable option for men again? There was no agreement.
My idea was using the marriage strike to force social change. That is, if we identify our collective demands as men and link it to a pledge to avoid women and marriage this could, collectively, cause inconvenience to women. This is the source of ALL social change.
In short, I think the efforts to destabilize marriage and family are so broad reaching that saying “remove the effort has little meaning.” Remove what? Movies, TV show, magazines, books, social media, our schools, our jobs, DAMMIT! It is everywhere. It is almost like a false reality or something. Like we should all take some pill or something and wake up to the real world.
Only bleeping out the whole damn Matrix will “remove the effort to destabilize the family.” Can you be more specific? What CAN we do? What SHOULD we do? How do we force social change?
BPP said, “While a fine example of exemplary writing I believe it is not entirely correct. Islams world view of sexual morality and the family are very similar to Christianity.”
Islam is a religion that condones honor killings, pedophilia, the rape and sexual slavery of Christians, Jews and Pagans as a mainstream practice. This Moral Equivalency fallacy makes a fool of you.
PA: There is no such thing as “Judeo-Christian.”
This is true. One of the core definitions of Judaism is rejection of Jesus. Many rabbis say that if a Jew accepts Jesus, he ceases to be a Jew. A Jew can be an atheist, yet remain a Jew. But a Jew cannot believe in Jesus and remain a Jew.
The term “Judeo-Christian” is an early example of political correctness (i.e., a term coined to promote an ideology, at the expense of accuracy). It has no theological accuracy, since Judaism and Christianity are at odds on key theological and ethical points.
From Wikipedia:
Promoting the concept of United States as a Judeo-Christian nation first became a political program in the 1940s, in response to the growth of anti-Semitism in America. The rise of Nazi anti-semitism in the 1930s led concerned Protestants, Catholics, and Jews to take steps to increase understanding and tolerance.[6]
In this effort, precursors of the National Conference of Christians and Jews created teams consisting of a priest, a rabbi, and a minister, to run programs across the country, and fashion a more pluralistic America, no longer defined as a Christian land, but “one nurtured by three ennobling traditions: Protestantism, Catholicism and Judaism….The phrase ‘Judeo-Christian’ entered the contemporary lexicon as the standard liberal term for the idea that Western values rest on a religious consensus that included Jews.”
Also:
Reacting against the blurring of theological distinctions, Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits wrote that “Judaism is Judaism because it rejects Christianity, and Christianity is Christianity because it rejects Judaism.” Theologian and author Arthur A. Cohen, in The Myth of the Judeo-Christian Tradition, questioned the theological validity of the Judeo-Christian concept and suggested that it was essentially an invention of American politics, while Jacob Neusner, in Jews and Christians: The Myth of a Common Tradition, writes, “The two faiths stand for different people talking about different things to different people.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judeo-Christian
I am prepared enough for things to go sideways, and the recession, I believe, taught most people how to tighten the belt, get by on less, and stock up on the basics in case the next job didn’t appear quick enough… anyone who was willing to learn, did learn.
…I got some groceries, some peanut butter, to last a couple of days…
The hard part will be seeing so many sufferings that we won’t be able to prevent. When I have bad dreams, it is never a situation where I fear for myself, but instead I’m afraid that I can’t stop the serial killer before they kill again, that I can’t get to a kid in time to protect them from a predatory monster. In real life, we’re honest with the things we can make happen, and the things we can’t. We all can go on living, we all can go on preparing for both the best and worst to happen.
History is good for that in a way, history includes plenty of inevitable bad endings missed by some last minute good fortune. It also includes bad endings that came to pass. We also get a sense of proportion, an understanding of just how soft of a life we’re privileged to lead. We’ve all lost a smaller number of siblings than previous generations did. We haven’t come up against a widespread contagious disease that wiped out large numbers of family and friends. Most of us have never had to take a life in order to preserve our own. The list goes on. But what is important out of all that, is that people have faced such realities, and have persisted and overcome and made something better.
The biggest problem for western civilization in the present is simply an unwillingness to fight in self-defense. But eventually the pacifists, nihilists and all the others will be wiped away, and what is left will hopefully be intact enough to fight back. Hopefully it doesn’t take three centuries of anarchy and wandering in the wilderness before a Martel the Hammer makes a showing.
p.s. @bluepillprofessor what will bring men back to marriage is three-fold: First the divorce generation of women need to recognize the consequences of their decisions, stop blaming men, and recognize that it was them and their choice to believe in a lie that led to those consequences. Second, said elder women need to desire to prevent the current generation of women from making the same mistake, and advise them against it by providing themselves as a cautionary tale. Third, women on a whole need to be committed to marriage as something greater than themselves something that makes them greater than just themselves. When women give marriage true reverence, most will be able to find men to marry them.
I know pigs will fly first, but that’s what it would take to reverse the tide.
Women on average give marriage contempt, and because of that, no man wishes to be a part of it. Who seeks out to be part of something contemptible?
Rabbis and theologians are the last people to decide what Judaism is.
When talking about Judaism they are in fact talking about Jewish culture, not about Torah the Oral and Written Law.
Timely, profound and sensitive, Dalrock. Two things jump out at me from this post:
1.”The Christian concepts of loving our neighbor, respecting authority, and sexual morality/the family are fundamentally different than the Muslim worldview. Even deeply flawed attempts to live out these values produce a far more successful and peaceful society than what we see in the Middle East”.
Muslims like to say that their god and the God of the Bible are the same. They are not. While this claim is debated by scholars,
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/islam.htm
the evidence is that the fruit doesn’t fall far from the tree.
Consider Saudi Arabia: in a century of political stability, undreamed of wealth, and granted national security, it has produced nothing of note. Nothing. Can anyone name a cancer cure from Riyadh University? Perhaps a vaccine against a horrible childhood disease? a drug to fight malaria or tuberculosis? The fact is, nothing has come out, because the intrinsic value of human life is a Christian concept, given to us by Jesus who told us to love our neighbour as ourselves.
Jesus’ teachings have produced the world’s most successful revolution, taking a race-based religion, turning it on its’ head and making faith the central tenet of salvation. This revolution laid the groundwork for the most sophisticated, technologically advanced and humane civilisation ever seen.
2. “As effective as the left has been at assaulting Christianity, and as effective as Christians (and everyone else) have been at assaulting the family and fatherhood, we still have a core knowledge of these things as a society”.
Anthropologists tell us that fatherhood, that social construct that is the weakest link of the family, is the most necessary (the other links – mother-child, for example are biological and therefore stronger), a fact proven over and over by decades of social research. Yet it is atheists, of the Cultural Marxist Left, following the philosophy of Antonio Gramsci and his student Rudi Dutschke:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_institutions
who have incessantly and savagely attacked every institution to make Marxist revolution possible. Christian leaders, themselves influenced by this thinking, have yet to repudiate it, so are thus dangerous heretics until they do in fact, do some serious repentance and repudiation.
The important aspect of Societal Systems is that almost no one actually notices them. They’re built into Cultural Assumptions. This is the pathway that Progressives used to ruin Western Culture, as chipping away at the assumptions, one by one, allowed the entire system to be shifted & changed without anyone noticing what is really going on.
But this is also why you should be prepared for the bad times ahead, yet also not fall into despair. Much of these issues can be fixed fairly quickly, and a lot less bloody than people think. Lord willing, it won’t be too bad.
It’s very true that the decisions you make in your own life today, tomorrow, next week and next month are much more impactful on your own life than events like these, politics and so on. There are times in life when that is not the case (if, for example, you find yourself in divorce proceedings), but outside of certain contexts like that, your own life decisions are paramount, and should always receive the bulk of your attention and focus.
@ bluepillprofessor says:
July 8, 2016 at 11:33 pm
“Islams world view of sexual morality and the family are very similar to Christianity.”
That’s inaccurate. While both worldviews set up husbands and fathers in leadership roles over the family, those roles look very different.
For example, Islam does not instruct husbands to “love your wives as Christ loves the church”, or anything similar. Nor does Islam instruct husbands to “dwell with your wives with understanding”, or to give “honor unto the wife as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers be not hindered”. In fact, just the opposite. Islam instructs husbands to beat their wives, and Mohammed provided the ultimate example of such behavior. Furthermore, Islam allows husbands to divorce their wives by simply saying “I divorce you” three times.
Islam does not instruct fathers to “provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord”.
As for sexual morality; Islam instructs Muslim men to take as many sex slaves as conquest will allow, and again, Mohammed provided the ultimate example of that. Furthermore, Mohammed provided examples of all kinds of sexual deviancy, from rape, to pedophilia, to necrophilia.
As Ravi Zacharias says, all religions are basically the same. They only differ on the nature of God, the nature of man, salvation and morality.
Of course there are Judeo-Christian values, and hence the coining of “Judeo-Christian.” Judaism stands at the core of God’s moral code in the ten commandants and its rule of law. These same things were carried forward to all the Western world through Christianity, finding its root is Judaism. No one back when the term was coined confused the two very distinct faiths, one believing in Jesus as Messiah and the other utterly rejecting Him. But in the values of home, family, marriage, treating one’s neighbor and enemy, even society’s rule and responsibility, the two faiths found not only common ground, but the same ground. Christianity adopts all OT values that are not Israel specific or specifically abolished by the New Covenant. Out of that little tiny nation springs forth the principles of God on which the moral man, the man seeking values, builds a successful life or blessed life, with or without God. It was to the Jew that God entrusted his oracles, including the New Testament.
They Call Me Tom
Marriage success can never depend on the good will of women ever it will always fail as it is now. In fact marriage has never ever depended on the good will of women. Marriage become viable for men when law and policy make it viable for men. Law and policy shows supreme respect for committed productive family men. No married man should ever fear at anytime having his children removed from him ever. Doesn’t matter what she thinks or has to say marriage is restored. Have faith in the red pill, (bible) the nature of women.
Marriage success can never depend on the good will of women ever it will always fail as it is now. In fact marriage has never ever depended on the good will of women. Marriage become viable for men when law and policy make it viable for men.
Absolutely.
The only way law and policy will ever again make marriage a viable institution for men is with a return to Patriarchy – in ALL of its forms. As in EXTREME Patriarchy. As in “women are effectively the chattel property of their fathers, husbands, or nearest male relative.” There is simply no other way to not only make marriage viable again, but to prevent western civilzation from ever again reaching the point of collapse. Unfettered freedom for women = civilizational chaos.
Fortunately for the future of human civilization, we are guaranteed the collapse of the current system as the events implied in the OP continue to accelerate in frequency and intensity.
Aquinas thought all the laws of the OT that are in the category of natural law apply to gentiles. That is how he deals with the problems. In any case what Ken wrote is true. The OT and it underlying philosophy and values are equal between Jews and Christians. (Saadia Gaon thought most of the laws are known by reason far beyond what Aquinas would have agreed to.) Rambam is a bit different. The laws have reasons that can be known but not known by reason. The have to be revealed in order to be known. [Immediate non intuitive knowledge, that is knowledge that is known not by senses nor by thought.]
There’s a gap though, between being here (feminism) and getting back to there (patriarchy). All the ways that occur rationally don’t seem to be ethical, all seem to involve brute force.
Forgive a little stream of consciousness and abstract thinking, but are we made to feel brute force is problematic soley because it is one of males’ best tools in keeping females in check? Is it like the Philologist and the Devil in Perelandria, that in agreeing to only fight on the enemy terms that we’ll find ourselves only losing ground? That would be a second kind of red pill, to wake up and find that restricting female’s freedom is the most loving thing males can do for them, the only way that males can save females from going over the cliff. Can they not find their own way through instruction? Is there not a way for them to change their minds free of coercion? Or is coercion the only way it can be accomplished? I tend to believe in free will, but perhaps it is a different thing in a man’s hands than it is in a woman’s, is that what you are saying, or am I misunderstanding?
To Tom. I think from here feminism to there patriarchy is defensible by reason.
No doubt getting from here to there is the right thing to do, but what the way is seems to be a little bit more complicated. Still defensible I suppose by the end result, but it would be even better if the methods as well could be argued. Patriarchy is better for men and women, but once you’ve given unchecked freedom, what is the best method for placing checks and showing them that their freedoms are being put in better hands than their own? How is the transition made, instantly and violently, or is there another way to accomplish that end?
4th Generation Warfare is a model for a globalist policing effort, if that is the world were living in its war with the new global government. Barring that government it’s going to be ethnos vs. ethnos.
In other news how hard are times when someone’s prime hobby is deciding who needs a Hugo nomination and how to dominate social media with the likes of Roosh and Milo.
Egoist is egotistical.
If things can be reasoned out that is the way back to patriarchy. People do listen to reason.
The best way to check female freedom with out firing a shot is to apply the responsibility that comes with it.
Women will gladly give their freedom to combat the near hysterical aversion to responsibility. Or the gina tingle of getting her ass kicked by a ZFG muslim immigrant
If people can’t accept this then they’re wasting their time talking about it.
Pingback: In praise of lived courage [Josh 1] | Dark Brightness
Pingback: Entropy and the pumps. | Dalrock
Ken said:
>Christianity adopts all OT values that are not Israel specific or specifically abolished by the New Covenant.
I wish that was true, but in my experience it is not. “Christians” may occasionally, or even regularly, read the OT. But if they find something they do not like, they pull out the trump card of, “oh, that’s OT, it no longer applies”. This makes the person into God, since they are deciding for themself what commands they will accept and which are rejected. Maybe they should read Amos 2:4-5.
The idea that God’s desires for human society have not changed, unless you can find a verse specifically repealing that OT law, does not constrain them.
Our cultural principles dictate the principles of most Christians, not Biblical commands, from either the OT on NT.
For example, what would the average churchian say of the following:
– any man proven to have had sex with another man’s wife must be both forgiven and put to death
– any married woman proven to have agreed to sex with another man must be both forgiven and put to death
– any woman who pays to have her unborn child killed, willingingly goes into the abortionist’s killing chamber, and sits still for the procedure, is obviously guilty of paying for a murder with “malice aforethought”. Passages such as Deut 19:1-14 would show the abortionist who committed the murder must be killed; is there a passage that talks about being party to murder, or paying for someone to murder? Perhaps Lev 20:1-2 applies; that talks about parents who give their children to be killed. And the penalty given in Lev 20:1-2 is death.
– any married woman who is proven to have falsely claimed a man raped her must be forgiven and put to death. (See Deut 19:15-21; as you read, remember that death is the penalty for raping a married woman)
– a husband has the right to cancel any commitment/oath/vow his wife has made. I think this includes her decision to commit to a divorce, since the passage in Numbers 31 has no restrictions beyond his need to cancel her oath/vow when he first hears of it. What would a “Christian” lawyer do if his client’s husband told the lawyer to cancel her petition for divorce?
– a woman who is not a virgin or married is given no protection from rape under God’s law. This is interesting. I did NOT say that raping a promiscuous woman is in any way good; see Matt 7:12. But it is interesting that only virgins and married woman were offered protection by God’s law. Is anyone willing to talk to women about their choice to remove themselves from under God’s protection?
Most “Christians” do not even accept the commands in the NT. I know one man who claims that the entirely of Jesus’ teaching in the gospels that occur before the crucifixion are cancelled, just as the OT, as they were given before the new covenant came into effect.
And how about the commands in Col 3 for wives to “obey your husbands”. Or the command in 1 Cor 7 for both husbands and wives to not deprive each other (sexually) unless both agree, and it is for a time, and it is for the purpose of pray, and they “come together again” after the expiration of the time.
No, “Christians” most certainly do not accept the commands given by God in the OT times. Or in the first century AD either.
No, “Christians” most certainly do not accept the commands given by God in the OT times. Or in the first century AD either.
“Churches” are all over the map on this one. Some of them –particularly fundamentalist evangelicals– spend infinitely more time and focus on the OT than on the NT, mostly cherrypicking sections out of the OT that glorify use of force from positions of authority, with an occasional reluctant nod to the Psalms, Proverbs, an Ecclesiastes. They’re still hopeless vague, though, on how much and which parts of Levitican law apply to Christianity.
Others focus on the NT, but mostly on selected epistles of Paul and obsessively on Revelation. The four Gospels, the books that actually focus on the life and message of the founder of the faith, probably get the shortest shrift of all. This is probably because Jesus was too much of a peacemaker for modern churchian appetites.
Exactly feeriker, and my new Officer made this exact same mention to me over coffee a few days back while I was at the Corps office.
@feeriker:
Actually, ignoring significant parts of the Gospel is about making Jesus far closer to either perfectly straight-laced (fundamentalists) or a hippie (Emergent). It’s pretty easy to forget he pissed off the Authorities so badly they broke nearly every rule they claimed to follow, just to kill him.
That is why I brought up Aquinas. I meant to bring up someone who had a logical rigorous approach to the OT that is applicable to Christians. Some people certainly pick and choose what they like out of the OT and NT. They do not have a consistent approach.
Dalrock
…and sexual morality/the family are fundamentally different than the Muslim worldview.
That’s an odd comment. Islam is pretty big on sexual morality and family. They are also doing a better job resisting feminism than Protestant Christianity. I do agree with the first half of your statement. Even in its current declining state, Western civilization is still superior to whatever is out there in the orient.
RPL,
They are wrong. Jews can be Christians, though you don’t have to be Jewish to be Christian. I am somewhat amazed that anyone who claims to follow the Scriptures could claim otherwise, but Christianity is a continuation of Judaism, with parts fulfilled. It is not an entirely different thing, even though some on many sides want to claim that.
Parts were certainly hidden under the Old Covenant, but The Gospels and Epistles deal with enough to consider. The problem is that many of those who refused to accept their Messiah were the most hostile to Christianity and they have brought significant backlash. We need to stay Biblical accurate in that effort.
That makes “Judeo-Christian” a fine term to use since it is the core value system this country was built on. It was more on the Christian part, but that proceeded out of Judaism, not whole cloth.
It is sad that many people who are cultural Jews have undermined this country so much, but that has been the case of some Jews for their entire existence. Read about how they acted before the Babylonian captivity, for one example. Following other gods did not bother them many leaders (and many people) even though it was a full stench to God and cost them serious consequences.
(And avoid a huge debate on these topics in these threads as that is not the purpose of this blog. Disagree if you wish. I just wanted to comment on the connection.)
@Avraham,
Exactly!
Anyone could claim to be a Jew and an atheist at the same time is definitely not consistent in their beliefs.
The quote someone said that such people “hate the God they don’t believe in” is very accurate. Ultimately they won’t accept His right of ownership of this existence and they will face consequences for that if they do not repent as did Paul.
Dota @ 7:30 pm:
“Islam is pretty big on sexual morality and family.”
No, it isn’t. Harems and warlord culture are what constitute a true matriarchy. It’s isn’t rule by women, that never happens, it’s rule by Alpha thugs claiming all the women they could want and using weaker men for slave labor. Islam is perfect for that.
“They are also doing a better job resisting feminism than Protestant Christianity.”
They are partnered with the feminists. That is why they have so much success these days. Do you think the Elites are desperate to flood the West with Muslim hordes because Muslims are RESISTANT to the Elites’ agenda?
No, it isn’t. Harems and warlord culture are what constitute a true matriarchy. It’s isn’t rule by women, that never happens, it’s rule by Alpha thugs claiming all the women they could want and using weaker men for slave labor. Islam is perfect for that.
Sounds like ancient Israel to me (remember David’s harem that Absalom had his way with?). I guess it’s a middle eastern cultural thing regardless of religion. Speaking of which, how many harems do you observe in the Arab world today? I’ve lived in Dubai for 10 years and I’ve never seen even one. Virtually all the Arabs I’ve known were monogamous. Same as you.
They are partnered with the feminists.
Do yourself a favour and walk into any mosque and ask the people there about their views on feminism. Partnership is a 2 way street. Just because leftists use Muslims (and diversity) as a club to beat whites over the head with does not mean that Muslims have any love for leftists. Some of the largest military aid shipments to Israel were made during the Clinton era and actions speak louder than words. Furthermore, I was talking about Muslims resisting feminism in their countries of origin. Here in the west, Islam is just as susceptible to leftist degeneracy as anyone is.
Reblogged this on MGTOW 2.0.
I’ve attended a lot of churches in 40 years, five continents and more countries than I can remember, and I’ve never attended a Protestant or Evangelical church that emphasized the Old Testament over the New Testament. There may be some out there, but I don’t see it.
If anything, I think that’s one reason why so many kids raised in the church leave after high school. They finally read – or more likely hear about – the rougher parts of the OT and are completely unprepared for them.
@ Dota says:
July 9, 2016 at 9:47 pm
“…’rule by Alpha thugs claiming all the women they could want and using weaker men for slave labor’
Sounds like ancient Israel to me (remember David’s harem that Absalom had his way with?). I guess it’s a middle eastern cultural thing regardless of religion.”
It’s the rule – not the exception – throughout history. You can see it in every culture until some cultural force civilizes it. Some cultures never civilize. Some that civilize regress back to the mean.
“Just because leftists use Muslims (and diversity) as a club to beat whites over the head with does not mean that Muslims have any love for leftists.”
Leftists are useful idiots. Always have been, always will be. If they’d had their way in Stalin’s day, Uncle Joe would’ve lined them up against a wall and shot them all. If they had their way now, some self-appointed Caliph would saw their heads off with a dull, rusty butcher knife.
Some that civilize regress back to the mean.
This seems to be the case with the Arabs. After the fall of Baghdad, the Arabs regressed back to their mean, as you put it. The best of Islam came from the Persians anyway. It was their intellectual energy that drove Islamic medicine, science, and philosophy. Arabs contributed quite a bit as well, but they built it all on the cultural infrastructure of Persia.
Avraham rosenblum: If things can be reasoned out that is the way back to patriarchy. People do listen to reason.
You’re serious? From what I see, many (maybe most?) men don’t listen to reason. And almost no women do.
Today, if you reason that a transgender person is mentally ill, you’ll immediately be dismissed as a hater. Never mind trying reason against no-fault divorce or abortion. And if you tried to reason in favor of full-blown Biblical patriarchy, almost everyone (at here in Los Angeles) will see you as a misogynistic, Neanderthal freak.
I’m sadly aware as I go about my daily business that I am deeply out-of-step with most people around me.
Dale: Most “Christians” do not even accept the commands in the NT. I know one man who claims that the entirely of Jesus’ teaching in the gospels that occur before the crucifixion are cancelled, just as the OT, as they were given before the new covenant came into effect.
I’ve met “Christians” (mostly women) who claim that Jesus is all about love. That’s all you need to do to be a good Christian. And these women interpret “love” as accepting them as they are, i.e. never judging them harshly. To judge them negatively is unloving and anti-Christian. Never mind what the OT or NT says. If you “judge” these women, you aren’t a Christian. (Apparently, it’s okay to judge Republicans, or deadbeat dads, etc.)
“This is probably because Jesus was too much of a peacemaker for modern churchian appetites.”
Actually it is the inverse, it’s the churchian appetite to make peace with anyone and everyone, be docile, confuse what forgiveness is until they cease to believe that one can sin.
Jesus on the other hand fought the Sanhedrin and the Pharisees and the Jews that had made the temple into a marketplace. He prevented needless fighting, but not fighting altogether.
“Some that civilize regress back to the mean.
This seems to be the case with the Arabs. After the fall of Baghdad, the Arabs regressed back to their mean, as you put it. The best of Islam came from the Persians anyway. It was their intellectual energy that drove Islamic medicine, science, and philosophy. Arabs contributed quite a bit as well, but they built it all on the cultural infrastructure of Persia.”
So in the end, what was best in the middle east was the vestigial remnants of the Greek culture brought to them by Alexander?
So in the end, what was best in the middle east was the vestigial remnants of the Greek culture brought to them by Alexander?
The Arabs loved the Greeks and borrowed heavily from them. However, their civilization was distinctly their own. It was a remarkable civilization that tolerated opposing viewpoints and intellectual curiosity. A pity it was so short lived. The Ottomans, the Mughals, and the Safavids never came close to producing anything like it. Islam has been on a downward trajectory since then.
@Avraham rosenblum:
“That is why I brought up Aquinas. I meant to bring up someone who had a logical rigorous approach to the OT that is applicable to Christians. Some people certainly pick and choose what they like out of the OT and NT. They do not have a consistent approach.”
AR,
They should pick and choose from these words of Jesus Christ the Nazarene –
“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. “For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”
That is one quote they never pick and choose.
Dota @ 9:47 pm:
“Sounds like ancient Israel to me (remember David’s harem that Absalom had his way with?).”
Very few of Israel’s kings were decent people. David was not one of them. Deuteronomy 17:17.
“Do yourself a favour and walk into any mosque and ask the people there about their views on feminism.”
Why? Your people have divine permission to tell me any lie they wish. Already I question your claim that Dubai, of all places in the Mideast, is a hotbed of monogamy. Don’t tell me your people are more sexually virtuous than Christians while your young men rape their way across Europe.
“Partnership is a 2 way street.”
Elites hate Christians. Muslims hate Christians. Both gain through cooperation against us. Both prefer the rule of kings to the rule of law.
Most things that Muslims claim to have invented were borrowed or invented by people under their rule. For example Algebra was well known to Diophantus and Euclid. Spain was a completely Christian country before it was conquered by Muslims so the more open minded period of Spain was of open minded Europeans under Muslim rule. Still to give credit where credit is due there were remarkable people like Ibn Rushd and Al Kindi. .
“Do yourself a favour and walk into any mosque and ask the people there about their views on feminism.”
Why? Your people have divine permission to tell me any lie they wish.
I’m aware of no such injunction, but as I said earlier, actions speak louder than words. How many blue haired Muslim women have you seen? That’s what I thought.
Already I question your claim that Dubai, of all places in the Mideast, is a hotbed of monogamy.
Doubt away. Polygamy is idiotic, but it’s not as prevalent as you think. Since reliable statistics are as rare as fresh water in those parts, feel free to fly there and check it out yourself. Not that you are going to anyway, you don’t strike me as particularly open-minded, let alone intellectually curious.
Don’t tell me your people are more sexually virtuous than Christians while your young men rape their way across Europe.
The rapists are Arabs. I am an Indian. We have nothing in common, culturally, linguistically, and (most importantly) racially. They are Semites. My ancestors were Aryans (I don’t say this with any pride, just stating a fact). By your absurd logic I suppose even Filipinos and Italians are the same people just because they both practice Catholicism.
Elites hate Christians. Muslims hate Christians. Both gain through cooperation against us. Both prefer the rule of kings to the rule of law.
Elites hate Islam just as much as they hate Christianity. What are American troops doing in the middle east right now? Sight-seeing and picnicking? Globalists continue to provide infinite amounts of military aid to Israel, because they love Islam? Some people just can’t see beyond rhetoric, sadly you happen to be one of them.
nastynate, can you read? Vox is rejecting the idea of not seeing her as fully human; he’s saying she’s not fully civilized.
Dota, do you really think Globalists support Israel more than Islam? Care to explain the rhetoric that’s common to the UN, the Globalists’ governing body?
Dota, do you really think Globalists support Israel more than Islam?
Given the amount of aid Israel receives, absolutely. If they loved Islam, why bomb Muslim countries? Globalist Kissinger’s policy of stalling peace in the 70s is still in effect today. The creation of Israel had little to do with the UN and more to do with Lord Rothschild’s machinations. It’s in the Balfour declaration, how can you deny it?
The Globalists support Saudi Wahabism, not Islam. Wahabism isn’t even Sunni Islam. Sunni Islam is comprised of 4 schools – Shafi, Maliki, Hanafi, and Hanbali. The Wahabis fit into neither. It was Wahabism that destroyed the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan, not Islam. Islam ruled Afghanistan for a 1000 years before the Taliban, and yet the statues stood peacefully during their rule. It is Wahabism that destroyed the ancient temple of Nabu in Iraq, not Islam. Iraq has been Muslim for a 1000 years before ISIS, yet not even the Caliphs molested those temples. If the wahabis ever take over Egypt, expect the pyramids to be flattened as well.
Care to explain the rhetoric that’s common to the UN, the Globalists’ governing body?
I don’t take rhetoric at face value. Actions > words. Why is this so hard to fathom?
Wahabism is Islam. What you’re doing isn’t much different than the people who say Marxism isn’t Communism/Socialism, as if the latter is not the inevitable consequence of the former. Why did Islam invade Europe and Africa if it only became aggressive under Wahabism?
If you’re trying to say that Wahabism is Shiite rather than Sunni, fair enough, But to say Wahabism is not Muslim is disingenuous.
Wahabism is most definitely Sunni (Saudi Arabia), not Shiite (Iran).
Tom
All tribes/nations conquer for resources. Always been that way. I’m not going to waste my time debating what Islam is and isn’t with people that don’t even know the difference between Hanbali fiqh and wahabism. I also see no need to defend a religion I no longer practice. I was just responding to Dalrock’s bizarre statement that sexual morality and family values are alien to Islam. I know his exact words were: “different from” but it’s obvious what is implied. Islam has many terrible characteristics but it at-least gets inter-gender matters right. Giving even an enemy credit where it is due does not make one a lesser man. Gunner’s statement about Islam being partnered with feminism (and the left) betrays an appalling disconnect from reality.
@ Dota says:
July 10, 2016 at 7:46 pm
“I was just responding to Dalrock’s bizarre statement that sexual morality and family values are alien to Islam. I know his exact words were: ‘different from’ but it’s obvious what is implied.”
Oh hell. Here we go.
Care to explain the rhetoric that’s common to the UN, the Globalists’ governing body?
The UN is not the Globalists’ governing body. The UN is just a showpiece where a lot of impotent Third World nations get to vent some steam.
I don’t think the Globalists have one governing body. But I’d say the Federal Reserve Bank and the International Monetary Fund are more representative of the Globalists’ power and agenda.
“The most dangerous creation of any society is the man with nothing to lose.” – James Baldwin
@RPL:
The BIS. As World Bank & IMF are functionally branches of the US State Department. BIS is the one that’s less controlled by the USA and far more independent.
@Dota
For such an enlightened individual, you are ignorance of Islam is stunning. I kindly suggest that you look up the word “taqiyya,” see Quranic verses 2:225, 3:28, 3:54, 9:3, 16:106 & 40:28 and learn how those verses are understood to mean.
All others, please notice Dota first sung the praises of Mohamadeanism then when confronted with truth Dota claimed ignorance and finally cast aside Mohamadeanism. He uses false arguments and insults, which are normal for the left and false flag operations. Both the left and Mohamadeans see each other as useful idiots that once the revolution comes, will eliminate the other. The enemy of my enemy is my friend; until my enemy is defeated.