I ask this in good faith as a practicing Heathen and pray I do not come across as trollish.I have difficulty responding to some Christian arguments against Heathenry. Mainly:Christianity as a uniter of Europe against the Muslim threat during T

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1414008327433.jpg (116.21 KB, 625x948, 625:948, Odin.jpg)

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 20:05:27 No.351

I ask this in good faith as a practicing Heathen and pray I do not come across as trollish.

I have difficulty responding to some Christian arguments against Heathenry.

Mainly:

Christianity as a uniter of Europe against the Muslim threat during The Crusades.

and

Christianity as a spreader of some of the more positive aspects of Greco-Roman Mediterranean culture (I.e. philosophy, art etc.) Specifically, they love to throw up the argument that Christianity became based on Greco-Roman culture, which was one of the major cradles of the European worldview and civilization, while the Germanic peoples were still in the woods so to speak.

They usually springboard from the above into a screed on how Christianity made Europe great, blah blah, blah, muh Cathedrals and such.

So far, they only effective counter-argument that I have been able to come up with is the fact that though Christianity may have done some good in the short term, it ultimately has screwed us in the long term, due to Christianity, void of European roots, ultimately morphing into the Universalist worldview that is now killing the West.

Perhaps, also that Heathen culture would have eventually made contact with Mediterranean culture and engaged in a syncretic relationship void of Christianity.

Not to mention their pro-Christianity arguments amount to crypto cheer-leading for Mediterranean Pagan culture.

Further thoughts and counter-arguments?

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 21:14:48 No.354

Are you the same person that posted
This: https://8chan.co/pol/res/213656.html

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 21:22:41 No.355

>>354

Nope.

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 21:22:59 No.356

Please explain to me what is this "Universalist worldview that is now killing the West".

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 22:05:03 No.357

File: 1414015503333.jpg (1.19 MB, 1808x2688, 113:168, fucking-germanics.jpg)

>Christianity as a uniter of Europe against the Muslim threat during The Crusades.

The Myth of Christianity as a Wall against Islam
http://thuleanperspective.com/2014/09/11/the-myth-of-christianity-as-a-wall-against-islam/
The Teutonic Knights did not attack Islam. Instead they attacked true Europeans (i. e. Pagan Europeans), in Prussia, Lithuania, Livonia and Estonia. They also attacked other Christians, both Catholic Poles and Russian Orthodox Slavs. Not only that; they attacked the Christian Slavic tribes at a time when they were already under attack from the Mongols in the East. Other parts of Europe too were under attack, from Muslims, and received no help from the Teutonic Knights, who gave priority to slaughtering Europeans.

1. Islam was a Christian sect, and Christianity originated from Judaism in the middle east, not Europe.
2. History would be so different if Christianity never became dominant, that there would never have been an Arab threat to Europe.
3. The crusaders spent a lot of time killing Pagan Europeans for not converting to Christianity.
4. Pagan Europe was far more united than Christian Europe because they weren't arguing over bible interpretations, there was more connection with the folk soul of Europe. They had a common goal of protecting the folk soul against enemies (See ‘The Viking Age And Christianity In Norway’ below). Egalitarian Christianity has destroyed the spiritual-racial pride of the European peoples.

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 22:06:41 No.358

File: 1414015601215.jpg (42.89 KB, 400x358, 200:179, rome.jpg)

>Christianity as a spreader of some of the more positive aspects of Greco-Roman Mediterranean culture (I.e. philosophy, art etc.)

Lol.

http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/gi0_vandalism.htm#classical
All religious traditions had been tolerated under the Roman Empire, although Christians suffered to some extent because of their sedition. They stated openly that they desired the destruction of the Empire, encouraged soldiers to desert, aparantly assassinated oponents, vandalised sacred monuments and statues, and tried to destroy the city of Rome by means of arson.

As soon as the Empire became Christian, this toleration ceased. The only writings to be permitted were those supported by the line currently regarded as orthodox. By 326 Constantine had authorised the confiscation and destruction of anything that challenged orthodoxy (i.e. the orthodoxy established the previous year). This included non-Christian places of worship as well as works by pagan authors and by all other Christian factions. Soon afterwards Constantine's mother Helena and Macarius, the Bishop of Jerusalem, were supervising the destruction of a temple in Jerusalem dedicated to Aphrodite, and building a Christian basilica on the site. This basilica, now the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, was imagined to be the very burial site of Jesus and to encompass the place of crucifixion. Evidence was conveniently discovered in the form of a tomb and miracle working splinters of the True Cross. Countless thousands of architectural treasures from classical times were soon being vandalised in the same way and turned into Churches.

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Censorship/Christian%20Intolerance.htm
"All writings whatever which Porphyry or anyone else has written against the Christian religion, in the possession of whomsoever they shall be found, shall be committed to the fire." – Emperor Theodosius I.

http://thuleanperspective.com/2013/07/24/about-christianity/

…We hear that the “barbarian” invasions caused the fall of Rome, but the truth is that Rome rotted from within, because of the work of the Early Christians, who did everything they could to destroy the Roman Empire; with terror, with porn and other perversities, with slavery, with usury and so forth. If there was some sort of undermining activity or business, the Early Christians were there, heavily engaged. The “barbarian” invasion came only because the other peoples of Europe, not yet infected with Christianity, saw what Rome turned into when exposed to these Early Christians, and they wanted to defend themselves against this – just like the Scandinavians did hundreds of years later, in the Viking Age, when the Christian spiritual plague had spread out.

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 22:08:10 No.359

File: 1414015690418.gif (8.8 KB, 363x323, 363:323, dark-ages.gif)

Definetely read all of this:
Kemp on Christianity
https://chechar.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/kemp-on-christianity/
…Although this policy of enforced celibacy amongst the priesthood, monks and nuns only ever applied to a relatively small number of Whites, it was nonetheless often the most intelligent members of society who became monks or nuns. This was so because during the Dark Ages, only the cleverest candidates were allowed to enter the priesthood: as the keepers of the arts and writing, the only way to gain any sort of education was to join the priesthood.

Although there can be little doubt that, given human nature, the celibacy rule was broken, it must also be so that the policy of deliberate celibacy saw many thousands of Europe’s cleverest people dying childless, their genes lost forever. The persecution of these great minds with the accusation of paganism also unquestionably stripped Europe of many of its cleverest people: the cumulative effect of the Dark Ages was to set Europe back centuries in development.

…The Dark Ages was a period in European history which has been arbitrarily set at between approximately 800 AD and lasting until the Renaissance. Although this is by no means a fixed definition, the common thread throughout this period of history was the total dominance of Christianity and the repression of all art, science and progress that was not Christian in nature.

In this way the great scientific, philosophical and cultural works of the thousands of years of pre-Christian civilization were suppressed, all being ascribed to the work of pagans and therefore of devil authorship. The era became known as the Dark Ages because of the introduction of theocracy as the only guideline in all fields of endeavor. This created a halt to all progress and centuries of cultural stagnation, which marked the time between the glory of Classical antiquity and the rebirth of that glory in the Renaissance and the beginnings of the modern world.

The Christian Triumph…
http://thuleanperspective.com/2014/07/25/the-christian-triumph/
Christianity didn’t really prevail in Europe. Christianity almost destroyed Europe; suffocated her in darkness, backwardness, stupidity, ignorance and destruction. As we know, the first thousand years of Christianity in Europe is called “The Dark Ages”! Christianity pulled a very advanced Europe down so far, that by the time of the Crusades the Muslims were ahead of us. They were still far behind the Pagan Europe (as it had been a thousand years earlier), but at the time of the Crusades they were miles ahead of Europe in almost all contexts.

The Renaissance did not come by chance, but because it was needed. Europe absolutely had to breathe again, think, create and advance again – and the Christians failed to stop this. What followed then was several hundred years of ‘witch hunts’, resulting in (some claim as much as 30) millions of deaths. We can assume that it was no coincidence that this came with the Renaissance: this is how they tried to stop it! This is how they tried to stop the Pagan/European ideals from forcing their way back up into the light; by murdering those they thought were behind it or in some way contributed to it.

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 22:08:20 No.360

File: 1414015700945.jpg (110.37 KB, 1032x1080, 43:45, 1414000526122.jpg)

The Sack of Rome by the Barbarians in 410
Joseph-Noël Sylvestre, 1890
It is not often mentioned that these barbarians were Christians

A common claim made by Christians is that Christianity single-handedly kept alight the guttering flame of learning during the Dark Ages, in the face of marauding wild barbarians. The truth is almost the exact opposite. The Church was largely responsible for plunging western Europe into ignorance and darkness. Towards the end of the fourth century for example Goths destroyed much of the Western Empire, including great cities like Delphi and Athens. But these Goths were not the pagan barbarians of traditional history books, they were Christians. These barbarians marched with bibles at the head of their armies. When they besieged Rome it was not, as is often supposed, pagans besieging civilised Christians but for the most part Christians besieging civilised pagans. To be sure there were some Christians in the city, but there is no reason to suppose that their faith was stronger than that of their bishop. Their bishop (now regarded as a Pope) consented to pagan sacrifices on the altar of St Peter's in order to save the city from the Christian hordes at its gates.

Popular stories about pagan barbarians sacking Rome are pure fantasy.

Rome was still in good shape until the middle of the sixth century when the Christian Emperor Justinian tried to reconnect Italy to the Empire. The city was repeatedly besieged and plundered by Christian forces. The Christian Emperor Constans II completed the destruction in 664 when he removed the last items of value, including any metal he could lay hands on, not only statues but also bronze fittings and lead roofs - even metal clamps and ties that kept the stone walls together. Rain and weather did further damage, but there was still enough left for later Christians to exceed the efforts of all their predecessors.

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 22:10:25 No.361

File: 1414015825115.jpg (507.8 KB, 635x979, 635:979, Zerstörung_der_Irminsaule_….jpg)

The Viking Age And Christianity In Norway
http://www.burzum.org/eng/library/the_viking_age_and_christianity_in_norway.shtml
The Viking Age began as a result of certain actions by Charlemagne, the king of France, in year 772, when he chopped down Irminsûl, the holy column or tree of the Saxons. He had assassinated approximately 5.000 Saxon noblemen, in cowardly ambushes, and crushed the ability of the Saxons to resist his armies any longer. This was the moment the northern brethren of the Saxons, the Scandinavians, finally ceased all hostilities against each other on a national level and instead started to wage war on Christianity. This was a war that started the age we know as the Viking Age. In 772 the kings of Norway were actually allied to Charlemagne in a war against the Danes, but they broke this pact when he cut down Irminsûl and assassinated the Saxon lords, and instead they too went to war against Charlemagne.

It was the Muslims who preserved much European literature and philosophy that the Christians had earlier tried to destroy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_of_the_Classics
The introduction of Greek philosophy and science into the culture of the Latin West in the Middle Ages was an event that transformed the intellectual life of Western Europe.[1] It consisted of the discovery of many original works, such as those written by Aristotle in the classical period. Greek manuscripts have been maintained in the Greek speaking world in Constantinople, Armenia, Syria, and Alexandria. Interest and availability of Greek text was scarce in the Latin West until with increase traffic to the East, including the Latin Empire during the time of the Crusade, the Sack of Constantinople during the 4th Crusade, and finally the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Empire caused many of the original Greek manuscripts to make their way into Western Europe, and thus fueled the Renaissance.[2]

http://thuleanperspective.com/2014/05/01/the-dark-ages/
The Dark Ages is a term used to describe the period between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance. It is called by that name because “The period is characterized by a relative scarcity of historical and other written records at least for some areas of Europe, rendering it obscure to historians”. We can also read that: “The concept of a Dark Age originated with the Italian scholar Petrarch (Francesco Petrarca) in the 1330s, and was originally intended as a sweeping criticism of the character of Late Latin literature. Petrarch regarded the post-Roman centuries as “dark” compared to the light of classical antiquity. Later historians expanded the term to refer to the transitional period between Roman times and the High Middle Ages (c. 11th–13th century), including the lack of Latin literature, and a lack of contemporary written history, general demographic decline, limited building activity and material cultural achievements in general. Later historians and writers picked up the concept, and popular culture has further expanded on it as a vehicle to depict the Middle Ages as a time of backwardness, extending its pejorative use and expanding its scope.”

As we know, the fall of Rome came shortly after the introduction of Judeo-Christianity as the official cult, and we also know that the Renaissance was a renaissance of the ‘Pagan’ (i. e. European) culture, ideals, philosophy, science and values, that by the 14th century had began to return to Europe from the Muslim world via crusaders and Muslim invaders. Unlike the Judeo-Christians, who burned and destroyed everything European they came across, the Muslims had kept the European literature they came across.

Asatruar 10/22/14 (Wed) 22:22:33 No.363

OP here,

>>357
>>358
>>359
>>360
>>361

Awesome stuff, thanks, I will be devouring this.

>>356

Cultural Marxism

Asatruar 10/23/14 (Thu) 03:24:00 No.378

>>363
>Cultural Marxism

So political correctness? Multiculturalism? "anti-racism"? Political correctness is silly. "anti-racism" in its oft misunderstood form is as well. But I have for someone to maturely explain to me what is wrong with multiculturalism.

Asatruar 10/23/14 (Thu) 03:51:36 No.380

File: 1414036295881.jpg (1.14 MB, 1989x4378, 1989:4378, 1413775394058.jpg)

>>378
I think you're reading it in the wrong sense
Anti-multiculturalism isn't anything along the lines of "one true culture" its people fighting to keep their own culture alive.
Multiculturalism wants one world culture, which destroys cultures in its wake.
What we are trying to do is preserve cultures for what they are
Blacks have a culture
Asians have a culture
Americans(native) have a culture
Whites have a culture
And its good that way. People need to keep cultures separate so we can experience each one
The comic explains it very nicely

Asatruar 10/23/14 (Thu) 04:42:13 No.382

>>380
It's good that everyone has their own culture. Perhaps the controversy arises on what to extent do they need to be separate. There should really be degrees to measure this type of thing, so people aren't so quick to jump the gun when the issue is brought up.

Asatruar 08/17/15 (Mon) 19:03:39 No.7401

Bumping so this survives. Some good arguments here

Asatruar 08/17/15 (Mon) 19:20:54 No.7403

>>351

>Christianity as a uniter of Europe against the Muslim threat during The Crusades.

What Christianity? Orthodoxy? Catholicism?

All it eventually did was throw Europe into more religious wars. Even during the Byzantine Empire, you had pagans like the Varangian Guard defending Europe.

Asatruar 08/17/15 (Mon) 19:44:28 No.7405

File: 1439840668772.png (18.04 KB, 569x126, 569:126, klages.png)

>>351

Christianity is not European *in origin*. End of.

The Holy Roman Empire was more Roman than Catholic.

Asatruar 08/17/15 (Mon) 20:29:11 No.7407

>>378

>maturely explain

Not many people here are good at that. I'll try:

Multiculturalism is part of the problem. All the world's cultures are slowly devolving into a globalized, overcommercialized mishmosh.

The larger problem, though isn't political correctness and anti-racism but the mentality behind it. It's a plague of victimitis. It's becoming more and more acceptable, even desirable, in society to be a victim of something, to be a charity case that's being bullied and persecuted by bigots. People fucking brag about it–gays about how they're being hated and bullied, women about how they're being denied jobs, blacks about how they're being targeted by cops. Now, that's fine as far as it goes. Bigots do exist, and they can be a problem. The real problem is the mentality of emotional vulnerability. Nowadays, everyone is expected to be vulnerable to the opinions and social pressure from other people–everyone having "triggers" and such. This means that society thinks it is everyone's responsibility to coddle everyone else's feelings and avoid offending them, rather than the individual's responsibility to deal with offense given to them as part of everyday life. This makes people emotionally weak. They are taught that it's okay to be sensitive to the point that simple words from other people can stop them from functioning in everyday life, so they are. They're taught that it's normal to become horribly depressed and give up on life when one feels like they're the target of public ridicule, so they are. That's the problem with political correctness–people are no longer considered responsible for handling their own feelings.

Asatruar 08/18/15 (Tue) 01:42:03 No.7411

Christians were busy killing pagan Europeans while Muslims were attacking Spain and later on when the ottoman empire was fucking up eastern Europe and the Mediterranean the only reason they didn't conquer us is because the Mongols attacked them from the other side.

Christianity killed far more europeans than it killed non-europeans thus this lie that it united europe is just that.

Asatruar 08/18/15 (Tue) 13:46:51 No.7421

>>351

>Specifically, they love to throw up the argument that Christianity became based on Greco-Roman culture

The trouble with Christianity is that it take the broad spectrum of Hellenic philosophy and uses it to justify the theological primacy of a very specific mystery cult. There's all sorts of implications that come with that which I've only started to become aware of, but the gist of the matter is that B does not follow from A, and pretending that it does while aggressively insisting that any other interpretation of A is flawed will likely corrupt A.

>They usually springboard from the above into a screed on how Christianity made Europe great

While it's true that Europe did become great during the Medieval period, the effect of Christianity can be measured by looking at the "control population". What about the Christians in the Near and Middle East? Despite the immense material head-start over Europe, they stagnated quickly and fell to the Saracens.

This also disproves the claim of Christianity being a spiritual bulwark against islam. When most of the population converts after a few centuries, the true faith brand suffers a blow.

Same goes for the claims about chivalry and forbearance being Christian virtues. Did similar virtues develop in the ME? A fortiori this goes for sub-Saharan Christians, Haitians etc. Did they become better people?

Asatruar 08/18/15 (Tue) 14:06:28 No.7422

>>7421

>B does not follow from A, and pretending that it does while aggressively insisting that any other interpretation of A is flawed will likely corrupt A.

By the way, in "Against the Neopagans", Evola argued that, in their zeal to react against it, neopagans, reconstructionists and the like failed to do a proper dissection of Christianity. They discarded B and adopted the corrupted A. Moreover, the Medieval Church being what it was, did more or less successfully manage to salvage bits and pieces of the original A from the first few centuries of iconoclasm, and thus, in hitherto discarding B, neopagans unknowingly discarded parts of uncorrupted A. It's a failed strategy in both directions, you see.

As long as the AFA and others have this confused orientation towards what is traditionally sound and what is corrupted by centuries of spiritual bolshevism, the Christians kind of have a point when they dismiss paganism as inauthentic.

Asatruar 08/18/15 (Tue) 18:37:20 No.7437

>>351

There would be no islam without christianity. There would be mo modern leftist degeneracy without christianity. The Baltic crusades were straight up wars of white genocide.

They can't answer this and this is just scratching the surface.

Asatruar 08/18/15 (Tue) 19:44:41 No.7438

File: 1439927081723.png (209.03 KB, 636x358, 318:179, scientific.png)

>>359

>dat graph

Asatruar 10/12/15 (Mon) 01:07:13 No.8269

>>7421

So the counter to Christianity supposedly single-handedly making Europe great is to point out the fact that Europe's greatness has more to do with European nature than Christianity (especially under a Christianity so heavily influenced by Paganism.)

Makes sense considering the Renaissance is pretty much the product of European Christian culture essentially picking up where the Mediterranean Pagans left off in terms of technology and knowledge, upon reacquiring said technology and knowledge.

Nevertheless, how then does one counter their assertions of the Germanics Celts, and Slavs being less technological and philosophically advanced than Greco-Roman culture?

Asatruar 10/12/15 (Mon) 03:24:16 No.8275

>>8269

One thing I thought of is the fact that the Germanics, once exposed to Mediterranean culture, adapted and contributed rather quickly. (i.e. The victory at Teutoberg Forest being the product of Arminius using the Romans' own tactics against them; the Holy Roman Empire being the product of Germanic culture being influenced by the Mediterranean, etc.)

Asatruar 10/22/15 (Thu) 11:39:37 No.8379

About Christianity as a Wall against Islam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ87iWfJdpw

-ThuleanPerspective

Asatruar 10/25/15 (Sun) 21:42:22 No.8398

>>378

Non NazBol socialism.

Asatruar 11/03/15 (Tue) 20:15:38 No.8514

>>8275

>(i.e. The victory at Teutoberg Forest being the product of Arminius using the Romans' own tactics against them;

What tactics? Arminius simply backstabbed his Roman comrades.

Asatruar 11/04/15 (Wed) 03:47:40 No.8519

>>8514

He led them out into a forest and forced them to move in a long snake-like formation, which was completely against roman battle tactics and formations and left them extremely vulnerable to attacks from the sides. He also goated Varus into leading his legions farther and farther into the forests, where the Germans had the home court advantage, while the heavy armor of the Romans started bogging them down in…yknow, bogs.

Also "comrades" is like saying the foreman slaves were "comrades" to white men. They supplanted him with wine and women, but he was still a slave and servant to Rome. The romans had beat down his tribe after they had been loyal to them for generations, and forced their children (including him) into slavery. It would have been a bigger act of backstabbing to have sided with the Romans.

Asatruar 11/08/15 (Sun) 23:48:45 No.8617

>>351

>good faith

>pray

actually, you do come off as a christfag troll

Asatruar 11/08/15 (Sun) 23:50:09 No.8618

>>359

>scientific advancement

By what measure..? Advancementometers?