Christianity and Race, by St. Nephon

Race is more than skin color

Correct. It's also hair color, eye color, head shape, facial features such as the nose, stature/height etc. Which is why focussing on skin color alone would be incorrect.

If you want to believe White people don't exist, you are free to do so, I have no idea who will win the battle of this debate when rubber meets road.

Of course "white" people exist. Here's a whole family of them:

article-2111298-120DAD79000005DC-35_634x642.jpg

But yeah, keep on using the term "white ethnicity" instead of "Euro-American" or whatever if you like. I honestly wish you the best in this battle that's supposed to happen.​
 
Correct. It's also hair color, eye color, head shape, facial features such as the nose, stature/height etc. Which is why focussing on skin color alone would be incorrect.



Of course "white" people exist. Here's a whole family of them:

View attachment 7026

But yeah, keep on using the term "white ethnicity" instead of "Euro-American" or whatever if you like. I honestly wish you the best in this battle that's supposed to happen.​
I didn't invent the term, I am just using it in historical context. And all the things you included are DNA markers. Race is simply DNA, formed by thousands of years of environmental pressures for survival of the elements.
 
I didn't invent the term, I am just using it in historical context. And all the things you included are DNA markers. Race is simply DNA, formed by thousands of years of environmental pressures for survival of the elements.
I'm aware of that - and I don't blame your personally for that this term is so frequently being used for groups of humans - it's just that I think it's so nonsensical. The term makes me think of albinos, who can occur in any race. Nobody considers Albinos to be superior even though their pigmentation is the lightest of all.

By the way - Albinos may not be a race, but do these people have "white souls" or what caused their features to bleachen?​
 
You didn't deny it, but you're making all those generalizations about "white" vs. "black" (while leaving out "yellow" for the most part) as if there were only two colors/races in this world. You're furthermore confusing race and soul:

If the "soul makes the man [race?]", how is it possible that Ethiopians can have "white souls"? Wouldn't they have turned into "whites" because of their souls by now? Apparently "whites today have souls of a Negro", but their faces aren't turning black because of it.​

You are seriously confused due to your lack of Biblical knowledge. The terms, "White and Black souls" does not make a reference to race, but to the purity of the soul.

It comes from Isaiah 1:18-20

“Come now, let us settle the matter,”
says the Lord.
“Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
19 If you are willing and obedient,
you will eat the good things of the land;
20 but if you resist and rebel,
you will be devoured by the sword.”
For the mouth of the Lord has spoken.

The above is stating for those who obey the lord, their sins will be forgiven and become "white as snow," a reference to purity.

Likewise Christians have used the exact same terminology for thousands of years to describe the state of one's soul - white for purity, like the wedding dress, and black for impurity, the color of Satan.

When Jesus was being transfigured, for example, he shined with the most intense bright white light; likewise Jesus says those cast out to Hell will be cast into the outer darkness. Matt 22:

And again Jesus spoke to them in parables, saying, 2 “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a marriage feast for his son, 3 and sent his servants to call those who were invited to the marriage feast; but they would not come. 4 Again he sent other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, Behold, I have made ready my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves are killed, and everything is ready; come to the marriage feast.’ 5 But they made light of it and went off, one to his farm, another to his business, 6 while the rest seized his servants, treated them shamefully, and killed them. 7 The king was angry, and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. 8 Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. 9 Go therefore to the thoroughfares, and invite to the marriage feast as many as you find.’ 10 And those servants went out into the streets and gathered all whom they found, both bad and good; so the wedding hall was filled with guests.

11 “But when the king came in to look at the guests, he saw there a man who had no wedding garment; 12 and he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13 Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth.’ 14 For many are called, but few are chosen.”

Thus when looking at the color of one's soul, it has nothing to do with one's race.

That is why students were asking St. Nephon if Blacks could be saved; and that is why the title of the section is "Blacks with White Souls," i.e. Blacks who have achieved salvation through the purity of their soul.

So to make clear, the races come in different colors, but the soul goes from White to Black, represented to how close or far away from God it is.

You're also ignoring the issue of race-mixing, which can produce intermediate stages. For instance the European+Asian mixes which paternos mentioned: Should these mixed children be considered as predominantly "white", or "yellow", or somewhere in between?

Mixed race is just that, mixed. They may become a new race if they grow enough in number, or they will simply remain a bridge between other major races. Mixed race children share many characteristics of their parents, and, from my experience, 99% of mixed race children have little problem assimilating with both or either of their parent races.

See, Hybrid Vigor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosis

It should be noted that Hybrid Vigor occurs through marriage; the opposite, Outbreeding Depression aka miscegenation, occurs through bastardization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outbreeding_depression
 
Even more explicit teaching on white or black souls comes right from John 3:15.

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.


To be pure is like White light, whereas the opposite is Black darkness.
 
You are seriously confused due to your lack of Biblical knowledge. The terms, "White and Black souls" does not make a reference to race, but to the purity of the soul.
You were talking about a "soul of a Negro" (="black soul"), though. "Negro" is definitely a racial term. You're thus conflating biblical terminology with modern raciology.

Is it said somewhere in the Bible that there is a "white race" or "black race" - in the modern sense?​

The above is stating for those who obey the lord, their sins will be forgiven and become "white as snow," a reference to purity.

Likewise Christians have used the exact same terminology for thousands of years to describe the state of one's soul - white for purity, like the wedding dress, and black for impurity, the color of Satan.

I can definitely agree with the color of the soul. If you take "white" in the sense of light and "black" in the sense of darkness (the absence of light), it makes totally sense. Christ is the light, Satan is darkness.

I'd also much prefer if we talked of "lighter/darker races" (Plural) instead of "white/black race" (Singular) - to make clear that as human races we're all on a scale of lighter vs darker pigmentation. Europeans (as a group) are lighter than Asians and Africans (as groups), but there are internal differences comparing the ethnicities. Even among Sub-Saharan Africans, the Nilotid race from South Sudan is darker pigmented than the rest of African races:

nilote.jpg

Then there are mongoloid Asians ("yellow") with darkish skin like these Indonesians who live close to the equator:

Indonesian.jpg

Nobody of us humans is totally "white/light" in race, neither is anyone totally "black/dark" (not even the Nilotes). Ever noticed how African negroes still have pale palms and soles with less pigmentation?​

Thus when looking at the color of one's soul, it has nothing to do with one's race.

You were implying that soul and race are correlated, i.e. that the color of the soul influenced the pigmentation of the person. A "white" with a "black soul" should develop a black face in a physical sense.

When a person is born as a very dark-pigmented African Nilote, does this mean he or she must have had a "very black soul" before incarnation or is it just coincidence? What if this Nilote was born as a depigmented albino?

 
There will first have to be a man-made Church which addresses these issues. Just going back to a random Christian Church, even a conservative one, will not address the serious political issues we already face. It can make their lives far better in the image of God, and this is needed for many White people, but the serious issue we face still have to be tackled by an organized movement to oppose the satanic elites. It might have fixed the issues 60 years ago, but this battle is now spiritual and political. The number 1 issue will be immigration, both legal and illegal, and if Whites have a right to their own homelands. Until this is addressed at a political level, more and more non-Christians will continue to flood into the west and vote away more and more of our society.

I predict, in the next few years, a White Nationalist based Christian movement will begin. Probably from someone in the Nick Fuentes realm, but not Nick himself. This will quickly replace Patriot Front, NJP and all other WN movements as the civil rights group that will defend the rights of Whites politically and makes racial reality a Christian component again. Seeing them get tax breaks while pushing for White civil rights will cause some serious issues for our government.

I very well could be wrong, but I see this taking place as things continue to get worse and churches continue to grow but there is no pushback to the political realities we face. Men will first rediscover Christ, then when they truly know Christ and what they are up against, they will take further action. You are correct, the first step is for them to return to the church, but there will be needed steps after this.
I don't think it will go the way you think it will. There may be worldly movements that are part of the overall strife, but I think we are looking down the barrell of a reconfiguring of things without a need, necessarily, for any identity claims at all - there will be regions of de fact homogenization that will be understood.
 
I spoke to a fundamentalist work friend about this only weeks ago who is very sensitive to the things of God, and he summarised the whole scenario very quickly as: "God brings judgment upon the land".
People say this a lot but it can mean so many things it's fairly useless - forgive me for saying this so quickly, but it's clear to me. How are we not already under judgment? We are directly or indirectly led or controlled by major feminist forces and have women opting out of family formation. We have weird homos/sexual degenerates/Hollywood doing whatever they want, promoting new soul and mind viruses every day. We have the swamp controlling the overall governmental structure. The only thing that hasn't happened yet in totality is the drastic standard of living decrease, but that is obviously happening right now, before our eyes ...
 
I don't think it will go the way you think it will. There may be worldly movements that are part of the overall strife, but I think we are looking down the barrell of a reconfiguring of things without a need, necessarily, for any identity claims at all - there will be regions of de fact homogenization that will be understood.
My personal prediction is China is already too powerful, and Whites waited too long. It isn't despair, I hope I am wrong, but when you really study China, they are worlds ahead of the west in technology. China is also world's ahead in discipline and logical thinking. What held the Chinese back for centuries was their lack of creativity. But now that Israel and the satanic elites sold them our top technology and they have reverse engineered it and added to it, their technology achievements are really remarkable. Their own citizens have phones and other consumer goods that even people in the west could only dream of.

China also had a very large population, and they have to import food from the west to survive. Giving them both a large potential miliary base and a strong need to conquer other land eventually.

Without a doubt China is really the world's only superpower right now, and they play the game so much better than the USA. They just sit on the sidelines and let the west destroy itself with immigration and diversity. Our 140 IQ White men are told they are not wanted and tossed aside, then we expect some 100 IQ diversity hire to keep the advancements coming. Their 140 IQ Chinese men are told they are hero's, much more important than a dumb athlete that runs around with a ball, and they are rewarded greatly with the advancements they push.

With all these factors, how much longer does China sit on the sidelines? Do we really expect them to just let all the fertile land in Africa and the west be run by people they see as inferior and be dependent on them forever? I certainly doubt it. My guess is they wait until their technology is so much more advanced than ours that they barely have to lift a finger to defeat us. Some cyber-hacking, shut down the entire system, and then just use drones, they probably could already do this, but will wait until they know our people are too fractured to mount any kind of response.

I'm not saying this to be glum, it is just the facts of where we are. In fact, I am saying it as a White man, who has been on here supporting White civil rights, in that I realize Whites are in NO WAY superior to other races and in fact our great weakness of not being strong with our women and being way too charitable will likely be our own downfall. As @Samseau correctly and wisely pointed out, Whites, as an ethnic group, suffer greatly from the sin of pride and this is our downfall right now. We think the Chinese just can't beat us, and they already are miles ahead of us with the finish line coming up quickly.

I hope I am wrong, I pray nightly that I am wrong and these Satanic Elites are removed from power in our countries. I am just starting what is currently taking place and I don't see anything to stop this result without God's own interception of it.

 
Last edited:
I see China being extremely powerful until 2050, then the great dieoff will begin to crush them. What then? Will they force their women to breed? Not holding my breath.
Well, historically they are vastly overpopulated. They simply have too many people and they will either be dependent on other countries to source them grain or take the land by force.

Their women, while becoming more materialistic, are also much more conservative/traditional than women in the west. I predict that once their population normalizes to their more historical levels of closer to 500 million, they will naturally start having more children. In fact, they have already gotten rid of the one child policy due to desires by their upper class to have more than one child.

They seem to be extremely K-Select, in that if they don't need more people, they just naturally don't do it. And if they do need more people, they naturally will. While one of my Chinses friends is a single child policy child, her parents came from families with 4 and 5 siblings respectively during the Mao years of the demand for them to have more people for a coming great war, that never happened thank goodness.

We also see the Chinese govt. very wisely telling their women to get married by 30, or they will be worthless old maids. It seems China has learned from the mistakes of the west and has plans in place to try to fight it.
 
People say this a lot but it can mean so many things it's fairly useless - forgive me for saying this so quickly, but it's clear to me. How are we not already under judgment? We are directly or indirectly led or controlled by major feminist forces and have women opting out of family formation. We have weird homos/sexual degenerates/Hollywood doing whatever they want, promoting new soul and mind viruses every day. We have the swamp controlling the overall governmental structure. The only thing that hasn't happened yet in totality is the drastic standard of living decrease, but that is obviously happening right now, before our eyes ...
As I live in the UK, most people on both the mainland and Ireland have no time for Christianity having had it presented to them on a plate. Young people, particularly those in the 50s and 60s chose to not believe and instead opted for the good life. Christianity was preached to them and was available within walking distance, yet the masses didn't want it, all made worse by the useful idiots who were idolised in popular culture back then.

Here's what the normie thinks now:


It begins: "In a land where ancient cathedrals once echoed with the sounds of worship, Christianity seems to be quietly stepping into the shadows. Here’s a light-hearted look at why this age-old tradition might be losing its grip on the British Isles".
 
Last edited:
White people currently dying out/being replaced in their own countries is just God's punishment for collective sin.
There is no "white race" or "black race" in an absolute sense. So, drop those silly color terms and call people by their actual ethnicity.
It is "White Nationalists" who are parading around the nonsensical label "white race", not me.
I'm a racially aware person myself.

I understand "white" as light pigmented.​
Oh my, how unconvenient :alien: Although the Euro / White race doesn't exist and is just a "silly, nonsensical label", the Euro / White people are, as usual, to blame for their countries being overrun by 3rd world aliens, and that is precisely their fault, and not ours. Oy vey! Accept the white guilt, goy!

Even if we are all said to hail from Adam and Eve, how come that there are three groups of human races? Europoids (Caucasoids), Mongoloids and Negroids.
How come you call yourself a Christian and don't know that part?
"There is only one race, the hooman race" 📯

White Nationalism is a ridiculously ambiguous and unscientific, superficial concept. So you take "white" as an umbrella term for all people with predominantly European Christian heritage who happen to have "white" skin...

- How do you define "white" skin? (excluding the phenomenon of albinism of course)
- How tanned does a person have to be in order to not longer be considered "white"?
How is "white" defined then?
I'd also much prefer if we talked of "lighter/darker races" (Plural) instead of "white/black race" (Singular) - to make clear that as human races we're all on a scale of lighter vs darker pigmentation. Europeans (as a group) are lighter than Asians and Africans (as groups), but there are internal differences comparing the ethnicities.
All cultural marxist / critical race theory brainwashing talking points. They start with ridicule, then continue with deconstruction, relativization and reinterpretation and end with redefinition / atomization / discord.
What is a woman, err, white race.webp
You can see that there's no single European "white" race, but actually several European races according to oldschool racial anthropologists such as Coon. It's only in the later half of the 20th century that all European races got lumped together as "whites".
Human "races" reproduce by their own volition. I'd say there are various European races within the Europid group.
So I'd suggest using the term "European Christian Nationalist" instead of "White Nationalist" just to make sure that Muslims and Jews are definitely excluded, because they can be light pigmented too - sometimes even lighter than Christians.​
my fellow whites.webp
No, "white" is a color. Ethnicities are "German", "Italian", "Swede" etc.
"White" and "black" are terms which are used to compare the color/pigmentation between two ethnicities, or two groups of ethnicities.
The "White" and "Black" are terms invented by the Left to mock and discredit racial theory, just as you do now. We can talk about European, African, Mongoloid and Australoid man, or Euro/non-Euro Caucasoid, Amerindian/Asian Mongoloid and Negroid/Capoid race, but that is just terminology. Everyone know what "White" and "Black" terms mean in racial context, and discrediting race theory based on terminology is not a discussion in good faith.
Human races.webp
I'm not necessarily a fan of Islam as it's a religion mostly for low IQ brown people, but one thing they're doing better than current nominally "Christian" societies is sexual morals - even if it's forced by violent measures. Boys and girls are circumcised (making them less sensitive/prone to masturbation), women are required to cover their hair (making them less tempting for men) and there is strict gender separation on most public levels. Also there are strict punishments for fornicators and adulterers.
Funny how the "brown" people exist while the whites are nothing but the color, or atomized unrelated ethnicities.

"Whites" or people of European descent never saw themselves as "one race" prior to the 20th century, not even in the US.
vintage-anthropology.webp
racial classifications 1600-.webp
A T and O map from the first printed version of Etymologiae.webp
timeline.webp
Eastern Roman Transphobic Racist Bigots.webp

Nobody considers Albinos to be superior even though their pigmentation is the lightest of all.

By the way - Albinos may not be a race, but do these people have "white souls" or what caused their features to bleachen?
Trick question: Should this man here be considered as "white" or as "black"?

44093811_804.jpg
Of course "white" people exist. Here's a whole family of them:

article-2111298-120DAD79000005DC-35_634x642.jpg
Yes, albinos are not a race, so therefore Euro / White race does not exist. We got it.
albinos races.webp
 
How is "white" defined then?
European people.
“White” = Biologically European. Peoples indigenous to Western Eurasia, whose racial group was formed within the boundaries of Europe, thousands of years ago. “White” includes every person of overwhelmingly* European heritage, including Whites who reside outside of Europe, such as the ethnic Russians of Siberia. A White person is a White person regardless of which plot of land they inhabit.
European ancestry & Y-DNA haplogroups.webp
Modern Europeans are a product of three closely-related peoples - WHG (Western Hunter-Gatherers), EEF (Early European Farmers) and PIE (Proto-Indo-Europeans) and two major migrations, both of which brought huge cultural and technological revolutions. In modern terms, these migrations would be biologically comparable to Chinese intermixing with Japanese, or Saudis intermixing with Libyans, or something like that. They were in no way comparable to present-day mass migration of non-White peoples into European lands — as the media often attempts to spin.
WHG, EEF, and PIE reconstructions.webp
EEF-EHG-WHG-Yamna-Corded Ware-Bell Beaker migrations.webp
The WHG (Western Hunter-Gatherers) were physically robust and powerfully built. They predominantly had dark hair and bright blue eyes, although some genetic studies (e.g., this dissertation, page 78) indicate that a small amount of WHG may have had light hair or darker colored eyes.
Western Hunter-Gatherers resembled modern Northern Europeans in every way, except skin tone (and the fact that they were considerably more powerfully built, in general). No living population other than Northern Europeans is remotely genetically close to the WHG and only Europeans have WHG ancestry. TL;DR: The WHG were not “Africans.”
WHG facial reconstructions.webp
With regards to pigmentation, genetic data indicates that most EEF (Early European Farmer) populations had pale skin, predominantly brown eyes and dark hair, with some rare instances of blue eyes and blondism. Unfortunately, there is a distinct lack of reliable EEF facial reconstructions available.
Minoan frescoes also provide insight into how Southern European Late EEF peoples depicted themselves. Tanned men and extremely pale women were consistent themes in Minoan artwork.
Minoan frescoes - Southern European Late EEF peoples.Tanned men and extremely pale women  wer...webp

The Late Proto-Indo-European cultures
In 2015, the Harvard ‘Reich Lab’ released their groundbreaking archaeogenetic study: "Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe" (https://archive.vn/hM45x). The validity of the Steppe Hypothesis was conclusively proven, as well as the existence of the long-hypothesized Proto-Indo-European people.​
PIE people & homeland.webp
The Steppe Hypothesis is also known as the “Kurgan Hypothesis,” named after the giant burial mounds constructed by Indo-Europeans.
Yamnaya.webp
Europe 3rd millenium BC.webp
The Bell Beakers of Northwestern Europe (e.g., UK) were directly descended from a Corded Ware culture known as the "Single Grave Culture"
(https://archive.vn/HZZJF)
Phenotypically, the Yamnaya (Proto-Indo-Europeans) had mostly brown hair and brown eyes, while blue eyes, blond, and red hair were common among the Corded Ware and their descendants."
https://thuletide.wordpress.com/2020/08/08/what-is-white-a-guide-for-complete-novices/

Late Proto-Indo-European facial reconstructions, mostly depicting men of the Corded Ware and Yamnaya cultures
Late Proto-Indo-European facial reconstructions, mostly depicting men of the Corded Ware and ...webp
Blond hair appears to have originated among Mesolithic Northeast Europeans, and is therefore more common in populations with high levels of (Baltic, Slavic and Germanic) R1a.
https://www.eupedia.com/genetics/yamna_culture.shtml#Phenotypes

The Proto-Indo-European invasions mark the final major shift in European genetics, which have changed very little from around 2500 BC to the present day. Despite Europe being in a near-constant state of invasion and occupation by various non-European races (e.g. Huns, Moors, Arabs, Turks, and Mongols), these invasive peoples left almost no genetic footprint whatsoever — a maximum of 2-5% in specific isolated regions, but mostly 0%.
https://thuletide.wordpress.com/2020/08/08/what-is-white-a-guide-for-complete-novices/
 
How is "white" defined then? Apparently, Irishmen and Italians were considered to be "non-white" at first, despite both of them being Europeans.


"White" and "black" are terms which are used to compare the color/pigmentation between two ethnicities, or two groups of ethnicities.

Compare a typical Italian with a Swede, both from Europe: The Italian is "black".
Italian and Nigerian: The Italian is "white".
Italian+Swede and Nigerian: The Europeans as a group are "white".

Also, compare the Euro-American and the Afro-American: The Afro-American is "black".
(Mulatto) Afro-American and (purebred) Nigerian: The Afro-American is "white".
Euro-American + Afro-American and actual Europeans: The Americans as a group are "black".
Euro-American + Afro-American and actual Africans: The Americans as a group are "white".

There is no "white race" or "black race" in an absolute sense. So, drop those silly color terms and call people by their actual ethnicity.​

We just had a black priest from Africa in our little white town preaching us that we should give our homes to his family in Africa, so I can assure there's a thing called race.

Showing us a Komi family doesn't mean they're "white" even though they integrate just fine living in their own lands.

You know everyone is talking about 'European' so you're being dishonest here or maybe you're some form of alien.
 
Last edited:
Insulting the entire forum by making assumptions about them (incel forum?)
@Kingdom

Wow, now you're really picture-spamming this thread. Chill down, brother. Do you think anyone will take your point more seriously because of all those colorful graphics? My posts must have triggered something deep inside of you that you're willing to research my whole forum history, down-vote my posts and even accuse me of being one of (((them))). I can assure you I'm not a fed either - why would they even care about a smallish forum like this one which is filled with incels?

I never denied the existence of race, by the way. I just denied lumping together blonde, blue-eyed, tall Northern Europeans with swarthy Southern Europeans as one single "white race". It is the light-pigmented Northerners who are the true "white" Europeans and the more civilized people, Southerners are olive-skinned darkies who are jumping the bandwagon.

Southern European countries such as modern Greece, the Balkans and southern Italy generally are shitholes compared to the Northern ones such as Germany, England or Sweden. Also - prior to the 20th century - the US was largely settled and built up by light-pigmented Europeans of NW-European descent like the English, French and Germans. It was only around the turn of the 20th century that swarthy S-European immigration (Italians) was encouraged.

DNA and genetic research is a Jewish dominated discipline that mostly ignores phenotypical classification:

Nordid.png
Mediterranid.png
Dinarid.png
Alpinid.png
East Europid.png

There is your "one white race". Please tell me that Mediterranids, Dinarids and Alpinids are "white" compared to Nordids and East Europids. Nazi anthropologists often were Nordicists who considered the blonde Nordid race superior to the swarthy European races. They claimed that Nordids were the founders of Indo-European civilizations like the Romans, Ancient Greeks, Persians, Indians etc. which is why you can still find their racial remnants such as blue eyes in modern-day mixed populations of Kurdistan, Iran, Afghanistan and India (mostly in the upper caste of Brahmans).
Even the light-pigmented East Europids which are mainly found among Eastern Slav populations today were inferior to Nazi Nordicists - so it's not about being "white" only. Ironically, many White Nationalists today consider Eastern Slavs "non-white" even though they are quite light-pigmented.

To return to the topic of "Christianity and Race":
Did you notice that the historical core of Protestant Christianity was in Northern Europe - thus largely overlapping with the core region of the Nordid race, the "whitest" of all? There is a historical link between Protestantism and the Nordid race. Catholicism and Orthodoxy are found in the more swarthy parts of Europe.

 
Race is a major topic for today's age given that White lands are being flooded with foreigners from all over the world, and the result is causing mass confusion amongst many Whites as they grow desperate while their nations fall into doom. The reactions from Whites are generally irrational; ranging from complete denial of race in an attempt to pretend that the barbarian invasions are no big deal, to the other extreme of fantasizing of some kind of White race awakening and mass consciousness. Both lead to hell, and to show this I will be quoting an ancient 4th century saint, Saint Nephon, who spoke in a plain language about race that any modern man today could understand.
What you call a fantasy of racial awakening is a natural reaction by members of one race who recognizes another that is unnaturally attempting to make them extinct by any conceivable means. I still don't think you understand racial awareness and keep confusing it for worship. Unlike the others here who share your views, you show the most effort to engage in this topic so I truly do appreciate you writing this and being willing to explore this subject.

Notice - the casual mention of race in a manuscript that is 1700 years old! How is it that "race is fake" when people were talking about race, plain as day, nearly 2000 years ago? And again notice, the fallen state of Nephon was compared to being as bad as a being a Black. Turns out that Black behavior being abhorrent is not merely common to our time.

...

Blacks With White Souls

Another time again, when we were together in his cell, I found the opportunity to answer a question to mine in respect to the black race. The question as to whether the color of their bodies had any effect on their souls preoccupied me. Could God have an aversion to them? Because, according to what I believed, there weren't any people from their race who had fought the good fight and had been saved. I had never heard of any black person who had pleased God.

“I'll answer you,” the saint said. “The Ethiopians are genealogically descendant from Shem. And there are many from their race whom God called to His Kingdom. Indeed their virtues glittered with miracles, too. I shall relate three examples to you:"


...


“My child, these are the accomplishments of the blacks,” Nephon said as he finished. “That's why you must not think that they are rejected by God. But just as the grapevine gives both black and white grapes, man was created the same way by God: some are black, some are yellow, and some white. Let's say, like the earth, because there is a great variety there, too.”
Saint Nephon's accounts of individuals of African descent achieving spiritual greatness are notable exceptions rather than the norm. Though he does acknowledge the virtues and accomplishments of these individuals, that do not change the broader reality of racial differences. Just as Saint Nephon compares humanity to the diversity of the earth with different races akin to different types of soil, he implies that racial distinctions are inherent and enduring. Therefore, rather than seeking integration or equality, Christians should embrace and celebrate racial differences, recognizing the inherent blessing bestowed upon the European-descended peoples as the chosen vessels of God's divine plan.

Also, as Saint Nephon affirms the unique virtues of individuals of African descent while maintaining the broader racial hierarchy, so too should modern Christians uphold the racial purity and integrity of their own communities, ensuring the preservation of God's intended order. To purposefully do the opposite to prove some point ("I'm not racist!" or "I don't worship my own race, see my mixed-race relationship!") is willful bastardization with a priori knowledge.
Out of these incredible stories, we can deduce two main conclusions especially relevant to our time:

1. Race Denialism is a Satanic Lie.
Contrary to the nonsense that "We're all part of the human race," and that "White, Black, and Asians" are clever Talmudic propaganda designed to divide and conquer people in order enrich the usurers, it is the exact opposite which is true.

If Greeks living in North Africa, 1700 years ago, could so causally and calmly discuss the different races of the world (and these were monks!!), then it is obvious that our own lying eyes are telling us the truth about race. Race is real, race is here because of God; the White, Black, and Yellow races are all part of His plan to populate His earth with His creation.

It is the marketing and brainwashing of our Talmudic (((Educations))) today that are designed to deceive Whites into ignoring their own history, their own race, in order that powerful interests can take advantage, divide them, and conquer them. St. Nephon and the monks of Ancient Rome did not have any financial interests when speaking to one another; people have noticed racial differences for thousands of years.

It is an interesting fact, however, that it is so difficult to discover racial talk in ancient times. This is because there just wasn't much migration between lands. Before modern transportation, the average White probably never saw a Black or Yellow person in their life. In the absence of any kind of rapid transport, Whites divided themselves into more artificial groups, such as Greeks, Goths, Visigoths, Teutons, etc. That Whites could have different tribes does not detract from the fact that they still belonged to the same race, and everyone in the Ancient world was well aware of this fact. Most likely, race wasn't written about much because it was so obvious; it would be like writing about the fact that the sun was shining.
Yes race denialism is a satanic (Hebrew for adversary) lie. These satans (adversaries) are using this lie to make us believe in the hodgepodge of a new Babel, it is no coincidence many of their new world order structures resemble its mythical image.

Also, contemporary anthropology is heavily scrubbed. The idea that there were only three races and that mixtures of these three spawned every other race: the Caucasoid (the White), the Negroid (the Black), and the Mongoloid (the Yellow) is fallacious. Much of the knowledge of other races were removed from public discourse when Phrenology was no longer studied openly.

Why would you call these divisions artificial? I've already explained the migrations in other threads, linguistic and paternal lineages are inherently tribal, the names are all descended from Israelite patriarchs or their sons. Calling these divisions artificial is saying that the promises and foretold fates of the 13 tribes are artificial, promises spoken by our Creator, the Lord.

There was plenty of transportation for any military conquest and it was written about extensively by Roman consuls. The issue is that there were not as many blacks, mongols, Indians (and no mesos) in the Mediterranean and the Levant of Greco-Roman civilization. Every one of the peoples living there, even in Egypt, were genetically similar, and all can be traced back to Noah's sons. Most of the incredibly dark slaves came from regions south of the lower Nile and these people were almost always slaves as the main body of their tribe never ventured far north.
2. God is Superior to Race, and Whites are Special for Being Able to Understand Him.

The other key takeaway from the St. Nephon, and the accounts of his days, is that Whites weren't simply considered superior merely because they were White. Notice how the entire passage begins:

The author, who was a neophyte monk learning from Nephon, clearly was repeating the biases of his day: Blacks were inferior because they did not have the soul of a White. They did not possess the same spiritual capacity of Whites, they did not pursue salvation; it even appeared that they were simply scorned by God Himself!

We can infer that Whites in those times did not consider themselves superior because of technology, art, or their high IQs. That was seen as completely trivial and even pointless. No, Whites prided themselves on their spirituality; it was God that made them, and it was God that made them great. It was because the White man could see God that the White man could create beautiful things, invent wonderous creations, and write beautiful works of philosophy and poetry. The soul of the White man was what set him apart, even the Pagan White could sense a deeper world beyond what he could see, and this is what made him great.

Hence the title of the entire passage: "Blacks with White souls." Because what made each of the Blacks great was their soul, not their race. Because they could see God, like the White man, they redeemed their entire race as worthy and capable equals of Whites who would also be called in great numbers to the Kingdom of Heaven. It is as the Bible says, "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal 3:28) For it is only through the Christ can the natural divisions that God created between peoples be overcome; without Christ, people are hopelessly divided and easily preyed upon by Satan.
No one is denying that the White, or European and Mediterranean man, is closer to God. That is the whole truth of these racial arguments that I make. I don't think I've ever heard you give a Pagan a compliment before, but you know it to be true too: the European races are spiritual creatures. Animals without souls don't create art, architecture, beneficial technology, poetry, music, and so on.

Where do you get that a handful of spiritual blacks redeemed their entire race? That is a fallacy. Even your own arguments do not support this, and you are then giving all the pagan Whites who deny their true heritage a free pass because a majority of the White race has done the spiritual toiling and suffering. The temporal actions of a few do not dictate the spiritual fates of the many.

I see Galatians 3:28 again. Christianity has never labored under a greater curse than the many mistranslations of the Bible. Some of these mistranslations are even followed in some other translations because these errors have become traditional. Bible scholars know that there are many thousand mistranslations in the King James Bible alone.

"There is not one Judaean or Greek, there is not one bondman or freeman, there is not one male and female; for all you are one in Christ Yahshua."

Is not a statement about race and sex, I will explain below. Also don't forget that Judaean is not jew, it is a nationality at the time as there were many different ethnicities living within its borders.

Paul is not saying that there should be no more slaves. The word here for bondmen is the same Greek word, δοῦλος, which was translated as servants in 1 Timothy 6:1 where, in an epistle written several years after this epistle to the Galatians was written, Paul wrote: “Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.” Rather, Paul is saying that among Christians, slaves should get equal love and respect with freemen, as he later wrote in the epistle to Philemon, where he wrote to him of the slave Onesimus, that he being a Christian should be treated “16 Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?” The word for servant in that passage is also δοῦλος each time it appears. Paul also continued to make distinctions concerning sex, where he wrote in 1 Corinthians chapter 14, an epistle which was written several years after this one, that “it is a shame for women to speak in the church.” Therefore he is not saying here that there will be no more distinction between the sexes.

Therefore it is not as if there could no longer be Judaeans or Greeks, but as Paul had said in Galatians chapter 2, “6 Now from those reputed to be something, whatsoever they were then makes not one difference to me. Yahweh does not receive a man's stature, therefore to me those of repute are conferred nothing.” Likewise he later wrote in Romans, chapter 3: “9 What then, are we better? Not at all: for we previously accused both Judaeans and Greeks all with being at fault: 10 just as it is written, 'that there is none righteous, not even one.'” Paul's words therefore have nothing to do with servitude, race or nationality, or sex.

Therefore, all of these things only have to do with the status of a person, and that there should be no distinctions of status among Christians: they should all love and treat one another equally. This is also the meaning of Paul's later discourse on the parts of the body of Christ which he had made to the Corinthians in 2 Corinthians chapter 12 where he concludes “25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.” But Paul is only speaking in reference to the Body of Christ, to the seed of Abraham, and that is a distinction which he maintains throughout this chapter of Galatians.

Additionally, notice in the above the special mention of Ethiopians, descended from the Israel tribe of Shem - I've said it so many times on the Roosh V Forum, and I've said it many times here, Ethiopians stand far apart from the rest of Africa, especially Ethiopian Orthodox who are generally better behaved and make for better neighbors than many secular Whites. People saw it easily back then, and it can easily be seen today. This is why there is a general media blackout on Orthodox Ethiopians; they are never mentioned, because it completely destroys 99% of race narratives on Blacks - many Christian Ethiopians have White souls.

Conversely, we see many Whites today who have forsaken their rich spiritual heritage, who souls are turning Black, just as St. Nephon's soul once was. His soul was so Black his face was turning Black! For it is the soul that makes the man, and not the man who makes the soul. So the Whites today who focus on money, gratification, and power are really no different than your average Black criminal. Their souls are putrid with rot, and this is why they turn a blind eye to the suffering of the Neighbor as their countries are invaded, raped, destroyed, and looted by financial parasites. Whites don't care about each other anymore, and that's why Whites are their own worst enemy.
Ethiopia has nearly 125 million people in such a small area, and barely half of them are Orthodox, which is still considerable for any country's population. So 43% of 125 million is roughly 53,750,000 Orthodox Ethiopians. Even with that many allegedly-practicing Orthodox citizens, its country still suffers incredibly high crime rates. Check its statistics from multiple sources, the murder rate is 19.3/100k compared to fallen jewmerica's 5.6/100k, nearly tripled. I wish them many blessings and love and peace, but I don't want to be their neighbor, and they don't want to be mine. They remain in their country and are not abandoning their soil to come live in the west for gibs. Both of us understand our place in God's plan. I would rather live next to a secular White who I could convert, the way the apostles went out and converted their brethren. Of course it's easier said than done, but we must live by example, and in these spiritually-trying times, the unbelievers will be forced to their knees one way or another.

The second paragraph you are right, Whites have abandoned their ancestral spirituality which comes straight from God. All of these hedonisms and worldly pursuits are wrong, but we are all aware of that here, it's time to move these discussions to the next level. The way to turn White apathy into spiritual intensity is to conquer them with Christ's teachings. It is befitting that a creature made in the image of the Creator would lose everything beautiful when it turns on its own roots. It is poetic justice in a way, but I do not champion nor encourage this. I believe the fallen Whites must be preached to and saved more so than any other people. They are the ones in the direst need.
Any White Nationalist political movement, in such a spiritually dead environment, is doomed to fail. For it assumes that Whites will somehow magically give a damn about their race, when they only care about themselves. Whites today have souls of a Negro, and without addressing this problem, everything else is futile. Hitler's great failure was the proof that paganism cannot unite Whites, and that until there is a true political movement that places Christ at its center there will be no salvation for Whites. They will continue to be marginalized, replaced, prevented from reproducing, and even wholesale slaughtered like we see in Ukraine. We do not need to see an Eagle on a uniform, but a Cross.

Until such a day comes to pass, avoid all political movements promising a better future for Whites; it is nothing but false prophets and race hucksters designed to prey on the weak, or it is the blind leading the blind, in this spiritually depraved time. The only success can come from a movement which elevates the soul of the White man, to his proper station, so that he may once again love his Neighbor.
Yes, any nationalist movement without a spirit is a broken animal. The entire point of nationalism is to put one's own interests on the back end in place of the interests of the nation, and what is a nation but a space of land and the people who live there? I think you have spent too much unintentional time in the company of self-hating White neo-liberals. It is infectious to be around these dead corpses. There are millions upon millions of European men and their descendants abroad who have given their lives so their children and a posterity for their people can endure through time. This is why I have to correct some of these historical fallacies.

"Hitler's great failure was the proof that paganism cannot unite Whites, and that until there is a true political movement that places Christ at its center there will be no salvation for Whites. They will continue to be marginalized, replaced, prevented from reproducing, and even wholesale slaughtered like we see in Ukraine. We do not need to see an Eagle on a uniform, but a Cross."

About a year ago there was much drama on RVF in the Hitler thread because of this very same sentiment. I don't remember you ever commenting in there, but I was all over it like white on rice. It was established there, as it is in many other places of these kinds of spiritual discussions, that Hitler was not a Pagan. The National Socialist German Worker's Party and movement in Germany was built on the principles of positive Christianity, it is in their doctrine. It was the last decent country on Earth and much of our modern technological conveniences we take for granted were spawned by Christian Germanic minds.

One has to question why all allied leaders (including Stalin) were high ranking Freemasons and at the same time leaders of the German coalition nations (including Hitler) were all Christian. Not forgetting the Jewish declaration of a Holy war by Samuel Untermyer in 1933. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ... it is a duck. WW2 was a Holy war and when the armies of Christianity were eventually defeated it should be no surprise that our once Christian nations have been slowly turned into a replica of Babylon. Every single Axis leader apart from the Japanese and some Arabs were Christian men who were not freemasons, and all of them were either Catholic or Orthodox, only one major one was a Protestant.

This line of argument about defeat is a theological fallacy, because it is both rooted in historical manipulation by the victors and by people who do not do the time-exhausting legwork of researching for themselves how everything went down. It is not your own thought, as I have seen this parroting of a research-less talking point many times before about an allegedly Godless cause getting wiped out for the sake of not being "Christian enough".

This claim you make also demands validity in the face of the opposite occurring every day in our reality. If this was a sound logical argument based in correct historical theology, then there would never be a Christian defeat in history and, inadvertently, we would have no martyrs or Saints, or even a faith for that matter. The spiritually bankrupt hordes have been "winning" every day in their demonic appetites for a material and flesh world, yet the Christian European suffers endlessly but the minute he decides to band together with his kinsmen he is doomed? No.

The Germans in WW2 did wear crosses, every single one of them, it just may look different to unknowing minds. The Cross Pattée (or Iron Cross) is an age-old depiction of the cross and is in many Cathedrals in Europe. The German belt buckles also bore the inscription: "Gott Mit Uns" or (God's with us). I could go into how the Hakenkreuz is also a Christian cross, but that deserves its own thread. It was particularly fond to Eastern Orthodox Romanians and Russians. Both the Romanovs and the Codreanu's had this hooked cross in several important aspects of their lives.

I have done decades of research into this and have spoken with the likes of David Irving and Ernst Zundel (RIP), among meeting and interviewing other people in Europe who either fought for or descended from those who fought for the Axis powers. My own family also supported these causes and every single one of them is Catholic, some even fought in Spain against the Red terror. The Axis were the Christian force that was trying to save Europe, and they were betrayed by their racial brethren in the USA and England who were under control of the talmudic jews. That was ultimately why Christian Europe lost to the communist new world order, because of treachery, deceit, and betrayal at the hands of those who should have been allies, not a lack of belief on the part of one side.

I implore you and anyone else who believes these lies that Hitler and the NSDAP were pagans to research more into this outside of mainstream sources. I will briefly go into it here, as it specifically relates to this topic. To delve fully into it requires its own thread with a focus just that one subject:

The Third Reich viewed Christianity as the traditional and continual religion of the German nation, it allowed freedom of religion for all denominations of the Christian faith , whether Catholic, Lutheran, Orthodox, or non-denominational. In addition to the support of Christianity, the Reich also extended religious liberties to all non-Christian faiths that did not pose a threat to the German nation's laws and ideals set forth by the state. In this manner, Germany enjoyed true freedom of religion like no other nation of its time.

According to the 25 point party program of the NSDAP that was first announced on Feb 24th of 1920, point 24 states the following:
point24-nsdap.jpg

With over 95% of Germany being made up of Christians, any subversive or anti-Christian sentiments and actions were quickly scrutinized and punished by law. In late 1935, almost three years after the NSDAP was elected into power, even the jewish-controlled foreign press confirmed that these promises were indeed being kept:

NYtimesHitlerChristian.jpg

Continued in that article from October 29th, 1935 is the following:
"The essence of National Socialism is faith, it is an act of love. Therefore national socialism is positive Christianity and love toward one's neighbor and neighbors, not primarily the Hottentots and Zulus, but towards German compatriots. Should not the representatives of the Christian confession recognize that with the Nazi seizure of power the time came when true Christianity would be made a potent force?"
"We have never interfered in matters of belief. We want complete freedom in such matters. National Socialism must demand that each party member be religious, but we don't bother about which confession he wants to belong to."


During the Weimar Republic, liberal secularism had halted laws against sacrilege and indecency. Once the NSDAP came into power in 1933, these traditional laws were reintroduced and reinforced, and one of the first cases was of a jewish artist named George Grosz, who was known for making disgusting and mocking cartoons of Christ. The first major trial in the Third Reich was a degenerate jew being put on trial, albeit in absentia, for blasphemy. He unfortunately escaped to America before he could be arrested, where he would not receive his due justice. In his absence, the NSDAP put a public showing of his works which they openly called "a mockery of the divine."

"We have put an end to the denial of God and the slander of religion!" - Adolf Hitler in 1933.

I have hundreds of more examples and proofs of Christianity in both Hitler and the Third Reich, and other Axis members, and plenty of refutations of paganism during this time period.

I am not advocating for not spreading the Gospel and the faith to non-White people. Let those who desire to do so go and do that as much as they believe it will make a difference. I am advocating for the urgency of spreading it to Whites and Europeans, and, however difficult it is, to re-convert as much of the lost masses as possible, because to redeem these people is a cause worth dying for, and certainly one worth living for. I won't let the stubbornness of my own kin prevent me from working the Holy Spirit and truth into them.

Be free of these historical lies. I am willing to work with you and other curious minds on bridging this gap of understanding. A majority of the White Nationalist groups that exist today are a portmanteau of both the fallout of project Mockingbird and the desperate reaction of the demoralized Whites who need a proper leader, both temporally and spiritually. The latter is already there, and we all will meet Him some day. As to the former, it can only be a wise shepherd, a true voice that can guide his people along God's laws.

Here is a video that recites a discussion of the battle between the soul of Europe which is inherently created by Christendom, and the liberal western decay that seeks to replace it, accompanied by some very kino visuals of the historical timeline:

"Europe's Other Soul" (Europa's Andere Seele)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top