Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (243).
[–] • 0 pt

btw i am following the general line of logic you establihed earlier in this thread and clarified here in this post but it comes across as not so much as logic but rather just window dressing and excusing yourself for investing into the ideas of others; ie- mathematics and hearsay.

of course there are things we have to engage in from time to time that are impossible to know - and if we have limited information to work from then our decisions will be limited - and often we have to concede authority to another for the purpose of surivival... yet these can be seen as temporary concessions; small fuckups we are to learn from as with over-eating or dabbling in alchohol or drugs. If it develops as a habbitual problem (ie- your 'faith' in god) that is when the serious problems occur.

As an operting principal we can execute vigilance in maintaining authority over-oneself and not giving it away so quickly; I question whether your life was on the line that you needed Pythagorean theorem or that you needed to believe those stories of others to live just one more day. More likely, those selfish releases of authority/consents to the ideas of others were a result of you 'wanting something'.

[–] • 0 pt

You dismiss my justifiable true belief as a "habitual problem", seemingly a priori. I sense the usual strains of cynical bias in you. Besides an ability to dream up the least charitable (and consequently least accurate) interpretation of what I believe, which is all that cynicism really is, what reason to you have for believing that belief such as mine is such a problem? If we are in agreement that the subject in question is beyond reason's scope, then the best way at allowing one gnosis to confront another may be to begin with the evidence of which each of us are aware in support of our position - not to say that gnosis reduces to such evidence. I've already listed certain circumstantial evidence lending credence to my gnosis.

In other words, justify thyself.

Maybe you want to bring forward the problem of evil, but I don't get that impression from you. More likely, I suspect you think the Church, and anything Christian, is just some diabolical concoction by the Jews to weaken the West and open the way for their subversion of it. But I have already tried to explain that this reeks of historical ignorance. You seem to think the Church can change her doctrines at a whim, and that this amenability makes the Church and anything under her dominion ripe for the subverting, but this is not the case. The true doctrines of the Church are as immutable as God Himself, since rooted in Truth they share the same essence. To enforce such Truth is to prevent Jewish subversion; to abandon it is to open oneself up to subversion. The Jews have the power they do now not because the Church enabled it by following Church doctrines; but because the world enabled it by rejecting Church doctrines.

Furthermore, what constitutes "the Jew" is something more than a collection of genes and a racial history - though these are a part of it. The Jew is what he is primarily according to his beliefs and his identity - these are the things that determine behaviour, not one's DNA, as is clear when comparing a white Antifa terrorist to , or comparing to the leftists doing the marching. Obviously the beliefs held by these people are influencing their behaviour more than their equally European DNA. Likewise with the Jew, but the problem with the Jew is that their very identity, and thus their revolutionary beliefs, are founded on the rejection of Jesus Christ as the Logos and Lord.

So I think your dismissal of the truth and importance of the Catholic faith is founded on a misunderstanding of the immutability of true Catholic doctrine, and a misunderstanding of the primary reason that the Jews are subversive in the first place.