yeah its like some dumbass in high-school spent 15 minutes putting a PowerPoint together; except he would have to use the internet and even Wikipedia doesn't possess bias that rends such fucking stupidity.
Why are you calling yourself "Ancestral Vril" while being opposed to actual ancestral religion and instead worshipping the King of the Jews? Why don't you rename yourself "Hebrew Vril" instead? This post is severely lacking in actual accurate characterizations. Atheism has been proven time and time again to be a high-IQ religion in the west. Smart people are disproportionately Atheist. This doesn't mean atheism is right, in fact I think atheism is quite ridiculous, but maybe consider renaming your post to "top 5 wrong religions", since that's obviously what you mean. And in that circumstance, it's a bit alarming that you omit the Talmudic Judaism you claim to be strongly against.
The New Age religious movement has very little to actually do with Hinduism. Imagine if someone pointed to a non-denominational church -- or better yet a Unitarian Universalist -- with a lesbian pastor wearing rainbow clerical scarf, and said "Christianity is the mother religion of this". That's what you sound like. Also, Hinduism does not have "a few dozen gods". It is ultimately monotheistic, but like other IE Paganism it promotes the worship of the gods as a means of worshipping the ultimate God, who depending on the sect is either Krishna, Shiva, or Vishnu (there are some other candidates in more minor sects as well). Both Hindu and Pagan morality originates from a notion of objective good stored within the godhead, with the mission of human beings as the act of maintaining the cosmic order established by the gods. Social hierarchy, gender roles, hospitality, keeping to oaths, moral piety, all of these are acts within he cosmic order. It is very retarded for you to deny this because several Church doctors literally adopted Pagan moral arguments for morality themselves. Indians are no more rapacious, smelly, and violent than Africans, who are largely Christian. It is because that country has a national IQ of 76. If an Indian became Christian, he wouldn't magically transform into a White man with brown skin.
>First, might is right. Those with strength and wealth have the ultimate say and thus hold the truth
This is not at all a tenet of Paganism, but this is not what "might is right" means. "right" in this context means, like, allotted privilege. Not factual statement.
>We do what is natural, which is a fallacy
This is a reddit fallacy, not an actual rigorous logical fallacy.
>Norse theology begins with a void that separates a land of fire and the other of ice.
Already wrong. The void, gunningagap, is surrounded by an icy rind. This is just poetic speech, though. It's the poetic edda, after all. Gunningagap is equivalent to the Buddhist notion of Sunyata, the unqualified absolute. Wotan and the gods are the demiurgic, formal force of reality, while the titans and monsters represent the cthonic, dynamic, and degenerative. The prima materia, so to speak. It is a metaphysical cosmogony, not a physical cosmogony, so comparing it to the big bang is like comparing genesis to actual earth history.
>Odin cannot act as the supreme moral arbiter because he was born at some point
Odin does not have to act as the supreme moral arbiter, all that matters is that we find a moral arbiter who is closest in resemblance to the ultimate reality, which is ultimately not knowable in our state of forgetfulness. Pagans do somewhat believe that they exist in a fallen state, but it is more that we live in a time of ignorance and immorality.
>Neopaganism in 2024 is largely a Hollywood fantasy. Most of its adherents are overweight consumers who are easily drawn by pretty aesthetics such as Viking tattoos, runes, and depictions of Odin.
This is only true in America, but I do agree that in many cases this is true. These people are not Pagans, they are just clowns. But that does not erase the existence of more intellectually invested Pagans.
Hmm okay, I see you skipped most of my comment to make a jab at the very last thing I said. Anyone can call themselves anything and anyone who criticizes this is making an arbitration. If you say "Christians are people who believe in the trinity" you are making an arbitration. Hell, if you say "Christians are people who believe in the infallibility of biblical scripture", that is still an arbitration.
Valid rebuttals and counter-arguments - thank you for your time and effort committed in making this contribution.
I really only have one objection:
> Atheism has been proven time and time again to be a high-IQ religion
"Atheism," insofar as the word can be used as an identifier for a mental or ideological disposition (as a matter of fact, if it is anything at all it is the absence of any religious or supernatural-thinking mindset or ideology), it is not a religion at all. Whatever may be the formal consensus definition (among the religious - after all, only the religious-minded entertain the very idea of atheism, while the people they address as "atheists" - more like a slur - simply don't think in these terms at all), atheism is supposed to describe the state of mind in which a religion or supernatural/magical attribution is absent.
Whatever the case, it's a preposterous notion as a basis for classification, because religion is subordinate to the rest of existence, and yet the term somehow inverts the status by subordinating existence to religion.
Atheism is not one religion, but metaphysical naturalism requires a leap of faith in my opinion and that is usually the form atheism takes in the modern west. So I call it a religion.
My own admittedly idiosyncratic definition of religion requires a state, or aspirations to statehood (such as those that are fundamental to Judaism), and for the religious practice to be formalized within the institutional infrastructure of the state and establishment for it to be considered a religion. It's with these stipulations in mind that I do not consider to being religions neither metaphysical naturalism nor animism.
You're worse than the gaytheists who hang out on reddit. You worship a jewish contrivance. You bown down to a sloppy seconds jew man/god king of the jews, who jews themselves made up in an attempt to trick people into venerating their group.
You don't even know you're being played, the fact that u left out Judaism and Chirstianity in the list while including Islam is apparent.
For all the shit Indians do (LITERALLY) at least their religion is theirs, they made it and to this day theyve cultivated it and Hinduism survived. Meanwhile Europeans have killed and warred with each other using Christianity as a cover for context, or that they truly believed it. Jews have gotten people like you to wage war with nonbelivers, putting them to death etc. The perfect golem is never aware that they're muscle for someone else high up the food chain.
Christianity and Islam were conceived as, and always have been, Judaism for gentiles.
All three Abrahamic "religions" have sprung from the same degenerate Jewish mind, with Christian and Islamic scripture being spun out from the Torah, which is as far from divine inspiration as can be and is more aptly described as a hideous blood revenge manifesto. The New Testament's compilation is laughably bungling, while the obvious Jewish connivance in Islam is also evidenced by the Hadith's resemblance to the Talmud.
Islam always was more kosher than Christianity, but when the rabbis eventually reveal the truth behind their Jesus deception while progressing their apocalypse bluff by inciting Gog and Magog war before the coming of their moshiach, the hated "false-gods" and idolatry, the blood-drinking sacrament, and other Jewish heresies of Christianity will be eliminated and Christianity will be rendered Noahide-compliant as well, just as Islam already is, and Judaism will finalize the conquest of the world.
It's all such wearisomely puerile, utter nonsense.
I have no problem with wether a belief system is nonsense or not. I have a problem when it encourages it's adherents to be antagonistic to life, to nature, to anything that is external to it.
Indeed christianity and islam is judiam but for non jews. These people and their golems have set mankind (mostly europeans) back by probably 1000 years or more with the introductory of this lie into the world.
I've argued elsewhere that Judaism and therefore Christianity, (but arguably more so Christianity) are anti-life because of their obsession with the afterlife/heaven and the insistence on the wickedness of this world, and that we are born in sin.
They are anti-life also because of the insistence on purification by blood-letting and blood sacrifice and the general obsession with killing, e.g. human/goat sacrifice in the Jewish scapegoat ritual, but also all that smiting and killing in the Old Testament. One of so many examples being Exodus 32:27 (King James): "Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor." Enlightening stuff.
(Of course, the Christians and the Jewish apologists are going to try to denounce this by claiming I'm cherry-picking)
The Jewishness of the Jesus invented by the Jews who repurposed the earlier Jewish messiah narrative (primarily Saul of Tarsus/Paul), in this case the suffering messiah of Christianity, which introduced the (innocent) human sacrifice equivalent of the practice already among the Hebrews of the scapegoat ritual - that one may cast one’s own sins onto an innocent goat - described in Leviticus 16:2-34, purification by the shedding of blood.
Besides being gruesome and barbaric, it is fundamentally immoral. It is the claim of vicarious redemption falsely professed through the crucifixion of Jesus, and this is purported to be Christianity’s novelty and greatest claim to validity.
Vicarious redemption is immoral in that it dismisses personal responsibility, which is the concept on which all genuine morality and ethics must depend.
But the fact that it is ritualized also demonstrates that blood sacrifice is central to the New Testament narrative as well as the Old. It accords with the anti-life Jewish-Christian-Islamic worldview.
It's hilarious because of your correct observation that exposes the level of irony that's thicker than peanut butter. I thought it was satarire on the first read. But they're serious apparently
I would just change one thing. Put Zionism first. You mentioned Atheism twice. I also would like to add Mormonism. A secret society that believes in aliens. lol 😂
There are really only two religions in the world. Historic Christianity, where Christ Jesus has done everything already to insure every penitent believer's salvation, and all of the other religions where you have to do this, that, and the other thing in order to save yourself, and, in the end, never really know if you've done enough until it's too late. Repent and trust Jesus, and do good works solely for your neighbor sake, and not to try to bribe the Lord God Almighty!
"the gospel By which also ye are saved, [believe that] Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 1 Corinthians 15:1-4; [Jesus] Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins ..., through the forbearance of God; ...by the law of faith. Romans Chapter 3:25-27
Oh look, another wignat who shits on the culture and beliefs of the majority of his ancestors while practicing a Jewish religion. That's really all I need to say. No amount of mental gymnastics can get you out of that paradox.
Hahahhaha this is the most low iq article on religion I've read to date. It's laughably sophomoric, my sides folded like a patio chair. More of this please, pure comedy!
You have to be the stupidest person on this app. This is unbelievably ignorant of logic. You can’t do these things bud. I suggest you stick to nonsense usual Christian preach and leave the heavyweights to the heavyweights.
First, Allah is a loving God according to Muslims. Love is a deep affection for someone. Allah existed before creation, and he is one person, so who exactly did love if he was eternally lonesome? Allah had to change if he could love, but that would not make him a god.
Does this not depend on what they mean by ‘a loving God’?
And even when you take that at face value it doesn't add up. It implies the type of love one feels toward a human can only be felt once you see a human. Even if you are, hypothetically, all knowing...
They obviously exist. It is so self-evident that even many Christian mystics like Cornelius Agrippa believed in them and did not believe they were harmful.
This is probably the dumbest article I've ever read on religion.
yeah its like some dumbass in high-school spent 15 minutes putting a PowerPoint together; except he would have to use the internet and even Wikipedia doesn't possess bias that rends such fucking stupidity.
Yup , obviously a pastor in the Greater Southern Church of Redneck Cretins Inc( Las Vegas Chapter). Apprentice Banjo singalong accompanist.
Blocked.
Why are you calling yourself "Ancestral Vril" while being opposed to actual ancestral religion and instead worshipping the King of the Jews? Why don't you rename yourself "Hebrew Vril" instead? This post is severely lacking in actual accurate characterizations. Atheism has been proven time and time again to be a high-IQ religion in the west. Smart people are disproportionately Atheist. This doesn't mean atheism is right, in fact I think atheism is quite ridiculous, but maybe consider renaming your post to "top 5 wrong religions", since that's obviously what you mean. And in that circumstance, it's a bit alarming that you omit the Talmudic Judaism you claim to be strongly against.
The New Age religious movement has very little to actually do with Hinduism. Imagine if someone pointed to a non-denominational church -- or better yet a Unitarian Universalist -- with a lesbian pastor wearing rainbow clerical scarf, and said "Christianity is the mother religion of this". That's what you sound like. Also, Hinduism does not have "a few dozen gods". It is ultimately monotheistic, but like other IE Paganism it promotes the worship of the gods as a means of worshipping the ultimate God, who depending on the sect is either Krishna, Shiva, or Vishnu (there are some other candidates in more minor sects as well). Both Hindu and Pagan morality originates from a notion of objective good stored within the godhead, with the mission of human beings as the act of maintaining the cosmic order established by the gods. Social hierarchy, gender roles, hospitality, keeping to oaths, moral piety, all of these are acts within he cosmic order. It is very retarded for you to deny this because several Church doctors literally adopted Pagan moral arguments for morality themselves. Indians are no more rapacious, smelly, and violent than Africans, who are largely Christian. It is because that country has a national IQ of 76. If an Indian became Christian, he wouldn't magically transform into a White man with brown skin.
>First, might is right. Those with strength and wealth have the ultimate say and thus hold the truth
This is not at all a tenet of Paganism, but this is not what "might is right" means. "right" in this context means, like, allotted privilege. Not factual statement.
>We do what is natural, which is a fallacy
This is a reddit fallacy, not an actual rigorous logical fallacy.
>Norse theology begins with a void that separates a land of fire and the other of ice.
Already wrong. The void, gunningagap, is surrounded by an icy rind. This is just poetic speech, though. It's the poetic edda, after all. Gunningagap is equivalent to the Buddhist notion of Sunyata, the unqualified absolute. Wotan and the gods are the demiurgic, formal force of reality, while the titans and monsters represent the cthonic, dynamic, and degenerative. The prima materia, so to speak. It is a metaphysical cosmogony, not a physical cosmogony, so comparing it to the big bang is like comparing genesis to actual earth history.
>Odin cannot act as the supreme moral arbiter because he was born at some point
Odin does not have to act as the supreme moral arbiter, all that matters is that we find a moral arbiter who is closest in resemblance to the ultimate reality, which is ultimately not knowable in our state of forgetfulness. Pagans do somewhat believe that they exist in a fallen state, but it is more that we live in a time of ignorance and immorality.
>Neopaganism in 2024 is largely a Hollywood fantasy. Most of its adherents are overweight consumers who are easily drawn by pretty aesthetics such as Viking tattoos, runes, and depictions of Odin.
This is only true in America, but I do agree that in many cases this is true. These people are not Pagans, they are just clowns. But that does not erase the existence of more intellectually invested Pagans.
Another pagan demonstrating the arbitrariness of his worldview. The masters of no true Scotsman.
Hmm okay, I see you skipped most of my comment to make a jab at the very last thing I said. Anyone can call themselves anything and anyone who criticizes this is making an arbitration. If you say "Christians are people who believe in the trinity" you are making an arbitration. Hell, if you say "Christians are people who believe in the infallibility of biblical scripture", that is still an arbitration.
Valid rebuttals and counter-arguments - thank you for your time and effort committed in making this contribution.
I really only have one objection:
> Atheism has been proven time and time again to be a high-IQ religion
"Atheism," insofar as the word can be used as an identifier for a mental or ideological disposition (as a matter of fact, if it is anything at all it is the absence of any religious or supernatural-thinking mindset or ideology), it is not a religion at all. Whatever may be the formal consensus definition (among the religious - after all, only the religious-minded entertain the very idea of atheism, while the people they address as "atheists" - more like a slur - simply don't think in these terms at all), atheism is supposed to describe the state of mind in which a religion or supernatural/magical attribution is absent.
Whatever the case, it's a preposterous notion as a basis for classification, because religion is subordinate to the rest of existence, and yet the term somehow inverts the status by subordinating existence to religion.
Atheism is not one religion, but metaphysical naturalism requires a leap of faith in my opinion and that is usually the form atheism takes in the modern west. So I call it a religion.
My own admittedly idiosyncratic definition of religion requires a state, or aspirations to statehood (such as those that are fundamental to Judaism), and for the religious practice to be formalized within the institutional infrastructure of the state and establishment for it to be considered a religion. It's with these stipulations in mind that I do not consider to being religions neither metaphysical naturalism nor animism.
This is funny coming from a wignat that worships a foreign jewish sect.
The dogshit trio - islam, judaism and christianity.
You are reddit.
You're worse than the gaytheists who hang out on reddit. You worship a jewish contrivance. You bown down to a sloppy seconds jew man/god king of the jews, who jews themselves made up in an attempt to trick people into venerating their group.
You don't even know you're being played, the fact that u left out Judaism and Chirstianity in the list while including Islam is apparent.
For all the shit Indians do (LITERALLY) at least their religion is theirs, they made it and to this day theyve cultivated it and Hinduism survived. Meanwhile Europeans have killed and warred with each other using Christianity as a cover for context, or that they truly believed it. Jews have gotten people like you to wage war with nonbelivers, putting them to death etc. The perfect golem is never aware that they're muscle for someone else high up the food chain.
Expressively and validly phrased.
Christianity and Islam were conceived as, and always have been, Judaism for gentiles.
All three Abrahamic "religions" have sprung from the same degenerate Jewish mind, with Christian and Islamic scripture being spun out from the Torah, which is as far from divine inspiration as can be and is more aptly described as a hideous blood revenge manifesto. The New Testament's compilation is laughably bungling, while the obvious Jewish connivance in Islam is also evidenced by the Hadith's resemblance to the Talmud.
Islam always was more kosher than Christianity, but when the rabbis eventually reveal the truth behind their Jesus deception while progressing their apocalypse bluff by inciting Gog and Magog war before the coming of their moshiach, the hated "false-gods" and idolatry, the blood-drinking sacrament, and other Jewish heresies of Christianity will be eliminated and Christianity will be rendered Noahide-compliant as well, just as Islam already is, and Judaism will finalize the conquest of the world.
It's all such wearisomely puerile, utter nonsense.
I have no problem with wether a belief system is nonsense or not. I have a problem when it encourages it's adherents to be antagonistic to life, to nature, to anything that is external to it.
Indeed christianity and islam is judiam but for non jews. These people and their golems have set mankind (mostly europeans) back by probably 1000 years or more with the introductory of this lie into the world.
I've argued elsewhere that Judaism and therefore Christianity, (but arguably more so Christianity) are anti-life because of their obsession with the afterlife/heaven and the insistence on the wickedness of this world, and that we are born in sin.
They are anti-life also because of the insistence on purification by blood-letting and blood sacrifice and the general obsession with killing, e.g. human/goat sacrifice in the Jewish scapegoat ritual, but also all that smiting and killing in the Old Testament. One of so many examples being Exodus 32:27 (King James): "Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor." Enlightening stuff.
(Of course, the Christians and the Jewish apologists are going to try to denounce this by claiming I'm cherry-picking)
The Jewishness of the Jesus invented by the Jews who repurposed the earlier Jewish messiah narrative (primarily Saul of Tarsus/Paul), in this case the suffering messiah of Christianity, which introduced the (innocent) human sacrifice equivalent of the practice already among the Hebrews of the scapegoat ritual - that one may cast one’s own sins onto an innocent goat - described in Leviticus 16:2-34, purification by the shedding of blood.
Besides being gruesome and barbaric, it is fundamentally immoral. It is the claim of vicarious redemption falsely professed through the crucifixion of Jesus, and this is purported to be Christianity’s novelty and greatest claim to validity.
Vicarious redemption is immoral in that it dismisses personal responsibility, which is the concept on which all genuine morality and ethics must depend.
But the fact that it is ritualized also demonstrates that blood sacrifice is central to the New Testament narrative as well as the Old. It accords with the anti-life Jewish-Christian-Islamic worldview.
"You are reddit." - guy called Ancestral Vril doing top 5 blogs on substack
It's hilarious because of your correct observation that exposes the level of irony that's thicker than peanut butter. I thought it was satarire on the first read. But they're serious apparently
Excellent article! 10/10. I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment, it is very accurate.
Thanks! Glad you liked it.
I would just change one thing. Put Zionism first. You mentioned Atheism twice. I also would like to add Mormonism. A secret society that believes in aliens. lol 😂
There are really only two religions in the world. Historic Christianity, where Christ Jesus has done everything already to insure every penitent believer's salvation, and all of the other religions where you have to do this, that, and the other thing in order to save yourself, and, in the end, never really know if you've done enough until it's too late. Repent and trust Jesus, and do good works solely for your neighbor sake, and not to try to bribe the Lord God Almighty!
Indeed, only Christianity teaches this.
"the gospel By which also ye are saved, [believe that] Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 1 Corinthians 15:1-4; [Jesus] Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins ..., through the forbearance of God; ...by the law of faith. Romans Chapter 3:25-27
¸.¤*¨¨*¤.¸¸...¸.¤*¨¨*¤..¸¸...¸.¤*
\¸.♥ Praise Lord Jesus Christ ♥.¸
.\¸.¤*¨¨*¤.¸¸.¸.¤*¨¨*¤..¸¸...¸.¤*
..\
☻/
/▌
/ \ All Glory to God!
Cope. Sub Saharan Africans are the most devout Christians.
Look at literally any crime statistic in any sub saharan african country.
"Ancestral Vril"
*Defends Jewish religion*
🫤
Oh look, another wignat who shits on the culture and beliefs of the majority of his ancestors while practicing a Jewish religion. That's really all I need to say. No amount of mental gymnastics can get you out of that paradox.
Christcvck, hail apollo negro
Glad to see most are calling this post out. Nothing to add, since the author is uninterested in truth.
Hahahhaha this is the most low iq article on religion I've read to date. It's laughably sophomoric, my sides folded like a patio chair. More of this please, pure comedy!
Named ancestral vril but prays to a rabbi 😸
You have to be the stupidest person on this app. This is unbelievably ignorant of logic. You can’t do these things bud. I suggest you stick to nonsense usual Christian preach and leave the heavyweights to the heavyweights.
Nice article. I have one question though:
Regarding this point you made:
First, Allah is a loving God according to Muslims. Love is a deep affection for someone. Allah existed before creation, and he is one person, so who exactly did love if he was eternally lonesome? Allah had to change if he could love, but that would not make him a god.
Does this not depend on what they mean by ‘a loving God’?
And even when you take that at face value it doesn't add up. It implies the type of love one feels toward a human can only be felt once you see a human. Even if you are, hypothetically, all knowing...
The chineese are atheist.
The Japanese are Buddhists
they have the worlds highest iqs.
Don't say that you'll get him upset.
I have yet to meet a pegan that belives his gods exist
They obviously exist. It is so self-evident that even many Christian mystics like Cornelius Agrippa believed in them and did not believe they were harmful.