It will take many generations for this knowledge to germinate after comprehending it, nothing in my studies in past few decades has compared. Joy to share it with anyone who cares to listen.

Lol, Gnosticism, what a joke. Have you even read Saint Irenaeus? Has this guy? Where is he getting his ‘research’ from?

https://youtu.be/ZdGuTCFeKdY

Well good for him hes already getting his wish

@FreshWholeMilk The joke is on you for comprehending The garbage version of The Syrian culture Gnosticism is dead forever in how it was and the Satanic mutations it became, This guy is shedding new light about it and reminding people that Gnosticism is a earth based narrative not a proto Christian Valentinian corruption

Santanic in the sense of it being turned into something it's not for adversarial use... Not Satan in the myth but Satan as a context of corruption

In any case the whole point is to expose international Jewery that is using the mysteries converting it Into a satanic process and acknowledge nature as a source of our purpose and not some off planet father God of Archontic delusions

👆🏿

Is that English? @Mythophrenicus

Perhaps not... I'm better at Galician

That’s not a serious argument @FreshWholeMilk

He started it

Thing with paganism is that it's always going to be adverserial to Christianity and that's going to be it's sole purpose. Hence why it's satanic. Hell, you can see it nowdays how it's always the pagans and atheists that mock Christianity, never really satisfied with just them putting faith in their own belief system but rather go around and impose it on others. They also like to impose themselves as the authority figures and gather a cult of personality around them, a big flaw in their thinking if you ask me.

inb4
>hurr Christianity does the same
nop, the ultimate authority is God not the priest

there's no unifying morality in a pagan religion. Just relativism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpVjJb-lLNE Based and redpilled

his words speak true

but he supports israel so im still suspicious

you are right, but imagine if the afd or trump woul do such things

amazing

@Bird Wizard paganism predates Christianity significantly, as do non-religious movements such as atheism so asserting that they only exist to mock Christianity seems flawed. Given Christianity holds a strong reputation for being *the most* evangelising faith on earth and certainly no less willing to act as authority figures this seems to be the pot calling the kettle black. On that note it’s worth mentioning that non-religious movements typically push for a divide in temporal and spiritual authority through secularism, which to some sects of Christianity’s credit some have been willing enough to accept.
Christianity is not alone is having an established canon which you may choose to believe was divinely inspired, as other religions do, but ultimately was directly the result of the work of priests agreeing what was and was not canonical in meetings such as the council of Nicea.
There is no one pagan religion and some pagan religions do have set moral principles although I’m not even sure if that would be an accurate description of the Gnosticism shadilay is putting forth.
Long story short there is no global conspiracy to specifically pick on the christians and if the shit shadilay was putting forward was relevant to anything in any real way I’d be doing the same

Honestly it’s one of the most stupid and self-absorbed things that christians trot out and up there with feminists and “the patriarchy” and Nazis and “the Jews”

nah this is bullshit.
>Paganism predates Christianity
Sure it does in it's old form, the neopagans are adverserial. The paganism of old is extinct.
Christianity is vast so it's easy to call it evangelising faith. Why even harp about docile Christianity when you have a far worse religion roaming around.

>On that note it’s worth mentioning that non-religious movements typically push for a divide in temporal and spiritual authority through secularism

It's usually undermining the Chruch and the community. The atheists typically forget Christians exist and just push their narrative to suit them and their view.

Pagan is polytheistic, multiple set of authorities each with their own personality and whims. The gods are not united hence why the message is scattered.

It's a weak form of social cohesion, they are adverserial amonst themselves let alone a new up and coming religion with a unified message.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/ExposeChristianSchools?src=hash

@Bird Wizard
>why harp on about Christianity when there are worse religions?
I agree there are much worse religions but they lack the impact and proximity that Christianity has to me so when it comes to levelling critique at practices that specifically impact my life the dumb assertions made by some christians (#notall, some christians are very well informed) are the most immediate. Beyond that I can walk and chew gum at once and We don’t need to punish all the murderers before we punish a single shoplifter, I can juggle criticising stupid aspects of Christian belief and criticising other beliefs just as fine.

>secularism undermines the church
Is your point seriously criticising the absence of spiritual authority in temporal affairs as undermining the church community while attempting to dunk on other faiths for wishing to have the same authority? How does this make you any different? Nor can I think anyone can accuse non-religious movements of being *over* represented in influence or pushing their narrative through secular channels where every single American president has professed to be a Christian of some denomination and while at other levels it isn’t quite so stark the non-religious are still significantly under-represented compared to the slice of the population they occupy.

>paganism has multiple authorities
As does Christianity in practice. Orthodox and protestant christians pay very little heed and in turn protestants and Catholics pay no attention to the patriarchs. In the same way as each establishes its own canon pagan religions determine their own pantheon and largely script a message which unites them under some creed.

I do agree paganism isn’t really relevant on any stage though and is unlikely to become so

Returning to the “undermining the church” meme there’s actually a bit of a divide between anti-religious movements and non-religious movements which find reason to support aspects of religious movements. The dichotomy between Dawkins and Haidt is an apt illustration

Richard "infanticide is ok" Dawkins

I don’t think Dawkins advocates infanticide and his statements have been strictly related to that for animals in evolutionary terms infanticide is an adaptive behaviour. Evolution is not lauded as a moral system however and nor should it be taken as one

I agree though Dawkins is not above criticism and he’s certainly less than charitable towards agnostics

as I said relative morality, by saying it's not a morality system it dodges the question of why not. No hard stance on any immoral behaviour as everything is adaptive behaviour.
At least Christian values stamp out the undesirables like murderers and thiefs while a secularist tries to reason their existence and justify the acts.

Evolution provides a moral system

Survival requires teamwork

and then u have this brainlet

yes

Your conflating a description of real systems with a moral judgement which it’s not. It so happens that to my knowledge Dawkins is a moral relativist but he I believe he would still likely decry infanticide and he certainly seeks to punish murderers and thieves. It is not a requirement that non-religious people be moral relativists by any means and ayn rand for example prompted an objective morality based on self interest.

Evolution doesn’t provide a value statement as to whether action is right or wrong only that shit that reproduces tends to reproduce. Teamwork in and of itself is not evidence of a moral system as people can frequently work together to achieve things they freely admit is unethical

Additionally wizard you can at the same time understand why someone took a certain course of action while stating that action was wrong

I'm saying the process itself does

which is true

It provides a dangerous perspective where morality is presented as something arbitrary. You expose the perspective of a murderer and suddenly everyone is a bleeding heart murderer that had his own deep reasoning for why he did it. We call it motive and it doesn't justify the murder yet something like this is presented as kill or be killed.