*blocks your usurious looting operation and asks why you choose to ignore the logos*

Never heard him talk about gun control before. I also disagree with his view that White people don't exist, and didn't really like his airing a personal note from Pat Buchanan for public consumption.

Aaaaaaand I should know who this nobody is because … ?

Attached: hes-right-you-know-goldwater.jpg (228x221, 11.26K)

Attached: laser EMJ.jpg (373x593, 85.79K)

Yeah, he thinks Logos is identical to rationality. He's a historian, not a theologian so you can't fault him too much.

Logos was a greek/pagan concept before the New Testament was written, how is it invalid to speak of it in that way? Obviously, identifying Christ with Logos isn't 1:1 with whatever explicitly pagan baggage the term carries, but everything else concerning human rationality, inherent order of the universe, etc.

White people don't exist. 100 years ago some British dude would look at you funny for identifying him with an Irishmen, or a Polish guy.

Buuu,,,,,Bu,,,But my race. You mean i've been Worshiping something, that's only really come into modern History. Now in the form of some demi god? But people on Zig Forums said the only thing that matters is muh race. You mean they lied?!? And had a Fanatical view of the world, as a result of that regarding their worldview? Bu… But kike on a stick right guys………

Attached: 3ff50dd633742af6fcdcbdd70ff64937e433c4657d3bfd7401d5f2a43423390d.jpg (528x480, 35.86K)

This.
It's just an umbrella term invented to to demonize ALL europeans everywhere.
There are no "whites" in europe. They have ethnicities, like polish, greek, italian, etc.

Acts 17:26
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation
Even if you don't hold race in high regard, God willed them to exist, so they must be preserved, every single one of them.

Just making some Sarcasm out of the thing. But he's right. Literally if you went back 100s ago, and started talking to some British dude, and Identifying him with Generic white Identity. He'd think you're nuts. Lumping me in with those Germans, those Irish, Those Dirty eastern polsih, Russians etc. That's the Ironic situation of the whole thing.

What's it like having a single digit IQ you leftist frauds

Attached: smart brainlet.png (601x508, 114.05K)

You sure about that? Stop believing what (((those))) who murdered God Himself say.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1314x752, 579.22K)

True, but 100 years ago Britain was filled with Brits. Now, not so much. You can't say the Italian and English living in the same country don't have more in common with each other than say an Irishman and an Ecuadorian, despite the former grouping belonging to a different denomination, and the latter being of the same denom.

It may be now in modern culture. Literally if we had a time Machine. And we went, back to WW1 era Britain. The local population would look at you funny for just labeling all the Ethic groups together in just one group. There were Ethic Guides made up for your travels in Europe even not as far back, in the early 20th century. Or better example of this would be Austria hungary pic related. Where's this race worship at? I don't see it. What we're trying to say is. Outside of mainland Europe. Putting people into Generic white category wasn't a thing. I think Michael E jones makes the point that. Until Blacks started Migrating into the Northern states. That Races wasn't an issue up where i live for instance in Pa. But now it is. But we're saying that it wasn't always like this. You can actually thank the leftist for that at least here in the states. You see what we are saying?

Attached: 20th Century racial ETHNIC Map.jpg (1280x924 636.25 KB, 195.03K)

What about in deracinated and de-ethnicized America… the place where the two people (Jones and Buchanan) whose example spurred on this line of discussion, are from?
Jones and Buchanan aren't just Catholics, they're also White (and overall right about nearly everything).

All in all, you'd all be right if we lived in a sane world, like we did 100 years ago (well saner). The fact is, society was never designed to accommodate such diversity, and in a saner world being Catholic would and should be the main identity you'd have.
But currently, trying to tell me that I, as a Catholic, have more affinity with some mud-hut dwelling African whose village the French colonized and converted, than I have with my WASP neighbor, is just silly.

*Err excuse me Inside mainland Europe. Outside sure. But again. The point being. If i was to go back in time. And spout the stuff/pol/ does. Save the white race Reeee, NOthing but my race!!!!. They'd think i was nuts for the reasons listed above. But Also for having such a fanatical narrow minded outlook on the world. And having such, a Truncated belief system.

100 years ago there'd be no need. Different White ethnic groups had their own territories and weren't being flooded with Africans and Arabs. White people also represented around 1/3rd of the world population at the time. Now it's what? 8-9%. If that.

Nobody is saying ethnicity doesn't exist, leftist idiot. The point is that race exists too, and ethnicity doesn't exist without race. Since you seem so history minded, let me give you an analogy to help you understand how retarded what you're saying is
Greek people don't exist. 2,500 years ago some Athenian dude would look at you funny for identifying him with a Theban, or a Corinthian guy.
Literally if we had a time Machine. And we went, back to Peloponnesian War era Athens. The local population would look at you funny for just labeling all the City groups together in just one group.
Now if you know anything about ancient Greece, you know how winnie the pooh retarded what I just said is, because while they had their city identities, they also had a much larger us vs them, of barbaroi and hellenes.
Also, how does square with your theory? Seems like a giant gaping hole to me.
Now tell me about how Ahmed is a German

I couldn't care less.

You make a lot of good points. But maybe i should rephrase what i'm trying to get across. I think having a Fanatical narrow minded, and Truncated view of the world where. Your whole sole purpose is life. Is nothing but the preservation of your race. But there's more to this world then just Blind allegiance to a race. Just because i happen to have been born White. It's a package deal it comes with other priorities. Ethnicity's, Faith, Traditional morality. Hopes this helps. Some bad explaining. I just think it's hilarious when you see people on Zig Forums all day spouting about saving the race. But at the same time Destroying their own Faith/Culture. And the ultimate worldview that made sense of any of it. But Race fascination, has really gotten out of hand since really post 1960s. Or to put it into Theological terms Idolatry. But yes you made some good points. But there's more to it. For instance before considering the Christian worldview. I like i'm sure many others, as people on Zig Forums probably don't see the distinction between a baptist vs Catholic vs Orthodox. Well to my surprise and to many others who've delved in. That would be wrong there's more to Christianity than. Jim Buck tooth. Who host his church in the backwoods of Kentucky.

I understand what you are saying, but trying to apply the "white" label in Europe would actually bring more harm.
That is why Richard Spencer is a literal winnie the pooh malevolent retard. Europe should remain divided on ethnic grounds, as it always used to be.

Then why are you posting? The context of this entire sub-conversation concerns two White American Catholics.

His view on ethnos and race is far more enlightened than post modernist alt right larpers

I’m a mongrel of six different European nations. The only single designation I fit under with certainty is white. If there’s no white history for me to associate with because you claim white doesn’t exist then I’m just a rootless hexaracial mutt with no history. A meaningless spark that will fizzle out in a few generations due to genetic drift.

Do you really need a sense of ancestral history to find meaning or significance in life

If I have no heritage to preserve then anything I do is just folly. At worst hedonism and at best helping some other people who will just die and become individually unimportant around the same time I do. A heritage lasts beyond individual lives.

Seems like a narrow view even materialistically and totally nonsensical as a Christian.
In fact, most people on the planet manage to pump out some kids at some point. It's a rather trivial task. Tchaikovsky never had kids and he's a lot more important than you and I will ever be.

Well, that certainly isn't a Christian View. That's more in line With Materialist/Atheist thinking. And not even a full view. You're still retaining some sort of quasi meaning. If the atheism is true then Nietzsche and others who're halfway honest would just say. Actually it really doesn't matter cause we're all going to the black void anyway. Heritage does matter. Defending your culture. And yes race can matter. The problem is people on Zig Forums Tend to have such as C.S Lewis put Truncated beliefs Where everything has been boiled down that all that matters and it comes down to, is the Class, The Tribe.., Or the nation.

Nah

Is this a joke? Forget for a second the stupid claim that only racial heritage is capable of affecting future generations; the idea behind that claim itself is stupid. Why would having your actions affect people in the future be any more meaningful than having your actions affect people right now? Retard larper

How so? In the next life I likely won’t care too much about Earth. If I’m confident I’m going to heaven I might as well work in preserving a heritage here too. It will probably even build my riches in heaven since it often involves helping and protecting my literal neighbor.

Because they REEEE like you.

Yep, sorry dude.

He's an actualy christian and not a white nationalist larper so he wont

Shem, Japheth, and Ham all had the same father, Noah.

and this is the problem of modernism in a nut-shell, you look to the words of mere men rather than the inspired Words of God.

An Ethiopian will claim to be different from a Nigerian…But that doesn't mean that "black" doesn't exist.

You're not fooling anyone with these word games user.

Attached: DSCF7938.JPG (1253x1600, 480.5K)

The only one fooled is you. What man is not from Adam? What man is not from Noah? Show them to me.

Nah.
Anyone can have sex. It takes a man to raise children.
Stay sterile my friend.

LOOK GUISE WE HAVE A RETARD HERE!

Yeah again, most people stick around to raise their kids.
Wanting to have a family is a perfectly natural urge but to insist that it's necessarily the most important thing a person can do, or that a person's life is meaningless without it, is absurd. But of course that was just part of your claim. The other part is that without some semblance of racial identity even that task is worthless, which is even dumber.

Logos seems to be used by him as a term for natural law theory, but with the benefit of its clear associations to Jesus Christ. All attacks upon the natural law, in the countless forms they appear to us today (usury, no-fault divorce, the separation of Church and State, sterile acts of sexuality, etc.), then, are attacks upon the reality and authority of Jesus Christ. Makes sense.

Attached: natural law and duty_edward feser_the last superstition.png (608x632, 76.42K)

I never said they weren't descendants of Noah or Adam. They are.

Feel free to build another strawman.

Attached: images-25.jpg (225x224, 15.3K)

Except ἔθνος means ethnic group or tribe (English, Danish, Irish, whatever be) not race.

The substance of your post implied that the division between the brothers is proof enough that we are more different than what is scripturally acceptable.

That man may be black-colored, but he also has a distinct ethnos, and he is also your brother. If we were anywhere else other than Zig Forums, I wouldn't be slamming you, but we know what is preached here.

No shit sherlock, maybe because that is the word they used, especially given that race is a pretty modern term?
You can get into a semantics game, but you are going to play that alone.

He has some very good points. However he is Americanist. But my main problem is that he views everything in the American perspective. Being half German half French or whatever he sees the ethnicities as meaningless. He's right that there's no white ethnicity. But that's not a reason why Americans could not preserve themselves.
Furthermore the fact that America is deracinated and not uniform is not European problem. Americans should stop pushing their nonsense on Europe. Nobody in Europe is huwhite. We are Polish, German, Ukrainian, Italian, you name it. We're all brothers, true. But we see we're different and we strive to live as peers, preserve our heritage alongside each other.
To return to Jones, he seems to go only halfway because he thinks US is sustainable if it reforms itself.

I do not care. They should do some form of integralism or something like that as far as politics is concerned. But to use "white" to speak of Europeans is an insult to us. I want to do nothing with this.
Furthermore Jones denounces what e speak of here. He said he would have no problem with literally anyone marrying his daughter if he "had the principles". Obviously that is his issue but he presents it in a way that implies that this is the right stance. "muh anti-discrimination" as a virtue. That's a thing I cannot agree upon.

This.
It's like you just want to call us slavers and imperialist oppressors or some shit like that.

The overwhelming vast majority of all Saints are white. They are my role models and I love them dearly. Western civilization, which is a fruit of the church and Christianity is by far the best. I was glad to be born and raised in it, and I'm glad I know about my parents countries culture just so I can expose how ugly it is, to all the idiot hippies out there. (My parents were also luckily raised in a western culture, immigrating at very young ages and is being Catholics, which at least back then separated them). Self hating whites need to shut up. And yes Europeans did Christianity the best.

Based.

Do you know what IDs are you ignorant faggot?

Various people have various motives to do this.
Some people use it in good faith (Americans) because they do not understand Europe and its nations since they all lived together in America for so long. They do not know the close ethnic identity an average let's say Romanian knows (music, folklore dress, uniform religion, and so on.). In America "white" may make sense. It does not make any sense in Europe. It is always laughable when Americans think they know what Europe should/should not do.

Then there are people who want to throw everyone in one bottle and shake it. All Europeans together in one superstate, destroy all cultures and create dull mass. Then repeat it and do the same by bringing africans.

The same people then go with "muh white" "muh colonialist/slaver/oppressor" to create one category to be shamed into submission in case they want to preserve what they inherited from their ancestors.
Will not work on me though.

As an all white mutt living in America I am against this. Not knowing which ethnicity to identify with is a struggle. Ethnicities should remain separate.

I know most Americans do not want to do this/do not act in bad faith.
There are certain minorities however all over the world that want to push points 2 and 3. I really wonder who could that be.
The first point is people who do it in a good faith/they do not know better.
I do not have any particular problem with Americans in general….unless they meddle into our politics/way of living/impose their values on us.
So my apologies go to you and all other Americans who have common sense.

Lol you never had to participate in the thread.

...

You do not get to take what you argue and walk back on it, there is a real distinction between race and ethnicity and my point isn't that white people are bad etc. I am not a CIA shill. Race isn't just a modern term, it's a modern concept, and the retarded American idea of projecting one "white" identity onto every European ethnicity or wanting to create a "white ethnostate" is totally retarded. America was the first country to treat all white people as interchangeable for the purpose of identity, and it there is significant research to show that the various ethnicities (Anglos, Germans, Scandinavians, etc.) still have very real differences between them in America, even after hundreds of years. My point is that this pants-on-head retarded whignat concept of a single white race that takes the place of ethnicity within society makes no sense. Spencerites and other retards who want to do this are the insane ones, at best it would only accomplish the destruction of all cultures and diversity within whites and turning everyone into 56%ers. It is the destruction of national identity and local culture just like importing tiggers is, just to a lesser extent. No serious European right wing party advocates for a pan-white state because they realize it is completely insane. It's people like Macron saying that all Europeans are the same, not right-wing ones. America has tried the project of treating all white people the same, and it's left me with no group to identify with other than "American" because I'm such a mutt, and American is not a real identity at all. We should put this stupid concept of treating all white people as interchangeable down for good, it was a bad idea and it just didn't work.

Who cares, bitchnerd

which? the russians? the italians? the spaniards? the jewish saints? the anglo saxon saints? the mexican saints?

it's occurred to me that perhaps, it is the will of God that human history last so long that all peoples may enter in Heaven, the Church is strong in Africa, and maybe even the persecution in China will lead to the emergence of martyrs

No such thing user. Once you are a christian, you're done being jewish. Those two are mutually exclusive.

Ａｍｅｎ

Well this is what white refers to, it is just a blanket term. Maybe someone would argue about Mexicans. I do not care because I hardly use "white myself" so seriously id makes no difference to me.
An oxymoron. Read St. John Chrysostom.

This user has a point. American experiment is based on making a superstate that overrides national identity. It is an anti-empire. The good empire would be along The Holy Roman Empire lines, not along US lines.
Spencerites project their "values" on Europe. It is puritan type of thinking. Override and impose what you consider to be right and universal because your culture is superior.
America is a failed project because it is built upon secularism, muh freedumz and upon treating all europeans the same. Materialism replaced Christianity. It is a sad state of things, difficult to say where it will head. When thinking about it I should pray for Americans to find a way as I do for my people.

Now, it does not matter their ethnicity. And yes, a Jewish person can become a saint if he/she converts to the true Christ. As Jews are an ethnic group too, not just a religious one.

Indeed, there are a lot of European and Caucasian saints, but I would not like the term "white" to be used as a slur nor as a pride. "White"…who is white? It is easy to turn it into an element of discord, just like the myth of the golden apple and the Greek deity with that same name…
I am Italian, born in Italy, with a mostly Italian lineage mixed with a few Levantine, Germanic and Slavic people. Here in the UK, I got mistaken many many times for a Russian and a Pole due to my ancestry, but I am fundamentally Italian. Do I see myself as "white"? No, Italians are Southern Europeans, the so called "white people" should be the Germanic and Nordic folks; but we are all Europeans, we are all being infiltrated by the same anti-Christian agents and we all have to work together whilst acknowledging and taking hold of our unique cultures, languages, traditions and roots; the West was never a monolith, and yet we were almost all connected by one singular beam of wood, the cross our Lord bore for us all, for us Europeans, for all the Africans, all the Asians and all the American tribes….for all mankind. To try and claim we are better Christian, and to claim that due to our skin and blood, that's tragic and a mark of shame.

There are more ethnicites.
Askenazi, then there are descendants of Khazars - eastern european jews, then there might be some descendants of Judeans. There are also black jews. You can't claim they're one ethnicity since that is even more absurd than saying an englishman is the same as russian.
Furthermore when you truly convert, you abandon "jewishness" and you're no longer a "jew". It is a classical "race or religion" bait but it will not work here.
Once you are a christian, you're done being jewish. Those two are mutually exclusive.
Jews cannot be saints.

The ones who originally came from that background are some of my favorites though. St. Teresa of Avila especially.

She wasn't jewish.
Her paternal grandfather was a jew who turned to christianity.

So she is not of matrilineal jewish descent neither is she 50+ % jewish.

Stop slandering our saints. Thanks.

Logos is a person. The second person of the Trinity. Not saying there's no correlation between St John's use of the word Logos but it's certainly not exclusive to the pagan conception. This shows when EMJ tries to criticize the translation of St Jerome when he uses Verbum/Word for logos which is actually the best translation you can have since it relates to the Old Testament when God created through speech. The Son is the Word/Verbum God uses to create and in which everything is created.

Glory to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit unto the ages of ages amen.

Attached: unknown.png (192x353, 95.36K)

When you truly convert you renounce "jewishness" because you cannot at the same time accept being a Christ killer and to love Christ. Is that easy enough to understand now?
See what other guys said here.

Stop insulting the saints. Stop inventing based jews.
Jews cannot be saints.

Attached: 3322960e76a4c414ed14268d6861c1ab6aaac96b424a63748ce6f1bd73d3efdb.jpg (900x900, 89.86K)

Correct

Attached: 1477646320557.jpg (552x791, 29.55K)

...

I have to participate in ALL threads. It is my mission!

I make a distinction between being spiritually Jewish or Jewish by blood. The former takes absolute precedence over the latter. You let yourself be confused by modern semantics, I say nothing that contradicts Church Teaching.

This user is making a distinction between the Jew by blood, and the Jew by spirit. Clearly he is speaking of the ethnic Jew whom has been cleansed with the indelible mark of Baptism.

Congrats, you just exposed yourself as a true ignoramus