Are there any pro-Christian authors with a similar philosophy to Evola's?
>>23306448
>>23306448Could you summarize Evola's philosophy?
Eliade Guenon until he converted to Sufism.
No. Christianity is absolutist. We believe in ONE FAITH, ONE LORD, ONE BAPTISM.“Traditionalism” is the coward’s religiosity. It proceeds from that anti-exclusionary, universalistic impulse inherent in the white race which simply cannot fathom the idea of true religion and exclusive revelation because that would have God sending the majority of humankind to eternal torment for its unbelief. They have to find some universal, “primordial” truth at the core of all religions instead, so that all may share in eternal life. They are the SJWs standing outside the gates of Heaven with a placard reading, “No one is illegal!”, because, deny it however want, they ultimately see the human being as an atomised Cartesian subject whose essence is fundamentally distinct from his actual character. But the truth is: people are what they are. Their form, their character, is obviously not “freely chosen” by them, but that does not negate what it is. A daisy which grows in the cracks of the pavement, with poor soil, will grow up to be ugly and deformed. Certainly it is not the daisy’s fault that it is ugly! But it IS ugly, it IS deformed, it IS to be reviled, it IS to be spat and stamped upon, and it IS inferior to the daisy which elegantly grows in fertile ground. God is the farmer who scatters his seed all around, and he does harvest the wheat and burn the chaff, not caring that the chaff did not “freely choose” to be chaff. There is only one true religion. Only one true revelation. And all who are outside of it will burn.Relevant Bible verses:*The ignorant are lost*>But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.*God has mercy only on his elect; there is no free will*>For he saith to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, “Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?” Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, “Why hast thou made me thus?” Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
>>23306634Great post. Just a little nitpick: It isn't entirely accurate to say that there is "no free will", but rather your Will is not free. God's Will, however, is. True faith in God, the alignment of your Will to God's Will, that is the casting off of the bondage of the Will.
>>23306887>God's Will, however, isTo imply God's will is free is to say that God has contingency, and that another kind of God could have existed.
>>23306634Calvinism is retarded and you should feel bad.
>>23306448Evola is completely unnecessary if you have read Wagner. He vaguely circumscribes what Wagner pierces to the very centre of in his understanding. What could he say about the technological world-dominion, paganism and Western destiny that has not been said in his Ring? Or about about religion and esotericism in his Regeneration Writings? Parsifal depicts a de-Judaised, Buddhistic, vegetarian, esoteric Christianity. In this scene Gurnemanz is initiating Parsifal into the mysteries:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hBKRlpGFcI>PARSIFAL:>I scarcely tread,>yet seem already to have come far.>GURNEMANZ:>You see, my son,>time here becomes space.
>>23306448Fr. Seraphim Rose's Orthodox Survival Guide is a Christian version of Revolt Against the Modern World.There is also G.M. Davis (Orthodox), Douglas Mark Haugen (Catholic) and Francis Schaeffer (Protestant) who all also reject the modern world with intellectual rigor.
>>23307043>For he saith to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, “Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?” Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, “Why hast thou made me thus?” Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
>>23307056Sorry, *Orthodox Survival Course
>>23306634At least you admitted to being anti-white.
>>23307199I’m not “anti-white”. I’m against the egalitarian and universalistic sickness that is disproportionately found in white people, whereby the idea that God would choose some and not others becomes unthinkable
>>23306899Is that so? Could you explain to me why? It seems to me that if God's Will were not free, then it would necessarily be bound to some extent, and so no longer omnipotent. I also don't see how admitting the free Will of God admits the possible existence of another kind of God as a matter of course. Furthermore, if Adam were created — as Calvin indicates in Book I, Ch. XV. of his Institutes — with free will, and only lost it after he was corrupted with sin, then wouldn't your denial of the free Will of God suggest that He had created a creature not in His own image, but rather quite far from it? Wouldn't it be much more blasphemous, then, to imply that Adam, being a creature with an unbound Will, was in truth more alike to God post casum hominis?>God has furnished the soul of man, therefore, with a mind capable of discerning good from evil, and just from unjust; and of discovering, by the light of reason, what ought to be pursued or avoided; whence the philosophers called this directing faculty το ἠγεμονικον, the principal or governing part. To this he has annexed the will, on which depends the choice. The primitive condition of man was ennobled with those eminent faculties; he possessed reason, understanding, prudence, and judgment, not only for the government of his life on earth, but to enable him to ascend even to God and eternal felicity. To these was added choice, to direct the appetites, and regulate all the organic motions; so that the will should be entirely conformed to the government of reason. In this integrity man was endued with free will, by which, if he had chosen, he might have obtained eternal life. For here it would be unreasonable to introduce the question respecting the secret predestination of God, because we are not discussing what might possibly have happened or not, but what was the real nature of man. Adam, therefore, could have stood if he would, since he fell merely by his own will; but because his will was flexible to either side, and he was not endued with constancy to persevere, therefore he so easily fell. Yet his choice of good and evil was free; and not only so, but his mind and will were possessed of consummate rectitude, and all his organic parts were rightly disposed to obedience, till, destroying himself, he corrupted all his excellencies. Hence proceeded the darkness which overspread the minds of the philosophers, because they sought for a complete edifice among ruins, and for beautiful order in the midst of confusion. They held this principle, that man would not be a rational animal, unless he were endued with a free choice of good or evil; they conceived also that otherwise all difference between virtue and vice would be destroyed, unless man regulated his life according to his own inclination.
>>23307246I’m not a theologian or a scholar, this is how I see it. To say one’s will is free is to say that it could have been otherwise. I could have willed X, but I willed Y, so my will was free. But by the doctrine of divine simplicity there is no composition in God. God’s essence is not distinct from his will. God rather is his will. Thus to say that God’s will could have been different is to say that God could have been different. But this is impossible as God is not contingent, there is no other possible God but him. Thus God’s will is totally subordinated to his Nature.
>>23307243Of course, aristocratic traditionalism is only egalitarian from the Jewish perspective. From the Aryan (white) perspective, one's fate in the afterlife is decided by one's nature, whether that be the heroism needed to enter Elysium, Valhalla, Svarga, etc. or the asceticism for union with Dao, Brahman, Nirvana, etc. The fact is that these are only available to distinguished superior men; it's a characteristically Jewish trick to claim that, since this isn't affected by the distinction between the Chosen People and the Goyim, it's somehow "egalitarian".
>>23307430All of your "gods" are devils. Polytheism does not answer the question of what grounds ultimate being. God is simple in essence, and there can only be one God, for very deep metaphysical reasons that the demonic backwards pagans never even grasped. >one's fate in the afterlife is decided by one's natureYes, but what is one's nature decided by? God. God creates one's nature. That's my entire point. God created the wicked and he created the just. He left some in ignorance and he enlightened some. The idea that "all religions" are of God is demonic. There is only one Truth, and that is in Jesus Christ.
>>23307430>>23307537Moreover, when one realises that God creates one's nature, and that free will is a meaningless concept which does not and cannot exist, one will do away with all of these delusions of grandeur that allow you to consider yourself a "distinguished superior man". For it is God who fashioned you, God who created you, God who sustains every breath you take, God who formed you for his own purposes.
>>23307537This is so true my fellow white man, unless it came from the yahudis, it’s DEMONIC!
>>23307583The Church superseded the Israelites. They have broken their covenant with God and are now cursed by Him.
>>23307583God is the fount and source of all being. If there are multiple "gods" then they exist within a context of Being that is prior to them. If God is made of parts then there must exist a context of Being prior to God in which his various parts can be related and cohere within the whole. A pen, which is composed of two parts (the lid and the base), must exist within a spatial context for its two parts to be related. But if God exists within a context of Being, then he is not the fount and source of all Being. He does not contain within himself the explanation for all existence, since existence is prior to him. Thus this "God" is revealed not to be a real God.Therefore God is one, and simple in essence. Polytheism is demonic.
>>23306448How about Christian authors? Augustine is what you want.
>>23307537>Polytheism does not answer the question of what grounds ultimate being. Factually wrong>God is simple in essenceThe Vedantic Brahman and the Neoplatonic One are more simple in fact than the Trinitarian God that is characterized by plurality.
>>23307725>Factually wrongCool argument, bro.
>>23307246>It seems to me that if God's Will were not free, then it would necessarily be bound to some extent, and so no longer omnipotent.nta, but you're quite right.Here is a sketch of how Divine freedom, properly understood, accords with Divine simplicity: https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2010/05/davies-on-divine-simplicity-and-freedom.html
>>23307737>Cool argument, bro.Both pagan Neoplatonism and Hindu philosophy posit Brahman/the One to be the ultimate ground of all being/existence
>>23307896Exactly but instead of worshipping the creator (God, the One) you worship the created (your little demigods), which are either devils or don’t exist.
>>23307904>you worship the created That’s also not true. I’m not sure what you are hoping to accomplish by lying. In Neoplatonism and Hindu theology they for the most part worship the God who is the uncreated ground of everything.
>>23307537>All of your "gods" are devils
>>23306547
>>23307047Ya I like when Wagner writes about Hermetic Alchemy and esoteric history and the Hermetic Masters.>>23307243>the egalitarian and universalistic sickness that is disproportionately found in white peopleThis comes from Judaism, not the West/Whites. This same gay universalism and egalitarianism is in Islam as well you cretin. It's an abrahamic/feminine/semetic tendency. You're probably a faggot brown teenager...I'm so sick of you fucking halfwits all over the internet worshipping andrew tate and pretending to be alpha males when you can't even talk to women. >>23307537Idiotic post. Religious retards trying to understand esotericism is basically when I leave the thread, because there is no end to their idiocy and they are usually the loudest/most stupid.
>>23307537This retard doesn't even know about the ontological difference lmao
>>23307047yet one can read Evola's book on the Grail in a fraction of the time needed to suck out all the marrow from Parsifal... and if one has time why wouldn't he read von Eschenbach's magnum opus instead?just saying that Evola is not completely unnecessary... there are parts of the world where the weather is better than in Wagnerland, we only need to raise the average level of spiritual quality
>>23308713The Primordial Tradition.
>>23308167Then they wouldn’t be polytheists, mongoloid, that’s why you snuck in the word “mostly”
>>23308693> This comes from Judaism, not the West/Whites. This same gay universalism and egalitarianism is in Islam as well you cretin.Completely false. The Jews believe they are the chosen people. They’re not convinced of any universalistic hippy notions about how “all religions really lead to God!” Same with Muslims. They believe their faith is the one true faith, that all others are demonic, and they would die for it. It’s only whites who reject their culture’s religion (Christianity) on the grounds that it is exclusionary and invent bogus philosophies such as Evola’s “traditionalism” which say actually ALL RELIGIONS are saying the same thing and you can just pick and choose whichever one you want.
>>23307430>>23308693You've been posting the arrogant styled schizophrenic garbage for years. When are you going to commit suicide? You live a completely meaningless and worthless life.You and Jews are psychologically equivalent. You're just taking the Chosen People vs. the Goyim dynamic and changing it to white vs. non-white/brown.
>>23309144NTA (just a different aspect arguing towards the same end): the poly- part comes from different modes of observation of the divine because people are not only different when looking at multiple individuals but also differ in mood, phase of life et cetera. Different angles on the same thing.If you closely observe christians you will find they in turn observe the divine in different aspects just as muh polytheists do. God the punisher, god the father, god the forgiving, the philosophical god, god as a source.Polytheism proper is merely that plus fanciful anthropomorphization to artistically communicate the intended meaning ie differentiate the symbols. Religion is the perennial communicative effort and as in all communication you can either try to be specific (polytheism) or shotgun a symbol and let everyone fill in the blanks.There are merits to both but I posit that polytheistic acquisition is a surer path towards the one God than the schizophrenic hellscape of absolute-truth you peddle versus the postmodern society our contemporaries grow up in. The uninitiated is a child at best and impossible to teach at worst. Lump those two kinds together and you get a dead end if you treat both as the latter.
>>23308713>and if one has time why wouldn't he read von Eschenbach's magnum opus instead?Because it's almost not an adaptation of Eschenbach at all? Complaining about the time it takes to understand a work of genius, you might as well say you only read books based on easiness instead of value.
>>23309148I'm not talking about their beliefs, I'm talking about their tendencies as a people. They are less virile of a people (ex: history of enslavement/servitude) and require universalistic and egalitarian worldviews. They want/need everyone to worship their God, hold hands and sing kumbaya. Abrahamism is gay. The "based" parts of Islam come from pre-Islamic sources, same with Christianity/Europe. >It’s only whites who reject their culture’s religion (Christianity) on the grounds that it is exclusionary and invent bogus philosophies such as Evola’s “traditionalism” which say actually ALL RELIGIONS are saying the same thing and you can just pick and choose whichever one you wantWhy do you even post here when you're so clueless? Evola invented Traditionalism? Traditionalists think all religions say the same thing? it's not even worth my time replying to this crap, bye. >>23309214You replied to two different people and you're projecting, you stinky, overweight Lebanese mental patient.>>23309225Eschenbach's writing is quite literally on another level (primordial Tradition).
>>23309214> the Chosen People vs. the Goyim dynamic and changing it to white vs. non-white/brown.btw I really don't care if that's the way you misinterpret it. You're just proving my point in the other post about that generalization i made....I make fun of annoying brown virgins who worship andrew tate and watch tiktok unironically and think they're the center of the universe but are obviously just extremely insecure, then you start whining like a jew invoking the holocaust and muh racism...while saying I'm the jew. It's just total worminess and weakness. Fuck you, slimy semitic faggot. I don't care if you're upset that I don't like dumbshit immigrants with massively inflated egos who think they're owed anything. That sounds like you actually, so it makes perfect sense.
>>23309148>Evola’s “traditionalism” which say actually ALL RELIGIONS are saying the same thingPeople who haven't read Evola always either say this or complain about his criticisms of Christianity/Judaism. He also criticised Mahayana sects of Buddhism, Pelasgian currents in ancient Greece, the cult of Isis in Egypt, etc. because he had an actual morphological approach that determined which religions were traditional or not. You would know this if you actually read his works instead of quotes on the internet. Someone like you should start with his book on Theosophy.
Rene Guenon was infamously not a Catholic but was pro-Catholic. Rama Coomaraswamy was a Catholic convert. Traditionalism is retarded though. You should get over it ASAP.
>>23309735Rama was the most based manhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvkkJZQw334
>>23309354>I make fun of annoying brown virgins who worship andrew tate and watch tiktok unironicallyThere are plenty of white people that do the same thing. It is a zoomer thing, mainly.
>>23309336Ancient Pre-Abrahamic "Aryan" traditions did not have a "Hyperborean" unity, you LARPing fag. Just because Abrahamism is cringe does not mean all pre-Abrahamic IE derived traditions are based.>LebaneseI'm not Lebanese.
No because knights actually put the good parts of Evola's philosophy into practice and he merely wrote about them, while it was the clergy who wrote. Despite all his exaltation of the superiority of the warrior caste, Evola was himself a priest.
>>23309336>Eschenbach's writing is quite literally on another level (primordial Tradition).Wagner's writing is quite literally on another level (primordial Tradition).
>>23310452Are you stupid? there is a valid archetype, or a generalization. Are you gonna cry again? is that White supremacy? Look on twitter if you want, his audience is mostly brown incels with low IQs mad that they can't get laid. The only people I've known irl who actually use tiktok regularly and simp for andrew tate (a mongrel halfwit) were brown immigrants who were clearly overcompensating, talking loudly about how they go to the gym all the time for hours (where's the muscle?), walking around with their arms out as if they're big and muscular hahahah. Actually i know a boomer grandpa who has tiktok and uses it with his White grandchildren and a mom who looks at it. None of my friends ever have, even when they're non-White they aren't dumbshits looking at tiktok lmfao.>>23310456>Ancient Pre-Abrahamic "Aryan" traditions did not have a "Hyperborean" unity,What do you mean by unity? Traditionalists posit that non-physical reality exists and was normally accessed through initiation. Fools who talk out of their ass compulsively don't even know what the Primordial Tradition is, nor have they ever tried to understand it. It's really the point of all initiation properly understood, Guenon is just correct on that. Nowadays people have no/very low standards, and they go play around with demons or meditate a bit or maybe even astral project...but that doesn't scratch the surface of initiation properly understood. >Just because Abrahamism is cringe does not mean all pre-Abrahamic IE derived traditions are based.Indeed, mostly the Aryan ones. Egypt too, idk if that counts as Aryan. >>23310720>no argumentNot surprising, the quality of this board has never been worse. The overall decline in quality is clearly accelerated as a result of pretending that these 3rd worlders are our equals. Even the most superficial observer can see the the increased popularity of "ebonics" (which is actually just southern trailer trash slang, aka very low class) or the decrease in quality in things like mainstream music, or the decrease in quality of services in recent years. Guenon wrote about the decline from quality to quantity more than half a century ago, he was definitely on to something. Even the people I talk to, they just seem more stupid and thoughtless. It's possible that is just me changing, but I don't think so. >>23310472You obviously haven't got a clue.
>>23311951>>no argument>Not surprising, the quality of this board has never been worse.It's literally your post. You just said Eschenbach was 'on another level' because he's Traditional, in case you're too stupid to figure it out, that's not an argument.You have to be the dumbest poster I've ever seen, but I don't expect anything more from Traditionalists. Just cult like repeating of stock phrases, no different from Marxists and their 'read theory'.
>>23311951You like to babble a lot.>twitterMost people on Twitter aren't even real. It's mostly just bots.You sound like arrogant underclass vermin, so ofc you will come across more dumb people in your social circles. After all, flies are attracted to shit (you).>Indeed, mostly the Aryan ones. Egypt too, idk if that counts as Aryan.There is no unified metaphysical schema among the Aryans/IEs, you low IQ underclass vermin. Even within the Greeks there were many different metaphysical schema among various thinkers or "Mystery Schools", and even substantial differences existed between Vedic systems and Mazdaeism. The "non-physical reality" was framed differently by all of them. Even classifying them all as Aryan is disposable; the Aryans were a polytheistic warrior steppe peoples who far predated the civilizations of many of these groups. Aryan influence was not unidirectional.>initiationInitiation pales in comparison to meditation in solitude, you pompous pseud garbage.It was a mistake underclass vermin like you ever learned to read or write.The anthropological domain is completely separate from the metaphysical domain. They don't intersect.
>>23311995>Most people on Twitter aren't even real. It's mostly just bots.Same could be said for here. Or the internet in general for that matter.
>>23311995>disposabledisputable*
>>23306634You are brown
>>23307243the reason why white people are like that is because of Christianity. Oswald Spengler said Christian theology is bolshevism. Wokeism literally works from an absolutist Christian framework that all are equal and if you claim otherwise you are put to death for heresy. Nietzsche was right about you Christcucks
>>23313779What's more pathetic is that you worship a brown man (Jewsus).
>>23313792You are (you)ing the wrong person. I was calling the Christian apologist brown
>>23307056this
>>23307056Nihilism is great and puts a lot of puzzle pieces together
>>23314000You can't put the puzzle pieces together in mereological nihilism.
>>23307056I'm going to just link to some of these since this thread is still upFr. Seraphim Rose - Orthodox Survival Coursehttps://archive.org/details/orthodox-survival-course(Alternate)https://archive.org/details/orthodox-survival-course-fr.-seraphim-roseFr. Seraphim on the Protocolshttps://archive.org/details/fr.-seraphim-rose-discusses-the-jewish-question-protocols-of-the-elders-of-zion/mode/1upDr. Francis Schaeffer - documentary - How Should We Then Live?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IB3Qqj5M2k&pp=ygUXSG93IHNob3VsZCB3ZSB0aGVuIGxpdmU%3DAnd the books by the others areG.M. Davis, PhD. - Antichrist: The Fulfillment of GlobalizationDr. Douglas Mark Haugen - Seeing Through the Singularity: Uncovering the Cosmic ConspiracyDr. Douglas Mark Haugen - In Pursuit of the Metaverse: Millennial Dreams, Political Religion, and Techno-UtopiaHaugen also has a youtube channel called Dr. Deep State.https://www.youtube.com/@dr.deepstate5867/videos
>>23306448>Are there any pro-Christian authors with a similar philosophy to Evola's?Are there any cringe authors with a similar philosophy to a based man?
>>23314128/thread
All brown tradcath faggots reading this kill yourself right now
>>23307056I heard that Seraphim Rose wasn’t baptized.
>>23313801but you are dysgenic cuck.
>>23306448Eros and the Mysteries of Love helped me understand the metaphysics of Christianity.
>>23314312lmao most indo-euro pagans are streetshitting browns retard.Only thing pagancucks are good at is losing wars against christians.
>>23313790oswald spengelr also made faustian spirit christian you pagancuck troonworshipper.your pagancuckery is judaism for goys.Nietzsche was good jew-lover you subhuman retard.
>>23314128>>23314192rich coming from fags who worship catholic -pagan evola kek.
>>23314918All you had to say was Jesus loves you and it would have assblasted him ten times more. There would be nothing wrong with loving Nietzsche and all that if it weren't for the inconsistent fact that Christ happens to be real. Hit him in the heart, philosophy is second rate in comparison.
>>23315138Inconvenient. Hate spell check.
>>23306448Catholic Integralist literature. Stuff like Juan Donoso Cortez. De Maistre. Latter's a gung-ho character/disposition match more or less. Hegel here and there in hand-tipping fashion.
