A Christian troll

Usually I don’t respond to trolling. But these days I got a terrible toothache and lost my patience. So here we go.

In my previous post a native German speaker (see how he uses quotation marks below), Thomas Fink, said in a comment that I didn’t allow to pass:

I checked occasionally into Chechar when I came across him on his journey from Larry Auster into eternity. He had a lot of conversions and recently he converted from the „jewish problem“ to the „Christian problem“.

“Conversion” is the wrong word here. I knew that there was a big Christian Problem since, as a young boy, my father’s doctrine of eternal damnation caused havoc in my worldview, and by 1976 I read Nietzsche for the first time in my life. Hardly can such an old critique of Christianity that gradually matured in my mind be called a sudden “conversion.”

As to the Jewish Problem, “conversion” is the wrong word too. A few years ago I didn’t know that the Jew Yagoda and his Jewish henchmen killed more innocent Whites than the millions of slaughtered Jews attributed to Himmler by orthodox historians. Awakening up to the facts of history—the Bolshevik Jews, not the Germans, started the genocide—is no “conversion,” but an awakening from the matrix of political correctness.

Fink’s trolling continues:

He is obviously a psychologically very troubled person, who was himself quite frank about this.

One of the reasons that I didn’t let Fink’s comment appear in the thread where it was posted, but instead added it as a whole new entry here, is because this is the second time that an angry Christian insults me in the last few days with sentences similar to the above: a perfect inversion of reality.

Why is this is a perfect inversion of reality? Because those who were abused in their childhood or adolescence and speak out vehemently about the abuse as adults are the sanest humans in the world.

Fink should know better, since a native German speaker, the Swiss psychologist Alice Miller, devoted her entire literary career to demonstrate why those who speak out about the abuse are infinitely saner than those who, following the accepted norms of conduct, repress their traumas. I wrote a book on the subject, the third of my Hojas Susurrantes, and cannot discuss this complex subject here (but you can take a look at my other blog, Fallen Leaves).

The Christian troll continues:

I do not think that it is ad hominem to link his anti Christianity with his upbringing as a Catholic and psychologically not resolved problems [my emphasis] with his Catholic parents, documented by himself.

This is an obvious lie. Fink simply has not read my Hojas Susurrantes. He doesn’t know, therefore, how “resolved” or “unresolved” my inner psyche might be.

Fink’s implicit commandment, Thou Shalt Not Talk About Your Abusive Parents, is the flawed implicit commandment of millions upon millions of psychologically dissociated humans: If you publicly talk about your traumatizing childhood or adolescence you must be a dissociated adult. In other words, our society only allows the victim of parental abuse to keep absolutely quiet about his or her life, or perhaps speak only in the privacy of a so-called therapist office. This is exactly why many neuroses and most psychoses cannot be healed by psychotherapy (besides Alice Miller’s work see also Jeffrey Masson’s).

The troll continues:

If someone works in the field of pure logic it is possible to detach the results of his work from his way of living but in the field of religion and social science your personal conduct [Chechar’s], who you are and where you came from is important, even if you can citate [sic] [Karlheinz] Deschner and write coherent sentences in a seemingly detached manner.

You see? Zero arguments.

Fink seems to be saying that because like Deschner—the German scholar who authored the multivolume Criminal History of Christianity—I feel passionate about Christianity, I must be emotionally unbalanced. In other words: I am not allowed to emotionally rebel openly and publicly against, say, the doctrine of eternal torture that my father used against me when I was a little boy.

Nope! You just cannot rebel publicly! Go to the therapist’s office instead! Otherwise that would be “personal conduct” reflecting “unresolved” emotional issues.

This grotesque line of reasoning is like asking Solzhenitsyn to write a “detached” Gulag Archipelago with no mention of any of Solzhenitsyn’s personal suffering he endured in the Gulag System. According to Fink’s logic, should we also call Solzhenitsyn “obviously a psychologically very troubled person” because he dared to speak out publicly using his own life experiences?

Let’s continue with the troll’s comment:

So it is of significance that Chechar and most of the anti Christian right circle around the thinking of a compulsive masturbator who went certifiably mad, that is Nietzsche.

In the last few days, because of his tragic death, I did a little research into the life of another Nietzsche fan, that is Jonathan Bowden. He was a great orator, but he was also a very troubled person, I could sense this on the spot. This is, by the way an ability I have. There is a lot of talk now, that Jonathan only was so great, because he was always on the edge. Maybe. But by definition, everyone who is „on the edge“ is troubled by unresolved sin. And I will never be part of a movement which is dominated by people like this. And this definition of troubled persons includes by the way also many persons who call themselves Christian.

I cannot speak of Bowden’s life, but I have read thick volumes by German authors about the life of Nietzsche, and neither Curt Paul Janz nor Werner Ross ever used the word “sin” against the poor philosopher.

Yes, Nietzsche went mad after his cataclysmic breakdown of  January 3, 1889, and never recovered his powerful intellect. A tragedy. But I remember my High School lesson of logic so well! It is a classic ad hominem to dismiss all of Nietzsche’s work prior to 1889 because of what happened to the poor man in and after that year.

Listen to the troll:

In fact this whole anti Christianity boils down to a graffiti on a wall near the Catholic Church in my small German town, which translates as: „Get the bible out of my head!“ which translates as: Get the law of nature out of my head! And that is what Nietzsche found out the hard way: you cannot redefine sin as virtue and live a happy life thereafter. It is not possible, because Gods [sic] law is natures [sic] law, and every unresolved sin will rot in you and make your life miserable.

What a personal and fallacious way of dismissing our arguments! I won’t speak of Nietzsche here, but can speak of me.

Fink simply does not address any of the arguments I have presented so far critical of Christianity. Not a single one. He reminds me of Fjordman, who got mad at another blogger, Tanstaafl, and me when we dared to point out to some philo-Semitic counter-jihadists that besides the Muslim Problem we have a Jewish Problem throughout the West. Half-Jew Fjordman never advanced any argument whatsoever in his many “replies” in the commentariat section of the counter-jihad site. Instead, he insulted Tanstaafl and lied about me.

Fink’s ad hominem stance is so self-defeating that, instead of indulging myself with the last word, I better reproduce his last sentence and leave his comment hanging:

For the non believer the only way out of this dilemma is suicide which now becomes fashionable as antinatalism or the way of the Marquis the Sade which is open rebellion against God by the way of torture and murder.

10 Replies on “A Christian troll

  1. You link your issues with your parents to your issues with Catholicism, and wider to Christianity in general. This is a constant theme of yours. Therefore, it is not ad hominem to point this out, and your German commenter is correct on that score.

    Further, you leapt into a post by an Anglican, directed to other Christians, discussing how they might retain their White ethnic solidarity, with your discourses on Christian universalism. Thus, you were off topic, bringing in your own irrelevent issues to that thread, and undermined what should be a common cause – our survival.

    You are completely at fault here Chechar.

    If you want to wax lyrical about Christian universalims at OO, save it for a post that discusses that problem.

    Re, speaking out about your abuse. You are conflating my and others chastisement of your actions in the OO thread with your personal history, once again.

    Good on you for dealing with your issues. Good on you for speaking out about it. But, don’t kid yourself that this has anything at all to do with Christianity and or Catholcism, or fighting the good fight for WNism. It is irrelevant to the subject at hand.

  2. „In fact this whole anti Christianity boils down to a graffiti on a wall near the Catholic Church in my small German town, which translates as: „Get the bible out of my head!“ which translates as: Get the law of nature out of my head!“

    This one was good. Can’t stop chuckling.

    Anyway. Chechar, I really admire your attempts to discuss with Christians, and your attempts to expose Christianity as a pro-miscegenation, anti-White ideological system.

    I do not follow you into this, though. For the simple reason that the only individuals I’ve seen rejecting Christianity in my life when confronted with facts were already sitting on the fence, were pretty agnostic about the existence of God, and were pondering if, despite its obvious theological lies, it was still a good social system and a good system of morality.

    There’s nothing you can do with pure believers who are past 16 years old. People who really believe in all that Jeebus shit — the virgin mother, the walk on water, the multiplication of bread and wine — and the Paradise/Hell dichotomy. Perhaps people like Pat, who posts on this very blog, and thinks his seat in Paradise is guaranteed for defending the slave religion with so much ardour, without realizing for a single second the egotism of the whole concept.

    Arguing with these people on theological and philosophical grounds is pointless, because their brain is clearly not wired in the same manner as ours, and cannot grasp the — simple, for us only — reasons why we don’t believe. If they cannot grasp them, there’s a good chance they never asked themselves the questions leading to them in the first place, for lack of intellectual curiosity or debilitating emotional bias (which is depressingly simple: they want their eternal soul).

    It would be more fruitful for our movement to inform those who already view Christianity as a probable lie, but doubt of its nefarious consequences on society. There are a lot of these types in the WN movement: don’t believe in the Abrahamic God and Jeebus, but think that Christianity, for lack of better alternatives, is still a good moral system (protecting the weak, encouraging solidarity, enforcing taboos on sex and physical appearance, discouraging crime and drug use, etc.)

    We should insist that, far from being a good moral system, it actually leads to evil, degeneration and destruction, and was the HIV which rendered us morally and emotionally vulnerable to to the Jews.

    We should insist that Christians are actually monsters, leading to immense suffering because of their lack of foresight.

    1. NB: I would add that I do not view the Feudal Period in Europe (400-1789) as particularly evil; in fact, people were probably pretty happy believing in a God that didn’t exist, despite the hardships of life. It was a trade: drop the science of the Antiquity, and take the feel-good Abrahamic thought system.

      The problem with the Feudal System is that it bore in itself the germs of its inevitable destruction (stagnation, totalitarianism, naivety and proselytism only take you that far), and this event led to great evil.

      Modernity, this absurd and horrid admixture of scientist and Christian values with Jewish alpha apes at the top, is the direct consequence of the Houses of Bourbon and Habsburg failing to foresee and address the results of technological breakthroughs happening in Europe. And these failures were entirely due to the Vatican’s influence.

    2. I am not attempting to communicate with true believers, but rather show nonbelievers that a profound criticism of New Testament fairy tales exist since Reimarus. Actually since Porphyry: but the Christians burnt all of his books and we had to wait fourteen centuries until the German Enlightenment to rediscover again what real exegesis of the NT texts means, what Randel Helms so beautifully summarizes in his slim book. (As I said, Fink tried to post his personal attack in the Helms thread. I lost my internet connection at home but still plan to add excerpts of the other Helms chapters for WDH.)

      1. Chechar, Panina is one of OneSTDV’s jew boy commenters. He’s a regular over there. Never heard a peep from him re any of OneSTDV’s Christianity.

        Yet, here he is.

  3. Panina of OneSTDV pro-commenter fame, what a pleasure it is to see you here.

    So, let’s get this straight, you’re pro-Jew at OneSTDV’s, hate others trolling there for WNism, yet suddenly gung-ho WNist at OO and here at Chechar’s You even troll OO itself with your off topic ramblings about how much you hate Christianity. I think I smell jew.

    See the company you now keep Chechar?

    1. Pat, let me be clear. First off, I am an admixture of Frankish (on my father’s side) and Gallo-Roman (on my mother’s side) blood, my facial features are 100% white, and I have no known Jewish ancestor.

      Secondly, I indeed leave comments on several racialist blogs, adapting my discourse to each, and avoiding to speak about controversial subjects (like the Jews) when there is no need to. Why? Because I don’t believe in proselytism, except when it is done in an indirect manner — via a media — and with tact.

      Your rumblings and insults on OneSTDV were frankly doing more harm than good to the Judeoskeptic cause…

      1. I don’t give a shit for your so called Judeoskeptic cause.

        Put up, or shut up.

        You have done nothing but back up a jew, and you continue to support him.

        Better that you destroy him by a thousand cuts than continue with your anti-Xtianity.

  4. Thank you for this blog and your attempts to seek and disseminate truth. You are doing much good. For example, understanding Hitler’s true motivations and what he was trying to prevent (seeing through the propaganda surrounding WWII) has been helpful to me personally.

    I don’t know if you realize that the original Christians and the native Greek speaking church fathers (New Testament was written in Greek as I’m sure you know) for the first 500 years of Christianity did NOT believe in or teach „eternal“ punishment or „hell“ – those words are not even found in the original Greek or Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible. http://www.JohnLilley.org (see book „Hell Is a Mistranslation“) or related articles on that site, as well as books by John Wesley Hanson and Dr. Edward Beecher (all free books online). The terrible lies of hell and eternal punishment invented by Catholicism in the Middle Ages have caused mental and emotional torment to many a well-meaning „Christian“.

    I would also like to point out that it may be unfair to characterize (what I would call „true“) Christianity as teaching that all men are equal. It is important not to conflate the terrible twisting of the Bible’s teachings that came many years after it was written with what it actually says when taken in balance. The Bible is extremely clear about its teaching that one day all men will be judged „according to their deeds“. Of course the Bible says that all men are made in the image of God regardless of race, HOWEVER (here comes the balance) nowhere does the Bible say that all people groups (or races, whatever word you want to use) have the exact same qualities, and there is also much teaching in the Bible about wisdom (and righteousness) and the responsibility of each individual and nation to get it, and there is absolutely no hint of teaching in the Bible that any man will receive any type of good REWARD in this age or the next if his actions are despicable, or that individuals or groups whose actions are despicable are „okay“. These types of ideas („minorities and females get a free pass on whatever inane behavior they want to display because they were abused in the past“ or whatnot) have no basis in the Bible whatsoever. Don’t blame the Bible for the inventions of fake Jews later.

    (The Bible explicitly states in the book of Revelation that there are Jews who claim to be Jews but are not. The „Jews“ Hitler and this blog rail against are not descendants of Abraham. They are pagan Talmudic Jews, as you know. Jesus rightly railed against them and called them „the seed of Satan“. Maybe too complicated to get into here, but the Bible teaches that there are „tares“ sowed amongst the „wheat“ on earth; Jesus railed against these Pharisees for example, that He labelled as „tares“ or „seed of Satan“. The Biblical worldview on the content of this blog would simply be that the seed of Satan – what you call „Jews“ are people that claim to be the seed of Abraham for their own purposes but are actually not, who have been in a perpetual battle especially since the time of Christ against the next most powerful group of people on earth, the whites, who in actual fact ARE descendants of Abraham – see for example the website britam.org. These fake Jews have co-opted the Biblical teaching that in the future Israel will rule over the earth with a righteous Messiah IN A FUTURE RIGHTEOUS AGE where the benevolent Messiah will rule much like Hitler did in 1930s Germany in certain ways, particularly economically. These fake Jews have taken that belief in „the right to rule“ upon themselves and created a counterfeit evil current version of what will be in the future a fantastic and wonderful time according to the Bible. These fake Jews have succeeded in tricking most of modern Christianity into thinking that they are real Jews and that the state of Israel is a wonderful fulfillment of prophecy – lies, lies lies. That particular prophecy has not been fulfilled yet and will not be until the Messiah returns – according to the Bible. My point is, it would be more effective for you to rail against and blame „modern Christianity and the pagan Middle Ages Catholic and fake Jew lies it has bought into“ rather than simply using the term „Christianity“, because the true original Christianity bore very little resemblance to the modern version which has been massively co-opted and twisted. I say this without caring whether you are a Christian or not – simply for the practical purposes of reaching god-hearted but naive Christians with your very important and timely practical and wise messages. If Christians can separate the Catholic and Jewish lies from the original beliefs of the early Christians and the actual balanced teachings of the Bible, they will wholeheartedly espouse the great majority of what you are trying to get accross!)

    There is also nothing in the Bible that says a person or group (racial or otherwise) is required to intermarry with another group, rather in the OT this was forbidden (in the NT not necessarily forbidden but not recommended either), and in fact nations and nationalism are portrayed in the Bible as part of God’s SOLUTION for evil – at the Tower of Babel God SEPARATED people into NATIONS (Biblical translation: ETHNIC GROUPS) to CURB evil. So it is no surprise to the informed Bible believer that when ethnic groups are mixed, greater evil occurs.

    My point is simply that whether you personally (the reader of this comment and/or the blog author) accept the Bible as the „Word of God“ or not, it is possible to reach Bible-believing Christians with the important messages you are trying to spread (anti-„Jewish“ elite evil of every sort – homosexuality, feminism, unbridled immigration, central and fractional reserve banking etc. etc.) AS LONG AS you educate them about the Biblical basis for what you are saying, which DOES exist and is easy to point out from the Bible itself. Truly educated and informed Christians (not Catholics or the typical modern mainstream naive and uninformed Christian) will cheer you on as long as you don’t conflate the true original Christianity and the beliefs of the early native Greek speaking church fathers with the errors and false teachings about the the Bible that came along later.

    1. Trouble is that I am not a Christian and therefore don’t buy Christian Identity theories about the Bible. Also, I own a translation of the Gospels & Book of Revelation by a contemporary scholar, Richmond Lattimore, directly from the Greek, and find no reason to believe that the citations about „hell“ were mistranslated. (E.g., „Go from me, cursed, to the everlasting fire which has been made ready by the devil and his angels“—Mt. 25:46, Lattimore’s translation.)