On progressive Christianity

The hatnote of my articles on the chronologically ordered New Testament links to a book by the late Marcus Borg, a representative of the liberal movement called ‘progressive Christianity’. Like other progressive Christians, Borg was a stepping-stone between old-time Christianity and what we are calling ‘secular Christianity’ or ‘neo-Christianism’. In other words, the theology of Borg and other progressives is at the midst of the traditional Christian and the secular humanist who actively destroys the white race.

Yesterday I watched this Borg conference, originally recorded in the year 2000:

In this talk, Borg presents to liberal Christians a classic book that we have been discussing, The Quest of the Historical Jesus by Albert Schweitzer, published in Germany more than a century ago.

Schweitzer was the clinical case of how, once the educated Christian starts doubting the historicity of the Gospels, the doubter contracts an ethnosuicidal mental disease: out-group altruism. In extreme cases, such as Schweitzer’s, the semi-apostate literally ends up giving his life for the well-being of blacks, believing that the noblest cause is thus pursued (see my 2013 article ‘Schweitzer’s niglets’).

Schweitzer was a German. The ethnically Aryan Borg, raised in a Lutheran family, followed that same path although without Schweitzer’ eccentricity of leaving the West in search of the poor peoples of Christ in Africa. I find fascinating how, once the exegete of the New Testament questions the historicity of some Gospel stories, he suffers a call to sublimate his previous theology into secular altruism, which includes feeling compelled to help, with all his might, the Other.

When visitors of this site see me using, in the hatnote of my New Testament articles, a link to Borg’s book it should not be believed that I endorse his theology. I can use his chronology about when the New Testament books were written. But unlike him and the nutty Schweitzer, I believe that we need an axiological apostasy, like the one preached by Nietzsche, whom I quote at the end of ‘Schweitzer’s niglets’.

Ultimately, Schweitzer, Borg and other representatives of progressive Christianity are more dangerous than the fundamentalists. Axiologically, they are closer to the ethnosuicidal ethos of secular humanists than, say, our parents and grandparents (I speak as a boomer). Their writings may be useful to see that, from the historical point of view, the Gospels cannot be trusted. But from the survivalist viewpoint they are, to put it bluntly, race traitors. Even the Wikipedia article has them as champions of ‘social justice’.

Very interesting, in the video embedded above, to see how Borg sublimates Christian ethics even after recognising that the historical Jesus was wrong to believe that the eschaton would happen within his lifespan (‘Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death until they see the son of man coming in his kingdom’). Yes: the eschaton failed to occur in Jesus’ time, but nowadays the progressive Christians try to make it possible through Orwellian social justice!

Christian love is murdering the white race.

As in a novel by Agatha Christie, I am increasingly seeing that Christianity is the real culprit of white decline (something like an HIV virus), and Jewish subversion is simply a secondary infection (like pneumonia).

I will continue to comment on the twenty-five remaining books of the New Testament. It is necessary to provide a Nietzschean view on those texts that leaves behind the Anno Domini of Borg et al and inaugurates the Anno Hitleris, even in biblical studies.


  1. Do you expect me to take this phony seriously? These people have created a false image of Jesus, one who is wrong, a failure, and one betrayed by God. A false image of Jesus which is a product of their worldview and an authenticator of that worldview. It’s this falseness; their repudiation of the essential truth of Christianity that makes them the menace they are.

    • You’re a Xtian, right?

    • Jesus was a Jew.

  2. Jesus was a Jew, as were his disciples. Saul/Paul was a Jew, as were most of his followers. The Gospel narration is nothing more than the depredations of elite, religious Jews upon the common people of Judea through the auspices of their “second” Temple.

    The entire Gospel story is based on the Jews’ Torah and contradiction of the Jews’ Levirate law. How then can one possibly postulate Jews are a “secondary infection” when the entire story of the three most destructive religions on earth are based on the product of Jews – about Jews, for Jews? The predatory practices of the ruling Hasmonean dynasty were no different from the predatory practices of today’s ruling Rothschild dynasty.

    It is indisputable fact – no Jews, no Temple – no Temple, no Jesus – no Jesus, no Saul/Paul – no Saul/Paul, no Christianity. Were it not for Jews, you, dear Cesar, would have no cause célèbre in Christianity because it would not exist.

    Consider the number of deaths from HIV; then consider the number of deaths attributable to the Jews’ two global wars, communism and countless revolutions. HIV? Naught more deadly than the common head cold compared to the Jews’ murderously destructive influence on western civilization.

    For some time, I have maintained Jews are stupid and unimaginative, but very cunning. You have proven my case in showing how Jews merely copied goy inventions with far greater destructive consequences for their hosts, e.g., how does the destructive legacy of King Louie’s 17th century “psychiatry” compare with the destructive influence of modern Jewish “psychiatry” on western civilization?

    What mystifies me is why you are so hell-bent on exonerating, or at least covering over, the Jews’ monstrous crimes against humanity throughout history to place blame on their host victims. Why the reframing of Jewish crimes against the goy like the reframing of Leo Frank’s murderous crime upon the hapless Negro janitor?

    If one truly desires the end of religious misery, get rid of the Jew and expunge ALL their influence from the planet.

    • What mystifies me is why you are so hell-bent on exonerating, or at least covering over, the Jews’ monstrous crimes against…

      This is of course false, and I won’t even try to link to the JQ posts in this site refuting such claim.

      Arch Stanton: your unfounded accusations in this site are becoming increasingly irritating. I would politely recommend you to move on, and comment in other forums.

      This anti-Xtian blog is not a blog for you (you, who have said elsewhere that you love Jesus, etc.) or for the Christian commenter whom I replied above.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: