Based Christianity for Beginners

[Emperor Constantine]

The thing about Christianity is that it’s red pill in and of itself. Adam let his woman talk him into serving the serpent rather than God, humanity lost its innocence, and now we are born in a state of separation from God that can only be remedied by picking up our cross and following him.

Blue pill Christianity only exists insofar as Christians choose to deviate from actual Christianity. The most important thing to read as an antidote to modernist garbage is the four Gospels, although the rest of scripture is also very valuable. Especially the Psalms, as pitbull owner pointed out.

One patristic book that is very relevant these days is
Marriage and Family Life by St. John Chrysostom. It’s very solid advice, and it saved me from what would have been an awful marriage.

Another that is always useful is The Desert Fathers. A great reminder of just how counter-cultural genuine Christianity really is. When Christianity went from being the persecuted minority to being the dominant religion of the empire, the Church was flooded with nominal Christians and many of the holy men and women fled to the desert to escape the bad influence and unfaithful pastors. This book shares many of their stories.

Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future by St. Seraphim Rose deals with a lot of very relevant topics for the modern West; pop “spirituality”, far-East religions, the hallucinogenic drugs that Joe Rogan peddles, the charismatic movement, people waiting for aliens to save us, etc. It really highlights the demonic forces we’re struggling against, and emphasizes the need to follow Christ to avoid these traps.

 

[infowarrior1]

I recommend reading the KJV for yourself. Also make use of the Interlinear, its direct word for word translation is the best tool.

Preachers like RC Sproul:

Voddie Baucham:


And Paul Washer.

 

[NoMoreTO]

I wouldn’t call myself a born again Christian as I’ve been baptized Catholic as a child, have always believed in the existence of God and Jesus Christ but I’ll have to confess that only since recently, as in the last few years, have I thoroughly read the Bible for the first time and started following Christian doctrines with a more serious and earnest attitude, as they deserve.
...

Basically I’d like to ask for recommendations on books, documentaries, interviews, podcasts etc. where I could read about the history of Christianity, it’s traditions and why they are important, how to follow Christian doctrine within this day and age from a Red Pill perspective… everything is welcome. God bless!

I am also Catholic. My recommendation is Taylor Marshalls New St. Thomas Institute.

It is a paid membership but often in life - you get what you pay for. I have found it has been worth it. You can listen to a video or two while you cook dinner, and work through specific topics. There are certificates on each level you can earn - in case you ever want to teach sunday school or be a deacon. It covers off Ancient/Medievel, Modern Church History, The Saints, Apologetics, High level Old and New Testament, analysis. It is an amazing resource.

New St. Thomas Institute

When I came back to the faith I was gobbling it up. Its different than his podcast content, which is largely focussed on Church politics in Rome.

 

[Roosh]

Anything by Father Josiah Trenham is worth reading, watching, and listening to. You have to be very careful who you follow on this journey, because heretics like Stephen Anderson can draw people in with their charisma long before you realize how twisted their beliefs actually are. I’ve seen a guy get sucked into Anderson’s horrible little world because he totally lacked discernment, only to later embrace Orthodoxy and be so ashamed of his Andersonite past that he won’t even talk about that period of his life. Anderson’s documentary “Marching To Zion” is well done and important, but I’d still avoid him completely except for that. And before someone says Anderson is just “based” and “a strong Christian man,” go watch Vatican Catholic’s YouTube video breaking down his beliefs and ministry. The guy is an unhinged lunatic who occasionally says correct things, and it’s unfortunate that those things happen to be things the rest of Christianity has generally stopped saying - hence how and why people are drawn to him in the first place.

Stick with priests who have genuine Apostolic succession, who spend all their time in the Scriptures and the Fathers, passing on what they’ve received with no innovations or additions of their own. That’s the only way you’ll receive what Christ and the Apostles taught in the proper context, without errors.

The Saints and Fathers wrote many times more books than you’ll ever realistically get through, even the small fraction of it that’s been translated to English, but St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press has done an excellent job making what’s available organized and translated properly. Their Patristics series is great and will keep you busy for a long time.

And I second the recommendation for E. Michael Jones as well, specifically on political and cultural topics, because his views on that are largely spot-on even if he and the Orthodox have theological and ecclesiastical disagreements.

Fully agree on Anderson. The amount of pride he has is off the charts. I can't tolerate him for more than 30 seconds. I suspect he is under heavy deception. He seems to be most popular with lapsed Christians who like his aggressiveness and angry style.

 

[Roosh]

Here are the articles I received a lot of value from early on my walk:

https://www.rooshv.com/40-christian-articles-i-highly-recommend

They served as a mini catechism.

 

[911]

Pastor Anderson is a bit of a firebrand in the American Evangelical tradition, but he's done some excellent work like his Marching to Zion, which goes to the heart of the main problem with the Scofield Bible and Dispensationalism, the scourge of the modern Evangelical movement:



Regardless of disagreements we might have on theological grounds, you have to give the guy a lot of props for his courage, he seems like an honest and pious man.

 

[bobmjilica]

We aren’t worshipping Anderson. He’s just a man and no man should be worshipped. People like him for his lessons from the Bible that he presents in a simple manner. He’s also funny.
If someone becomes too attached to him then it’s obviously an issue, but just as a vessel to better learn certain issues from the Bible? I don’t think it’s an issue though who knows

 

[bobmjilica]

Maybe a less controversial starting point to Christianity than Anderson for beginners would be ‘Mere Christianity’ by CS Lewis. Not too involved in these theological debates and gets to the point.

 

[Athanasius]

I agree with you Pit Bull. I’m not finding any verses about how murder is OK once you’re “saved.” I’m not a huge fan of Vatican Catholic either, but they’re spot-on about his ministry and that’s very clear from the video I linked.

This is all giving me deja vu, since Anderson had cast his spell on the aforementioned last guy I tried to steer in the right direction as well. I look forward to the day Spectrum Walker joins that guy on the right side of this discussion, and will pray that a similar illumination occurs.

"Praying the prayer" or "walking the aisle" can be the evangelical version of baptismal regeneration. It's no so much taught by pastors, although there was a movement out of Dallas Theological years ago that strongly attacked Lordship Salvation. The protestant reformers taught that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone, but the result of true salvation is a changed life.

 

[Athanasius]

FYI Calvin might well have been a crypto-talmudist according to some historians, his original family name was probably Jean Cohen.

According to F. Bruce Gordon's biography, his parents were Christian, his mother devoutly so. His bloodlines are immaterial to me. I don't know why anyone would think his teachings are crypto-Talmudic. They certainly are less hostile toward the Jews than Luther's late writings, but Calvin was more balanced than Luther. Calvin's commentaries on Scripture are profitable and most Christians would find them more useful than they think, even those who think they'd agree with little in them, just as they can profit from Matthew Henry's commentary. Both are skilled writers.

 

[MichaelWitcoff]

Calvin’s errors aside, he was definitely a great writer. His “Little Book On The Christian Life” helped me learn a lot at the beginning of my journey. But if you have to read the Reformers at all, my top pick is John Wesley.

 

[Magnus Stout]

Here are some thoughts that might help you in your journey: My background was Protestant (Southern Baptist). I deeply understand the sola scriptura impulse. Growing up, there were only Protestant & Catholic Churches around me (no Orthodox).

My “lightbulb” moment was a confluence of three factors: 1) Red Pill truths illustrating that feminism had co-opted most Protestants (resulting in Churchianity); 2) that most Protestants seemed unable to resist (practically & philosophically) a culture increasingly embracing Sodom (E. Michael Jones has good work on this point); and 3) being challenged by Ortho-bros & reading Fr. Seraphim Rose’s, “Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future.”

What was missing for me was the deep spiritual discernment of Orthodoxy. When the Scriptures say that the “gates of hell will not prevail,” part of that must mean that the true Church will not be mislead by satan. To me, it’s madness to ignore the wisdom of the Church Fathers.

If we assume that there is an ongoing spiritual war, then it makes sense to be part of the side with the most experience & the best record of fighting against the evil one. In this way, Protestants are like one-man armies or groups of peasants fighting against a seasoned army (satan & his minions).

If we are close to the End Times, then it’s worth remembering that we will need heightened spiritual discernment to avoid being mislead by the one who is disguised as an “angel of light.” (2 Cor. 11:14). As difficult as things are now with Woke culture, the deceptions will get far more intense: imagine when an “alien” or “space being” comes down and begins working “signs and wonders”? Remember: most people will enthusiastically worship the antichrist.

The “pachamama” idol worship sanctioned by the Vatican (& pedophilia scandal) also indicates that their church has not prevailed against the gates of hell. Fr. Rose was again correct: all other religions (except Orthodoxy) seem to be morphing into a one-world religion.

Finally, the last book I’d recommend captures the joyous Christian spirit: “Everyday Saints and Other Stories” by Archimandrite Tikhon. It’s an easy read but captures the essence of Christian living.

 

[Athanasius]

My “lightbulb” moment was a confluence of three factors: 1) Red Pill truths illustrating that feminism had co-opted most Protestants (resulting in Churchianity); 2) that most Protestants seemed unable to resist (practically & philosophically) a culture increasingly embracing Sodom (E. Michael Jones has good work on this point);

As much as I like Jones-- Libido Dominandi is excellent-- he's wrong on this. He's focused on mainliners, but these churches went Ichabod long ago. They may not even exist within a generation. Their average attendee is like 70 years old. I wish they were stronger in many ways, but the average evangelical church (which is where most churchgoing protestants are these days) isn't anywhere near as liberal as the Vatican hierarchy, nor does it push sodomy or feminism. Not to say there aren't some that do.

 

[Magnus Stout]

Good point, Athanasius.

I should clarify my point: when I say the culture of Sodom, I am using that term to encompass something broader—like the Marquis de Sade‘s philosophy: if it feels good, it must be good. While Evangelical Protestants are weathering the storm, mainline Protestantism is collapsing: https://www.pewforum.org/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/

Sex (feminism, gay marriage, transmania, etc...) is the wedge issue to persecute and corrupt the church. This issue also seems to be connected to views on science and creation. Put differently, if you hold man is evolved (not created), then you open up serious problems in your theology answering the dominant narrative (and scientism). This seems to operate as a Pandora’s Box of various perversions (just look at the recent fracture of the “united” Methodists).

So, in sum, I think another important work for based Christianity is on creation. Here is a good book on that topic (currently on back-order): https://www.sainthermanmonastery.com/Genesis-Creation-and-Early-Man-p/gen.htm

 

[NoMoreTO]

My “lightbulb” moment was a confluence of three factors: 1) Red Pill truths illustrating that feminism had co-opted most Protestants (resulting in Churchianity); 2) that most Protestants seemed unable to resist (practically & philosophically) a culture increasingly embracing Sodom (E. Michael Jones has good work on this point);

As much as I like Jones-- Libido Dominandi is excellent-- he's wrong on this. He's focused on mainliners, but these churches went Ichabod long ago. They may not even exist within a generation. Their average attendee is like 70 years old. I wish they were stronger in many ways, but the average evangelical church (which is where most churchgoing protestants are these days) isn't anywhere near as liberal as the Vatican hierarchy, nor does it push sodomy or feminism. Not to say there aren't some that do.

The Current Hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church is very liberal, and has been moving in a liberal direction now for 50 years. Demographically, things should turn around but it might take 50 years to steer the Ark back so to speak.

The key in the Roman Catholic Church is selecting a parish which is 'based'. My thinking would be that your first priority should be a conservative traditional liturgy, this would be my favourites in order. The great thing about latin mass isn't just the liturgy, its also that the parishioners are seeking a traditional liturgy and I have found are more devout.
(1) FSSP / Institute of Christ the King (Latin Mass)
(2) SSPX (Latin Mass)
(3) Latin Mass at your local diocese (if you can't find #1 or #2 locally)

After this you look at your local parish celebrating Novus Ordo (New Order) Mass.
(a) Listen to the homilies. I recently met a white girl who went to a Hatian Church with all black people because the Priest gave based homilies. There are still some good homilies depending on the Priest. It isn't all about being based either.
(b) Following above, consider a Church built by an ethnic group that is based. These parishes might be a little more based if the people are from Victor Orbans' Hungary for example.
(c) Take a look at the bulletin, how many female lectors (readers) are there ? How many times is confession offered/ week? Do they do first Friday, First Saturdays, benediction on a regular basis.
(d) Are eucharistic ministers being used, if so, take your communion from the Priest and avoid using them.
(e) Are all altar boys male
(f) Does priest wear all black with collar outside of mass? To me this is a good sign of a trad priest.
(g) Consider the organ music mass over the guitar mass if you want more conservative.
(h) Look at the architecture of the Church. Was it built before 1970 ? Catholic Churches with new architecture are built like barns, are less ornate and have more simplistic stain glass windows. Also you will notice some of them are more circular or have a fan quality. Basically avoid modern architecture churches!

Overall I'd say go with Traditional Latin Mass and Check out that thread. Latin Mass Thread

 

[bobmjilica]

Love him, but Jones is clearly wrong on this front. Also Protestants were not always cucked (as many are today). America used to be a God fearing nation built on Christ and the family, and was heavily Protestant. The idea that our Protestant heritage was the cause of our decline is bizarre and wrong.

 

[NoMoreTO]

Love him, but Jones is clearly wrong on this front. Also Protestants were not always cucked (as many are today). America used to be a God fearing nation built on Christ and the family, and was heavily Protestant. The idea that our Protestant heritage was the cause of our decline is bizarre and wrong.

Founders were masonic. The South in my mind has always been a strength. The people there bring Christianity into the culture in an unabashed way and it's a beautiful thing.

The South Pushed for "In Jesus Christ we Trust" but got "In God we Trust". -- Big difference.

I think the USA was preserved as a Christian Nation for a long time in large part by the Bible Belt.

Protestantism is viewed by EMJ as Judaizing. There is a lot of Zionism in Protestantism, and USA is currently the muscly brutish brother of Israel. Think of LBJ, the guy was off the hook pro Israel.

 

[bobmjilica]

@nomoreTO I agree with a lot of what you say, and the south is our strength, but most of the northern colonies such as the Plymouth colony were founded with a heavy focus on Christianity as well. Also, yes there was Masonic influence in the founding of our nation as well as in Protestantism as a whole, but it seems hypocritical for EMJ, a papist, to be criticizing us heavily for that, when the Vatican has so many secret societies, such as the Jesuits, as well as literal Jewish forced converts who still practice their Jewish faith (conversos). I ultimately think that the denominational debates are highly unproductive, but for Catholics to criticize our heritage as being riddled with secret societies seems a bit rich, when they have a ton themselves (and again I’m not really even criticizing them because they are still our brothers in Christ). In addition, even today, Protestant men of America are more religious and conservative on average, than catholic men.
Also, I do not support the Masons obviously, and would never join them, but the idea that at the lower levels it is nothing more than a social fraternity for networking and connections is true. Many of the Masonic affiliations of the founders are also loose at best. George Washington, for example, attended like one meeting. Some were more Masonic than others. I know Thomas Jefferson was not even really much of a Christian. Some were more Christian than others.

 

[bobmjilica]

The pro Israel thing is an issue, no doubt. But that is more due to the rise of televangelism and stuff like that that had a huge rise ultimately due to the cultural revolution

 

[NoMoreTO]

The pro Israel thing is an issue, no doubt. But that is more due to the rise of televangelism and stuff like that that had a huge rise ultimately due to the cultural revolution

Hey we have our share of Judaizers in the Catholic Church. Conversos can often behave as infiltrators coming in and mucking things up, although there are some amazing Jewish Converts.

The Traditional Papacies were pretty based, but post Vatican 2 the situation on a practical level is overly 'ecumenical' and pretty bad with new terms being pushed out like 'dialogue'.

The theology doesn't allow for a 'dual' covenant, even though in some cases you can here Catholics talk like it does these days.

Getting back to OP, this is a key tenet I would say of 'Based Christianity' is that Jew <> Christian. We are not the same at all in values.