Christian Aryanism: Polls.
Discuss in the comments.

History/ World.
— Age of universe when Adam was born?
— Shape of earth?
— Evolution?
— Ancient Israelites, White?
— Europeans, Israelites?
— Jesus, White?
— Jesus birthday?

Theology.
— Can Nons go to heaven?
— OT Textual Basis?
— NT Textual Basis?
— Day of worship?
— Triune Christology?
— Cessationism Vs Continuationism?
— Real Presence: Eucharist?
— Salvation: Human Reconciliation?
— Eschatology?
— Baptism?
— Satan/ the Devil?
— Levitical/ Mosaic law?
— Noah's flood?
— Sons of God, Daughters of Man?

See how you shape up to RP views 😎

Christian Aryanism IRL Disclaimer:
(in-real-life activity disclaimer)

A recent surge in randoms claiming to run unofficial or official IRL CA groups has forced me to make this statement to be perfectly clear. As a starter, we highly discourage anyone from joining any IRL group on Telegram, especially if you're approached by a stranger.

This channel is purely a research and theological channel, I do not and will never run any IRL CA organisation; anyone claiming to be affliated now or in the future, is deceiving you.

Our only mission here is to elucidate truth to Whites, create a concise and exhaustive Catechism for instruction on belief and practice, and put together a reliable bible translation for common use.

Any IRL group that uses any of the resources, including the Catechism, for their group, does so independently of us and has no endorsement.

We encourage people not to create new churches, and instead seek out local churches for fellowship and community, regardless of denomination, based purely on how White they are, and privately espouse these views to them. To create a new church based on views that are heavily persecuted, will only paint a target on your back and isolate you to a very marginalised group, with no community.

We disavow any and all calls to illegal activity and violence. We understand Whites must once again become majorities in their own nations, and this will only occur through economic, political and demographic means, it will never occur through violence.
It will require Whites to be economically and politically powerful, as well as disproportionately having more children than other races.

Why White?
Our race has been known by many names and even many today, but why White over the others?

Aryan: ethnonym referring to a particular (White) Indo-European tribe that inhabited and spread from Central Asia, and their mixed Indo-European speaking descendants; in the fields of anthropology this has been often used as a synonym of Caucasian, or as a linguonym for Indo-European languages.

Caucasian: (known today in genetics as West Eurasian) ethnonym referring to the branch of homo genus that separated in West Asia and spawned exclusively the White peoples of Europe, North Africa and West Asia. In genetics however, being a supermajority Caucasian (West Eurasian) considers you as one, despite admixture.

European: demonym for inhabitants of the European continent, despite being conflated as an ethnonym for White, purely due to Europe's history of being exclusively White; our people have inhabited other vast lands both before and after inhabiting Europe.

White: ethnonym referring to Caucasian (West Eurasian) people, however the term implies purity due to the very high levels of purity required to maintain hyperdepigmentized complexion; this ethnonym refers to pure Caucasians (West Eurasians), to a one drop purity standard.

I understand most of us would consider impurity to be a disqualifier for any of these terms, however this is what they genuinely mean.

Why White? Because it means pure.

Just call them Nons:
The non-white races go by many different names and terminologies, some specific, some general.
Unique terms denoting a plethora of different and specific non-white: ethnic groups, races, linguistic groups, and even a wide varying of mixes amongst themselves and even with Whites.

This becomes overly convoluted when discussing non-whites in general, when we don't care about their uniqueness, preserving their specific groups, etc. We only care that they stay separate from Whites, that's it; they can mix into a million different shades of brown amongst themselves and we don't care; so why even mention specifics?

Clearly the perfect term for them is non-white, denoting them as specifically not us; however I find it's disgusting to damage the purity and integrity of the word White by suffixing it to non-White, so drop the suffix and call them Nons.

I'll make it clear that you're a Non if you are not 100% White (West Eurasian), a drop below and you're a Non. To clarify further, admixture from the ancient ethnic groups Natufians, and West Siberians, are found in varying degrees in Southern and Eastern Europe, respectively.

Modern geneticists will claim these ancient Caucasian groups were negros and orientals, respectively; but this is politically motivated and baseless beyond the errors of K-Means Clustering which group by similarity, rather than descent (what actually makes a race); a similarity which is likely caused by Natufian/ West Siberian admixture in the adjacent Non races, rather than the inverse.

To reiterate:
They're non-White.
They're non-Adamic.
They're non-human.
Just call them Nons.

One Drop: Non-negotiable.
You are only White if you are entirely Caucasian (West Eurasian), completely unadulterated by the non-Caucasian races. Everyone who doesn't meet this standard is a Non, and this is entirely non-negotiable.

Does this include the Middle-East?
No, MENA while majority Caucasian, are significantly tainted by 5-20% negro ancestry. MENA demonstrate why racial purity is important, once a region of world superpowers, now a wasteland of ruins, only took a few drops to make the switch (5-20%); and it only took 2-5% negro ancestry to create Jews.

Is this realistic?
Even if it wasn't and only 1000 people met this standard, it wouldn't matter, the pure shouldn't have to adulterate their unblemished ancestry to appease the corrupted; however there's much more than a mere 1000 pure Whites.
Even in the US, 94% of White identifying Americans are completely pure, this is approximately 180m pure Whites in the US alone, let alone the hundreds of millions abroad.

This standard is completely reasonable.

Purification:
When discussing White racial purity, the topic of "well can we be bleached?" arises, likely out of a cope for the person or someone they know. Short answer no, long answer technically yes.

Genetic Recombination:
Is the rearrangement of DNA sequences by the breakage and rejoining of chromosomes or chromosome segments, from parents. Women will get 50% from each parent, while men will get 51% from their mother (size of X chromosome compared to Y).

While children will inherit half their ancestry from each parent, it's not the same half of each parent, as segments are random. Most people assume it's the sum of both parents ancestry divided by 2, which while something you should expect, isn't what will occur, as segments are taken in whole.

For example, a couple who are both 50% Irish and 50% English, can potentially have a child who is 100% Irish and another who is 100% English (assuming they had the right segments of each ancestry).

The assumed "sum divided by 2" applied to impurities doesn't occur that way either, while you expect the impurity to half each time, it can actually be entirely erased from the genome, without a shred of evidence it was ever there, in as little as 3 generations in a million to one odds (isn't going to happen, just can), and is a statistical impossibility to remain in the genome after 14 generations.
This effectively means that you have absolutely no ancestry from nor relation to a Non ancestor.

This can even occur with two mulattos producing a child who is purely White; just impossibly unlikely. However both the process and the odds can be significantly improved with modern technology to screen embryos and select for purity.

Is it feasible?
No, not by a long shot. The amount of time, money, genetic screening, pure Whites sacrificed, etc that would be required is enormous, all to purify a few tainted Nons; especially considering there's still hundreds of millions of pure Whites today.

It would be far more economical to just have the pure Whites have large fertility rates, and the tainted very low fertility rates; and demographically replace them.

Would it even be good enough?
No, as Christians, we believe a person is more than just their body, they're also a soul.

While the body could and can be purified, according to the doctrine of Generationism¹ ², in which souls are propagated from two parental souls, the resulting purified body would be soulless.

Perhaps a model could be developed which maintains Generationism while providing a means that the purified could gain a soul; perhaps partial segments of a soul propagated with the genetic segments, which recombine into a full soul with the body. However this would most likely just be a cope.

Bleaching is a meme. You won't be purified.

West Siberians:
Also commonly known as North Siberians or Nganasan, are a major ancestral group to many North-Eastern Europeans (NEE), such as Ukr. (8%), Rus. (10%), Fin. (11%) and Saami (26%); and a minor ancestral group (0.5—4%) to all Europeans, with the only exception the Irish and Southern Europeans.

Alleged a partially East Eurasian (EE) group, West Siberian (WS) admixture in all North and Central Europeans is concerning for views of White racial purity.

However it is clear they do not have EE admixture. WS are a splinter group from Ancient North Eurasians (ANE: the people which blonde hair originates from), it is here ANE is claimed to be 75% WE Western Hunter Gatherers (WHG) and 25% an unknown "East Asian" group.
This "unknown" group was in fact WE Tocharian-like, making W-Siberian White, albeit Archaic Caucasian.

Why would WS cluster with EE? A combination of k-means limitation when comparing different variance, and ANE admixture in EE, falsely attributed to EE.

North Eastern Europeans are White.

Present-Day West Siberians:
It's no lie that many, if not most, present-day Siberians look Asian, that's because they are.

In the previous post we defended the purity of ancient West Siberians and the admixture it injected into Northern/ Eastern Europeans, Finnish and perhaps even the Saami; as a more Archaic Caucasian group. However we do not defend the gooks that reside in Siberia today, nor the purity of all who reside in Europe, individual discernment is important.

Look at this chart for West Siberians, and you'll see that while they started off pure West Eurasian, the majority of their ancestry was quickly replaced by East Eurasian, of which the modern "West Siberians" descend from; however the admixture in modern Europeans is ancient.
Many pure WS branches are likely omitted from this chart prior to the admixture event, as no surviving WS group exists today.

In short, West Siberians are extinct and only exist today as admixture in Whites, and in Asians; but they should not be conflated as Asian.

Composition of West Siberian Hunter Gatherers:
"Three samples from the west Siberian forest zone (6.2-4kBC) are representatives of a mixture of ancestry called “West Siberian hunter-gatherer” (WSHG) ancestry, made up of EHG (30%), ANE (50%), and AEA-related ancestry (20%). This ancestry was also present in the southern steppe..."
—Further reading.

From the article, WSHG ancestry is found in WSH (Proto-Indo-European), with many WSHG sample haplogroups being R1b, which is interesting as most modern Siberians aren't; demonstrating there isn't untainted genetic continuity between ancient and modern Siberians, of which N. and E. Europeans have admixture of the former, not latter.

It's claimed there's 20% AEA-related ancestry. AEA is an East Eurasian population which has up to 40% ANE ancestry; given the related tag, location and haplogroup, it's reasonable to infer this 20% is related to the ANE admixture, not EE.

WSHG composition is 30% EHG, 50% ANE¹, 20% ANE²; entirely Caucasian.

Not to worry, I won't be talking about West Siberians forever. Posts have been slow recently as I research more heavily into West Eurasian divergence, diversification and convergence.

The 4 main points of contention regarding West Eurasian racial purity is:
—West Siberians. (WSHG)
—Ancient North Eurasians. (ANE)
—Basal Eurasians.
—Neanderthals.

—WSHG is clearly just an offshoot of ANE, however ANE requires better proof of purity.

—ANE is being further researched, but not a lot of information than a plain "20% East Asian" claim from researchers which is rather baseless imho considering ANE were blonde, and we see none of that in Asia.

—Basal Eurasians are a hypothetical pre-Eurasian population, completely unproven, but claimed to exist as an explanation of why West Eurasians have less Neanderthal admixture than East Eurasians, of which many other reasons could explain, such as inconsistent Neanderthal admixture across Eurasians, or different genetic recombination efficiency. The premise is that Basal Eurasians have no Neanderthal ancestry as they split from Eurasians before they mix with Neanderthals, then they mix with West Eurasians.

This hypothetical Basal Eurasian is claimed to be about 50% of both Natufians and Early European Farmers, the latter of which is claimed to have "bleached" Europe of Neanderthal ancestry; however looking at the Linearbandkeramik (EEF) sample, there's approximately 1.9% Neanderthal introgression, which is consistent with standard West Eurasians, which debunks this Basal Eurasian nonsense. I'm reading into Natufians to further confirm this, being half Basal, half UWHG, they should be ≤1% Neanderthal to prove the Basal Eurasian hypothesis, if they're ~2% it disproves the hypothesis.

—Lastly, Neanderthal admixture doesn't make West Eurasians (Whites, Europeans) impure as the standard for racial purity is purity to the West Eurasian branch, of which I claim Adam started. Anything that occurs before this split is inconsequential and meaningless, such as the Neanderthal introgression, but can be useful to track populations by looking at the Neanderthal %.

A further study we could look into is the effect of Turkic admixture in the Balkan, such as how much Turkic ancestry is actually not West Eurasian, and how much this actually effected the region, but this is a difficult area to study that is likely to disappoint.

Longer follow-up than I expected, but glad to keep everyone here in the loop and informed. 😎👌🏻

Basal Eurasians:
—are a hypothetical ancestor to NHG (Natufians) and EEF (Early European Farmers) at approximately 50% and 44%, respectively.

The hypothesis was developed to explain why WE (West Eurasians) have less Neanderthal admixture than EE (East Eurasians), as both only mixed with Neanderthals while as ancestral "Eurasians," by suggesting WE mixed with a Proto-Eurasian splinter group, Basal Eurasians, who had no Neanderthal admixture, through the mixed NHG and EEF, the latter of which mixed with all WE; this would make all Europeans race-mixed.

However a simple search of NHG and EEF samples show 2.06% and 1.9% Neanderthal admixture, respectively; which is not only within the normal range for WE (~1.8% ±0.4%), but is on the high end of the range; making Basal Eurasians rather baseless.

NHG, EEF and subsequent Europeans do not have Basal ancestry, they are White.
More detail in image.

Ancient North Eurasians:
—(ANE) is a West Eurasian (WE) group that diverged from WHG approximately 24,000 years ago, unrelated to East Eurasians (EE).

"ANE is considered to have been "basal to modern day WE" but not related to East Asians, and suggested to have perhaps originally lived in Europe or Western Asia. According to Lazaridis et al. 2014, the common ancestor of ANE and WHG separated from EE around 40kBC, and ANE split from WHG around 22kBC."

While often claimed that ANE aren't WE and have approximately 20% EE admixture, there is very little evidence to support admixing, and the former is just semantics, as ANE are from the same branch that diverged from EE as the rest of WEs.

A few ANE samples may share some alleles with EE implying admixture, but that's likely owing to retained alleles from the recent WE/EE split, or that these particular samples were admixed; as we don't see evidence of EE in subsequent ANE populations such as EHG, SHG and WSH.

ANE and subsequent Europeans are White.

White Ethnogenesis:
I've done significant research the past month delineating the origin and descent of West Eurasians, and put together a very thorough infographic detailing this information.

A common accusation from critics of "one drop" racial purity standards is that "we're already mixed" however I've put research that demonstrates Whites are genuinely racially isolated to West Eurasians.

Previous posts:
—General ¹
—Basal ¹
—WSHG ¹ ² ³
—ANE ¹
Note: I'll edit the infographic sometime over the next few days for extra details and higher resolution.

Final Footnote: If in the future we are to find this is all inaccurate and Europeans are genuinely mixed in their pre-history to other races, this should not concern us in the slightest.
Christ, the Apostles, the Disciples and Paul all preached exclusively to Whites throughout Europe, West Asia and North Africa, not to a single Non race and then said it was done. Whatever we were at that point, God was satisfied with, and we descend purely from those people.

Philippians 2:15
¹⁵ Vt sitis sine qverella, et simplices filii D‌e‌i‌, sine reprehensione in medio nationis pravae, et perversae: inter qvos lvcetis sicvt lvminaria in mvndo,
¹⁵ So may you be without complaint, unmixed sons of God, without reproof in the midst of a nation depraved, and perverse: among whom you shine like lights in the world,

John 1:13
¹³ Qvi non ex sangvinibvs, neqve ex volvntate carnis, neqve ex volvntate viri, sed ex D‌e‌o‌ nati svnt.
¹³ Who is not of bloods*, nor of the will of flesh, nor of the will of man, but from God they were born.
*Note the plural.

Protect your God given racial purity until the last drop, we are surrounded by the masses of dark hordes, but we will prevail, as unmixed sons of God.

No One Is Coming To Save Us:
Fantasies of spaceage Nazis from the moon/ Antarctica, divine intervention and even "the collapse", that will save the White race, is Q-tier "Trust The Plan" nonsense. None of it will ever happen.

Not to disparage God, but there will never be divine intervention to save us from ourselves: refer to doctrines of Cessationism and Preterism; since Christ, God hasn't and never will again intervene on earth. We must save ourselves, guided by God's word.

We don't save ourselves by sitting around waiting for it to blow over, inaction is racial suicide; our enemies don't take the same stance. Hiding innawoods isn't an option, there's nowhere left to run on earth, and nothing will be fixed in our absence.

We save our race by usurping the vehicles of power: institutions, corporations, political offices, media, influencers, military, agencies, financing, etc.

White men must be smart, powerful, influential and charismatic; if we ever hope for the White race to survive and prosper.

How Can I Be Certain Of My Racial Purity?
A very common and fair question that should be explored.

"You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorns nor figs from thistles, are they?
In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the corrupt tree bears bad fruit.
A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit.
So then, you will recognize them by their fruit."
—The Tree and its Fruits [Matthew 7:15-20; Luke 6:43-45]

In the absence of obvious signs of foreign admixture, such as Non phenotypical traits, or known Non ancestry, you should try not to be so overly convoluted and just fallback on the duck test, of which this passage effectively describes.
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."

If it looks White, acts White, and sounds White, then it's probably White; and you should have very little concern about the possibility for the presence of any hidden ancient foreign microadmixture.

There is an obvious concern of Non admixture in our pre-history, which we discussed the plausibility of Whites remaining pure through and that if however it were found that we did mix during this pre-history period, not only would the admixed value be low and insignificant, it theologically would be inconsequential.
This is due to Christ, Apostles, Disciples and Paul all preaching exclusively to Whites throughout Europe, West Asia and North Africa, not to a single Non race and then said it was done.

This demonstrates two things:
1- Whatever Whites were genetically composed of at this point, was acceptable.
2- Whatever Nons were genetically composed of at this point, was unacceptable.

Assuming there is Non admixture during pre-history (we disagree there is) then by whatever reason, justification or mechanism that would allow only Whites to retain souls, we just simply don't understand yet, but should take sollice in the fact we only need to check purity to the last 2000 years.

To summarise: to be certain of your racial purity, you simply need: the absence of any known Non ancestry in the past 2000 years, the absence of any Non phenotypical traits, to appear White and to act White.

You will recognise a good tree (White) by it's fruits (character).

The 4 Tenets of Christian Identity.

Nativism:
The term "native" today is deeply misunderstood, which is derivative of nation.

Native: a person born in a specified place.
Nativism: the policy of protecting the interests of native-born against immigrants.

Often the term native is conflated with indigenous, which is actually a term denoting where a creature developed.

A native American is not a red-Indian and throughout US history only ever meant a White person born in America, only changing in very recent history.

Above is an early American White supremacist flag (Know Nothing Party) which not only opposed nons coming to the US, but also foreign born Whites (non-native).

While not used as commonly historically, this applies to the rest of the world as well:
—A native Australian is a White person born in Australia.
—A native European is a White person born in Europe.

As much as it'll trigger some, these aren't interchangeable, an American is not European; these are demonyms, while White is the ethnonym.

Only Whites are Native American.

Eye of Providence:
Despite kooky conspiracies attributed to the symbol, the symbol is actually entirely Christian, first appearing in the early 16th century AD, in Protestant and Renaissance Europe, as a symbol for the Triune God (Trinity).

The symbol is characterised by:
- an enclosed eye, representing the omnipresence of God: the all-seeing eye.
— an enclosing triangle, representing the Christian trinity.
— often a circle and rays emitting from the triangle; the former artistic, the latter representing the emitting of divine providence and sunlight.

Despite claims of Freemasonry, it only ever features once in Freemasonry:
— Thomas Smith Webb's: The Freemason's Monitor, 1797.
Allegedly after this publication Freemasons would use it commonly. This is however centuries after the common Western European Christian usage.

However EOP features extremely frequently throughout the United States and Europe:
— Great Seal of the United States, 1782.
— State Seal: Colorado.
— City Seal: Kenosha, Wisconsin.
— DARPA's Information Awareness Office.
— United States $1 bill.
— Vermont Copper, 1785.
— Nova Constellatio patterns/ coppers, 1783, 1785.
— Serbian Constitution, 1835.
— French: Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, 1789.
— Coat of Arms: Confederation of the Equator, 1824.
— Coat of Arms: Brasłaŭ, Belarus.
— Coat of Arms: Wilamowice, Poland.
— 5 Lithuanian Coat of Arms: Alovė, Baisogala, Kalvarija, Plungė, Šiauliai.
— 2 Lithuanian flags: Plungė, Šiauliai.
— Estonian 50 krooni note.
— Ukrainian 500 hryvnia (old) note.
— UK Guards Division insignia, 1915.

While above is all government usage, the earliest known usage of the EOP is:
— Pontormo's Supper at Emmaus, 1525.
Since then it has been featured on numerous Eastern Orthodox, Latter-day Saint, Catholic and Protestant churches and buildings.

The EOP is still used in church architecture and Christian art today to symbolize the Trinity and God's omnipresence and divine providence.

Clarification: nativism only applies to Whites, Nons are fauna.