A paradox in pictures…
A paradox in pictures…
The “strong delusion” of modern times is that Liberty is somehow the enemy of Security, that you can somehow trade one in for more of the other, that individual freedoms somehow negatively correlate to public safety.
But this antiquated notion has already been richly blown out of the water, by political scientists far more credentialed than I, as being almost as anachronistic as those who cling to the idea that the Vatican (or even the Jesuits) are somehow at the top of the élitist food chain. They’re up there, don’t get me wrong, but to say they’re at the top, you’re simply living in the 1700s, before the Rothschilds’ star began to rise.
And similarly, you have to go back about 100 years to find a time when “law and order” (i.e. government) wasn’t the top non-natural cause of human death, as it has been since at least the hatching of the Bolshevik Plot (i.e. the “Russian Revolution”).
To wit, UH political scientist R.J. Rummel’s research suggests that six times as many people have died from democide (murder by government) during the 20th century than in all that century’s wars combined! democide having just dethroned war as the leading cause of non-natural death, which had been war in all foregoing centuries.
We American churchgoers have been browbeaten into framing our afterlife questions in leading terms that are easy to pretend to have canned answers to, e.g., Where do we go when we die?, which begs the question of whether the afterlife is really a matter of flash mobs rather than the heart?
Such mass-eschatologies and -soteriologies seem to work extraordinarily well for the clergy classes and religionist racketeers, but by contrast they have precious little basis in any respected mystical visionary or philosophical tradition, and unsurprisingly they offer near-zero nourishment for the sincere seeker.
Such pseudoacademic theologizing as this Where do we go when we die? tripe has its roots in dogmatism¹ and should therefore be consigned to the pile labeled spiritually and sapientially vapid.
Pat answers generally are a lot of clergybabble—static—which are rooted in dogmatism and which work well for the political flavor-of-the-month²…and little else.
For those who spend quality time with the source-texts of Christianity³, it soon becomes clear that these default and binary afterlife destinations are always couched in terms of myth and allegory, and⁴ our experience of “the other side of life”⁵ varies as widely as our experience of this world does—speaking within the dimension of spirit (which is not abstract but rather means breath [as in the respiratory system] and is also a synonym for chutzpah, like in spirit and spunk).
Our experience of both planes of reality—both the inner and the upper—depends greatly on our attentiveness to the intuitive, subtle and subconscious—all things that, unlike the banal sermons we’re mostly treated to, are tough to capitalize on—all things that only the myth or the parable is suited to cultivating in the hearer.
But that’s fine with me, since didn’t the Parabolist himself say:
– “freely ye have received, freely give” (Matthew 10:8b),
– “the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21b), and finally
– “strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it” (Matthew 7:14)?
¹ Dogma is the opposite of Christ’s exclusively parable-based preaching/teaching style.
² The clergy surreptitiously supports whatever government establishment their sheep happen to find themselves under and receives kickbacks from in the form of 501c3 tax breaks.
³ And quality time with the Indo-Egypto-Hebraic sources of those Christian sources.
⁴ Assuming we’re speaking in spiritual terms here.
⁵ As well as our relative glory or obscurity on the other side.
All materialistic pursuits, worldly and carnal as they are, are quantitative (i.e. numerical) in nature, and therefore they are all finite, transient and temporary.
And much of “atheism” is just a “modernism”* that has come out of the Catholic (or Anglican) closet.
Because despite their austere label, “atheists” have gods; the only difference is that their gods are tangible and tend to include Earth (Gaia), other heavenly bodies, and perhaps even Government (Statism).
In short, most of the guys and gals running around calling themselves “atheists” are instead pre-Christian religionists.
In conclusion, a vast majority of atheists aren’t atheists but dogmatic materialists.
Atheism is a philosophy, and all attempts at turning it into a culture, just like all attempts at turning the Christian gospel into a church, have predictably fallen flat on their faces.
Modernism is the denial of the past and often of spirituality.
If you’re like me, you’ve been treated to more than one unwanted advance from that well-dressed, smiley and clingy page thumper who claims to know where you can find all the answers and save your soul from a default afterlife that’s allegedly even more excruciating than the encounter you’re presently having—even thought they can’t, for the life of them, articulate just one independent, critical thought. Which begs the question: Who will save your soul (i.e. mind) from this belief system that sounds like something that came straight from the (undisputedly schizophrenic) mind of H.P. Lovecraft?
Faced with such an uncannily sticky social situation (not that different in theory from your brush with that salesman or that politician), you may have thought your only options were joining their cult (which unless you’re broke often involves an implicit “church tax” known as tithing), claiming to be Jewish, or being saddled with something even worse than the lake of fire itself: that all-too-familiar aftertaste of guilt, awkwardness and pity. But that, my friend, is where you’re wrong…
Be their psychological prey no longer!
Defend your sanity with these all-natural, all-rational pest deterrents!
“All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 13:34-35).
“And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them” (Mark 4:11-12).
“They have the Churches, but we have the true Faith”
(early Christian saying, regarding the Arian Christians).
“The New Testament is hidden in the Old, and the Old is revealed in the New” (Augustine, Quaestiones in Heptateuchum).
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature (Mark 16:15).
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).
“And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye” (Mark 7:9-13).
Jesus said, “Call no man on earth your father“, but he did give his beloved disciple an earthly mother.
“And I will bless them that bless thee [singular], and curse him that curseth thee [again singular]: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” (Genesis 12:3), which makes a lot of sense since at this point all families of the earth are descended from Abraham—no more Ashkenazis (who rule the modern State of Israel) than any other group!
“Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile [also translated ‘deceit’]!” (John 1:47).
Zionism: 100% dependent on anti-Semitism.
Road to perdition much? Oh the self-defeating theologies that are born of making a neurotic named Augustine (who couldn’t even read Greek much less Hebrew!) your exclusive patristic authority on Genesis.
“I hope the last Day of Judgment is not far, I persuade myself verily it will not be absent full three hundred years longer” (Martin Luther).
Gee, double-standard much?
Funny thing: Emulating Muslims (in teetotaling, iconoclasm, scriptural literalism, and a general anti-monastic sentiment) while simultaneously hating them…
To what extent has the devil of Christianity come to be portrayed in the same way as the God of the Bible? Lucifer is mentioned one time in the Bible and refers to a king in Babylon. To say Lucifer is Satan is unbiblical fakelore, at best.
I’d better withhold comment on the titles I would tend to bestow on them. (Sorry, forgot “Minister”.)
Conclusion: Do you even Gospel, Pastor?!
Also used in genuine priestly chrism (see Christ) or anointing oil.
“God only speaks to me and not so much to you except through me and especially this book that I have, that’s actually an anthology of frankly quite probably altered tales and rules, most of which if you read on are no longer binding anyway. (Sorry about wasting valuable time and trees.) But I have a really cool costume and can drop names so you’ll keep coming back to me, rather than just take the book and walk, which would be an understandable move especially because I’m constantly telling you which parts are literal, which parts are metaphors, and which parts I think God got wrong. Don’t you ever stop to wonder if I really represent God…or perhaps the other guy?”
—Your Pastor’s Name Here
Now really, is Christianity as drastically or essentially different from Islam as we’re asked to believe it is—or is this mostly a turf war that the polemics are engineered to suck us all into, generation after generation, each in his own ideological ghetto?
Well firstly, consider that Christianity in its history has gone through several far-flung and even contradictory trends (as have all religions!), many of which in fact were quite clearly influenced by non-Christian sects and esoteric schools: there was the Judaizer phase, the Pauline/Gnostic, Arian, Constantinian/Conciliar, Papist, Reformed, Counter-Reformed, Radical Reformed, Pentecostal (Corinthian/Neo-Gnostic), Evangelical, and whatever Pope Pius IX was—just to name a few.
The Arians (not Aryans!) were essentially pre-Mohammedan Muslims, and the minority group they exiled would say of them, “They have the Churches, but we have the true Faith”. In a way, it wasn’t that different from today, where churches would be converted into mosques and back again. Anyway, all that to sort of blow away the idea that Muslims worship “a different god” from the Christians—let alone a “less reasonable god”—particularly since Allah was Jesus’ term for God, Aramaic being far closer to Arabic than to Hebrew. (!)
And before that, the Gnostics are credited with having introduced into Christianity the quite Hindu ideas of:
And then before the Gnostics, followers of “The Way” (which was at that point an all-Jewish sect) worshiped in common synagogues with their “non-Way-ward” fellow-Jews (more or less freely, though persecutions of course erupted here and there).
Truth be told, the Jesus of the canonical gospels did preach that he was sent only to the “House of Israel” and never called himself “God”, except to say to his fellow-Jews, “ye are gods”! so it’s understandable why these first three main (largely Semitic and non-Hellenic) branches of Paleo-Christianity would have cropped up, and right there you can sort of “give the devil his due” and grant that Muslims (or certainly many Muslims) might not be savage bat-wits like the image that’s beaten into us by the Jew-dominated influences on the American mind. After all, consider the Mohammedans’ contributions in mathematics, philosophy, and for heaven’s sake eye surgery!
Now let’s fast-forward to the modern world, because I think it perplexes less informed Americans to hear that a majority-Sunni nation is regimented by Shiite adherents…until you look at the makeup of the US Supreme Court: 1/3 Jewish, 2/3 Roman Catholic!
Anyway, American Christian culture in post-Enlightenment modernity has in many ways become a caricature of Islam, buckling down and pitting itself against Liberty and Reason in many quarters, sort of the way a virus mutates to defend itself against the immune system. One is sorely tempted to suspect intelligence connections and an overarching agenda to maintain our sheeple status by bolstering fideism in the populace.
Particularly the Evangelical Christians (but also many Protestants and Jesuits from the very beginning of the Reformation/Counter-Reformation) seem to take their cues in fact from Islam itself, reading the Bible literally and sort of making a game out of “quieting” their intellect in order to give fideism (that is, philosophical Lutheranism) and communitarianism free rein while paying lip-service to “independent thinking” to outsiders. As a phenomenon, this must be called absurd—and even absurdist! (This is not to say that radical secularism [i.e. the notion that government officials must not be openly religious] is any more rational!)
So the question I must ask these demonstrably two-faced Grahamite Evangelicals is this: Where do you get off asking people to “just have faith” and passively accept the politically expedient idea that the Biblical canon and theological specifications of this specific time and place is the one true faith God intended from the 6,000-year-old beginning? I mean, first off, can it get any shallower—any less spiritual—than that?
And if, God forbid, we analyze this trendy sentiment (which is truly covert modernism, committing the unforgivable sin of blasphemy against the spirit), we quickly see that the theology of our day came about through questioning the theology of its day that likewise “must not be questioned”! Jesus said “He who lives by the sword dies by the sword”, and it almost seems as if the same is true of mainstream or exoteric theologies—that implicitly deny spirit, never mind blaspheming against the Holy Spirit!
And a sword one could thrust through the belly of today’s (per)version of “Christianity” is simply this: If original sin was the knowledge of good and evil, what on earth are these “Christian” churches doing teaching about what’s right and what’s wrong? And if Jesus only taught in parables, what are these “Christian” churches doing teaching dogmatic and systematic theologies? Surely—surely!—something is rotten in Christendom.
Prime suspects¹ in the case:
So if contemporary Jewish voices are to be believed, Christians supposedly claim that “the Jews killed Jesus”—which, even if it were the case, wouldn’t exactly come as a shock to anyone, since kill is exactly what they did to innumerable prophets before him, whom unlike Jesus—whom many consider the last of the prophets—they actually later came to believe!
(To corroborate this commentary, here is the impression of a Talmudic Jewish professor with a PhD in Ukrainian-Jewish history:)
But if you were to say sit down and read the Christian Gospels for yourself (*gasp*), you would quickly learn that Jesus’ countrymen did not kill him in fact, but rather they had attempted to kill him on several separate occasions (per tradition it would seem), but in the end resorted to tapping into their world-renowned expertise at handling the goyim², permitting the goyim to do their dirty work, handling the goyim like so many golems or marionettes, and playing groups off each other for their own advancement (then as now).
With that said, by the superstitions of the time, the Jews may as well have crucified Jesus, since Pilate washed his hands, a symbolic gesture that was met with a resounding “May his blood be on us and on our children!”³
By many outward appearances, the Temple Establishment steered Caesar’s representative toward killing Jesus, yet Jesus had clearly told Pilate that only with the former’s Father’s permission could the latter have any power over him whatsoever. (!)
But let us rewind even further, because Herod I the Client-King (who had also styled himself as king of the Jews) attempted to kill Jesus at about 2 years old by ordering “age-icide” on all the two-year-olds in his region.
And then when Jesus was grown an angry mob in Capernaum, the town of his local synagogue⁴, tried to shove Jesus off a nearby cliff for interrupting their get-together by proclaiming a Jubilee of debt cancellation. And then closer to Jesus’s death—in his last winter on earth—the Jerusalem Mafia tried to stone him to death.
Conclusion. Assuming that, by some amazing coincidence, Christian tradition is history, it’s literally a miracle that the Jews didn’t kill Jesus, but academically speaking they didn’t, end of story.
Verdict: Not guilty. The real culprit? Simple. The “peace” the world gives always requires the deaths of the best of men!
¹ Suspects for murder, attempted murder or conspiracy to commit murder.
² If you don’t know what goyim means, you are one.
³ Again, that’s only if you opt to believe the gospels that Emperor Constantine’s bishop friends liked and not the accounts taught by Muslims, Jews, or any non-Christian group based in the Holy Land (!).
⁴ Interestingly, the synagogue irevy Hellenic fishing village of Capernaum (later Nanhum then Hum) features the first-ever Jewish hexagram (or “Star of David”) built a couple hundred years A.D.