Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7106
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by iambiguous »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:06 am
iambiguous wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 2:58 am Yes, of course, by allowing you to completely ignore this part:

"But don't expect me to believe that He does exist just because you quote from the Christian Bible that He does. And this being the case you assure us because it is the Word of the Christian God. And it must be the Word of the Christian God because it says so right there in the Christian Bible.

I challenge others here to resist further discussions with him until he can in fact demonstrate that his own God is, in fact, the God.

Those videos, for example...

I never said any such thing. You inferred that, apparently from your own suppositions.

Here's how it actually is: I tell you what the Bible says, so you will know I'm speaking authentically about the topic at the top of this thread, "Christianity," and not making things up -- and I give the reference, so you can look it up and check me on that.

You're welcome. :wink:

:wink: is right.

It still amazes how some here can sustain exchanges with you as though you really were worthy of being taken seriously.

Just out of curiosity, are you perhaps just pulling their legs? Are you in fact an Atheist yourself seeing how far you can go with them? Making arguments that are patently ridiculous in order to see how many will still take you seriously? And at a philosophy forum derived from Philosophy Now magazine no less!!

Sorry to be the one to pull back the curtain.



How about this though...

I want you to swear to God that you really do believe that those videos will demonstrate that the Christian God does in fact reside in Heaven. Because if you really do believe this, why in the world would you not note the clip/segment that most powerfully shows this? Not doing this merely demonstrates [to me] that you don't even believe this yourself.
reasonvemotion
Posts: 1813
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: Christianity

Post by reasonvemotion »

Alexis Jacobi wrote:
That’s the part that interests me: to have influenced thousands, even millions.
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Matthew 24.24

Here are some examples of Benny Hinn's teachings that reflect a New Age influence rather than a revelation of the Holy Spirit:

Don't tell me you have Jesus. You are everything He was and everything He is and ever shall be...Don't say, "I have." Say , "I AM, I AM, I AM, I AM, I AM."

You know, I'll tell you something. I'm not supposed to, but the Holy Ghost is upon me, and I think I need to. The day is coming when those that attack us will drop dead.

You say, "What did you say?"

I speak this under the anointing of the Spirit. Can I tell you something? Don't touch God's servants—it's deadly. You'd think we should do whatever we want with someone who's failed God? "Touch not my anointing."

I'm not afraid to tell you what I think. I owe nothing to no man; and don't touch Morris Cerullo; don't touch Rex Humbard; don't touch Billy Graham; don't touch Larry Lea, Oral Roberts, Richard Roberts—don't touch them!

Pray for them. Pray, pray, pray. I speak it under the anointing, woe to you that touch God's servants; you're going to pay.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5087
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Nov 02, 2021 5:44 pm I think that if you look to the "Occidental Paideia," then what you're looking to is the same variation of alleged "Christianity" that allowed Hitler to bring institutional religious and moral elements into his program....namely, a soulless religiosity devoid of the life of God. And no, I don't suppose this will "renovate" Europe or anywhere else, though I have no doubt it will promise it will.
Note that the above was written Nov 2nd, 2021. Man, we've been at this for awhile!

Allow me this bit of a preamble which I will direct to Immanuel Can because he wrote the above paragraph and has made himself the primary object here. Or let it be like a missive:
"Dear Immanuel Can. You have provided me over the months with a direct experience of a man who has been totally indoctrinated with sets of false-belief that so dominate his consciousness that he has no longer the capability of thinking freely. You have shown me what it looks like when a man surrenders his own self, his sovereignty as a free intellect, to a strange possessive and enchaining 'spirit' which, simultaneously, the man himself affixes the chains. You are both the 'jailed' and the 'jailer'.

"And through my confrontation and encounter with you, though the process began earlier, I have been forced to 'see through' the enchaining constructs that have been installed in you and which you yourself enchain yourself with, and to propose alternatives. I must refer to a designation, a wide category, that is an abbreviation: Occidental paideia. I observed that you fought against this tooth & claw. Why you resist this so intensely must be examined (at another time I will). But I note your adamancy.

"That is why I say, and I do believe that you believe such fundamentally, that "without HaShem all human roads lead to Hell". It is a subconscious or unconscious assertion that is latent in the Christian declarations. And that Christian declaration is a manifestation of what I call Hebrew Idea Imperialism. That needs to be defined, of course, but I take it as being a power-based declaration directed to men who are not themselves sufficiently empowered to be and remain sovereign agents of their own destiny.

"So the issue then becomes: How then can such men become empowered and resolved to face their own sovereignty? But moreover to construct it within themselves? You see I am asserting and I am declaring that such is possible. While you (and you-plural and also the Idea-Imperialism I refer to) assert that this is NOT possible and will lead to Hitlerian outcomes. Do you see? You then, perhaps without knowing it, set yourself up not a a friend but as an enemy of man's sovereignty.

"Where then can we find the intellectual and spiritual tools for this 'sovereignty'? Well, not in some abstract outside power certainly. Subservience to that opens one up to subservience to things outside of oneself (the State for example).

"And this is why I refer to 'our own traditions' as the source and the area where we must focus. It is a return to ourself, a refocus on ourself, a turn back to a sovereign center."
What is most striking here [in the paragraph quoted at the beginning] is, once again, the reference to Hitler. What interests me here is a bit difficult to put into words and I find myself struggling to do so. But here goes:

Our entire present is dominated by a sublimation of Protestant theological categories. We do not seem to have any sense, and certainly no agreed-upon sense, of who God is, but we definitely do know who the Devil is and, weirdly, the Devil is a great deal more real to us than is God. A couple of further comments to substantiate this observation. We cannot invoke God and make God become manifest (God seems invisible and absent to most people) but we can certainly invoke the Devil in the sense of see his work and understand him. Who is he? Where is he? This is where things get really strange and weird. He is wherever you choose to see him and he is behind everything. This must be true because, again, these are established Christian-Protestant categories that have, literally, been installed at a foundational perceptual level. In the Medieval conception the Earth itself was seen as the lowest point of condensation, the densest point, in the manifest Cosmos. The Earth is 'the Devil's realm' therefore. This means that Satanic entity rules here in this plane of existence where we all are.

The same idea still operates in our present conceptions and is reiterated through our own perception. We know that Christians see the world in this way -- they are Children of God and are here to do God's will but they are opposed by Satan who owns and controls the realm. This leads to a total conundrum that, as I see it, cannot be resolved. And it is in this unresolvableness that we, in our Christianity and post-Christianity, actually live. It is as Immanuel says: we are subsumed into a situation that is simply bad through-and-through. It cannot be cured, resolved, or improved by anything man alone can do. It is a hopeless situation and I take hopeless in the most essential sense. There is no hope for Man -- except by turning to an outside source.

But now we must examine that (and please note that I do not believe any of this, I am just trying to express Ruling Ideas that dominate out present). Salvation: what is it? We all have enough of a sense of what Christians believe it to be. I could submit videos of Christians explaining how their *salvation* came about. But I want to put that aside since I am more interested in the post-Christian version of the same.

What does it mean to say that man requires Salvation? That he cannot do without it? It seems to mean that he must come under the *ray* or the influence of a Therapeutic Power. Obviously, to the Christian, that is the mystical power of Jesus. But in our post-Christian world, and this certainly means even and even most especially for people who have exited Christian belief (take our Lacewing and Iambiguous as excellent examples) they may have exited conscious submission to the Therapeutic God, yet they are still and very much unconsciously and subconsciously held or subsumed in the 'shadow' of that same assumption of the need for a therapeutic event.

Will you allow me to jump ahead in order to make my point? Today and in our Present it is the State Regime that has taken for itself the role of Therapist. The State has assumed the role that a Church power-structure might at one time have had. And it is the Citizen who is the subject of the State's therapeutic molding. What I mean to say is that what I am describing is in process and I do not mean to say that the process is complete. But I think we all see that such a thing is forming.

But in a general sense we -- especially we who are White and of European descent -- we are all in therapy. We are the problem. We have been designated as the 'source of evil'. It is ourselves, our history, all that we have done that requires a specific therapeutic cure. And for this reason there are thousands and millions of those Guilty Ones who have voluntarily submitted to the authority of the State and its supporting institutions by first recognizing the level of their complicity. And so complicity must be examined:
noun: collusion, conspiracy, collaboration, connivance, abetment
So a few things have to be said about the supposed cure.

This picture seems at least largely accurate: God has substantially disappeared. Or God has, like a cloud, de-vaporized into something like a 'general sense'. God is 'in the background' in a Protestant sense and has become mostly an awareness of guilt & blame. The Protestant sense of God has come to operate in a universal cultural sense of 'social justice'. And it is in this context that I refer to Americanism and Homo americanus because it is these persons, this system, that carries forward this basic 'mission' of establishing global egalitarianism and this strange thing called 'democracy' (which in no sense is democracy).These are cultivated tropes which have been deeply and even indelibly imprinted into our consciousness. I actually do not think we could act independently of them unless we submitted ourselves to a sort of deprogramming. I am being serious here. These ways of seeing and ways of thinking have been installed in us. Even if we did not give assent to their installation they are there nonetheless.

Blame & Guilt then have become dominant sentiments but we must see that there is one particular people, and one particular race, that has taken on the burden of 'atonement' for this Guilt. It seems pretty obvious, given all the narrative accusations flying about, that it is the White Race that is in the center of this profoundly psychological, but really religiously-embroiled, atonement process.
Last edited by Alexis Jacobi on Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5087
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

iambiguous wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 6:16 am It still amazes how some here can sustain exchanges with you as though you really were worthy of being taken seriously.
What I have just done is, in a way, linked you to Immanuel Can in the sense that you seem to me to have absorbed the Protestant guilt-categories I referred to. Look it over and let me know what you think. If you can do it in normal sized and non-bolden print I'd consider that an added gift!
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9452
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Harbal »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:24 pm What interests me here is a bit difficult to put into words and I find myself struggling to do so.
Then do yourself a favour, and don't bother putting it into words. It's not as if it matters. :|
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:24 pm "Dear Immanuel Can..."
Sorry. You're on your own.

I find your answers non-responsive, evasive and perpetually ad hominem, which is to say "off topic," as well. One cannot hold a conversation that way. People have to be responsive to each other.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5087
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

iambiguous wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 9:08 pm Is he a racist? Is he sympathetic with those who walk his talk more or less in the general vicinity of the Nazis? Would black and brown and red folks have anything to be concerned about if the "demographic crisis" was resolved to his own satisfaction?
I respond:
AJ: My assessment of you is that you are *intellectually neurotic*. You are fixated on a specific approach and you are certain that your approach is the right one. You keep insisting (like a broken record) that I do your bidding. And you imply that there is something wrong with the way I approach these topics and issues.

I can only politely suggest that you modify your obsession.
Iambiguous: This instead of at least attempting to bring his "theoretical" views on race and gender and homosexuality and Jews down out of the clouds and exploring "what is to be done?" about the "demographic crisis" faced by the Northern European white stock.
Mr Iambiguous, I have told you that you rush forward far too impetuously and that you must slow down considerably so that outlooks -- my outlooks in this case but also the outlooks of those who attempt to define a dissident position -- can be examined carefully.

So what I am trying to do -- and this I think it incomprehensible to you -- is to *see* the present, and to *see* ourselves from a point outside of the immediacy of our perceptions about the Present. I do not see this as soaring up into theoretical clouds, as you constantly exclaim, but actually taking ourselves in hand in a different way. This seems to be intolerable to you.

In regard to both *race* and *gender* what I wish to point out, as a starting point, is that we live within a Therapeutic State which has assumed the role of our reconstructor. Do you understand what this implies? What do you think of that assertion? The State, and an assortment of State-affiliated institutions, has made *US* its therapeutic subject.

And what I try to show you is the degree to which you are also acting (in this sense) as the State's proxy. You seem to act like a moral enforcer and you also seem to believe that you know what is right. That is, the right attitude and outlook to have, but primarily the one that is moral and good.

I am not sure that you, and really anyone, can make these sorts of declarations. It is not that I desire to 'sponsor racism' or oppress those of the feminine gender, but more that I am examining the core predicates that seem to operate in you. This seems to make you uncomformable. You do not like it! And you attach negative assessments to what I am trying to do (which I assert you do not understand).
That's all that I am "fixated" on here. And that is because over and again I make it abundantly clear that my own interest in philosophy revolves around connecting the dots existentially between words and worlds. Whereas, in my own personal opinion, AJ is fixated only on providing us with walls of words -- worlds of words -- that expose the extent to which being the didactic pedant is what it is really all about for him.
No Sir. That is not *all*. That is a part though, that I accept. I do not give a flying fuck what your own focus is to be quite frank. I do not discount it but there is no need for you to keep insisting that your methods are the right ones for this or for any conversation. So put that shit aside.

If you are concerned about *words and worlds* -- which I do not consider invalid --I may point out that I am concerned with the conceptualizations that determine word-use. And I am interested in, and focused on, the intrusion of determined ideological constructs into our perceptual order. Further, I am concerned about how the State has become the agent of applied therapeutics. And I am aware of the 'causal chains' through which this has come about.

You have a superficial relationship to these issues and, I'd say, take your stand as a modern Liberal man. I do not have a fixed position (as I tirelessly repeat). But I do sense the need to examine the present -- our ideas and attitudes -- from a critical standpoint.
And, again, no problem. He will always find other "serious philosophers" who will go up there with him. The "slower" approach. Let others walk his talk politically. He'll join them...later.
This is more of the 'broken record' that defines nearly everything you say. You just repeat yourself time and again! It is so annoying.

I have just clearly and carefully explained to you why I take the tack I do. If you don't like it, fine. But at the very least try to understand it.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5087
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:40 pm Sorry. You're on your own.

I find your answers non-responsive, evasive and perpetually ad hominem, which is to say "off topic," as well. One cannot hold a conversation that way. People have to be responsive to each other.
No need to be sorry. Put such sentiments aside. I have always been on my own. I do not perceive you as capable of the response you pretend to value. So I simply go forward with what I set out to do originally.

It is really best, as I said, that you side-line yourself for the time being.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9452
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Harbal »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 4:00 pm I have always been on my own.
It's not hard to see why. :|
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 6604
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Two things...

First, the concept of it being bad that humans gained sight because Eve ate the apple has an interesting parallel to the way Christianity aims to limit and control the scope of human thinking. The story suggests that we are sinners (and have condemned ourselves) for thinking beyond God's world. In other words, it is better to stay blinded. Believe and do as you are told. Don't look anywhere other than the Bible for 'truth'.

Also, the song "Jesus Loves Me", which we might think is cute when little kids sing it...

Jesus loves me, this I 'know': Convince them they 'know' something by having them say so.
For the Bible tells me so: Convince them that the Bible is the authority for truth.
Little ones to him belong: Tell them who they belong to.
They are weak but he is strong: Tell them they are weak. Even as a child, I questioned why we were supposed to think this!
Yes, Jesus loves me! Yes, Jesus loves me! Yes, Jesus loves me! The Bible tells me so: The chant of mind control.

The level of manipulation in Christianity is creepy. It's much more along the lines of keeping people controllable and unquestioning (almost desperate for approval) than being demonstrative of a loving creator. Who or what would actually want this -- such blind following -- of human beings?
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5087
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Feb 01, 2023 4:17 pmWell, let Jesus say it, instead: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6)

Meanwhile, the superficial, cultural religiosity (combined, as it is, with racist suppositions above) that I have indicted will, as I have said, "renovate" nothing.
The question I wish to ask — for anyone interested in answering — is: What brings a person into Life? What gives us the sense that we are living well? and fully? and ethically? Is it luck? To be blessed by circumstances? Is it knowledge (understanding and power combined)? Is it nonchalance? Not caring? Is it fulfillment in family life, friendship or vocation? Can a fulfilled life be attained? And if so through what means?

Why has this concept — salvation — come to mean so much (too much) for some people?
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 6604
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:47 pm The question I wish to ask — for anyone interested in answering — is: What brings a person into Life? What gives us the sense that we are living well? and fully? and ethically? Is it luck? To be blessed by circumstances? Is it knowledge (understanding and power combined)? Is it nonchalance? Not caring? Is it fulfillment in family life, friendship or vocation? Can a fulfilled life be attained? And if so through what means?

Why has this concept — salvation — come to mean so much (too much) for some people?
It might be interesting to explore such questions with you if you hadn't developed such a reputation for using people as springboards for spinning off on your own agenda and dominating discussion. The poison in your bait has become widely known. 8)
owl of Minerva
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:16 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by owl of Minerva »

Returned to this discussion and surprised to find it still in full venomous mode, strident and fanatical. What hope is there for humanity in this Tower of Babel.
Belinda
Posts: 8030
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Belinda »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:24 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Nov 02, 2021 5:44 pm I think that if you look to the "Occidental Paideia," then what you're looking to is the same variation of alleged "Christianity" that allowed Hitler to bring institutional religious and moral elements into his program....namely, a soulless religiosity devoid of the life of God. And no, I don't suppose this will "renovate" Europe or anywhere else, though I have no doubt it will promise it will.
Note that the above was written Nov 2nd, 2021. Man, we've been at this for awhile!

Allow me this bit of a preamble which I will direct to Immanuel Can because he wrote the above paragraph and has made himself the primary object here. Or let it be like a missive:
"Dear Immanuel Can. You have provided me over the months with a direct experience of a man who has been totally indoctrinated with sets of false-belief that so dominate his consciousness that he has no longer the capability of thinking freely. You have shown me what it looks like when a man surrenders his own self, his sovereignty as a free intellect, to a strange possessive and enchaining 'spirit' which, simultaneously, the man himself affixes the chains. You are both the 'jailed' and the 'jailer'.

"And through my confrontation and encounter with you, though the process began earlier, I have been forced to 'see through' the enchaining constructs that have been installed in you and which you yourself enchain yourself with, and to propose alternatives. I must refer to a designation, a wide category, that is an abbreviation: Occidental paideia. I observed that you fought against this tooth & claw. Why you resist this so intensely must be examined (at another time I will). But I note your adamancy.

"That is why I say, and I do believe that you believe such fundamentally, that "without HaShem all human roads lead to Hell". It is a subconscious or unconscious assertion that is latent in the Christian declarations. And that Christian declaration is a manifestation of what I call Hebrew Idea Imperialism. That needs to be defined, of course, but I take it as being a power-based declaration directed to men who are not themselves sufficiently empowered to be and remain sovereign agents of their own destiny.

"So the issue then becomes: How then can such men become empowered and resolved to face their own sovereignty? But moreover to construct it within themselves? You see I am asserting and I am declaring that such is possible. While you (and you-plural and also the Idea-Imperialism I refer to) assert that this is NOT possible and will lead to Hitlerian outcomes. Do you see? You then, perhaps without knowing it, set yourself up not a a friend but as an enemy of man's sovereignty.

"Where then can we find the intellectual and spiritual tools for this 'sovereignty'? Well, not in some abstract outside power certainly. Subservience to that opens one up to subservience to things outside of oneself (the State for example).

"And this is why I refer to 'our own traditions' as the source and the area where we must focus. It is a return to ourself, a refocus on ourself, a turn back to a sovereign center."
What is most striking here [in the paragraph quoted at the beginning] is, once again, the reference to Hitler. What interests me here is a bit difficult to put into words and I find myself struggling to do so. But here goes:

Our entire present is dominated by a sublimation of Protestant theological categories. We do not seem to have any sense, and certainly no agreed-upon sense, of who God is, but we definitely do know who the Devil is and, weirdly, the Devil is a great deal more real to us than is God. A couple of further comments to substantiate this observation. We cannot invoke God and make God become manifest (God seems invisible and absent to most people) but we can certainly invoke the Devil in the sense of see his work and understand him. Who is he? Where is he? This is where things get really strange and weird. He is wherever you choose to see him and he is behind everything. This must be true because, again, these are established Christian-Protestant categories that have, literally, been installed at a foundational perceptual level. In the Medieval conception the Earth itself was seen as the lowest point of condensation, the densest point, in the manifest Cosmos. The Earth is 'the Devil's realm' therefore. This means that Satanic entity rules here in this plane of existence where we all are.

The same idea still operates in our present conceptions and is reiterated through our own perception. We know that Christians see the world in this way -- they are Children of God and are here to do God's will but they are opposed by Satan who owns and controls the realm. This leads to a total conundrum that, as I see it, cannot be resolved. And it is in this unresolvableness that we, in our Christianity and post-Christianity, actually live. It is as Immanuel says: we are subsumed into a situation that is simply bad through-and-through. It cannot be cured, resolved, or improved by anything man alone can do. It is a hopeless situation and I take hopeless in the most essential sense. There is no hope for Man -- except by turning to an outside source.

But now we must examine that (and please note that I do not believe any of this, I am just trying to express Ruling Ideas that dominate out present). Salvation: what is it? We all have enough of a sense of what Christians believe it to be. I could submit videos of Christians explaining how their *salvation* came about. But I want to put that aside since I am more interested in the post-Christian version of the same.

What does it mean to say that man requires Salvation? That he cannot do without it? It seems to mean that he must come under the *ray* or the influence of a Therapeutic Power. Obviously, to the Christian, that is the mystical power of Jesus. But in our post-Christian world, and this certainly means even and even most especially for people who have exited Christian belief (take our Lacewing and Iambiguous as excellent examples) they may have exited conscious submission to the Therapeutic God, yet they are still and very much unconsciously and subconsciously held or subsumed in the 'shadow' of that same assumption of the need for a therapeutic event.

Will you allow me to jump ahead in order to make my point? Today and in our Present it is the State Regime that has taken for itself the role of Therapist. The State has assumed the role that a Church power-structure might at one time have had. And it is the Citizen who is the subject of the State's therapeutic molding. What I mean to say is that what I am describing is in process and I do not mean to say that the process is complete. But I think we all see that such a thing is forming.

But in a general sense we -- especially we who are White and of European descent -- we are all in therapy. We are the problem. We have been designated as the 'source of evil'. It is ourselves, our history, all that we have done that requires a specific therapeutic cure. And for this reason there are thousands and millions of those Guilty Ones who have voluntarily submitted to the authority of the State and its supporting institutions by first recognizing the level of their complicity. And so complicity must be examined:
noun: collusion, conspiracy, collaboration, connivance, abetment
So a few things have to be said about the supposed cure.

This picture seems at least largely accurate: God has substantially disappeared. Or God has, like a cloud, de-vaporized into something like a 'general sense'. God is 'in the background' in a Protestant sense and has become mostly an awareness of guilt & blame. The Protestant sense of God has come to operate in a universal cultural sense of 'social justice'. And it is in this context that I refer to Americanism and Homo americanus because it is these persons, this system, that carries forward this basic 'mission' of establishing global egalitarianism and this strange thing called 'democracy' (which in no sense is democracy).These are cultivated tropes which have been deeply and even indelibly imprinted into our consciousness. I actually do not think we could act independently of them unless we submitted ourselves to a sort of deprogramming. I am being serious here. These ways of seeing and ways of thinking have been installed in us. Even if we did not give assent to their installation they are there nonetheless.

Blame & Guilt then have become dominant sentiments but we must see that there is one particular people, and one particular race, that has taken on the burden of 'atonement' for this Guilt. It seems pretty obvious, given all the narrative accusations flying about, that it is the White Race that is in the center of this profoundly psychological, but really religiously-embroiled, atonement process.
But there are a lot of black people who are Xians. Such a large group indeed that the present Archbishop of Canterbury has had to dilute the democratic initiative towards same sex marriage in churches because of, mostly, African Xians who are sort of fundamentalist.

Wait awhile longer and you will see that younger educated people generally are throwing off old authorities and redefining human nature as not guilty of sin but as innocent as any other animals.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5087
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

owl of Minerva wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 8:27 pm Returned to this discussion and surprised to find it still in full venomous mode, strident and fanatical. What hope is there for humanity in this Tower of Babel.
I.am.that.hope.

I am setting in motion here things that will spread out into our Present, our Future, even to our Past!

Selah
Post Reply