Curt Doolittle

Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology

  • IT”S NOT CHRISTIANITY ITS HOW ITS ARGUED —“Has anyone ever noticed that it isn

    IT”S NOT CHRISTIANITY ITS HOW ITS ARGUED

    —“Has anyone ever noticed that it isn’t Christianity that is the problem? But the Marxist infection of X. It’s the cancer that high trust cultures are prone to. … Yeah, wrong subtopic. It’s hard to say, because Abrahamic religions seem to want to be, at least start out as high trust but quickly degenerated by something power hungry, and/or angry at a slight.”—Anne Summers

    —“Yes. the problem is xianity is conveyed by the same method so how can we get rid of the marxist axis without it affecting xianity unless we convert xianity to secular scientific terms?”—CurtD

    —“It’s hard to say whether Christianity is salvageable. God did not try to salvage either paganism or Judaism. There is no telling what the next covenant will be.

    It’s like trying to read the early parts of the “Voluspa” and trying to decide which gods will survive. Or reading the OT and trying to figure out what God has in store.

    The Owl of Minerva spreads its wings only at dusk.”—Don Miguel

    Neolithic European Farmers

    ……………> Pre-Germanic Nordic

    ……………> Megalithic Atlantic

    ……………> Central?

    Aryanism (Sky Father, Sun God)

    ………..> East

    ……………> Indo Iranian > Zoroastrianism >…

    ……………> Indo Indian > Hinduism > Buddhism

    ………..> West

    ……………> North: ?? > Germanic Thor > Germanic Odinism

    ……………> Central: Germanic Celtic

    ……………> South: Greco-Latin-Roman

    Judaism >

    ……………> Christianity > Protestantism > American Xianity

    ……………> Islam > Islamic Fundamentalism.

    ………….. > Marxism > cultural Marxism > Postmodernism > anti-western feminism > Political Correctness > Denialism

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-26 12:30:00 UTC

  • If you want a Church that works, you need a church that is state funded, otherwi

    If you want a Church that works, you need a church that is state funded, otherwise they sell false promise to the bottom.

    Our founders were only interested in prohibiting the choice of one christian sect over the others. they were presuming that christianity was the religion of the state, and only didn’t include it in the bill of rights because they didn’t want the state choosing the sect.

    Now that we know only Christianity is compatible with natural law that’s not a problem.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-26 10:00:00 UTC

  • Why are so many of us on the right ex-theology students, involved in the church

    Why are so many of us on the right ex-theology students, involved in the church in our youth, or sons and daughters of missionaries?

    (I know the answer)

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-26 09:31:00 UTC

  • Jan 25, 2020, 4:28 PM

    https://adamvoight.wordpress.com/2018/09/21/common-themes-in-the-bible-and-homer/?fbclid=IwAR23jM6z3cmnvBIEhpr_nsLv6DpIJvAoAyc_dp74bB-O_wG5DCK-gMvs6mIUpdated Jan 25, 2020, 4:28 PM

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-25 16:28:00 UTC

  • THE ANTAGONISTS IN THE ILIAD AND THE BIBLE: WHAT ALL REVOLUTIONARIES CLAIM TO BE

    THE ANTAGONISTS IN THE ILIAD AND THE BIBLE: WHAT ALL REVOLUTIONARIES CLAIM TO BE

    by Don Miguel

    All I am pointing out is that there is a big difference in the relations between the protagonists and antogonists of the Illiad and that Bible.

    The antagonists in the Odyssey, are seen in a rather Satanic light and people utterly without excuse. For many reasons:

    1) They are in another’s kingdom and yet do not respect the interests of the King.

    2) They have been given many chances to repent to the regents or deputies of the true ruler and yet fail to do so.

    3) They treat the kingdom as if it belonged to them who are only guests.

    Therefore and a day and hour of which only the gods know, there shall be justice severe and eternal when the true rulers return.

    It’s like LOTR, Robin Hood, the Mahabharata, and the New Testament.

    The good guys who are the representatives/descendants of the proper rulers are marginalized and vilified by the current usurpers.

    The current world order of peace and prosperity was created in accordance with natural law, and the signs of this agency are found in the order that we enjoy. But the people who currently rule are not the servants of Natural Law but usurpers.

    This is what Christians are claimed to be in the Bible as well as what just revolutionaries claim to be.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-25 15:52:00 UTC

  • The purpose of dogma is to give the mind an excuse for what the body feels. That

    The purpose of dogma is to give the mind an excuse for what the body feels. That’s all. The purpose of MYTH is to provide a group strategy that is persisted by the addiction.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-25 11:59:00 UTC

  • “Abrahamic absolutism and rejection of Greco-Roman religious syncretism are the

    —“Abrahamic absolutism and rejection of Greco-Roman religious syncretism are the largest stumbling block to a resurgent European or American “right-wing” movement.”—Rocco Ryan

    Well, this is my problem.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-24 20:58:00 UTC

  • AND DIFFERENCES HOMERIC AND SEMITIC By Don Miguel (Must read) You are correct ab

    https://adamvoight.wordpress.com/2018/09/21/common-themes-in-the-bible-and-homer/?fbclid=IwAR23jM6z3cmnvBIEhpr_nsLv6DpIJvAoAyc_dp74bB-O_wG5DCK-gMvs6mIPARALLELS AND DIFFERENCES HOMERIC AND SEMITIC

    By Don Miguel (Must read)

    You are correct about how fundamental Homer’s work was to the classical worldview. If you read the Platonic dialogue “Ion”, it is clear that the Greeks say Homer as a conduit of divine scripture.

    My only criticism is that in my view the parallels between the Biblical and Homeric metanarratives are many, strong, adn far more important than the differences. Some of these similarities are discussed in my below-linked blog post.

    The main difference is that in the Bible, God promises to give the protagonists possession over the land of the antagonists 500 years earlier for no apparent reason and the antagonists are not characters in the drama other than as “the bad guys”.

    In the Illiad, both sides are seen as good and heroic in their own way and the war is just a by-product of an ultimately meaningless conflict among the gods.

    In my view, this is the main difference between them. Which of these two are more relevant to our current situation? I think it’s the former, since our enemies have no real claim to equality with us; our conflict with them is not just a misunderstanding or bad luck as it is in the Illiad. Most the Norse myths also lack a villian who is wholly “other”- for example Loki cannot even tell a lie when he is trapped by Thyrm. The giants are just the impersonal forces of nature or chaos. In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas and the Kauravas are both relatives and both end up meeting in heaven.

    The Canaanites, Philistines, Judas and the Synagogue of Satan are not noble like Priam and Hector. That is the main difference between them in my view. Our struggle at this late point in history is for higher stakes. We are no longer at the level of “may the best man win”.

    https://adamvoight.wordpress.com/2018/09/21/common-themes-in-the-bible-and-homer/Updated Jan 24, 2020, 6:08 PM

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-24 18:08:00 UTC

  • CHRISTIAN COMPATIBILITY Yeah, well you know, the faithful need to believe the my

    CHRISTIAN COMPATIBILITY

    Yeah, well you know, the faithful need to believe the mythos is true because men said so. We, the rational, only need to understand that Christian love, natural law of reciprocity and the physical laws are written in the structure of the universe regardless of what men said. The difference is between a personal god that they desire, and the impersonal god or nature that we observe. What we can say is that whether you are a supernatural and theological Christian first and Aristotelian second, or an Aristotelian first and scientific Christian second, that the only difference is their need to preserve the social construction of a personal deity and a life after death. Like the empathic female (christians-first), and the analytic male (aristotelians-first), women and men are also compatible – we are just not identical. I don’t know why that’s intolerable other than it leaves them on the defense in creating the social construction of a mythical reality in which they have a greater sense of control than they in fact do. But it is simply true that people who lack agency need more rigid less dynamic rules to live by. Whereas we have greater agency and are comfortable with scientific christian love, scientific natural law, and scientific physical law, because we have ourselves and others of equal agency to trust – and they don’t. So it’s understandable that they want their faith to produce the outcomes. It’s understandable that we don’t need faith in order to produce the same outcome. And it’s rather obvious that these two positions are as compatible as are the male and female.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-24 13:38:00 UTC

  • RT @DegenRolf: Robin Dunbar argues that religion evolved to allow humans to live

    RT @DegenRolf: Robin Dunbar argues that religion evolved to allow humans to live together in previously unknown large-scale communities wit…

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-24 12:41:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1220688020376039424