Theme: Religion

  • THE CHALLENGE OF THE CHURCH So the difficulty facing the church is this: we can

    THE CHALLENGE OF THE CHURCH

    So the difficulty facing the church is this: we can see gods writing in the universe: the laws of nature, and in the actions of man: Natural Law. If church doctrine is incompatible with Natural Law then it is false – the frailty of men of God, interpreting the words of god as best they could. But there is not much to correct. The church developed natural law itself. There is nothing in the words of Jesus Christ, or the Common Law of Europa that is incompatible with Natural Law. There is however, a great deal of Jewish, Babylonian, and Egyptian writing in the bible that is incompatible with natural law. Much of the Tanakh and nearly all of Jewish Law – even that reformed by Mendelssohn is incompatible with Natural Law – it is poly-ethical – and we have seen Jews punished by history for it. And very little of the Koran – so much so that it might be the work of an anti-Christ. For it prevents man from ascent through mandatory ignorance. And we have seen the result in the death of every civilization touched by it. Communism is the worse religion as it is predicated on violations of natural law, and a series of great lies, where most ancient religions are merely ‘imprecise’ because of the limits of ancient knowledge and of ancient languages. Hinduism, Buddhism, and Shintoism are prisoners of the limits of primitive human thought and language more than they are incompatible with Natural Law. At present the false pope is not practicing Christianity, nor is he seeking to restore the other half of the church: the aristocracy; nor is he practicing Natural Law, but Communism. He is a False Pope. He is too weak to be an anti-christ. But he is a false pope. So this is why I have little faith in the future of the church. They are trying to make money through donations not to teach the Word and Meaning of God. And as we have seen with the communists, the jews, and the muslims – civilizations pay heavily for failing to teach and learn the meaning of the words of God.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-04 08:42:00 UTC

  • UNDERSTANDING THE WORDS OF GOD, AND THE MEANING OF THOSE WORDS ARE TWO DIFFERENT

    UNDERSTANDING THE WORDS OF GOD, AND THE MEANING OF THOSE WORDS ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

    FWIW: There is a great difference between understanding the words of Men of God as they write and speak them, and understanding the words of God as he wrote them with the universe. Gods words are perfect, they are consistent, they are comprehensible with enough effort. But they are not simple. Once we understand God’s words, we must then understand God’s meaning. Understanding God’s meaning has been the struggle for men. And men have always been poor interpreters and translators of the divine. Today we understand Gods language better than ever before. But we understand God’s meaning perhaps less than before. And there are those who intentionally lie and deceive, precisely because Gods words are so difficult for man to interpret and translate. We live in a world constructed largely of lies on the one hand. And on the other, I am not sure we will like the meaning of the words of God once we understand them better. Why? Because god made man and woman, young and old, weak and strong, beautiful and not, rich and poor, ill and hale, dim and wise, ignorant and educated. He created a word that is only plentiful if we exist in small numbers. He created a universe which is vast, but that is dangerous to man. He gave us the ability to reason, but not wisdom and character. He gave us the ability to cooperate, but to be selfish. He gave us kindness and care, or the ability to punish and kill. So he gave us tools. But he requires that we cooperate in vast numbers, if we are to earn our way to sit beside him. The One Law he gave us to do so is Natural Law. That which we call ‘reciprocity’. But unless we save all of us, we may not save any of us. And it is this uncomfortable truth we must face: God allowed us to fail. And only together can we succeed. And this is the meaning of the existence of Natural Law.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-04 08:17:00 UTC

  • (from a christian discourse elsewhere) Western man has not abandoned god. He has

    (from a christian discourse elsewhere)

    Western man has not abandoned god. He has abandoned the church for having failed to achieve in the modern world what Aquinas achieved in the ancient: the reconciliation of prior eras with the knowledge obtained in the current.

    Aquinas saved the church by reconciling it with greek reason. There has been no Aquinas to save the church by reconciling it with anglo empiricism.

    Gods universe is constant. Gods meaning is constant. The means by which man comprehends his meaning changes. The closer to god we evolve, the more in his language we feel, think, and speak, and the less in the language of animals with feel, think, and speak.

    The first christians were extremely primitive people – just barely removed from animals – as were the first christian europeans. The greeks less so. The romans less so, the moderns less so. And our generations even less so. We increasingly see the language of god.

    But we do not understand its meaning.

    Christian man has not abandoned god. he has been taught a false religion of hedonistic pseudoscience instead.

    We can blame men. We can blame the church. We can blame the pseudoscientists, and the marxists and the communists, and the postmodernists, and the secularists.

    But the truth is, that without an Aquinas to reform the church, it will die.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-03 18:04:00 UTC

  • ON FAITH(RELIGION) VS TRUTH(LAW) An Open Letter To Traditionalists (from elsewhe

    ON FAITH(RELIGION) VS TRUTH(LAW)

    An Open Letter To Traditionalists

    (from elsewhere)(important)

    1) I was raised a catholic, and identify with the pre-vatican ii church. I consider vatican ii a disaster. I consider the chair of st peter empty. I consider the current pope a false pope.

    2) I write for an audience in the language that they can understand. It does not mean I cannot write for different audiences, in their languages – languages that they will understand. The problem in talking to traditionalists is one that is common, and we just saw in the debate between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris: the difference between conflationary, and coherent truth that combines the good, spirit, literature, and meaning, with the true regardless of existential limits, – and deflationary, descriptive truth within existential limits and free of judgements spirit, literature, and goodness. However, I must explain the importance of that difference.

    2) My understanding is that the spiritual experience is necessary and that the church provided it. That this experience can be provided to many by Ritual(Repetition), by Action-Discipline (Stoicism), by Disconnected Mental Discipline(Mindfulness) and by Prayer and Contemplation (language). That the church and temple experience is necessary for the experience and training in sacredness (emotional security). That the literary experience is necessary for our envisioning of possibilities(Intellectual security). That the scientific experience is necessary for the cooperation of men in transforming the universe for our use (practical security). And that the juridical experience is necessary for the resolution of our disputes – (security of life, property, family and society). And that the military experience is necessary for all security – particularly for men. And that in the west, we developed all of these languages and traditions to provide for all those needs.

    3) I specialize in Action: the practical (scientific), Juridical (Life and Property), and Military (civilization itself). I do not specialize Experience: in the spiritual, the sacred, or the literary. There are reasons for this division of specialization. They are good reasons: competition keeps us free of corruption of spirit, sacred, and literary that we have seen in some civilizations, and the corruption of science, justice, and violence in other civilizations …. and that we have seen in christian civilization since the lies of Boaz, Freud, Marx, and Frankfurt, and the lies of the French and the Postmodernists who tried to recreate a pseudo-scientific religion, were industrialized by mainstream media for the profit of business, finance, academy, politician and bureaucracy at the expense of soul, individual, family, civilization, law, and religion so carefully constructed by the church over millennia. So I work at deconflating the experiential and the actionable because the conflation of the experiential and the actionable, the good and the true, the ideal and the possible, were the means by which our church and our civilization was undermined – by intent, and continues to this day.

    This is a more technical way of saying that faith teaches the golden rule, and law the silver rule.

    4) There are many degrees of decidability. Between one feeling and another. Between a preference and another. Between one parable and another. Between that which is reasonable (Understandable) and another. Between that which is rational (non contradictory) and another. Between that which is more correspondent with reality and that which is less so. Between that which is existentially possible (operational) and that which is not. Between that which is economically possible (tolerable) and that which is not. Between that which is voluntary and that which is not. Between that which produces beneficial unintended consequences, and that which does not.

    But principally, we divide these methods into Spiritual, Mythical, literary, traditional, moral, reasonable, rational, logical, empirical, and scientific. When we have a great deal of information we may use the scientific. When we are highly uncertain, we rely on the moral, traditional literary, mythical, and spiritual. The more information we possess the more reason (calculation), the less we possess the more intuition (spirit).

    We can identify an attempt at deception when a question may be answered by use of a method of decidability of greater precision because we have the information necessary to use that method of greater precision. Or when one attempts to use a method of more precise decidability, yet we lack the information to apply that method of decidability. We can create frauds either way.

    But we are mere mortals, we vary in ability, in education, in experience, and in mastery.

    This is a more technical way of saying that the world of the spirit belongs to God (Faith and Religion), and the world of action belongs to Caesar (Science and Law).

    5) So I teach ‘convergence’ -and that is, that we must – as humans – practice the spiritual, literary, conflationary, and meaningful to cooperate, and we must practice the actionable, descriptive, deflationary, and ‘true’ to resolve conflicts.

    And so I leave the ‘good’ for those who conflate, and I practice the ‘true’ for those of us, who, unfortunately, must resolve conflicts between people – provide restitution if possible, punishment if not, and death if necessary. And it is this convergence and competition that keeps the faith and the law uncorrupted. And it is the conflation of faith and law that corrupts both.

    This is a more technical way of saying that some of you wish to sit in safety at the right and hand of god, to do what might be done to create good: inform and advice. Some of us sit at the left and of god, to do what must be done: judge and punish, to end and prevent bad. Between possible goods and certain bads, we prevent each other’s corruption and do what Christendom has done best: build a world that the rest is in envy of.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 21:37:00 UTC

  • (cultural humor) —“If we could convince the Chinese that Jihadi testicles were

    (cultural humor)

    —“If we could convince the Chinese that Jihadi testicles were an aphrodisiac islam would be extinct in a generation.”—

    Great way to save endangered species.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-29 19:21:00 UTC

  • (humor)(takedown) Typical product of the Australian education system, with a deg

    (humor)(takedown)

    Typical product of the Australian education system, with a degree in philosophy (fictionalism) and politics (fictionalism), and like a good secular christian pursuing proper left-interests and debating them with feminine passion

    —-

    You should recognize that there are higher goals to fight for than those you do: namely those things that preserve your ability to think, act and feel as you do. Simple passions are for women.

    I will venture you do not understand the necessary meaning of politics rather than the conventional, nor philosophy as literature rather than science.

    Perhaps had you studied common law, mathematics, physics, economics, war, and history, rather than moral fictionalism – secular religion – you might speak and argue both scientifically and with a full accounting rather than cherrypicking those intuitionistic measures that satisfy the priors of your self selected fictionalism.

    That is a masculine adult scientific criticism of your feminine , adolescent, sophomoric screed.

    Or more colloquially, you argue like a schoolgirl.

    I am too kind to suggest the host of reasons for your condition, but I am sure that besides the primary cultural export of Australians (like Canadians) being self aggrandizing virtue signaling, and perhaps some lack of paternal or martial influence, or perhaps genetics, that you have chosen the work of women for your cause. Usually a sign of conspicuous consumption by those lacking masculine attributes.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-29 09:55:00 UTC

  • HATING ON RELIGIONS, PHILOSOPHIES, AND GOVERNMENTS Religions, Philosophies, and

    HATING ON RELIGIONS, PHILOSOPHIES, AND GOVERNMENTS

    Religions, Philosophies, and Governments I will hate on all day long. You cannot choose your genes – only learn to act morally with them. And yes, it is costly to choose a new Religion, Philosophy or Government. But if you do not choose the costly, then you force the rest of us to pay the price of your poor choices. And then whether we hate your responsibility.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-27 11:27:00 UTC

  • Political Quakerism?

    —“If we view liberal humanism as a political religion, leftists are Anglicans and libertarians are a Quakerish sect, defending the beliefs of the majority but in a purer form, and only dangerous to the status quo in that they are not willing to actually defend it, or expand its dominion except through peaceful conversion.”—Waylon Hill

  • Political Quakerism?

    —“If we view liberal humanism as a political religion, leftists are Anglicans and libertarians are a Quakerish sect, defending the beliefs of the majority but in a purer form, and only dangerous to the status quo in that they are not willing to actually defend it, or expand its dominion except through peaceful conversion.”—Waylon Hill

  • The Past Superstition vs Present Pseudoscience. (Fictionalisms)

    ….I think the problem is that the past was honest but justified it supernaturally, because the promise of reward was after death. Whereas the present is dishonest and justified pseudo-scientifically and promised if we can reach a socialist utopia or some variation thereof. The medieval order was hierarchical and honest. The only false promise was after death. We live in a world of loneliness and lies….