Theme: Religion

  • Partly correct. Yes. Not entirely. Though there is certainly an intersection, ch

    Partly correct. Yes. Not entirely. Though there is certainly an intersection, christianity was alien to europe but it was ‘germanized’ over time, and while it did serve to suppress tribalism an clannishness over time it’s an underclass religion wherease natural european religions were upper and middle class, with license for the underclasses. Christianity made it possible fo the underclasses to effectively join society not by producing commons but by not doing wrongs.

    Reply addressees: @Griffit15999943


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-21 04:18:24 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1792771904048119808

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1792744918940876936

  • CHRISTIANITY, EUROPEAN RELIGIONS, AND THE COUNTER ARGUMENT AGAINST OTHER RELIGIO

    CHRISTIANITY, EUROPEAN RELIGIONS, AND THE COUNTER ARGUMENT AGAINST OTHER RELIGIONS
    The Christians, in an effort to produce cooperation, and suppress tribalism first, and clannishness second, succeeded in producing the nation-state, but those nations states were all within Christendom.

    There is a reason religions reflect civilizations and civilizations reflect races – because race and civilization and planetary geography, are the maximum demographic and cultural and political organizations that can follow the same group strategy.

    As such religions are always and will always consist of group strategies for states, federations, and civilizations that are relatively racially, civilizationally, culturally, and institutionally marginally indifferent.

    And, even if say, christianity is the optimum religion of transition into a middle class majority polity, (just as buddhism and hinduism are a race to stagnation, and islam is a race to devolution to the bottom), that doesn’t mean that it won’t preserve the group evolutionary strategy of the people, because all it does is foster tolerance, forgiveness, trust, and mindfulness despite human instinct and intuitions.

    Conversely there are no other religions, at least other than our native religions, even the new secular leftist religions, that are not contrary and hostile to our group evolutionary strategy.

    For this reason tolerance for other religions in the home is one thing, but presence of these religions in the commons is nothing more than warfare against our commons.

    As such, while we do not want the self interest of the state to interfere in our European religious spectrum, that does not mean that we need tolerate, permit, and not outlaw those religions that are hostile to our civilizations.

    Affections
    CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-20 17:10:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1792603750705643522

  • The Christians, in an effort to produce cooperation, and suppress tribalism firs

    The Christians, in an effort to produce cooperation, and suppress tribalism first, and clannishness second, succeeded in producing the nation-state, but those nations states were all within Christendom.

    There is a reason religions reflect civilizations and civilizations reflect races – because race and civilization and planetary geography, are the maximum demographic and cultural and political organizations that can follow the same group strategy.

    As such religions are always and will always consist of group strategies for states, federations, and civilizations that are relatively racially, civilizationally, culturally, and institutionally marginally indifferent.

    And, even if say, christianity is the optimum religion of transition into a middle class majority polity, (just as buddhism and hinduism are a race to stagnation, and islam is a race to devolution to the bottom), that doesn’t mean that it won’t preserve the group evolutionary strategy of the people, because all it does is foster tolerance, forgiveness, trust, and mindfulness despite human instinct and intuitions.

    Conversely there are no other religions, at least other than our native religions, even the new secular leftist religions, that are not contrary and hostile to our group evolutionary strategy.

    For this reason tolerance for other religions in the home is one thing, but presence of these religions in the commons is nothing more than warfare against our commons.

    As such, while we do not want the self interest of the state to interfere in our European religious spectrum, that does not mean that we need tolerate, permit, and not outlaw those religions that are hostile to our civilizations.

    Affections
    CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-20 17:10:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1792602138247372800

  • THE ARC OF CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY AND RATIONALITY: Fundamentalism > Traditiona

    THE ARC OF CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY AND RATIONALITY:
    Fundamentalism > Traditionalism > Secular Humanism
    Fundamentalist arguments from Christians are always false. But surprisingly, moral arguments from Christians are nearly always correct – unfortunately they all too often require the fundamentalist paradigm of indoctrination to wield. When Christianity evolves into secular humanism, it ceases being a personal philosophy and becomes a political philosophy thus decreasing the personal responsibility of Christianity into the political and economic philosophy that seeks to undermine personal responsibility in favor of public ‘caretaking’ (infantilization).
    So IMO the Church of England is Correct, training in Christian teachings when young, need only produce rational application of traditional Christian morality in adulthood, and as both rational and moral it will defend against the abandonment of that responsibility in secular humanism.
    Thinking of the faith as producing responsibility for the self and commons, and insulating the self from the seductions of irresponsibility for self and commons by others, isn’t the lens through which we view Christianity. But it is however, the reason for it’s success.

    Affections
    CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-20 16:36:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1792595347178446848

  • MYTHICISM IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITION VS HISTORY IN THE EUROPEAN TRADITION |VERSU

    MYTHICISM IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITION VS HISTORY IN THE EUROPEAN TRADITION

    |VERSUS|: Europeans: Aristocracy, History and Natural Law
    vs
    Semites: Priesthood, Mythicism and Authoritarian Law.

    Context (Origins)
    Much of the mythicism in the Abrahamic tradition is relatively recent…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 20:09:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790474555330326679

  • MYTHICISM IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITION VS HISTORY IN THE EUROPEAN TRADITION |VERSU

    MYTHICISM IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITION VS HISTORY IN THE EUROPEAN TRADITION

    |VERSUS|: Europeans: Aristocracy, History and Natural Law
    vs
    Semites: Priesthood, Mythicism and Authoritarian Law.

    Context (Origins)
    Much of the mythicism in the Abrahamic tradition is relatively recent (between the 2nd century BCE and the 1st century AD) aligns with the period of Hellenistic influence and the formation of key texts and ideas in Judaism and early Christianity.
    During this time, Jewish thought was influenced by Greek philosophy, and significant religious literature, including the Dead Sea Scrolls and the apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings, was produced.
    This period also saw the development of the Pharisaic and early Rabbinic traditions, which further shaped Jewish and Christian religious thought.

    Mythicism (Covey Meaning Produced by Others)
    Mythicism refers the production of fictional history by incorporating events, people, myths, legends, loading, framing, and propaganda. The audience is left with the responsibility of interpreting these figures or stories as symbolic, allegorical, or fictional, rather than as real, historical events or individuals. Mythicism was, historically the interpretation of ‘wisdom literatures’ produced by mythicism especially among south eurasians from the west coast of north africa to the east coast of India. The Chinese chose a philosophy of harmony (social), and somewhat mythologized the past. The europeans chose rational (legal, political) philosophy and sought to produce history (legal evidence).

    Properties of Mythicism:
    – Symbolic Interpretation: Mythicism interprets religious or historical narratives as symbolic or allegorical, often conveying deeper truths or cultural values.
    – Skeptical of Historicity: Mythicists often question or deny the historical existence of certain figures (e.g., Jesus Christ in some versions of Jesus myth theory).
    – Cultural and Religious Context: Myths are seen as products of their cultural and religious contexts, reflecting the beliefs, values, and practices of the people who created them.
    – Narrative Structure: Mythic narratives often involve supernatural elements, deities, or heroes, and serve to explain natural phenomena, human behavior, or cultural traditions.

    History (Derive Meaning Yourself From Evidence)
    History consists of the study of past events, particularly those involving human activities, societies, and civilizations. It is based on the critical analysis of evidence such as documents, artifacts, and other records, aiming to reconstruct and understand past realities.

    Properties of History:
    – Empirical Evidence: Historical study relies on empirical evidence, including written records, archaeological findings, and other material artifacts.
    – Methodological Rigor: Historians use critical methods to evaluate sources, verify facts, and construct coherent narratives about the past.
    – Focus on Actual Events: History seeks to document and explain real events and developments, distinguishing between factual occurrences and fictional or mythological accounts.
    – Contextual Analysis: Historical analysis involves understanding events within their broader social, economic, political, and cultural contexts.

    Comparison of Mythicism vs History
    – Basis: Mythicism often interprets narratives as symbolic or fictional, while history focuses on factual, evidence-based accounts of past events.
    – Purpose: Myths typically serve to convey moral, philosophical, or cultural lessons, whereas history aims to provide an accurate and coherent account of what actually happened.
    – Methodology: Mythic interpretation relies on literary and cultural analysis, while historical study employs empirical research, source criticism, and contextual examination.

    Cheers
    CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 20:09:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790474555003166720

  • Theology is dead. It’s left for just the weak. We had already passed through phi

    Theology is dead. It’s left for just the weak. We had already passed through philosophy. ANd now we live in a world of testifiability: science.

    You are done. Sorry. Time has left you behind. Just like genetics economics and political influence have left you behind.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 19:09:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790459369038999675

    Reply addressees: @finishedyet34

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790445739039961212

  • The Ten Commandments are an Abrahamic Ideology Imitated from a Long Regional His

    The Ten Commandments are an Abrahamic Ideology Imitated from a Long Regional History, and Not an Original Composition

    The Ten Commandments, traditionally found in the Hebrew Bible (Exodus 20:1-17 and Deuteronomy 5:4-21), are a set of moral and ethical principles that have… https://twitter.com/finishedyet34/status/1790433130094231861


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 18:13:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790445390229037397

  • YOU CANNOT HAVE A NATURAL RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, ADVOCATE, OR INDOCTRINATE INTO, A

    YOU CANNOT HAVE A NATURAL RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, ADVOCATE, OR INDOCTRINATE INTO, A SUPERNATURAL RELIGION – ONLY A PRIVILEGE

    –“Thanks to freedom of religion I can believe whatever I want.”–

    1. You can believe whatever you want.
    2. Freedom of belief is of course irrevocable.
    3. Freedom of the public practice of a religion IS revokable.
    4. Because the social construction of fraud by false promise of the unpromisable and the externalities produced by such fraud, is criminalizable.
    5. Because all supernatural religions are untestifiable and their false promises unwarrantable and as such unpromisable.

    Ergo, you may have the natural right to believe and think because it cannot be deprived from you.

    But then again, your capacity to speak it, advocated it, and argue in matters of the commons using it, is absolutely positively prohibitable and punishable.

    In fact the only reason it hasn’t been done more frequently, is that those false hopes, like drugs, and other fantasies, do in fact calm the minds of those less capable of survival and adaptation in the real world.

    It took me years to find justification for not outlawing all supernatural religions, because they are in fact, a violation of the demand for truthful reciprocal speech in the commons.

    In the end, it’s a simple recognition that archaic religions are cheap, because they had to be, but the world requires revised ‘religions’ in the broad sense of the term, that are not false – well, that turns out to be costly just like education.

    Don’t presume a privilege is a right.
    Don’t presume a Political right is a natural right.
    Don’t presume even a natural right is possible without others insuring it.

    Affections
    CD

    Reply addressees: @finishedyet34


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 17:56:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790441089972752384

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790433130094231861

  • Q: “Why Fundamentalist Christians Should Never Project Scripture or Faith – Only

    Q: “Why Fundamentalist Christians Should Never Project Scripture or Faith – Only Christian Ethics and Morals, and Only in Normative Terms?”

    Loving our fellow devout Christians and Christian familial and social behavior, does not require those of us who are traditionalists, rationalists, or empiricists, treat archaic texts as anything other than mythology invented for the purpose of indoctrinating illiterate uneducated masses of women, peasants and slaves into that Christian ethic.

    What you and those like you don’t recognize and cannot tolerate because it forces you to question your illusions, is that by claiming the rest of us should follow the same mysticism, you’re accusing us of being illiterate, uneducated, incompetent, masses, of the effeminate, women, peasants and slaves. And that you are confessing you’re illiterate uneducated incompetent masses, of the effeminate, women, peasants and slaves.

    With Love
    CD

    Reply addressees: @finishedyet34


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 17:18:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790431622254239744

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790414799983215091