Francis Berger's Blog, page 47
July 4, 2023
Christianity as Divine Bureaucracy; Or, Behold, The Salvation Credit System
Nothing amazes and depresses me more than seeing Christians who recognize the inherent evil of modern bureaucracy and bureaucratic systems yet simultaneously insist upon a Christianity that fundamentally resides in the realm of officialdom and boils down to the following of centralized administrative procedures that must be followed to a T to be valid, effective, and authentic.
Such Christians are sharp enough to discern the Ahrimanic evil in the various totalitarian schemes the globalist demon spawn try to implement, yet muddled enough to believe that a technical glitch in some regulatory or organizational procedure is more than enough to render salvation null and void, regardless of the heart-felt, faith-based motivation of the individuals involved.
Such Christians are quick to decry godless and dehumanizing bureaucratic networks like birdemic peck passports or social credit systems that unfairly and maliciously encroach upon an individual’s freedom to travel, work, and associate but are equally quick to laud the necessity of Christian regulatory framework analogous to a salvation credit system that holistically assesses the “Christian-worthiness” of individuals before relegating them to the great Christian black list.
Such Christians reduce Christianity to the level of policy-making and diminish God to the level of policymaker. Faith is circumscribed by the administrative, the ministerial, the rule-bound, the managerial, the rigid, the inflexible, the procedural, the organizational, and the regulatory. Everything must line up. Every “i” has to be dotted; every “t” crossed because the presence of even the smallest snag nullifies everything.
To such Christians, I pose the following questions. Do you really believe God works like that? Do you really believe God would purposefully organize the world in such a way? Do you really believe that represents who Jesus was during his mission on earth or his offer of salvation and Heaven?
Do you really believe that the Divine operates at the same level and employs the same methods as the demonic totalitarians via their ever-encroaching and ever-increasing legalistic oppression and subjugation?
Is that all Christianity is in the end? Another credit system? A divine bureaucracy?
Or could it be that this conceptualization of Christianity as divine bureaucracy is the fruit of a now-limited, exteriorized religious consciousness that should be outgrown and surpassed lest Christianity become a religion of passports, digital IDs, and bar-code readers?
Such Christians are sharp enough to discern the Ahrimanic evil in the various totalitarian schemes the globalist demon spawn try to implement, yet muddled enough to believe that a technical glitch in some regulatory or organizational procedure is more than enough to render salvation null and void, regardless of the heart-felt, faith-based motivation of the individuals involved.
Such Christians are quick to decry godless and dehumanizing bureaucratic networks like birdemic peck passports or social credit systems that unfairly and maliciously encroach upon an individual’s freedom to travel, work, and associate but are equally quick to laud the necessity of Christian regulatory framework analogous to a salvation credit system that holistically assesses the “Christian-worthiness” of individuals before relegating them to the great Christian black list.
Such Christians reduce Christianity to the level of policy-making and diminish God to the level of policymaker. Faith is circumscribed by the administrative, the ministerial, the rule-bound, the managerial, the rigid, the inflexible, the procedural, the organizational, and the regulatory. Everything must line up. Every “i” has to be dotted; every “t” crossed because the presence of even the smallest snag nullifies everything.
To such Christians, I pose the following questions. Do you really believe God works like that? Do you really believe God would purposefully organize the world in such a way? Do you really believe that represents who Jesus was during his mission on earth or his offer of salvation and Heaven?
Do you really believe that the Divine operates at the same level and employs the same methods as the demonic totalitarians via their ever-encroaching and ever-increasing legalistic oppression and subjugation?
Is that all Christianity is in the end? Another credit system? A divine bureaucracy?
Or could it be that this conceptualization of Christianity as divine bureaucracy is the fruit of a now-limited, exteriorized religious consciousness that should be outgrown and surpassed lest Christianity become a religion of passports, digital IDs, and bar-code readers?
June 30, 2023
Nearly Everyone in the West Has Achieved Transcendence
One of the hallmarks of an un-Christian or anti-Christian consciousness is a movement away from the concrete in favor of the abstract, with the ultimate expression of this being the dissolution of the self and its absorption and assimilation into something higher or deeper. This sort of transcendence is un-Christian for the simple reason that Christianity should be about freeing and transforming the self, all without losing the concrete essence of the self.
If Christianity is about anything, it is about working through our superficial, sinful, fearful, false selves and finding our realest and most concrete self. A Christian who chooses to follow Jesus to Heaven does so as a person – as a concrete self sans all the false selves accumulated during mortal life. Heaven is not a place of non-entities, but of selves who have chosen to abandon all abstractions and align themselves with God in the most concrete way possible – love.
Christian love is concrete love. It is love directed at Beings rather than ideas. It does not drift about in the diaphanous ether loving everything and anything that is or isn’t there. It emerges from a concrete self and engages with another concrete self at the most concrete level of existence, the spiritual.
Modern consciousness has inverted the concrete/abstract dichotomy by elevating the abstract above the concrete – and when I say above, I mean far above. It sees nothing special or noble in loving that which is near, real, tangible, and concrete. In fact, it often regards such love as selfish or non-inclusive. Value-inverted modern consciousness sees concrete love as limited, limiting, and exclusionary. If I choose to love my actual neighbor, I limit my capacity to love faraway strangers. Loving my local place of inhabitence is not love but rather an expression of fear and hatred of other places that I am unfamiliar with.
The modern world demands that love be unlimited and unfocused. Thus, loving all human beings is infinitely superior to loving just a handful of human beings. Loving “the world” is much nobler than loving your town, city, or country. Loving all cultures is far more virtuous than loving your own cultures. Of course, the highest virtue of all is loving mankind while simultaneously denigrating the concrete people in your life. Same applies to nations and cultures.
I bring this up because Christians should be motivated by salvation and theosis, both firmly rooted in the concrete. Following Jesus is a concrete decision based on a relationship between two selves. The choice to become more God-like is the decision of a concrete self striving to become more concrete. When we choose to follow Jesus, we are following Jesus, not the idea of Jesus. Striving to be God-like entails being less rather than more abstract in our thinking and action.
The philosophy and psychology people in the West have absorbed over the centuries tends to value the abstract over the concrete. Unfortunately, Christians are not immune, with altruism representing the most egregious Christian error in this regard. Christians must use discernment when engaging with philosophical and psychological theories. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs – which I touched upon briefly yesterday – is an example of why such discernment is indispensable.
I don’t believe Maslow was an intentionally malicious soul. As an idealist, he regarded humanity positively and was generally pointing in the right direction, but without the spiritual – more specifically, without a concrete belief in Christ – his well-meaning motivational theory has not only failed to pan out but has effectively done far more harm than good, as exemplified by his definition of transcendence as “becoming more God-like”:
“Transcendence also means to become divine or godlike, to go beyond the merely human. But one must be careful here not to make anything extrahuman or supernatural out of this kind of statement. I am thinking of using the word ‘metahuman’ or ‘B-human’ in order to stress that this becoming very high or divine or godlike is part of human nature even though it is not often seen in fact. It is still a potentiality of human nature.
To rise above dichotomized nationalism, patriotism, or enthnocentrism, in the sense of ‘them’ against ‘us,’ or of we-they, or Ardrey’s enmity-amity complex. For example, Piaget’s little Genevan boy who couldn’t imagine being both Genevan and Swiss. He could think of being only either Genevan or Swiss. It takes more development in order to able to be more inclusive and superordinate, more integrative.
My identification with nationalism, patriotism, or with my culture does not necessarily mitigate against my identification and more inclusive higher patriotism with the human species or with the United Nations. As a matter of fact, such a superordinate patriotism is, of course, not only more inclusive, but therefore more healthy, more fully-human, than the strict localism which is regarded as antagonistic or as excluding others. That is, I can be a good American, and of course must be an American (that’s the culture I grew up in, which I can never shake off and I don’t want to shake off in favor of being a world citizen).
Stress that the world citizen who has no roots, who doesn’t belong any place, who is utterly and merely cosmopolitan, is not as good a world citizen as one who grew up in the family, in a place, in a home with a particular language, in a particular culture, and therefore has a sense of belongingness on which to build toward higher need and meta-need levels.
To be a full member of the human species does not mean repudiating the lower levels; it means rather including them in the hierarchical integration, e.g., cultural pluralism, enjoying the differences, enjoying different kinds of restaurants with different kinds of food, enjoying travel to other countries, enjoying the ethnological study of other cultures, etc.”
If Christianity is about anything, it is about working through our superficial, sinful, fearful, false selves and finding our realest and most concrete self. A Christian who chooses to follow Jesus to Heaven does so as a person – as a concrete self sans all the false selves accumulated during mortal life. Heaven is not a place of non-entities, but of selves who have chosen to abandon all abstractions and align themselves with God in the most concrete way possible – love.
Christian love is concrete love. It is love directed at Beings rather than ideas. It does not drift about in the diaphanous ether loving everything and anything that is or isn’t there. It emerges from a concrete self and engages with another concrete self at the most concrete level of existence, the spiritual.
Modern consciousness has inverted the concrete/abstract dichotomy by elevating the abstract above the concrete – and when I say above, I mean far above. It sees nothing special or noble in loving that which is near, real, tangible, and concrete. In fact, it often regards such love as selfish or non-inclusive. Value-inverted modern consciousness sees concrete love as limited, limiting, and exclusionary. If I choose to love my actual neighbor, I limit my capacity to love faraway strangers. Loving my local place of inhabitence is not love but rather an expression of fear and hatred of other places that I am unfamiliar with.
The modern world demands that love be unlimited and unfocused. Thus, loving all human beings is infinitely superior to loving just a handful of human beings. Loving “the world” is much nobler than loving your town, city, or country. Loving all cultures is far more virtuous than loving your own cultures. Of course, the highest virtue of all is loving mankind while simultaneously denigrating the concrete people in your life. Same applies to nations and cultures.
I bring this up because Christians should be motivated by salvation and theosis, both firmly rooted in the concrete. Following Jesus is a concrete decision based on a relationship between two selves. The choice to become more God-like is the decision of a concrete self striving to become more concrete. When we choose to follow Jesus, we are following Jesus, not the idea of Jesus. Striving to be God-like entails being less rather than more abstract in our thinking and action.
The philosophy and psychology people in the West have absorbed over the centuries tends to value the abstract over the concrete. Unfortunately, Christians are not immune, with altruism representing the most egregious Christian error in this regard. Christians must use discernment when engaging with philosophical and psychological theories. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs – which I touched upon briefly yesterday – is an example of why such discernment is indispensable.
I don’t believe Maslow was an intentionally malicious soul. As an idealist, he regarded humanity positively and was generally pointing in the right direction, but without the spiritual – more specifically, without a concrete belief in Christ – his well-meaning motivational theory has not only failed to pan out but has effectively done far more harm than good, as exemplified by his definition of transcendence as “becoming more God-like”:
“Transcendence also means to become divine or godlike, to go beyond the merely human. But one must be careful here not to make anything extrahuman or supernatural out of this kind of statement. I am thinking of using the word ‘metahuman’ or ‘B-human’ in order to stress that this becoming very high or divine or godlike is part of human nature even though it is not often seen in fact. It is still a potentiality of human nature.
To rise above dichotomized nationalism, patriotism, or enthnocentrism, in the sense of ‘them’ against ‘us,’ or of we-they, or Ardrey’s enmity-amity complex. For example, Piaget’s little Genevan boy who couldn’t imagine being both Genevan and Swiss. He could think of being only either Genevan or Swiss. It takes more development in order to able to be more inclusive and superordinate, more integrative.
My identification with nationalism, patriotism, or with my culture does not necessarily mitigate against my identification and more inclusive higher patriotism with the human species or with the United Nations. As a matter of fact, such a superordinate patriotism is, of course, not only more inclusive, but therefore more healthy, more fully-human, than the strict localism which is regarded as antagonistic or as excluding others. That is, I can be a good American, and of course must be an American (that’s the culture I grew up in, which I can never shake off and I don’t want to shake off in favor of being a world citizen).
Stress that the world citizen who has no roots, who doesn’t belong any place, who is utterly and merely cosmopolitan, is not as good a world citizen as one who grew up in the family, in a place, in a home with a particular language, in a particular culture, and therefore has a sense of belongingness on which to build toward higher need and meta-need levels.
To be a full member of the human species does not mean repudiating the lower levels; it means rather including them in the hierarchical integration, e.g., cultural pluralism, enjoying the differences, enjoying different kinds of restaurants with different kinds of food, enjoying travel to other countries, enjoying the ethnological study of other cultures, etc.”
Maslow's Metamotivation Is False-Self Actualization
Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs ranks among the most well-known and influential motivation theories of psychology, mostly because it appeals to and is readily comprehensible to modern, post-Christian, or anti-Christian despiritualized consciousness. Maslow’s theory is simple – so simple that it is depicted as a five-tier pyramid (not Maslow’s invention). Physiological needs – the essentials of physical survival – form the pyramid base. Above that are the safety needs, followed by love and belonging needs. Esteem needs come next before the pyramid is capped with something Maslow refers to as self-actualization.
Without getting into too much detail, the essential idea is the needs on the lower end of the pyramid must be fulfilled and satisfied before higher needs can be pursued and attained. Like many theories, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs contains much of what qualifies as truth for the modern, despiritualized consciousness. After all, a starving, destitute human will likely be less motivated to compose a great symphony than a properly nourished human who can focus on pursuits higher than mere survival.
On the other hand, the motivation to create great works has inspired many great artists and thinkers to willingly sacrifice meals, resources, and stability for creativity, demonstrating that Maslow’s theory is far from flawless.
Maslow’s motivation theory started me thinking about Christian motivation. Suffice it to say, the Hierarchy of Needs is not constructed upon a Christian framework but is instead the brainchild of an atheist who flatly eschewed religion and the spiritual. With this in mind, it becomes readily apparent that Maslow’s self-actualization capstone is the entirely humanistic ideal of reaching one’s full potential and becoming the best version of oneself that one is capable of becoming.
After the Hierarchy of Needs became well-known and influential, Maslow revisited his original five-tier framework, found it wanting, and added transcendence above self-actualization. Why an atheist, humanist psychologist would feel inspired to add this extra level is a question I can’t answer confidently; however, Maslow obviously sensed the gaping void in consciousness above self-actualization and tried to address it as best as he could.
Maslow’s level of transcendence has since been mostly ignored. Whenever it is addressed, it is usually from the nebulous perspective of New Ageism, replete with its cosmic consciousness, mindfulness, and connectedness. Maslow himself was slippery on definitions. More often than not, he insisted on achieving peak experiences or veered toward altruism and other ideals of selflessness as examples of transcendence. Or he claimed that transcendence ultimately had something to do with overcoming the self.
Imagine that. You spend your whole life struggling toward self-actualization only to dissolve or dilute the self. How noble. How virtuous. How Oneness religion. How cosmic.
The bottom line on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is the lack of authentic spiritual motivation. Since individual human beings are ultimately going nowhere, the best they can hope for is the fundamentally meaningless pursuit of self-fulfillment followed by a gentle assimilation into the great void of nothingness, all to the sound of a soothing uhmmmmmm.
The Hierarchy of Needs remains immensely popular and is a cornerstone of the positive psychology movement. Unfortunately, meeting the needs ensconced in Maslow’s hierarchy in today’s world entails submitting to and complying with the anti-God, anti-Creation System and its endless cascade of value inversion, particularly when it comes to esteem and self-actualization. However, even the most rudimentary physiological and safety needs require submission and complicity, which raises the question of how Christians can expect to meet Maslow’s higher-level growth needs when they are already being pressured at the lower deficiency need levels. Little wonder many Christians yearn to return to Christendom or, at the very least, mid-twentieth-century America.
From a Christian perspective, it is imperative to stress that the self that yearns for actualization in Maslow’s hierarchy is a false self. Christian motivation is clear and simple and can be reduced to two overarching goals – salvation and theosis. Both motivations ideally aim for the emergence of the real self – a self that Maslow’s theory flatly dismisses or conspires to deny.
With this in mind, Christians would be wise to reconstruct Maslow’s hierarchy by adding salvation and theosis to every tier. After all, the motivation for salvation and theosis should not be and cannot be eclipsed by any deficiency need or growth need, including the basic physiology needs, and any growth need that does incorporate salvation and theosis as the primary motivation is not a growth need, at least not in the Christian sense.
I’ll return to this theme in future post . . .
June 28, 2023
I Excel at Growing Fewer Weeds
A couple of years ago, I noted that when it came to gardening, I excelled at growing weeds. I am pleased to report that I now excel at growing fewer weeds. Daily (or nearly daily) hoeing and weeding is the primary reason for the improvement, but plant spacing has also played a significant role.
That aside, I have covered the spaces between my vegetables with garden felt, which, as the name implies, is a cloth material rolled out over the soil. The felt is water and air permeable but blocks a good deal of sunlight, thus hindering weed growth. It’s far from a perfect solution – weeds still manage to push through here and there – but the felt has easily cut the weed growth in my garden by two-thirds.
Last year I used straw and mulch for the same reason. Both inhibited weed growth to a certain degree, but after a few weeks, the weeds powered through the layers and took over. They are now attempting to break through the felt and have succeeded in some spots. Thankfully, the black felt surface makes the weeds far more conspicuous; however, the material prevents hoeing and makes the weeds much harder to pluck.
Next season, I think I’ll forgo the felt and increase the hoeing. With any luck, the felt will reduce the seed count in the soil this year and make weed management even more efficient next spring and summer. We’ll see.
I planted cucumbers for the first time this year and am experiencing great success with them. The same goes for red-leaf lettuce. The zucchini, cantaloupe, tomatoes, and snap peas are all coming along nicely. My onions are already hand grenade-size. The rows of corn look promising.
On the downside, my pepper plants have fallen into a coma. At first, I thought the problem was soil-related; however, my neighbors are experiencing the same trouble with their pepper plants, which leads me to believe that the problem might be weather-temperature-related instead (it was cooler than usual in the late spring, particularly at night).
Peppers aside, it looks like it will be another good year.
That aside, I have covered the spaces between my vegetables with garden felt, which, as the name implies, is a cloth material rolled out over the soil. The felt is water and air permeable but blocks a good deal of sunlight, thus hindering weed growth. It’s far from a perfect solution – weeds still manage to push through here and there – but the felt has easily cut the weed growth in my garden by two-thirds.
Last year I used straw and mulch for the same reason. Both inhibited weed growth to a certain degree, but after a few weeks, the weeds powered through the layers and took over. They are now attempting to break through the felt and have succeeded in some spots. Thankfully, the black felt surface makes the weeds far more conspicuous; however, the material prevents hoeing and makes the weeds much harder to pluck.
Next season, I think I’ll forgo the felt and increase the hoeing. With any luck, the felt will reduce the seed count in the soil this year and make weed management even more efficient next spring and summer. We’ll see.
I planted cucumbers for the first time this year and am experiencing great success with them. The same goes for red-leaf lettuce. The zucchini, cantaloupe, tomatoes, and snap peas are all coming along nicely. My onions are already hand grenade-size. The rows of corn look promising.
On the downside, my pepper plants have fallen into a coma. At first, I thought the problem was soil-related; however, my neighbors are experiencing the same trouble with their pepper plants, which leads me to believe that the problem might be weather-temperature-related instead (it was cooler than usual in the late spring, particularly at night).
Peppers aside, it looks like it will be another good year.
June 26, 2023
Focusing on Inner Christianity Is Neither Surrender Nor Defeat
An increasing number of Christians are (finally?) waking up to the reality that their churches are becoming ever more aligned with System ideology, beliefs, principles, values, ethics, morals, opinion, and teaching. The outlook for churches is entirely negative, with no meaningful reversal or repentance on the horizon. Things are going to get a lot worse, and there’s no sign that they will get better – at least not in the short-to-mid-term. So, what’s a faithful, churchgoing Christian to do?
Before we dip into that, it’s imperative to stress the one thing a faithful, churchgoing Christian should not do – and that one thing is to stop being a Christian.
Christians whose faith, principles, convictions, and identity are wholly contingent upon external considerations like churches and communities will be forced to make a decisive and potentially divisive choice in the near future. Continue down the perilous path of escalating corruption, degeneracy, and profligacy under the questionable assumption that all is well and God is in charge. Or take a stand and spiritually reject exterior Christianity’s streamlining calibration with the demonic System.
I use the term exterior Christianity above because I believe we are already far past the point of being able to devotedly and conscientiously rely upon external, moderate, everyday Christianity. That aspect of Christianity has been thoroughly dismantled. It would take an unfathomably insincere imagination to envision that what is coming up in its place is in any way remotely related to Christ.
Those convinced that they are safely barricaded behind some unassailable exterior Christian fortification will eventually find themselves in the same situation as Christians in vanquished or less-defended bastions. All externals are vulnerable. They will inevitably be assimilated, corrupted, or destroyed.
Christians are well into a potentially devastating time of choice and division. No Christian will be spared these choices and divisions. Do I recommend abandoning all aspects of exterior Christianity? Not necessarily. Such a choice depends on individual circumstances; however, if one continues to adhere to exterior Christianity, the adherence must be outweighed by an elevation and intensification of interior Christianity.
Contrary to popular Christian belief, elevating and intensifying the internal does not signify a retreat from the external. It is not quietism or submission or fatalism. It does not mean digging in. It does not mean surrender. Very little is relinquished. Quite the opposite. The elevation and intensification of inner, inward Christianity is an advance. A step forward. A breakthrough.
The forces of darkness utilize external, temporal means to achieve internal, eternal ends. They use the external to demoralize, humiliate, infuriate, tempt, and goad. They enthusiastically invite external reactions unsupported by elevated and intensified internals. It makes little difference to them if rage and resentment or despondency and despair fuel the reaction. Either way, all is lost in the eternal, which is the ultimate aim.
One way or another, Christians will have to go through what the demonic forces have lined up before them, and they will have to come out the other side or be lost. The only open question is what they rely on to carry them to the other side.
Before we dip into that, it’s imperative to stress the one thing a faithful, churchgoing Christian should not do – and that one thing is to stop being a Christian.
Christians whose faith, principles, convictions, and identity are wholly contingent upon external considerations like churches and communities will be forced to make a decisive and potentially divisive choice in the near future. Continue down the perilous path of escalating corruption, degeneracy, and profligacy under the questionable assumption that all is well and God is in charge. Or take a stand and spiritually reject exterior Christianity’s streamlining calibration with the demonic System.
I use the term exterior Christianity above because I believe we are already far past the point of being able to devotedly and conscientiously rely upon external, moderate, everyday Christianity. That aspect of Christianity has been thoroughly dismantled. It would take an unfathomably insincere imagination to envision that what is coming up in its place is in any way remotely related to Christ.
Those convinced that they are safely barricaded behind some unassailable exterior Christian fortification will eventually find themselves in the same situation as Christians in vanquished or less-defended bastions. All externals are vulnerable. They will inevitably be assimilated, corrupted, or destroyed.
Christians are well into a potentially devastating time of choice and division. No Christian will be spared these choices and divisions. Do I recommend abandoning all aspects of exterior Christianity? Not necessarily. Such a choice depends on individual circumstances; however, if one continues to adhere to exterior Christianity, the adherence must be outweighed by an elevation and intensification of interior Christianity.
Contrary to popular Christian belief, elevating and intensifying the internal does not signify a retreat from the external. It is not quietism or submission or fatalism. It does not mean digging in. It does not mean surrender. Very little is relinquished. Quite the opposite. The elevation and intensification of inner, inward Christianity is an advance. A step forward. A breakthrough.
The forces of darkness utilize external, temporal means to achieve internal, eternal ends. They use the external to demoralize, humiliate, infuriate, tempt, and goad. They enthusiastically invite external reactions unsupported by elevated and intensified internals. It makes little difference to them if rage and resentment or despondency and despair fuel the reaction. Either way, all is lost in the eternal, which is the ultimate aim.
One way or another, Christians will have to go through what the demonic forces have lined up before them, and they will have to come out the other side or be lost. The only open question is what they rely on to carry them to the other side.
June 25, 2023
June 24, 2023
The Gnostic Tar
Gnosticism has become a fashionable tarring tactic among some Christian bloggers. An efficient means to neatly – albeit restrictively and inaccurately – categorize the views of another. "Gnostic" not only brands, it also condemns. How convenient!
Disagree with something a Christian has expressed somewhere? Easy solution – call it Gnosticism. Confused or unsettled by the metaphysical assumptions a Christian has disclosed? Simple – write it off as Gnosticism. Unhappy with the Christianity a Christian espouses – piece of cake; label the Christian a Gnostic.
Great pigeonholing tactic there. What’s next? Resort to terms like racist and transphobe?
To all those who enthusiastically sling the Gnostic tar, I offer the following humble advice – up your game . . . seriously . . .
Disagree with something a Christian has expressed somewhere? Easy solution – call it Gnosticism. Confused or unsettled by the metaphysical assumptions a Christian has disclosed? Simple – write it off as Gnosticism. Unhappy with the Christianity a Christian espouses – piece of cake; label the Christian a Gnostic.
Great pigeonholing tactic there. What’s next? Resort to terms like racist and transphobe?
To all those who enthusiastically sling the Gnostic tar, I offer the following humble advice – up your game . . . seriously . . .
June 23, 2023
God as All or Nothing
I don’t believe in the classical abstract conceptualization of the Omnigod – omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipresent, and so forth – but my disbelief does not entail that God is nothing.
Those who adhere to the Omnigod conceptualization approach God from an all-or-nothing perspective. God is either Omni, or He is not a god at all. Moreover, they accuse those who do not accept the Omnigod idea of committing a category error stemming from anthropomorphism.
God is God, and man is man. One is the supreme, absolute, self-sufficient Creator capable of anything; the other is a mere creature, finite, mortal, utterly contingent, with limited capabilities.
Considering these two disparate natures, it is readily evident that God and man are not and cannot be in the same category of being. Furthermore, those who suggest that God and man are in the same category think far too highly of man and far too little of God. Non-omni God is just hyper-anthropomorphism -- excessive projection of human traits and characteristics onto the Divine.
Those who subscribe to Omnigod theology declare that only Omnigod is worthy of worship. Put another way, if God is not omni in every conceivable way, He is just a being among beings and essentially unworthy of reverence, devotion, exaltation, praise, etc.
If He is just a being among beings, He cannot expect us to obey Him or feel duty-bound to Him. Nor can he expect us to love Him. If God is not Omni, He cannot command such things and should not expect to receive such things from us.
Omnigod believers accuse those who do not believe in the Omnigod philosophy of errant, arrogant, hubristic anthropomorphism that elevates man far beyond his station in Creation; however, they rarely stop to consider that their vehement refusal to consider relations with a non-Omni God might mark the very pinnacle of human error, arrogance, and hubris.
Those who adhere to the Omnigod conceptualization approach God from an all-or-nothing perspective. God is either Omni, or He is not a god at all. Moreover, they accuse those who do not accept the Omnigod idea of committing a category error stemming from anthropomorphism.
God is God, and man is man. One is the supreme, absolute, self-sufficient Creator capable of anything; the other is a mere creature, finite, mortal, utterly contingent, with limited capabilities.
Considering these two disparate natures, it is readily evident that God and man are not and cannot be in the same category of being. Furthermore, those who suggest that God and man are in the same category think far too highly of man and far too little of God. Non-omni God is just hyper-anthropomorphism -- excessive projection of human traits and characteristics onto the Divine.
Those who subscribe to Omnigod theology declare that only Omnigod is worthy of worship. Put another way, if God is not omni in every conceivable way, He is just a being among beings and essentially unworthy of reverence, devotion, exaltation, praise, etc.
If He is just a being among beings, He cannot expect us to obey Him or feel duty-bound to Him. Nor can he expect us to love Him. If God is not Omni, He cannot command such things and should not expect to receive such things from us.
Omnigod believers accuse those who do not believe in the Omnigod philosophy of errant, arrogant, hubristic anthropomorphism that elevates man far beyond his station in Creation; however, they rarely stop to consider that their vehement refusal to consider relations with a non-Omni God might mark the very pinnacle of human error, arrogance, and hubris.
June 21, 2023
We Made the Wrong Choice Concerning Freedom and Love
I have written many blog posts about the anti-God, anti-Creation, demonically-led Establishment and its System, but it would be an error to assume that They are solely to blame for the malevolent and putrid conditions of our time and place.
Don’t get me wrong, They are certainly the drivers of our current spiritual malaise, but They could not have done it, could not be doing it, without the active, willing, and submissive compliance of the vast majority of the West.
Put bluntly, the majority of the West actively chose, is actively choosing, to participate in the anti-God, anti-Creation, demonically-led agenda.
Why?
Two words – freedom and love.
People in the West turned their backs on freedom and love that aligns with God and Creation and embraced the pseudo, anti-God, anti-Creation freedom and love the Establishment promulgates.
We chose this. It really is that simple.
To underscore this undesirable fact, I turn to the current American ambassador to Hungary – a gay, Jewish human rights lawyer who demonstrated his respect for Hungary’s support of traditional family values by arriving in Budapest with his husband and kids in tow – and the recent speech he gave to celebrate Pride month.
Pay attention, because everything this man says is on point:
Hungarians are fiercely independent, sophisticated, and intelligent people, and rightfully proud of their rich culture and history. No matter how many government-produced posters of “Brussels” bombs may be emblazoned around town at any given moment, the reality is Hungary is not under “attack” by outside forces, or vulnerable to a “liberal virus” or “Western decadence,” or cowering before George Soros, or at the mercy of omnipotent conspiratorial powers. No, the reality is something far simpler.
The story of Hungary, including its movement for equality, is one being written not by foreigners, but by Hungarians.
Not by them, but by you.
Not by people abroad, but by the people in this room.
It is not fictional. It is a true story that is rich, resonant, and real.
And the United States supports you as you write that story, and in your effort to advance human dignity.
While the news should report this truthful story factually. I can already read the headlines Minister Rogán’s team is dictating for tomorrow’s papers. No doubt I’ll be accused of staging provocations, of importing Western wokeness, and foisting obscene values while meddling in Hungary’s domestic affairs.
What won’t happen is any of the government’s captured and controlled media outlets printing this speech in full. What they’ll cut out – what they always cut out – is the fact that it is Hungarians who believe in these universal human rights, and it is Hungarians leading the fight for them.
What they’ll cut out is all of you.
But they should print this speech because tonight is different.
While the government-controlled media would have you believe these topics are all I talk about, in fact, this is the first speech I have given here on LGBT rights. As I approach my one-year anniversary here — having spent much of the year focusing on other issues of strategic importance to our two countries — they should print what I am actually saying about this topic rather than what they portray. They should print it in full. I dare them.
But no matter what the government-controlled media will or will not print, no matter what it does or does not say, it cannot distract from one simple, undeniable fact: Hungary made its choice.
Hungary chose to be part of the West.
It is Hungary and Hungarians who chose to join the OSCE, the Council of Europe, and the European Union and to uphold their bedrock principles.
It is Hungary and Hungarians who chose – 25 years ago next year – to join NATO, and who pledged to uphold our shared security as part of a community of democratic values.
It is Hungary and Hungarians who in 2003 — 20 years ago — passed the Act on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of Equal Opportunities, which forbids discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
In short, Hungary made a choice, and it is a choice Hungarians should be proud of – and most are – and a choice that should be honored. A firm, unequivocal, and prideful declaration of Hungary’s identity and place – in Europe, in NATO, in the West. A choice to move away from an era of oppression and repression – and towards an era of freedom and, dare I say, love.
Szabadság és szerelem. (Freedom and love.)
You can replace Hungary and Hungarians with any other nation or nationality in the West in the text above and the message remains the same.
The same applies to the pronoun we.
We chose this freedom and love. We. It was our choice. We must stop pretending otherwise.
The only way forward is repentance and, if possible, resistance. But repentance and resistance are not enough.
We need to actively and willingly reject the Establishment's "freedom and love" and align with real freedom and love.
We need to make the choice for real freedom and love and commit to this choice -- eternally.
Simple . . . yet tough.
Video below of the full speech in which the ambassador reminds Hungary that there is no globo-only option. Note added: When the ambassador is not pushing "freedom and love", he pours his energies into berating Hungary for not being more involved in the "freedom and love" war against Vodka Land.
Further note added: My criticism of the ambassador should not be taken as an automatic endorsement of the current Hungarian government who -- despite being on the "right" side on some issues -- is most definitely on the wrong side overall.
Don’t get me wrong, They are certainly the drivers of our current spiritual malaise, but They could not have done it, could not be doing it, without the active, willing, and submissive compliance of the vast majority of the West.
Put bluntly, the majority of the West actively chose, is actively choosing, to participate in the anti-God, anti-Creation, demonically-led agenda.
Why?
Two words – freedom and love.
People in the West turned their backs on freedom and love that aligns with God and Creation and embraced the pseudo, anti-God, anti-Creation freedom and love the Establishment promulgates.
We chose this. It really is that simple.
To underscore this undesirable fact, I turn to the current American ambassador to Hungary – a gay, Jewish human rights lawyer who demonstrated his respect for Hungary’s support of traditional family values by arriving in Budapest with his husband and kids in tow – and the recent speech he gave to celebrate Pride month.
Pay attention, because everything this man says is on point:
Hungarians are fiercely independent, sophisticated, and intelligent people, and rightfully proud of their rich culture and history. No matter how many government-produced posters of “Brussels” bombs may be emblazoned around town at any given moment, the reality is Hungary is not under “attack” by outside forces, or vulnerable to a “liberal virus” or “Western decadence,” or cowering before George Soros, or at the mercy of omnipotent conspiratorial powers. No, the reality is something far simpler.
The story of Hungary, including its movement for equality, is one being written not by foreigners, but by Hungarians.
Not by them, but by you.
Not by people abroad, but by the people in this room.
It is not fictional. It is a true story that is rich, resonant, and real.
And the United States supports you as you write that story, and in your effort to advance human dignity.
While the news should report this truthful story factually. I can already read the headlines Minister Rogán’s team is dictating for tomorrow’s papers. No doubt I’ll be accused of staging provocations, of importing Western wokeness, and foisting obscene values while meddling in Hungary’s domestic affairs.
What won’t happen is any of the government’s captured and controlled media outlets printing this speech in full. What they’ll cut out – what they always cut out – is the fact that it is Hungarians who believe in these universal human rights, and it is Hungarians leading the fight for them.
What they’ll cut out is all of you.
But they should print this speech because tonight is different.
While the government-controlled media would have you believe these topics are all I talk about, in fact, this is the first speech I have given here on LGBT rights. As I approach my one-year anniversary here — having spent much of the year focusing on other issues of strategic importance to our two countries — they should print what I am actually saying about this topic rather than what they portray. They should print it in full. I dare them.
But no matter what the government-controlled media will or will not print, no matter what it does or does not say, it cannot distract from one simple, undeniable fact: Hungary made its choice.
Hungary chose to be part of the West.
It is Hungary and Hungarians who chose to join the OSCE, the Council of Europe, and the European Union and to uphold their bedrock principles.
It is Hungary and Hungarians who chose – 25 years ago next year – to join NATO, and who pledged to uphold our shared security as part of a community of democratic values.
It is Hungary and Hungarians who in 2003 — 20 years ago — passed the Act on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of Equal Opportunities, which forbids discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
In short, Hungary made a choice, and it is a choice Hungarians should be proud of – and most are – and a choice that should be honored. A firm, unequivocal, and prideful declaration of Hungary’s identity and place – in Europe, in NATO, in the West. A choice to move away from an era of oppression and repression – and towards an era of freedom and, dare I say, love.
Szabadság és szerelem. (Freedom and love.)
You can replace Hungary and Hungarians with any other nation or nationality in the West in the text above and the message remains the same.
The same applies to the pronoun we.
We chose this freedom and love. We. It was our choice. We must stop pretending otherwise.
The only way forward is repentance and, if possible, resistance. But repentance and resistance are not enough.
We need to actively and willingly reject the Establishment's "freedom and love" and align with real freedom and love.
We need to make the choice for real freedom and love and commit to this choice -- eternally.
Simple . . . yet tough.
Video below of the full speech in which the ambassador reminds Hungary that there is no globo-only option. Note added: When the ambassador is not pushing "freedom and love", he pours his energies into berating Hungary for not being more involved in the "freedom and love" war against Vodka Land.
Further note added: My criticism of the ambassador should not be taken as an automatic endorsement of the current Hungarian government who -- despite being on the "right" side on some issues -- is most definitely on the wrong side overall.
June 20, 2023
Zichy's Brilliantly Subtle Depiction of the Answer to the Triumph of Destruction
I have covered Mihály Zichy's The Triumph of the Genius of Destruction previously on this blog, here and here. I must confess that my appreciation for the painting has increased significantly since I wrote those two blog posts.My deepened respect for this particular work of art stems partly from the awareness that Zichy's destructive scene could easily be our time and place. More than that, my admiration is grounded in how Zichy depicts "the answer" to the triumph of the genius of destruction. The depiction is so brilliantly faint and subtle as to be barely visible in the fiery kaleidoscopic ruination the canvas displays.
Yet there it is.
