User Answers

AMERICA’S RELIGIOUS DEFAULT SETTING: APOCALYPSE THEATER

Yesterday I blogged about the attack on Governor Mitt Romney's Mormonism and Governor Romney's response. But I'm not quite done with the topic of America's religious default switch being set to "baptist-revivalist." So, first, a couple of caveats. By "baptist" I mean not the denomination, but the theological position, namely, any group practicing so-called "believer's baptism" and opposed to the practice of historic Christianity of baptizing, and in some cases, communing, infants. Within the mainstream Christian tradition, the Kingdom of God was open to all, including infants, a manifestation of the basic Christian belief that God and a participation in the love of God was something both mystical, sacramental, and ultimately beyond mankind's reason. There was within such systems, no need to claim a "decision" nor to have any special illumination or experience, for indeed, within the mainstream, such views were viewed as inherently Gnostic in nature.

The baptist religion inverted all that, for membership in the Church became centered upon man's reason and the claim to have made a rational decision for Christ, and in many cases, to have an experience of  salvation (thus, many within this revivalist religion, as I know all too well, spend their lives seeking one experience after another, to assure themselves that indeed they are saved). It is the quintessence of classical Gnostic systems.

Add into this mix yet another potent doctrine: millennialism, which the popular culture in America knows as "the Rapture." Here we must digress briefly, and note that the reason this doctrine - itself yet another late-comer on the scene of Christian history and found nowhere in the first one thousand years of Church history, and finding only adumbrations in the millennial speculations of the mediaeval theologian, Joachim of Fiore - has taken hold on the popular and theologically illiterate imagination of American culture only because the revivalist religion has promoted it relentlessly through its "ministries" and television networks and "annotated bibles" teaching but one interpretation of certain textsand novels fictionalizing the millennialist doctrine.

So why belabor all of this?

The answer is very simple: it is this religion that has made its influence felt at the very pinnacle of American power, and hence, of American foreign policy, for within this teaching is the idea that at some future point, the "true Church" of all believers will be magically taken out of the world (to avoid the "Tribulation"), and thus, the only way to approach God will be again through - you guessed it - the reinstitution of the bloody animal sacrifices of the Old Testament dispensation. Now pause and consider the implications of this.

For one thing, it means that Israel -God's "chosen people" - must be supported, no matter what (forget all that stuff in the New Testament about Christ abolishing the distinction between Jew and Greek...remember, that is raptured out of this world!). For another, the goofiness of this doctrine need only be considered from another perspective: imagine having to get on an airplane in New York, fly to Jerusalem, and buy some turtle doves, turn them over to a priest, who will then slaughter it in an act of ritual sacrifice. Imagine red heifers, imagine a return to Old Testament law in other respects...you get the idea.And if you think there is no serious danger here, think again... just google "Amalekites" and "Israel" and you will be astounded.

The point is that an eschatological expectation has been created - perhaps and arguably even deliberately - even within a popular culture that otherwise wouldn't even think about religion at all: America's religious "default" setting is set to "revivalist millennialism." And that is a dangerous setting to be set on, regardless of where one stands. I mention all this because it is my hope that my co-author and I eventually will be able to address such issues regnant in the "apocalypse theater" driving American culture - and hence, its political and policy climate - in future ebooks. Consider this carefully once again: with the promotion of the doctrine through books, television, and "ministries" most Americans would be shocked to know that the doctrine is a relative late-comer on the scene, and that means that the interpretation it advocates is a form of deliberately created expectation, a form of social engineering for an apocalypse theater.

 

59 thoughts on “AMERICA’S RELIGIOUS DEFAULT SETTING: APOCALYPSE THEATER”

  1. For anyone interested in where Christianity may have come from, I suggest CAESAR’S MESSIAH by Joseph Atwill.

    I am no expert, but I have read quite a bit of New Testament criticism (much of which is very good), but Atwill’s book stands alone in providing a probable source for Christianity (the Flavian emperors). If you think Christianity comes from some Jewish mystic, think again: it appears to be a state-sponsored religion created out of whole cloth by the Romans to help pacify their al Qaeda of the day: the Jews.

    There is no absolute “proof” here, as there never will be for events 2,000 years ago, but the connections that Atwill points out are simply mind-blowing.

    1. This stuff is interesting. I am familiar with the theme but not the particulars. It may be interesting to read.

      Also,

      Along the Western Borders of Asia on some trade-routes is a statue or representation of Buddha STANDING up making some kind of hand symbol/sign? He’s thought of as the DIVINE PHYSICIAN. (at least in that neighborhood)

      I think of geographical movements of peoples and the FUSION of cultures. A kind of VICIOUSNESS (did I spell that right?)

      I don’t know if I would think of JEWS = ? back then as the al Qaeda of the day. I understand perfectly why you use that word but the nuance can lead some poor soul like me up the wrong alley or some dead-end!

      I like what the Historian said (i speak as if I knew the guy — I know jack about that guy? Just going along with a citation from Farrell) about back in the Roman Days; Where did all THESE PEOPLE come from with do-V-ous GREEK surnames? That’s more to my liking.

      I remember Carl Jung writing something Theological (I don’t know what he really meant – I am just guessing) somewhere “If only Christianity wasn’t associated with a slave revolt. ”

      So the BUZZ-word al Qaeda works.

    2. But the idea of a retelling of the Osirus story relating to someone who may have been an Essene rabbi is not out of the question.

      Anyhow the Romans didn’t really adopt Christianity until about 300CE.

      As for Jews being “al Qaeda” of the day, a simple way of dismissing opposition to invasion by locals, call those locals terrorist.

      The US did it in Iraq 2003 thru 2007. The Nazis did it in Holland.

      As for al Qaeda, that just seems like a front made up of many those whom the US employed in Afghanistan in the 1980s, who pulls the strings is the better question.

  2. The FIRST thing I did was define consciousness.

    You either are paid very well by the gobmit to come here and just annoy people, you are facing a VERY long sentence so you are doing your best to please your probation officer by coming here and annoying people, or you are just an idiot who is starved for attention and so you come here and annoy people to get attention.

    WAIT! Their is an internet name for people like you: TROLL.

    I will no longer feed the troll.

      1. PS

        Are we off page one of your government provided response sheet yet? Page 3? Four maybe? I’ll bet they have a SPECIAL sheet made up just for me that you read off of.

        Don’t feed the trolls. Chew on “dessert,” sir.

      2. Right you made conscousness a faculty, like sense of smell, which in no way is a complete definition so isn’t a definition.

        You predecided what Randian outcome you sought and limited meaning to that outcome. (Roger Ailes, Fox News, and Karl Rove are all very good at this kind of limitation of the terms of debate to force an outcome.)

        That’s not a definition, that’s gaming the argument. So no you haven’t come close to a definition of consciousness. It’s something that has been argued over for thousands of years. And those I cite are much closer to something reasonably valid and complete than the truncated version you’ve purported as being complete.

        Why so sure I’m paid by the guvmit, if only I were. Why do you think Alex Jones is tolerated by various powers in the US of A?

        1. I did say that I was NOT going to feed the troll any longer and I did say that I had fed you your dessert but, withstanding all that, there is one more thing I want to point out and I am doing so for the benefit of Dr. Farrell’s analysis (Are you listening, Joe?), and anyone else who happens to pass thru and stumbles on this post.

          I now submit that you, Jay, are not even a real person. You are a web bot, an artificially ‘intelligent’ computer program. I have encountered these before.

          “You” / they are easily distinguishable from real humans in that your responses are designed to elicit a reply no matter what and they have zero, or almost zero, to do with actually trying to arrive at a conclusion in any discussion/debate whatsoever.

          These programs learn from this reply via a comparative feedback loop that generates and puts forth more questions, often in the same comment block, to try to elicit more replies based on the same theme.

          A simple n-dimensional grid/array/matrix is at or near the core of the whole program and is occasionally, though perhaps seldom, tweaked by a live person.

          Other sister applications search the web to follow certain internet monikers around from site to site, going by ASCII code string similarity if nothing else (not to mention IP addresses which DHS has a record of every one) so that an AI program will continue to study the same target individual as the individual moves from site to site.

          And so it goes. Count this as the icing on the cake, whatever you are, “Jay,.”

          1. I have to laugh — I ams whats I aM and that’s all that I AMS —-

            Jay, my fellow soujourner —– Your not a BOT, your POPPIE THE SAILOR MAN! TOOT_TOOT! ha, ha!

            I would love to stay all day in this site but I really have things to do today.

            All of you are my kind of people.

            How’s this for TELEPATHY:

            I can remember sitting in the back seat of a car with my 5 year daughter grinning at me? My mother and sister were having a BICKERING session in the front seat.

            My daughter, upon observing this behavior thought it humorous and looked at me without saying a word as if to say (and i understood fully the look on her face):

            Two ADULTS acting like their one of us Children = Isn’t that funny!

            Instead of nancy reagon’s just say NO to arguments. I say::: NAH, NAH, NAH and stick out my tongue while I’m at it.

            Ha, Ha!

            Have a good day. I am off to do some chores and see a few people and I hope someday a WIZARD can help me.

    1. Citizen,
      Did you ever have a dog that would chase a ball as long as you’d kept throwing it? Now think of Jay. As long as you answer, he’ll keep coming back with the ball. He doesn’t mean anything by it. That’s just the way he is. You say, “Merry Christmas” and he’ll answer “Humbug!”. It’s just Jay being Jay. He’s a good guy. Pay him no mind and he won’t bother you any more.

      1. Well really, don’t post comments about consciousness and then later claim that the comment is in fact the definition of consciousness, when it’s not even particularly close to what a basic good dictionary says.Then I won’t pop in, but you know that V.

        1. Sure do Jay,
          But do try to do something about your icon. Take off the glasses and smile for a change.
          Truthfully, you’re a good guy and I do enjoy you.

      2. If “Jay” is a real person like you say, then he(?) has the mentality of a spoiled 9-year old who is starved for attention.

        No. “Jay” is a web bot.

        1. Then stop making stuff that simply supports your predrawn conclusions.

          Typical of the group-think ilk, they don’t like challenges and denigrate those who point out problems with their postions.

          Perhaps we are all ‘bots, dancing puppets casting shadows in a cave…

  3. Religions are institutions of man, created by man
    for nefarious purposes.

    Spirituality is a whole other ‘thing’ and can/does testify
    to an Ultimate (Observer) Consciousness that Is a form
    of energy we think of as “Thought.”

    Thought is a vibration that creates the ‘strings’
    and not the other way around.

    The West has it backward.
    The Eastern ancients had it right

  4. The pop-Christian beliefs Dr Farrell points out here (rapture, salvation by decision experience, support of Isreal as a “chosen people”) are constructs that impart to the “believer” a sense of pride. Pride is used by the power elite of Christian tele-religion as a wedge to seperate the folks from their cash. Pride begats pride, Pride has no place in a servants life.

    All that said, I would caution that going too far down the path of “proper religion” could damage an otherwise reasoned evaluation of the science and ancient histories path. It could, in fact, create a new religion which is a danger of traversing this subject too far.

  5. “(thus, many within this revivalist religion, as I know all too well, spend their lives seeking one experience after another, to assure themselves that indeed they are saved)”

    Kind of reminds me of 12-Steppers seeking validation from ‘THE GROUP’ by having “spiritual experiences.” They are always something that cannot be independently verified. At least when their godhead Bill Wilson had his “spiritual experience,” he was high on hallucinogenic drugs.

    “to have an experience of salvation”

    Is this the same thing as an epiphany? Christians, and other faithists, always proffer something that is NOT causally connected to magickind and then they attribute it to magickind and say that it is proof of the existence of magickind. For example: I knew an ice [a drug] addict once who used to be a crackhead. His neighbor’s source would occasionally leave him some on my acquaintance’s outside windowsill.

    He would open the window and scrape every last bit of crack up with a razor blade. One day as he was doing this, the window sash crashed down onto the back of his head. He told me that was God telling him not to smoke crack. I told him that maybe the vibration from him scraping the windowsill with a razor caused the sash to work loose and conk him in the occipital region of his noggin.

    He remains unconvinced of my explanation to this day. To him, God did it…to tell him not to smoke crack. Come to think of it, this story does involve harmonics and geometric relationships…

  6. Consciousness is that faculty which perceives that which exists.

    Something (existence) can exist without a consciousness to perceive it. However, a consciousness cannot exist without something existing to be conscious of.

    Am I missing something here? I don’t think so.

    1. No, consciousness is part of existence; it doesn’t separately perceive, see the likes of Reich, Drown, Bohm, Bearden, Goethe, Chundar Bose.

        1. No you separated consciousness into a tool not of the thing(s), and sort of only of you, which is a problem with Rand, libertarians, and many French diconstructionist types–others too.

          1. I DEFINED consciousness. The genera of consciousness is “faculty.” The differentia of consciousness is “which perceives that which exists.”

            Whether or not consciousness may also be a tool is irrelevant to the definition of consciousness. Consciousness as a tool is a descriptor and is NOT a defining referent.

            Rand classified conscious as an axiomatic concept, one which cannot be broken down into more concepts. That is, either a person is conscious or they are not. Now, there are those who would say that a person is only partially conscious at times as if this divides consciousness into further concepts. Yet if one is conscious at all then consciousness is existentially true, the degree of consciousness being only a quantifier.

            The most basic axiomatic concept, according to Rand, is existence. Epistemologically speaking, this is coincident with the universal set in mathematics as portrayed in a Venn diagram. Existence per say must exist in order for anything less than the total of existence to exist.

            Rand postulated a third axiomatic concept: A is A. Another way to state that A is A is to say that a thing is what a thing is. In other words, if one is to note the difference between apples and oranges, apples must be apples and NOT oranges (or anything else) and oranges must be oranges and NOT apples (or anything else). Otherwise any comparison is meaningless.

            In summation, the best way to prove that these concepts are axiomatic is to try to DISprove them. This can be done by answering three very simple questions which I like to call “The Three Strike Rule:”

            1. Dose existence exist?
            2. Are you conscious?
            3. Is a thing what a thing is?

          2. Citizen Quasar:

            First, you didn’t define consciousness until later.

            Second, that definition seems to indicate that only a human has or controls consciousness. Perhaps the orange is concious of the human too, saying don’t call me an “orange, my name is…”

            You’ve given a very good example of why Rand wasn’t very smart or perceptive, don’t even have to bring up Alan Greenspan or her reliance on welfare.

    2. Consciousness is the letter C, is the letter o, is the letter n, is the letter s, is the letter c, is the letter i, is the letter o, is the letter u. is the letter s, is the letter n, is the letter e, is the letter s, is the letter s linked together serially in a presubscribed order. A “representation” of something else.(makes no difference if it is a spoken word).

      Draw a triangle to represent the dimensions of a mountain. Is the triangle a mountain? Do mountain goats dwell on a triangle.

      I much prefer the use of the word – WHAT which is of course the letter W, etc.

      What is consciousness? Notice the two letter word in between the Subject and Object —-IS ? (so there you have it! Don’t bother to look behind the sofa or under the rug or even under the bed at night before you go to sleep. I just revealed to you where consciousness isn’t hiding.)

      So even my preference for WHAT is faulty because it is a Subject.(as screwy as the Object) They say, “Subjectivity is still part of this DUALITY.” mess.

      I would FRAME (my preferences – to each his own poison)—- IT—— as — What is CONSCIOUSNESS in itself for itself.

      Or better yet to avoid this entire SLOPPY-SOUP just substitute the word AWARENESS = just fine with me. (but who is aware ,no—— awareness itself for nobodies purpose.)

      1. Well the Latin would mean something like “with knowledge”, but I think the meaning is broader in English.

        Your awareness may work, but is awareness limited to a who, can the brick of a wall be aware of it’s part in the wall and the occupants of the building, and what medium who comunicate that awareness to the brick?

      2. I missed that, Paul.

        “Self-Awareness” is probably closer to the point here,
        since the Universe is understood to be totally
        inclusive, yes, no, maybe. (?)
        I would think that is implicit in the definition.

        As is ‘god’ within its definitionj of Omnipotent,
        Omnipresent and Omniscient.

        Yes, Jay.
        That reminds me of Socrates’ “Know Thyself”
        and quite appropriate.
        And Consciousness IS Existence.

        Thanks all of you. Very ‘mindful’
        as in Full of Mind. hhmmm…
        Yes, I like that !
        😉

        1. Omnisient?

          How does one differentiate between big brother and God! Pan-psychism would kind of hint their both the same but there’s “trouble” or difficulty in that zone. (at least for me)

          Did you ever see that movie with DAVID BOWIE starring in it. I think it was called “THE BOY WHO FELL FROM SPACE?

          In his lounge like living room were (I guess) about 200 TV SCREENS all turned on at once in all different channels and countries.

          The movie directors was implying he, the alien, could view it all and grasp that!

          All I can say is WOW! Imagine if we were just a little-bit OMNIsuebt?

          ANYway, Christmas is just around the corner and you better be GOOD!

          1. I am on my way out the door to walk the dog when I remembered something about GOD.

            Farrell once questioned his readers about certain written record’s of YAHWAY.’s behavior. Would GOD ACT THIS WAY OR BE SO CRUEL?

            At least that is one way of looking at it.

            I give credit to Farrell. It’s a good eye-opener ETHICAL question for beginner’s who are not Theologians.

            I would say this about OMNIPOTENCE —- Can GOD create a STONE so heavy even HE/SHE/IT cant lift it?

            My dog is getting IMPATIENT! Have a good day today.

          2. paul degagne:

            Does anyone, save the most constricted thinkers, really still confuse various powerful beings in a various scriptures, mythologies, and ancient texts with “God”?

            Even if the powerful being existed, and used faculties not of this limited reality, does that make these beings gods? No, just the way the fact that I can drive a car and a dog can’t doesn’t mean that I am God to a dog.

        2. HAL838 says:

          What is “self”? What is “good”? How can a blinkered being, chained to one perspective in a cave watching shadows dance on a wall, know that which controls the objects casting the shadows; objects and illuminating light which could be of another dimension? And perhaps that otherness may just have a bit to do with you and your limitations to this 3D space and time.

          1. Ah, constricted thinkers. At least they think? I have met many people who don’t even do that. They just (sic) remotely – emote,animate and eliminate.

            Onee thing that bugs me about these people They probably would give me a drink of water when I’m really thirsty or some food if I was really hungry or even let me sleep on their couch if it was raining outside and I didn’t have anywhere else to go. Yes, some people with the most constrictive thought would also too, do these things for me or maybe even YOU.

            What was that movie about someone throwing a coke bottle out the window and the tribe believing that coke bottle was SACRED from God, or the gods. So What. Believe anything you like? Does IT Matter what the hell we all believe? Will it make one speck of a difference? —IN —-WHATEVER GIANT SCHEME OF THINGS!

            I like YOU and am LIKE YOU I wouldn’t be here posting. SI SENIOR?

            Another thing—- About this CAVE BUSINESS? That’s my usual habitat during the day. At night –sometimes and I am only saying SOMETIMES – I get out of this 3D prison and have strange-dreams and at times their even LUCID!

            The shadows in Plato’s Cave are ARCHETYPES and sometimes they die or fade away and SOMETIMES they come BACK to HAUNT — US— IN THE daylight WORLD.

            Yes, I shake at shadows cast upon the cave-walls. Other times I see anima-images that make me like Baudrilaire once wrote, go in to a SWOON, FAINT AND DIE itso BEAUTIFUL!

            I like you posting. I am or try alway to ENGAGE with others. After all my last name spells ENGAGED backwords, ha, ha! (french quebec ancestry)

            I just finished reading that latest David Icke BOOK. The first chapter’s title is “I am not David Icke.” In the last chapter he states, “David Icke is slowly “Disappearing.” I am experiencing moments of joy and peace. (amongst all the TURBULENCE I imagine he is exposed to.)

            Maybe one day you will disappear in your sleep and wake up to ….

            Well if we were in another Dimension I don’t think we would be coming back here UNLESS we were some kind of BOW-EEE-DHARMA or like that little statuet where you rub its belly for GOOD LUCK.

            Have a nice evening.

            I can imagine him finally having some peace in his life

          2. Speaking of limitations;
            that’s the answer to age old question of the Big Rock.
            In other words the answer is yes,
            by total self limitation.

            It goes to;
            once He accepted His mission, Christ could NOT
            jump [or otherwise get] off the cross.

          3. Paul De Gagne:

            The shadows are archetypes? Who told you that? You could read “Flatland”, I can’t go on with how incomplete and even wrong that “archetypes” idea is.

    3. No.
      You’ve messed it up very well, Quasar 🙂
      Not really.
      It’s just that it is very easy & simple really.

      This equation WILL ultimately fit on a T-shirt.
      Yes, the math will fit; maybe already and no
      one is telling us…………….

      People’s idea of Consciousness is all very interesting
      except for those that can’t separate it from ‘mind.’

      Two different words; two explicitely different meanings.
      Close, but not enough.

  7. jesuitgatekeeper

    ever heard of “LEFT BEHIND BY THE JESUITS” ?

    it was a JESUIT distraction to create this “LEFT BEHIND” nonsense.
    yet I have not heard or read joseph farrell mention the “jesuit order” and it’s influence on the world government power structure, and the current “apocalyptic theater” , I wonder why.

    glad to see the term “jesuit” is not censored from this site like alex jones’ sites.

  8. I remember Dr. Farrell mentioning on the byte show that he had to move because he felt threatened in his old location. I thought it may have been Nazi International types threatening him for exposing them. After reading and listening to Dr. Farrell’s work on religion (especially the stuff about the Bible being edited), I now believe it was a different group that was/is displeased with him.

    Anyway, knowing what I now know about the Bible (due to JPFs work) , I am now more interested in the Bible than I ever was even as a Christian. I grew up a mainline Protestant and then evolved into an agnostic. I went from thinking the Bible was the word of God to seeing the Bible as a book of fairly-tales.

    But after reading JPF I now see the Bible as a text with great insight on possible events in the past. JPFs work also got me into other old texts and the connections between them all.

    I hope one day JPF will give us his insight on who the real Jesus (Son of God) was and what his story is really about? When was his “first coming?” Was this first coming even on earth? Was he in the Pantheon that JPF described in Cosmic war? The Norse “God” Thor is a “son of God” in that he was Odin’s son. Is Jesus Thor? Is Jesus the Kalki from the Hindu texts?

    I would love for JPF to address these questions in a blog post but understand if he wants to wait for a members only chat. If you’re reading this JPF, I will be asking you these questions at the next chat.

    1. Ugh these posts don’t work so often!!!!

      Try Osirus, and also the documentary “The God Who Wasn’t There”.

    2. Where does one run to to get away – the Underground? The one’s who would be trying to GOTCHA know your shoe size. Small fry they leave alone and let their legions of morons do their dirty-work!

      I live in Chicago where thousands of blacks escaped the pre-civil rights South. They soon found out Chicago was no picnic either. Not as dangerous as say, Mississippi or Alabama was but still but no wonderland. I read where Martin Luther King once said he never seen such hatred in his entire life as in one demonstration in Chicago where the bricks were flying.

      There just coming around now to building a couple of large Grocery Supermarkets in the Ghetto. (yeah, you heard me right – not-one!) About time. They should call this Ghetto the USA’s version of South Africa.

      The Bible is important. Like the dead sea scrolls suggest Jesus was an Essene ( the name is like Joe or Mary in our times) who was an egalitarian and the Jesus we think of is some representation of older beliefs In my eyes he’s still a Messiah Figure. How many people in the world truly believed in him and because of that belief went on to lead excellent lives? You may have met one of them in time of need? Nothing wrong with common decency even if the giver is a bit mis-taken.

      If that cocaine addict who had the window fall on his neck or head believes God did it and from that belief goes on to really recover. You know goes on to live an honorable life who am I to question his beliefs in a way that changes or attempts to destroy them? I speak as a former Counselor – its better to leave that area alone. UNLESSS some CON IS being laid upon me. Then All is fair and I can fight back as dirty as they are!

      I

      1. SPEAKING OF ERRONIOUS BELIEFS — Wasn’t there a Novel by Umberto Eco about the Illuminati, mafia and who knows who (it’s been years since I read it?) where everyone was seeking the mysterious magical like object where what’s written upon it would give the possessor un-believeable powers or knowledge? The whole book was suppose to be an intrigue. In the end someone found this OBJECT and I think in reality it was just a plain ordinary laundry or grocery list, ha, ha!

        I hear Farrell LOUD AND CLEAR in his most recent Interview mention how he would like to figure out THE —PLAN or what’s it all about —- of those who built the ancient structures. WHO wouldn’t want to know?

        Then I think of Eco’s story and I have a little chuckle to myself. What if we found the SECRET years from now when we’re so old and grey we can barely speak and the SECRET from beyond the EDGE OF THE UNI-verse had a message similar to the following: LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF”

        Would that be such an Embarishment? If only we could or did instead of quoting or talking about it and then go on to our everyday dreary business of screwing somebody out of anything instead of being saintly

        (I lost my halo crossing the muddy streets of Paris — like that poem of Baudrillaire’s PARIS SPLEEN. I have two lumps on my fore-head or a high fore-head. I think that is where the HORNS are starting to grow, ha,ha!

        Perhaps, one day I’ll get my DNA re-engineered to where it has 12 strains instead of just these lousy two.

        I remembers NUNS beating into my little brain as a child. WE were created in the IMAGE AND LIKENESS of GOD. It really stuck with me at the bottom of my little true and tender heart.

        Lets just hope this God who supposedly created us didn’t have a tail, ha, ha!

        Whether their is a GOD or not their is the IDEA or SYMBOL or ARCHETYPE of GOD and there’s no getting around that one for if their is no IDEA of GOD then THEN what the hell are we talking about — ABSURDITY?

        1. Last night I dreamt I went to a bus station around 6:40 pm to buy a ticket to get a few miles by home. The clerk said: ”There are no buses running that late. I shouted, “‘What do you mean, that late. For heaven’s sake it’s only 6:40 pm in the evening!” Afterwards in the dream I figured I’d just have to walk back to my hometown. (it was about 14 miles away and not impossible to get to. Besides I didn’t want to bother my friends who are probably busy doing important things instead of goofing off like I am.)

          Upon waking up from the dream I immediately understood Farrell when in this Red Ice interview he was mentioning or suggesting it was wise to GO SLOW when dealing with the Nature of these kind of Investigations.

          Maybe a good TIBBIT?

          1. All this trying to figure out Hindu Naga’s and Vehicles up in the Clouds?

            I thought of this very short prose-poem that is humorous and maybe even worth a laugh or two. What the heck the bore that I am, I’m going to risk it and hope I don’t get hit with any tomatoes. (All work (research) and no PLAY (fun) makes Johnny very DULL.)

            It’s Titled ——–“The Soup and the Clouds”—– from Baudelaire’s PARIS SPLEEN;

            My Dear little mad beloved was serving my dinner, and I was looking out of the open dining-room window contemplating those moving architectural marvels that God constructs out of mist, edifices of the impalpable. And as I looked I was saying to myself: “All those phantasmagoria are almost as beautiful as my beloved’s beautiful eyes, as the green eyes of my mad monstrous little beloved.”

            All of a sudden I felt a terrible blow of a fist on my back, and heard a husky and charming voice, an hysterical voice, a hoarse brandy voice, the voice of my dear little beloved, saying: “Aren’t you ever going to eat your soup, you damned bastard of a cloud-monger?”

            _________________________________________

            Any of You have your head in the Clouds?

            If so – Watch out! (chuckle, chuckle)

  9. Who do you think was doing this programming? In one of your interviews on the Byte program and also on Red Ice you said that at one point in time we were tampered with……and that we have the genetics in our bodies that reflect both of the sides of the conflict on a physical level and on another plane.

    Do you think that these are the entities that are, were and still seeking to do the programming?

  10. This Evil/Good God that is represented in the Bible has troubled me for years. I have struggled and struggled with this concept. Even the Lord’s prayer in which he says……and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from Evil…. why is God doing this?

    I am reminded of a Randy Newmann song……”God, if you can’t take care of us, please just leave us alone….”

    And yet, we have the call to the highest form of Love in Corinthians ….

    I really struggle with this.

    1. Consider that the struggle is because you pay too much attention to a book, which people are programmed to accept is “the Word of God,” and then, within that “word” there is further ambiguous moral programming, such that it leaves good people in the position of not knowing, and easily prey to the manipulations of “leaders appointed by God” to interpret the ambiguity…

  11. “a form of social engineering for an apocalypse theater.”

    “life is a stage”- author known

    organized religion is just simply one pixel in a much larger picture (and the view ain’t pretty)- just another power/control ploy by a global elite-

    one’s religious “denomination” doesn’t mean diddly-squat-

    I was born, baptized, confirmed, raised and brain-washed German Lutheran- these “beliefs” contributed absolutely nothing to my own spiritual growth as a human being- just the opposite- I wasted a lot of time in “church”-

    anyway, alone the rite of communion should give one pause for thought: we ‘symbolically’ (cough) drink Christ’s blood and eat his body-

    it’s nothing more than a glorification of human cannibalism (sacrifices)-

    animal sacrifices are a cover story

    1. I agree…though it’s much much worse than that…but a creation of elites? Yes…that is the way it looks to me. But the old adage, you know, is, “The devil is in the details…”

  12. Like we used to say when I worked in Dealey Plaza:

    “Oh what a tangled web we weave
    when we practice to deceive.”

  13. Interesting thoughts. Having spent four, depressing (literaly, emotionally
    painful) years at Bob Jones University, until I finally ggot to Ohio State University,
    (and had to redo three years because BJU isn’t accredited) i understand
    where you are coming from. Have you read Crazy for God by Frank Schaeffer?
    FABULOUS! I have exchanged thoughts about our mutual, religious background and damage it has done to so many. I remember thinking while I was at BJU, “I would NEVER want to live in a country where these people were in charge…” Sometimes not just your dreams come true, but your nightmares, too!

    1. Well I was never a fundamentalist evangelical…though I went to those schools. At the time I was a very high church Episcopalian, and of course the “christians” at these institutions were constantly trying to get me “saved.” But the problem is much deeper, it is Yahwism itself.

      1. Which of course, spells death for Christianity is general as it is founded on Yahwism and Christ is made to vet the Hebrew scriptures. Certainly a supernatural being, or God himself would know better. But if we discard the entire idea of mankind requiring a sacrificial substitute, the need for a savior, esp. an incarnation of god, becomes non-existent.

  14. Its for reasons like this I have a sneaky admiration for the Lutherans and their stand against Catholic plenary dispensations. But for God sake don’t tell anyone.

      1. Heeeeyyyyy…NICE video of United States Marine Corps. Sgt. Shamar Thomas !!! I heard about that and I have been looking for EXACTLY the video you have posted. I downloaded it.

        Thanks again !

  15. Add to this conconction a dollop of another recent creation….zionism and you have a dangerous and deadly new brew; judeo/christianity. Intolerance built on ignorance.

Comments are closed.