36 thoughts on “THE YAHWIST CULTURE IN ACTION”

  1. Daniel

    I would define perfect DNA as being one 100% human be it African,Asian,European etc. The question you have about the control group i would refer you to Tom Horns work but in general view i would point out his view based on the hebrew interlinear bibles interpretation of the offspring of the sons of God(angels) being fit extensions of their consciousness to our reality through their sons with human women, one could say proxies or tabernacles to host them whenever they so please.

    Therein comes the difference of pure human and not pure human, nothing to do with fascism at all on Gods side, just protecting his creation!

    If you go to the core of the bible what you see is that the land of the Canaanites was polluted through and through, it even mentioned the land devouring its inhabitants. The nephilim were firmly in place in the promised land at the arrival of the Hebrew’s and what is constituted as genocide by most people today i myself would refer to as divine guidance (hard as it might seem to the casual reader of the bible) to rid the land of the offspring of the angels like Og king of Bashan etc.

    The Canaanites of the time were mostly worshipers of Baal at that time and Baal has been referred to as Nimrod even by Mr Farrell, and Nimrod was referred to as Gibborim (mighty one) in the passage He was a mighty (Gibborim) hunter before the Lord. Id say that some inhabitants of the promised land were human all the way but most of them were totally immersed in the human sacrifice culture of the nephilimic surrounding they grew up in!

    Hence most of them fighting alongside their masters at the arrival of the Israelites and perishing along them human or not!

    Christ is the son of man meaning he is Adam as he should have been before the fall, through one man came death, through Christ 2:nd Adam came life abundant to everyone willing to accept his claims and accepting him as Lord and saviour. Hence id call him 100% man as being a non corrupted form of humanity and a living temple of God as Christ said all humans are in their natural state, but at the moment fallen away and being lost!

    The intention of the Nephilim if you understand from the time of the proto evangelium ie thy shall bruise his heel and the seed of man crush the head of the serpent. Meaning Satan devised his plans to destroy humanity through attempting to genetically poison humanity so that the saviour could not be born and he could show God a liar!

    Its not a question who being human or subhuman, only who is human enough and has the parentage of pure humans to be called an heir of the promises of God and that as far as im concerned is every human from Africa to Africa all around the world.
    And Gods promises concern all of them even you Daniel who’s name means God is judge and from where you have probably received your judging,questioning measuring personality which is a good thing as far as im concerned!

    Perhaps more on later have a nice day and remember every day is a day of salvation!

    1. Stig-ove,

      I think this is a demonstration of question begging. Can you show me a work other than quoting “book-god” that the Canaanites are in fact an offspring of Intelligibles and Sensibles? In other words, how is your view point corroborative with how modern scholarship views Canaanite religion as well as the witness of modern archaeology? If you deny it because it doesn’t fit with the “book-god,” would this be a clear example an ad hoc argument to save the “book-god” and also perhaps an example of stacking the deck?

      Also, you are not addressing my question on a theological level. I will ask it again:

      If ‘sons of God’ are intelligible beings, what DNA material do they supply to human offspring to make it different from the “Pure” humanity you ascribe to?

      And again, the moral question,

      How is Yahweh, “protecting” his creation, if he’s wiping out another “non-pure” humanity? Is this the message of the “gospel,” or is this rather, BAD news for some?

      1. Daniel

        The only way you can today even remotely show that the Canaanites and other people have been an offspring of intelligbles and sensibles as you put it is through myths and perhaps the works of Stephen Quayle who has dug up plenty of archeological material that has not fitted the conventional model. Even mr Farrell has used it in some of his books! Then there was on mr Heisers page long ago a book called the divine council that went into depth into the beliefs and practises of the canaanite culture+of course pseudepigraphical writings like Enoch and the book of giants etc of the dead sea scrolls.

        When it comes to Dna material mr Farrell went into some lenght in his book Babylon banksters about the elite and their colossaly stupid kids i remember the title was that i could perhaps draw on as “evidence” about difference to pure humans vs not 100% pure ones Ie bloodline families in todays world, the socalled elite+royalty!

        They are known for some out of the normal behaviour and traditions and mr Farrell pointed out on his blog about the digging up and extracting of dna from long dead royalties around the world some time back.

        That is all i have time for now have a nice day

        1. Sitg-ove,
          I don’t think you understand the nature of my question when I say: “If ‘sons of God’ are intelligible beings, what DNA material do they supply to human offspring to make it different from the “Pure” humanity you ascribe to?”

          This is a metaphysical question that is analogous to the Incarnation of Christ. You should be able to tackle it on metaphysical grounds alone to provide me an answer without DNA analysis, which you will never have.

          If you’re going to appeal to myth, then you need to be able to give a cogent argument for the myth, otherwise we can toss it to the dust bin just like any other demi-god myth. Do you give the greek and babylonian myths equal weight? Why or why not?

          I don’t know why you insist on tying your views to DOCTOR Joseph P. Farrell (I believe he has earned the title). First, DOCTOR Farrell in his book Genes, Giants, Monsters, and Men gives the Sumerian/Babylonian version equal (or more) weight vis-a-vis the biblical version, and therefore, he’s drinking from a much broader well here than you are. Second, DOCTOR Farrell’s argument is more or less a modus ponens argument that looks something like the following:

          If Group A is able to produce offspring with Group B, then they are at a minimum of the same genus.

          Group A produces offspring with Group B.

          Therefore, Group A and Group B are the same genus.

          Now we could go further and put this in the form of a syllogism to give it even greater weight to state that Group A and Group B must be the of the same genus based on modern taxonomy in biology.

          The gist here is that DOCTOR Farrell’s view is scientifically INFORMED myth that does need to wax nonsensically to make the text intelligible. It’s a straight Ockham’s Razer if the text has any historical validity, which it may or may not at all.

          You then go on to state how DOCOTOR Farrell points out certain traditions and tales about the Elite & royalty, and this once again, highlights exactly my point. The different groups are not of a different human nature in his view (or even necessarily intelligible beings, i.e. Angels), they are of different social classes OR possibly different technocratically. It would basically be like saying–on his view–that ‘sons of God’ are an Elite social class (and technocrats) that intermingle with the ‘daughters of men’ of a lower social class (regardless if one took a Sitchianite view here or not for Ancient Aliens). What he is tracing out here is a view that is ANE inclusive, and not biblically exclusive, about genetic compatibility and a genetic compatibility that is informed by modern biology and what those MORAL implications are. He resists appeals to so-called “super naturalism” because they simply are not needed to explain the texts, and it [“supernaturalism”] does no conceptual work of giving man any kind of real answers. On that score, he’s very much IN ‘Athens’ and not in ‘Jerusalem,’ but here, rather than demur the fact, both he and I happily celebrate it.

          1. correction to the above:

            The gist here is that DOCTOR Farrell’s view is scientifically INFORMED myth that does not need to wax nonsensically to make the text intelligible.

          2. Daniel

            You are clearly correct in many of your observations and i cannot deny the fact that you are clearly well read and an excellent thinker. As what comes to what they bring to humans in the form of DNA is in the way you read it in hebrew traditions like Enoch that they(Fallen angels) extended their shape or bodily materia to our dimension which it was not made for through human women. Which are interpreted as fit extensions by some, that meaning they had access to things they were not made for overstepping their boundary/mandate and even using those children as proxies to extend their agenda to our world!

            And this constitutes to me an clear attempt to conquer/extinguish the native created people made by God/Yahweh.
            Some angels especially Cherubim are depicted as four faced creatures one of them human, but i don’t see them as being needed to be of similar genus because clearly they are of superior intelligence and probably know their way around humans intimately!

            Intelligible beings as you call them is an Aristotelian term as far as i know and Dr Farrell as you point out calls that a closed system philosophy in one of his books, and that means its mostly based upon observation that is of sensory nature! Dna is in my view partly metaphysical in nature and i see it clearly needed in making my case, considering the fact that Dr Farrell has made a strong case about torsion and seeing Dna:s spiral form it makes me go hmm.

            When it comes to Greek&babylonian myths i have to say that i see them as mostly true in the cases that they corroborate and strengthen many views in the old testament&enoch about the sons of god and also the genesis creation account in the Gilgamesh epic(link between Utnapishtim&Noah).

            And as i said you and Dr Farrell are both clearly way over my head in many things you say and bring forth, and one might say on the right track. But when it comes to taking potshots at Yahwist culture id say you are barking at the wrong tree, considering that the O’ Briens that Dr Farrell citates in one of his books Genes,giants,monsters and men are of perhaps gnostic leanings and much of that thinking seeped into philosophy also id say we can see where the hostility comes from!

            I also excuse myself for not perhaps having all the terms correct since english is not my native language and myself being a Christian fool as St:Paul stated we are i excuse myself is my strength is made perfect in weakness 🙂

            As i said you clearly are an well educated and articulate man Daniel, but you are barking at the wrong tree here looking from Athens and not the Footstool of God Jerusalem. One day we will know and i’ll hope you are there to look at it with me!

          3. Stig-ove,

            I will address your points in reverse order you presented them:

            First, your admonishment that I “shall not bark up the yahwist tree” is more or less a rhetorical threat. If the book is there for thought, than it needs to be evaluated as such and sized up for what it is by philosophy and ethics. If it can’t hold up to the arguments of Lady Philosophia, then it is not objectively good for humanity as any guide to live one’s life, and therefore, unhealthy for one to construct the well rounded polis or nation-state. On this score, if you can’t handle the argumentation and have to resort to rhetoric, than you are contributing to obfuscation, sophistry, and not dialogue. I would ask that you please refrain from such rhetorical appeals and stick to dialoge and argumentation.

            Second, your arguments about the O’Brien’s being gnostics and that resulting in Yahwst “hostility” is irrelevent and ad hominem. It is rather Yahwism that promoted violent conquests and looks to future bloody Apocoplyptic “other-wordly” scenarios that will result in great crimes against humanity. The O’Brien’s book–like any other text–need to evaluated for the thought that is. That’s called doing philosophy. Furthermore, Joseph and I are not gnostic dualists of any kind. Joseph Farrell and myself are more or less modern scientifically informed (as much as we can be) Neoplatonists and Hermeticists. That philosophical tradition is capable standing its ground against the divine revelation revealers as well as having built in self-correcters in the system because it is precisely and Open System, that is, the Neoplatonic tradition is fundamentally scientific and progressive.

            Third, I’m glad you take the myths of those other views as having partially equal weight. But our different perspectives here is that I’m not looking to those myths to confirm or disconfirm my world-view, but analyzing them solely for what they are. Again, my interests here are ethics and philosophy.

            Fourth, the idea of intelligibles does not originate with Aristotle, it is of the Platonic Parmenides: “το γαρ αυτο νοειν εστιν τε και ειναι” “For to be is to be there for thought.” Thought always apprehends Being, and “to be there for thought” means distinction to which something can be said at all. The relationship between intelligibles and sensibles in the Platonic tradition is that of continuum, i.e. they are not two things. Angels or Daimones (good beings), from this perspective, are the archetype consciousness of rational beings, and therefore, the *differentiated* presence in sensible beings. There is no “closed system” here as the One [or Good Beyond Being]–which processes to Sensible reality–is nothing but “Overflow.” This understanding pretty much leaves unmotivated the notion of Angels, from the standpoint of hiearchical Being, with what is in the biblical text. The other rational possibility is to interpret it the way Dr. Farrell did above with a common genus, which also leaves completely unmotivated your assertion of a “corrupted humanity.”

            Fifth and Sixth, the notion that Angels are of “super intelligence” (which the above refutes the notion of two things), and therefore, they “know there way around humanity,” is special pleading and nothing but an appeal to supposed “higher morality.” Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that Canaanite people were out conquering and eating up the land. I would point you to the Academic Egyptologist Donald Redford’s book “Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times,” for a refutation.

            Finally, this is not an ethical theology that you are proposing, which is why I keep presenting that Yahwist theology can’t deal with the moral problem of the Canaanite Conquest. There is no justification for genocide. None. Any sensible and rational life that is there whether this be ‘engineered’ or a product of evolution, is ultimately a product of the One, nay, it is nothing other than God-in-it, and should be honored and cared for as such.

          4. Daniel

            Just a little thought here considering the moral problem of the canaanite genocide or perhaps as one could say it an very poor attempt by me to not justify but perhaps give an understanding of why it happened.

            The concept of Sin is ever present in the bible and one could refer to it as a darkening of the mind that estranges us from God! Many of the people who fought and got killed by the Israelites were given a chance to just let them pass or exchange goods for passage(most in Joshua). The amalekites however where another case totally they had fought and tried to destroy the Israelites while they fought for life in the desert, Immanuel Velikovsky’s book Ages in Chaos lays out the thesis that the amalekites where the dreaded Hyksos who invaded Egypt and on the way the Israelites caught a part of their wrath, in which they attempted to annihilate the Israelites.

            This is a side point though because in my view the life away and alienated from God brings an dark mindset that erupts occasionally in hostility towards faith and also part in hostility within philosophy and other doctrines of men who dearly attempts to make man the author of his own success/life whatever you have by negating everything that is considered God or his deeds.

            God/Yahweh is stated as a warrior but not a genocidal monster as sadly has been attempted to portray him as, here is why:

            Answer: Many people make the mistake of reading what the Bible says in Exodus 20:13“You shall not kill,” and then seeking to apply this command to war. However, the Hebrew word literally means “the intentional, premeditated killing of another person with malice; murder.” God often ordered the Israelites to go to war with other nations (1 Samuel 15:3; Joshua 4:13). God ordered the death penalty for numerous crimes (Exodus 21:12, 15; 22:19; Leviticus 20:11). So, God is not against killing in all circumstances, but only murder. War is never a good thing, but sometimes it is a necessary thing. In a world filled with sinful people (Romans 3:10-18), war is inevitable. Sometimes the only way to keep sinful people from doing great harm to the innocent is by going to war.

            The darkening of the human mind is what causes some wars to be fought the lust of the flesh, and you cannot tell to me that the Canaanites where good people considering the amount of human sacrifice evidence that has been dug up there. Which brings me to my next point:

            It is an error to say that God never supports a war. Jesus is not a pacifist. In a world filled with evil people, sometimes war is necessary to prevent even greater evil. If Hitler had not been defeated by World War II, how many more millions would have been killed? If the American Civil War had not been fought, how much longer would African-Americans have had to suffer as slaves?

            As said war is terrible and the Israelites fell to the same abominable behaviour as the former occupants and were punished accordingly! Yahweh is just and living in accordance to his decrees is not slavery or stupidity. The law of Moses was given to show people what sin is and Christ was given for redemption that simple!

            War is a terrible thing. Some wars are more “just” than others, but war is always the result of sin (Romans 3:10-18). At the same time, Ecclesiastes 3:8 declares, “There is…a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace.” In a world filled with sin, hatred, and evil (Romans 3:10-18), war is inevitable. Christians should not desire war, but neither are Christians to oppose the government God has placed in authority over them (Romans 13:1-4; 1 Peter 2:17). The most important thing we can be doing in a time of war is to be praying for godly wisdom for our leaders, praying for the safety of our military, praying for quick resolution to conflicts, and praying for a minimum of casualties among civilians on both sides (Philippians 4:6-7).

            Yahwist culture is neither slavish nor stupidly pasifistic but desires peace and prosperity, freedom of worship in whati can only say seems to me the only right way to go!

            Philosophy is good, thinking is good but all in vain without the 3:rd wheel faith in revealed scripture and seeing all in that light!

            Thank you for reading all and have a nice day

  2. Monotheism – “Debunk it.”

    It seems to me before this amplification of Yahweh there was a plurality of gods? I think Polytheism is a better idea for if you don’t like one god – So What! Just move further down the shopping aisle to maybe one god you do like on the shelf. A postmodern smorgasberg!

    There’s one thing I sense about this Yahweh-book and I don’t know if I like it or appreciate it yet? Is it just another form of MISOTHEISM? Hating God is one thing but one is still caught in a Stochelm Syndrone-like situation if you hate something too much. ( not that there is no reason not to —- like this theocity baloney which tries to … although I like how far absurdity can go? When it starts to sound impossible that is when I pay heed!)

    Indifference —- now that is a real baddie, no passion or emotion!

    Farrell, I know in this post-modern day and age where personal secrets aren’t allowed and Transparency is God or where the Private becomes Public and vice-versus- I still have a major gripe with YOU! It’s funny because most of the time all I read around here are accolades on how great you are! The flattery gets a bit nausia(ing) (as if one never heard of the ‘death of the author”) Even if the sincerity is true then it’s even worst because who likes groupies (in the sense that they are not really CONSCIOUS of themselves(driven) and can turn on you despite their proclamations of loyalty! Kind of like True Love — until your out their standing in the rain!

    I don’t think American People are really Slaves in any real sense but they are ‘slaves to distraction — detract from their distraction for one second and it gets ugly — kind of like the INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS?))

    Farrell,you hold back too much and what I don’t like is this ” It sells more books.” (I am the kind of guy who likes twenty books packed into one instead of one book spread out into twenty — it’s more affordable to people like me with ‘Beggars purses!”)

    I am a take it or leave kind of guy but this in-between serial TV shit or wait til the next episode baloney pains me. (I much rather see an End-failure of an idea that at first was Terrific. Some FLOPS are even better learning tools than the real-mccoy? I generally learn more from them but not always but then again those “One Books” are so rare!.

    Now a POINT with no end — that’s a different story. I think you weasel around this by calling it an ‘Open System and leave it at that.” I can also do that arbitrary linguistic-trick of From-Now-On we call a Camel a Rabbit —- it’s still a Camel!

    I’m still around because I know you make a POINT with this alternate his-story business(a couple of dynamite pointers — well worth furthering. You chase the wild goose. You kind of remind me of Metaphisto chasing the “cherub instead of collecting the dues from Faust at the end of Gothe’s book (Gothe couldn’t solve the problem of draining the swamps so he ends it this way !)

    The few scattered or dispersed POINT(s) is what matters. (most people never even get that far for how is the Invisible Visible?)

    I am tired of all this ALTERNATE stuff re-invented as something totally unique when it is the same old stale buns passed off as some gourmet dish!)

    I have an idea what this disquiet when I think of you as an Author is about…. but it recalls to mind I like that old sixties song === “If its your thing then you can do what you want.” It really only concerns me when I start buying more of your books?

    Alan Watts that old FOX once put the problem in words with the title of one of his chapters ===

    HOW TO BE A GENUNE FAKE! Ha, Ha!

    1. I guess I will clarify this POINT with no end?

      One could call it like George Bataille did —- AN UNFINISHED SYSTEM OF NON-KNOWLEDGE. (now that’s better)

    2. A “Died-in-the-Wool” MATERIALIST (Farrell) is Still A Sheep by Any Other Appelation. He has FALLEN into the Elite’s Manipulation of Thought/Belief Processes ($), & is Now “A Star” of that materialistic System. All Heil JPFarrell! Heil, Heil! … (life is short, right?) … E X cuses are Aplenty. The old sheep is crafty like a wolf, though: “Come Into my Coffers!…” (Hoho!) … And yes, Virginia (Paul), you & all humanimals are Total Slaves… (you apparently haven’t developed Deep-Enough perception, yet!) … and are Here To Be Consumed (Psionic Collection & Distillation) in All manners & levels. The Masters & Their Herds (Stock). Good “pets” (Elite/useful traitors of Self) get Table Scraps! … Are the Images on the Silver Screen… Real? Sigh, Cry, Laugh & Die. (Duh? OH!)

      1. Naga,

        I think your a hot duck!

        Why is it you can sing Heil, heil farrell and nobody seems to mind. I say one peep in here and the flack hits the fan?

        Anyway, I am not into this magio-satanist hocus-pocus I imagine you are pedlingly because for me that’s just a path to psychosis if one hasn’t arrived there right from the beginning at birth.

        Don’t get me wrong for it does interest my morbid dispossiton at times. Any PATHOS does if it’s genuine but I am afraid my friend (notice I didn’t call you Dorathy and I am not going to play tic for tat games or ping-pong with you)

        Naga —-we are not in Kansas! We are or at least I am in the USA(inc)period

        1. INDEED… You Are in “the usa.” InDeed. … The physical is surrounded by the superphysical… these ‘days’ oft referred to as the “supersymmetrical.” To obtain a Clear gleaning of this, google “kirlian auras”‘ & perceive how those missing limbs often still ‘feel’ them (even seek to scratch them atimes!) – note too that a fresh leaf with a cut-off tip retains the full aura field, including the “cutoff” section. Even rocks (& all!) have these electro-fields. You are not just in the “usa” – that is the “comforting/comfortable” Illusion – you are also Simultaneously in “kansas” (unknowingly for most) & Elsewhere (Field-Awareness). TriUnity. Left-Center-Right. -1 0 1+ … Oh Well, sometimes A Kiss just doesn’t wake (every) Beauty.

          1. People have neural pathways built into their grey matter so they CAN feel pain ( not in the brain of course – the brain doesn’t feel ) in their brains and think it’s in their legs. It can get truly screwy trying to explain it? (Where are the legs? Show me the legs and then I will believe you. )

            Where’s the grey matter in plants?

            I like the idea of Morphic Fields or what you call electro fields. It can get very exciting imagining about that! BUT, always a big butt in more ways than one — to get carried away with posibilities I don’t know? As far as I am concerned it’s years ahead of Our Time? Most talk of this subject is just talk or more of METAPHORICAL THINKING. And besides comparing apples with oranges leads to difficulties as if matters aren’t complicated enough?

            Now something I would think a little more about related in a small way as to how I IMAGINE you perceive matters is this RIGHT CELL TURNING ARTICLE POSITED TODAY? Very interesting if that’s the case.

            Naga – ARE YOU LEFT HANDED? Wasn’t the left-handed way taboo or thought to be evil. I remember NUNS used to punish ‘lefties’ when they caught them using that hand to write with. (I can understand why there are now so many misguided Satanists pissed off at the Church? (Never mind me I am digressing or thinking out loud, no, writing out loud)

            You say left center right -1 0 1+ while I see it as —- you must believe this, now MARCH – hup two three and don’t dare stray from formation even if it is as far out as “kirklian auras or the next current FASHION coming down to us from UP THE PIKE!”

            There’s a little Hitler in all of us!

          2. No, I Am Right-Handed. But mind, I did get a few “knuckle-busters” from those sadistic, misanthropistic Nuns (haha)! … Also, it is possible to describe the Right-Turn cellullar tendency, but not with the assembled audience (it seems). Folks operating within stringent boxed-belief systems “have a way to go yet.” … Can’t find the ‘grey-matter’ in the plant kingdom? It’s abit abstruse, so I’ll pass (never have a debate with an opponent who brings a knife to a Laser-Lyght fight). … You have a Grasp on “things” regarding “showing you the legs.” Very Admirable Awareness. Now, if you can just apply that Awareness to the “gods before, demons behind” Paradox, you’ll Soon leave them In The Dust: Creational Principle DisSolves them (In Equilibrium, E-Den). … Lastly, you are most correct: it is equally true that one may view ‘it’ as +1 0 1-. or as simple dualness (omitting the nonzero). … No marching, no mustachios… Flow & Resonate:- 3 + 1 = .5/ – (“There’s the Legs!”) Being is Emanated From E-Den, or ReFlect,ion-ProJect,ion. Presence Is Also Dual=TriUnity. Being-Presence Journey “Home” (Equiibrium). Usa has your “Body;” ‘kansas’ has your “mind.” Clean your Lens… you’LL See Clearly. (Life is ImBalance, InEquilibrium… Know you Not?)

          3. Again Naga,

            Your a hot sketch at times. In-between the mountain of rubble you wrote I detect a little bit of wisdom. You should take up Alchemy and learn how to purify all that! Fire it out of existence so what you have left or the “remainder” can do you so real good.

            I didn’t know it was a knife? Now if you called it (???) the sword of discrimination like the one that the god “Kali” holds over her head in many figurines of her then I could agree with you or see your point.( I have a vivid, grandiose opinion of myself so it’s a sword not a knife)

            Anyway I found out a simple INSTRUMENT can often times do the job very efficiently without going bankrupt!. Ask the Chinese? The West spent millions on geological technical instruments to detect earthquakes. In China where they weren’t so flush (at that time) with ‘DOLLAR BILLS” they got a bunch of “chickens” and other barnyard creatures as their early earthquake warning systems. From what I hear it not only worked almost as good but the operating costs were miniscule! (chicken feed, ha, ha! instead of taxing the hell out of it’s citizens like they do here))

            What happens when all these refined technological MACHINES break down. How about their breaking down just before the Mother of All Earthquakes Happens? What good are all these fancy instruments if in the end there is no power to run them or anyone with half-a-brain remaining to run them the right way?

            A poisoned dart flowing out of a long tube from pigney people will kill you just as effectively or maybe even better than lazer-light adolescent boy- toys!

            Now about CLEANING THE LENS — that is what I call Alchemical Refinement only it’s using a analogy of a Visual Modality. Fine! ( i used so much elbow grease scrubbing the lens that i felt like the Karate kid washing fences and the god -dam lens are still FILTHY!!!! I guess a dirty mind is a terrible thing to waste and very hard to get rid of?)

            I once had a very simple but memorable dream where I found my -sic(?dream-ego) self standing in a white room and up in front of me was a simple window revealing the clearest Blue Skies I ever seen! iIt had the kind of erridescense something like one experiences on LSD but without the synthetic plastic look! It, the sky, had a sense of Purity if that is the right nomenia to call it?

            There is a poem by Baudelaire the French Poet called the Window which many critics claim is his very best poem? The poem doesn’t have a view of the sky like in my dream. It has a flaneur walking past a window on a dark night and seeing a solitary-candle lit in dark room of some passing house.

            Now in that room I can see many so-called “demons’ hiding in the darkness. No big deal. I was never one of those kids or children who were afraid of the shadows or the dark at bedtime. I kind of loved the night for I experience something like a regeneration or creativity from BEING in absolute pitch darkness of sleep or almost total Unconsciousness!

            I said almost ‘Total and not total for a reason. I agree PRESENCE is a mighty soft but very significant word! I don’t usually or prefer not to use duality or tri-polar words to express a perspective but I can see why people do because it is appropriate. In line with this grandosity of mine — You heard this ‘put down” expression used to criticize someone = “he’s a man that stands APART from his fellow men?”

            Well, I am a man that stands apart from my -self, ha, ha!

            I am getting long winded here. One more thing I shockenly learned or discovered about dreaming experience which came from the writings of Maurice Blanchot. He stated, “The dreamers consciousness in a dream is not the dreamer. The dreamer is something or someone else OTHER THAN YOU!!!

            This was a mind-blower. I used to use the term Dream-Ego to make or prevent that realization from happening. it’s convenent for when we don’t want to recognize that sometimes we are not WHO WE ARE or are supposed to be? (OR – Who WE ARE NOT!)

            So you see I can create my own “rubble’ just like you but it’s all just more Horseshit! AND a dollar-eighty-three will buy you a cup of coffee!

            Bon Jour fellow bozos!

            Now I am off on my merry way!

        2. I should add this – almost two years ago I had two catarak (spept wrong) operations where they replace the epidermus in my eyes with lenses.

          Now on the physically I have 20-20 EAGLE-VISION again.

          Simply Marvelous!

          Now I can see my doom or eniviable demise much better, ha, ha! (yours too!)

          1. Naga,

            I am forgetting you did compliment me so I will show you some more awareness!

            These aren’t my own thoughts but i can see for myself which is why I continue to survey Existential Philosophy because as the slang saying goes —They really gGET DOWN to the nit-ty gritty.

            No pussy-footing around!

            It’s from some guy named Bichat — The passage in which Bichat describes the gradual and inexorable extinction of animal life in the indifferent survival of organic functions constitutes of one the most intense moments in “Recherches” (unfortunately the book is in a foreign language I don’t understand. This is a translated citation from some other book;

            Natural death is remarkable in that it puts an almost complete end to
            animal life long before organic life ends. Con sider man, who fades
            away at the end of a long period of old age. he dies in details: one
            after another, his external functions come to an end; all his senses
            cease to function; the usual causes of sensation no longer leave any
            impression on him. His sight grows dim, confused, and ends by not
            transmitting the image of objects; he suffers from geriatric blind-
            ness. Sounds strike his ear in a confused fashion, and soon his ear
            becomes completely insensitive to them. At this point, the cuta-
            neous layer, hardened, covered with calluses partially deprived of
            blood vessels, and now inactive, allows for only an obscure and
            indistinct sense of touch. Habit, in any case, has blunted all sen-
            sation. All the organs that depend on the skin grow weak and die;
            hair and body hair grow thin. Without the fluids that nourished it,
            most hair falls out. Odors now leave only a light impression on his
            sense of smell….Isolated in the middle of nature, partially deprived
            of his sensitive organs, the old man’s brain is soon extinguished. He
            no longer perceives much of anything; his senses are almost inca-
            pable of being exercised at all. His imagination fades away and dis-
            appears. His memory of present things is destroyed; in a second, the
            old man forgets what was just said to him, since his external senses,
            which have grown weak and are, as it were, dead, cannot confirm
            what his spirit thinks it grasps. Ideas escape him, while the images
            traced by his senses no longer retain their imprint ( Bichat 1986:
            200-201):

            ———————————————
            An intimate estrangement from the world corresponds to this
            decline of external senses:
            ——————————————————————————
            Hold on to your seats in this Magical Mystery Tour of the End! There’s more coming…

            “The old man’s movements are seldom and slow; he leaves only with
            great cost the condition in which he finds himself. Seated beside the
            fire that is heating him, he spends his days concentrating on himself,
            alienated from what surrounds him, in the absence of desires, pas-
            sions, sensations — almost without speaking, since nothing pushes
            him to break his silence. He is happy to feel that he still exists, for
            almost every other feeling has vanished….It is easy to see, from
            what we have said, that in the old man external functions are extin-
            gushed one after another and organic life continues even after ani-
            mal life has almost fully come to an end. From this point of view, the
            condition of the living being about to be annihilated by death resem-
            bles the state in which we find ourselves in the maternal womb, or
            in the state of vegetation, which lives only on the inside and is feaf
            to nature (ibid.: 202-2-3)

            ___________________________

            The description culminates in a question that is truly a bitter
            confession of powerlessness in the face of an enigma:

            “But why is it that, when we have ceased to exist on the outside, we
            continue to live on the inside, when senses, locomotion, and so forth
            are above all designed to place us in relation to bodies that nourish
            us? Why do these functions grow weaker than internal ones? Why is
            their cessation not simultaneous? I cannot succeed in fully solving
            this enigma (ibid.: 203-204).

    1. Marcos,

      This is a bit off topic but I think you might find this interesting for I think you like dark, humorous irony as you gave a few examples of it in past posts.

      I heard toward the very end of WWII in German conquered territories some people suddenly felt the urge to adopt a few remaining Jewish Children who fell through the cracks of the net ( I guess this is the inverse of a SAFETY-NET — pretty ironic isn’t it?) in order to look good when the war was over! ( I imagine it’s still a good thing for the Jewish kids even if the intentionality of the adult is a bit devious or may be called in(?) question even if it were a horribly wrong evaluation. i guess horror is horror — a little less horror then looks like a great GOOD?)

      Also I came across a book about genocide with this unusual but very thoughtful Title that I think you will understand right away > “Get-em All! Kill-em All!” ( it’s probably the same old, same old but I think I am going to scan it real quick? Sometimes there’s a rose in all that stink!)

      I am not one for Buddha, buddha, budda but there’s a touching tale or story or legend that when Buddha saw this old, happy man whose career is rummaging through the garbage because he finds some flowers still fresh enough to sell and is glad about that because he can now buy some food with it (instead of pissing and moaning like I would! Dirty Work and AH, what the f@ck – lets go get a drink! – every get stuck in…? instead — Buddha then persuaded the flower-collector to be one of his closest followers (I don’t know if that is the right word (follower). More like tag along and quit this garbage business for we’ll take care You Survivors?)

      When all is naught ——– I am going to go to Beverly Hills and look for an open-convertable Rolls Royce and jump in the back seat and when the owner comes around I’ll start crying my heart out with pleas of ” Please, please ADOPT ME! (i know I am adopted as a Son of God by Jesus through Baptism but that doesnot counter and besides who still BELIEVES that anymore.

      I take a shower every day but don’t feel like some dam Puritan who just came over from the boat called the MAYFLOWER?)

  3. Well, sure, Yahwist culture with the coefficient of mental illness. I have a friend who suffers from bipolar disorder and when in the throes of a manic episode believes she hears God tell her to do all sorts of wacky things; she sees and employs symbolism from her religious cosmology to even justify everything, including on one occasion the purchase of cases of saltine crackers and on another the destruction of drywall in her home to catch a spiritually-unclean non-existent mouse.

    If the woman discussed in the article were Buddhist, she would probably have employed that sacred mythology to justify her twisted reality. The story of the Buddha laying sacrificing his own life so that his body may serve as food for a tiger for the sake of the tiger’s cubs comes to mind. The Yahwist cosmology is not at fault here; we have at our disposal much more damning examples of the vagaries of Yahwist culture to build a case against it than the plight this poor sick woman and her murdered child.

    1. Yahwist culture *IS* mental illness. It is inherent to its existence as a conceptual foundation. Get the book.

      1. Seeing as you’ve read the book and I’ve only listened to the Byte Show interviews (I won’t have time for another two weeks to read it,) could you apply the logic presented therein to my above critique of the article?

        1. I did, you aren’t seeing it. While it is true that people will justify their actions by whatever belief system they have at their disposal, this is beside the point. The point about Yahwish is that it founded on a purposeful, violent, moral schizophrenia as a premise that is inescapable as a defining principle of its existence. This moral contradiction, this sickness is part of the very fiber of being that Yahwism is. It isn’t a twisting of the original concepts, it IS the original concept and Yahwism does not and cannot exist without it. Yahwism IS the twisting itself.

          1. And torsion is a necessary element of the physics of reality.

            I don’t like spinning though . It makes me sick!, Let’s just rid ourselves of it and see what comes.

            Makes good sense don’t you think? We don’t like it ! We don’t understand it! It’s uncomfortable, so let’s flush it!

            It amazing the wisdom we find here!

  4. This 2001 story is so sad. Religion caused this pathetic person to distroy a precious gift of God. Religion, in many cases, promotes “feeling” over reason, in direct opposition to God’s will.

    Romans 12:2 “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” (ESV) “By testing you may discern…” in this scripture implies that we MUST use the mind God gave us to “test” what we hear, think or feel. “Renewal of your mind…” is accomplished by studious research and compassionate consciousness. Ignorance IS NOT a virtue

    Simple enough…Use what God gave you.

    1. If god is all there is, then everything is a gift of god, which means that nothing is a gift of god since it loses all meaning. If god is all there is, there can be no gift for there exists no other to give the gift to. You can’t give yourself as a gift to yourself.

  5. February 17, 2012
    MILLIONS OF EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS WANT TO START WORLD WAR III … TO SPEED UP THE SECOND COMING

    The Founding Fathers weren’t particularly anti-Islam.

    But millions of Americans believe that Christ will not come again until Israel wipes out its competitors and there is widespread war in the Middle East. Some of these folks want to start a huge fire of war and death and destruction, so that Jesus comes quickly.

    Reference doc:
    http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/millions-evangelical-christians-want-start-wwiii-speed-second-coming-and-atheist-neocons

    1. The fact that Christian, Islamic and Jewish doctrines all say there will be a final judgement and many of them hope that it happens soon, so they can be carried off to heaven, makes them all potential mass murderers. They think it is God’s will and accept that the Apocalypse is going to happen. This widespread belief is a threat to human survival and should be treated as a national security threat.

      The situation with Israel and Iran could turn into WW3. Religious tolerance should be called Religious complicity. We are supposed to tolerate people wanting the World to come to an end? If we do not speak up, then we being tacit accomplices to mass murder, mental child abuse and physical child rape. Through forgiving of sin, the Catholic Church condones organized crime and prospers for the ill gotten gain of extortion and murder. The murder of native americans,africans and other non-christain by the millions is a product of church dogma, saying we can take the lands of non-christians . Jihads, Holy Wars, inquistions, crusades are all words for genocide.

      Drink of Blood, Eat Flesh, Kill your son on a cross, flood the planets and kill all the fuzzy bunnies, kittens babies because people are bad, God is love, Jesus loves you, thou shall not kill, go on a jihad or crusade, commit suicide on a cross, love your neighbor while you are killing them.

    2. Mr Farrell is a very smart and educated man that’s for sure. But his recent book Yahweh the 2 faced even if it contains plenty of good material is not sufficient to explain all of christianity!
      What he does is expose the dominionist part of churchianity as i call it. The bible exhorts believers to pray for the peace of Jerusalem psalm 122:6 not for Israel to be in war!
      If the point of Mr Farrel’s book is to point out the corruption of the established institutional monolith that is called the church he is free to do it because we know what happens when too many people dictate what to do to the rest!
      Healthy spirituality is individual and is expressed in actions of mercy and compassion towards your fellow men and also rebuking possible too big generalizations about something that i feel mr Farrell might do sometimes based upon the huge spectrum of topics he handles and generally brings well out to his readers.

      So instead of generalizing Yahwist culture to concern all believers i should admonish you good people here to consider the individual and not the institution as the personification of certain ideals. All people have some weakness organizations and institutions tend to bring all those faults forward!

      Please continue to read Mr Farrell’s books but withold yourself from too much generalization!

      And finally to mr Farrell from the bible some passages to consider;
      22] Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
      [23] That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.
      [24] And as he thus spake for himself, Festus said with a loud voice, Paul, thou art beside thyself; much learning doth make thee mad.
      [25] But he said, I am not mad, most noble Festus; but speak forth the words of truth and soberness.

      Not to imply mr Farrell is mad but much learning distances ones views from the rest of people and so once again please keep the dominionist theology in your crosshairs but be wary of throwing out the baby with the bathwater with too big generalization in your online writings.

      Your doing great work mr Farrell but some consideration is sometimes advicable!

      1. Stig-ove,

        How would you suggest an assessment of Yawist culture without an analysis of Yahweh himself? This is precisly what Dr. Farrell is doing and attempting to do. Dr. Farrell is not blaming any individuals that exist or have existed peacefully in that culture, but to assess how we are to move forward when something, for example, like the Canaanite conquest is accorded the status of Special Revelation, and how the ‘template’ of that scenario seems to be played out in history with the proclamation of ‘divine truth.’ That’s the problem, and it has to be addressed squarely, regardless if the Canaanite Conquest is a fiction (by present Archaeology).

        The Irish Neoplatonist Dr. John M. Dillon has proposed that Islamic, Jewish, and Christian cultures should completely allegorize their scriptures.

        The question Dr. Farrell has is that even good enough? Besides allegorization, should it also be reduced to the same privileged status of ALL ANE literature?

        1. Well mr Jones here is how i view some of the things that makes people see Yahweh as a genocidal monster in the old testament. Mr Farrell has through his work made many good observations especially going into the topic of the cosmic war where he builds up quite a convincing case about civilization existing before the birth of our current one. The thing is if you look from a biblical perspective and combine certain views of Mr Farrell and Michael Heiser and start to build up your case based on much what mr Farrell has written about a paleo ancient technology&civilisation and combine it with the book of Genesis interpreted by mr Heiser an semitic language phd you get an opening where you see Yahweh God creating mankind anew from scratches after an cataclysm of perhaps even galactic proportions. This scenario is laid more out in detail in G.H Pembers book earths earliest ages!

          Mr Farrell would probably concur on the galactic scale or perhaps even inter dimensional scale:)

          What then follows after the fall of Adam is the corruption of humanity on a almost absolute scale Noah being the last “Perfect” human being along with his family boarding the ark, Perfect being the same word that was used for the sacrifices of the old testament implying spotless 100% pure representant’s of whatever they were ie DNA!

          After the flood we meet the protagonists the Nephilim again implying an war waged on spiritual,physical,soul level where the Lord Yahweh created Israel to be his people who would bring the redeemer Christ to pay for the original sin of Adam&Eve and along the way made warfare on their behalf when the peoples surrounding Israel were growing bold because of Satanic nephilimic influence, him even wiping out some of them during the invasion of the promised land depicted in the book of Joshua.

          People have a hard time understanding these happenings unless view from this point of view. Questions like why being the main one!

          Many of these subjects i wrote about here mr Farrell touches upon in his great works, but forgive me if i say that his biggest weakness is his ability to seemingly penetrate every strata of history making him being in danger of seeing the forest but not the trees or vice versa.

          Please do continue on mr Farrell but me as a christian man has to say that from my spiritual point of view you have started to tread a dangerous path, as knowledge is! But in this case its going towards what humanity has defered to as the almighty and lets just say that i would tread more carefully spiritually.

          The questions he raises are valid and should be answered by people of faith as much as can be done!

          And scripture i can say from my own point of view i would never allegorize it in total, perhaps some points are to be viewed in light of Hebrew literary interpretations in this multifaceted way, but consider the fact that some archeologists are by academic indoctrination or individual supposed free thinking standards biased against faith in general.

          Be what they may be(matters of faith) i hold to the truth that all things should be viewed through science,spirit and objective reasoning based upon things like the scientific method!

          The scientific method though being the Achilles heel of it all because it requires observation and Bohm,Heisenberg others have showed us that not all things can be relied upon by observation!

          Here it is mr Jones hopefully i have made my point of view.

          1. Stig-ove,
            I’m familiar of the Hebrew and linguistic scholar Dr. Heiser and his work, and generally, I find him to be a good and honest scholar in attempting to interpret the text. His doctoral theis on the Divine Council is very interesting and opens up many avenues of interpretation.

            Nevertheless, in regards to DNA and the moral problem, 1) what do you suggest is the control group for that DNA? and 2) how would you define “perfect” DNA? And again, what is the control group for that?

            To some more theological issues, IF you had a breeding program between ‘sons of God’ on one hand and ‘daughters of men,’? Does that mean that they are or are not the same species? If not the same, then the Angels as intelligible beings, would supply absolutely nothing to the humanity of the off spring of the dauther’s of men?

            Does Christ get his humanity from Mary or the Holy Spirit in the Annunciation Narrative? If the former, then my point above is well taken, and Nephilim nonsense is corrected, which means Jews and Canaanites are of identical human nature. If the latter, then Christ is not consubstantial with the rest of humanity. If from both as a hybrid, Christ again is not consubstantial with humanity.

            Even if one could genetically prove that Nephilim were genetically different than what we see in modern homo sapien sapiens, this changes absolutely nothing about the moral imperative. For if there is a difference genetically, does that render some people “sub-human” now that need to be wiped out genocidal fashion? This is nothing but fascism and Nazism. My word, I wouldn’t even treat my dogs, who aren’t even human, the way Yahweh has treated humanity, because like everything else, they are nothing but Theophany in the form and being they possess from the One.

Comments are closed.