No, not at all. They are hysterical and frantic - but they are not over-reacting. This is indeed a very major blow against them and everything they most 'value' - and potentially the beginning of the end (but only the beginning).
They are, however, absolutely bewildered - they have near zero understanding of the situation; clearly the Establishment mostly believe their own lies (even if the mass of the being public-lied to are obviously not convinced).
The fact that the media-bureaucratic rulers are so stunned with surprise shows this more than anything. Nobody with common sense and normal perception and common sense levels of reasoning should have been surprised by the defeat of Clinton!
All this is exactly as I would most wish it to be: they are afraid but ignorant and deluded; they don't understand what is happening, so they are much less likely to be able to stop it - but will continue to fight imaginary enemies, while leaving the real threats to secular Leftism invisible and untouched.
Thursday 10 November 2016
Thought Prison: the fundamental nature of Political Correctness by Bruce G Charlton, 2011
Those of my readers who have never yet read it, may be interested to take a look at the first mini-book (about 24,000 words) I published after I became a Christian (2008-9), and simultaneously recognised the evil falsity of the 'Matrix' world of modern Western public discourse. It is now available free online.
http://thoughtprison-pc.blogspot.co.uk
I was trying, in this book, to get down to the very roots of Leftism; both in history and in the individual - and the book was written from a perspective rooted in Eastern Orthodoxy as I had it (mostly) from Father Seraphim Rose (especially the book Nihilism which he wrote as Eugene Rose before he became a monk); also from JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis.
If you think you might like to tackle Thought Prison, it is worth bearing in mind that although it is short, the style of the book is aphoristic, dense and polemical; and it would probably be wise for a serious reader to copy, paste, edit and print-out the thing; rather than merely skimming it online.
http://thoughtprison-pc.blogspot.co.uk
I was trying, in this book, to get down to the very roots of Leftism; both in history and in the individual - and the book was written from a perspective rooted in Eastern Orthodoxy as I had it (mostly) from Father Seraphim Rose (especially the book Nihilism which he wrote as Eugene Rose before he became a monk); also from JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis.
If you think you might like to tackle Thought Prison, it is worth bearing in mind that although it is short, the style of the book is aphoristic, dense and polemical; and it would probably be wise for a serious reader to copy, paste, edit and print-out the thing; rather than merely skimming it online.
Wednesday 9 November 2016
Glenn Gould - beyond 'interpretation' to approach complete musicality
With Gould it was the placing and shaping of every note and and pause which was godlike - in the sense that it was a microcosm of the creator at work.
This was made possible by a combination of a highly detailed and explicit form of musical understanding, astonishingly intense and sustained powers of concentration, and a superb technique.
This goes beyond, is at a higher level than, the question of musical 'interpretation' (with such concerns as tempo, phrasing and fidelity to the score or composer's intentions) - it is simply the primary realisation of music.
Gould was not the greatest pianist - rather he was, in his fashion, the most complete performing musician.
This was made possible by a combination of a highly detailed and explicit form of musical understanding, astonishingly intense and sustained powers of concentration, and a superb technique.
This goes beyond, is at a higher level than, the question of musical 'interpretation' (with such concerns as tempo, phrasing and fidelity to the score or composer's intentions) - it is simply the primary realisation of music.
Gould was not the greatest pianist - rather he was, in his fashion, the most complete performing musician.
Relief, not pleasure - hope but not optimism
I am very relieved that Clinton is not going to be the U.S. President; but not optimistic that Trump will himself be an agent of positive change.
This pessimism derives from his nothing/ conciliatory acceptance speech. My prediction is that the first hours and days tell you what to expect; and that if radical transformation is not there and at the front from the very start, it never will happen.
By this, Trump will be just another mainstream secular Leftist politician - better than his evil, incompetent, warmongering and dementing opponent; but not a positive good.
However, the unleashed forces that brought Trump to power... well they do fill me with both hope and also a dash of optimism!
This could be the next step towards a real spiritual awakening in the West - so far 2016 continues not to disappoint. The dominoes are lining up...
This pessimism derives from his nothing/ conciliatory acceptance speech. My prediction is that the first hours and days tell you what to expect; and that if radical transformation is not there and at the front from the very start, it never will happen.
By this, Trump will be just another mainstream secular Leftist politician - better than his evil, incompetent, warmongering and dementing opponent; but not a positive good.
However, the unleashed forces that brought Trump to power... well they do fill me with both hope and also a dash of optimism!
This could be the next step towards a real spiritual awakening in the West - so far 2016 continues not to disappoint. The dominoes are lining up...
The importance of pre-mortal life to understanding mortal life
Although not many Christians have, historically, believed in pre-mortal life; it seems to me a fact of primary importance in understanding this - our mortal life.
(Specifically, I believe the standard Mormon doctrine that we were first created as sons and daughters of God - Heavenly Parents - in spirit form; we then chose to incarnate as mortals, to die, and - thanks to the work of Christ - will be resurrected as immortal incarnates; this sequence being a spiritual progression.)
The reasons are many; but one is that it makes sense of the very different mortal lives that humans experience - including the very different times, places and parents into which we are born and live.
Since we all had a pre-mortal spirit life, we all begin mortal life with very different experiences and needs. Thus it makes sense that - across the sweep of history and throughout the world - we each have such different experiences; indeed each person's mortal experience is unique.
The belief in pre-mortal life makes human uniqueness a feature, not a bug; and the divine intention is that each unique life provides what that person most needs on the basis of their pre-mortal experience.
So, in a broad sense, we know why it is that mortal life is diverse; and since God-the-creator is our loving Father, we can be assured that - overall - this world and our own life has been designed and it operated for our eternal benefit.
Note: I should clarify that I believe in the reality of pre-mortal life not from 'logic' but from personal revelation - that is, through direct and experiential knowledge; but having had this insight, I found that a great deal of what had previously confused me 'fell into place'.
(Specifically, I believe the standard Mormon doctrine that we were first created as sons and daughters of God - Heavenly Parents - in spirit form; we then chose to incarnate as mortals, to die, and - thanks to the work of Christ - will be resurrected as immortal incarnates; this sequence being a spiritual progression.)
The reasons are many; but one is that it makes sense of the very different mortal lives that humans experience - including the very different times, places and parents into which we are born and live.
Since we all had a pre-mortal spirit life, we all begin mortal life with very different experiences and needs. Thus it makes sense that - across the sweep of history and throughout the world - we each have such different experiences; indeed each person's mortal experience is unique.
The belief in pre-mortal life makes human uniqueness a feature, not a bug; and the divine intention is that each unique life provides what that person most needs on the basis of their pre-mortal experience.
So, in a broad sense, we know why it is that mortal life is diverse; and since God-the-creator is our loving Father, we can be assured that - overall - this world and our own life has been designed and it operated for our eternal benefit.
Note: I should clarify that I believe in the reality of pre-mortal life not from 'logic' but from personal revelation - that is, through direct and experiential knowledge; but having had this insight, I found that a great deal of what had previously confused me 'fell into place'.
Tuesday 8 November 2016
Raise your consciousness level - Glenn Gould plays Beethoven
This is truly incredible, transcendent piano playing and interpretation - especially in the last section when he 'offsets' the right and left hand; it is perhaps my very favourite of the 32 Short Films about Glenn Gould (1993) - which is itself one of my very favourite movies.
What I look for in the months of the year
November -The carpet of newly fallen leaves, in a multitude of colours
December - The night sky in clear conditions - the newly naked trees
January - Primroses, nestling among the roots of a tree
February - Snowdrops
March - Crocuses, and tree blossom
April - Daffodils
May - The fresh translucent leaves on trees
June - The sheer greenness of everything
July - Hot dusty days
August - The heather in bloom
September - Inklings of autumn colours, a sweet sadness
October - The fullness of autumn colour
The sickening elites - coming soon to an institution near you
The modern Western elites are very brittle - necessarily so, because their complex, artificial and ever more unnatural ideology is under pinned merely by secular hedonic nihilism (weaker than any religion - too weak even to sustain replacement level birth rates) - which is a motivational basis that is only effective when fed by continual inputs of endorsement, confirmation and fear.
So the modern elites are sickening - both in the Good-inverted belief systems which they have elaborated and impose on The West; and in the fact that they are getting ever feebler, more cowardly... ever closer to the paralysis of despair.
At present they have whipped themselves into a frenzy against the somewhat feeble, but somewhat anti-politically-correct, ripples of 'right wing' 'populism' - i.e. the resurgence of a politics (somewhat) of protest, driven by the simple common sense and personal experience of the non-elite Westerners.
But think of how things are from the perspective of a typical elite Westerner:
You personally regard the universe as a meaningless collection of random events; you regard your own life as a brief interlude between an emergence from chaos and a descent into oblivion.
All of you readers will know these people; will (like me) probably have been one of these people yourself. You know have fragile a state it is.
How they have rejected marriage and family, how even their best human relationships are little more than temporary and expedient mutual exploitation; how their goals are limited and only possible with self-blinding - how the whole charade is kept going by holidays, treats, drink, drugs, medications, sexual fantasies (and how the reality of these things never remotely matches-up).
How for them life is only about hopes of pleasure and money, fame and status - and an awareness that these never last, and are never enough - nothing like it.
And how there is nothing else: this stuff is the whole of life; and the expectation is even worse (unless death and presumed oblivion comes quickly).
This describes most of the people who run this world - and the feebleness and brittleness of Life which sustains them.
Of course, beyond and behind these people are supernatural forces of evil who are providing the overall direction and strategy and pulling the strings of the elites (and in a few instances, possessing and directly controlling them - having been invited to do so).
But you can see that the more sickening the system the elites are sustaining, the more they become sickened - the more brittle they are; the closer to wakening up to reality; the closer to a paralysing state of demotivation and despair.
Which will bring the whole edifice tumbling... no crashing, down.
So the modern elites are sickening - both in the Good-inverted belief systems which they have elaborated and impose on The West; and in the fact that they are getting ever feebler, more cowardly... ever closer to the paralysis of despair.
At present they have whipped themselves into a frenzy against the somewhat feeble, but somewhat anti-politically-correct, ripples of 'right wing' 'populism' - i.e. the resurgence of a politics (somewhat) of protest, driven by the simple common sense and personal experience of the non-elite Westerners.
But think of how things are from the perspective of a typical elite Westerner:
You personally regard the universe as a meaningless collection of random events; you regard your own life as a brief interlude between an emergence from chaos and a descent into oblivion.
All of you readers will know these people; will (like me) probably have been one of these people yourself. You know have fragile a state it is.
How they have rejected marriage and family, how even their best human relationships are little more than temporary and expedient mutual exploitation; how their goals are limited and only possible with self-blinding - how the whole charade is kept going by holidays, treats, drink, drugs, medications, sexual fantasies (and how the reality of these things never remotely matches-up).
How for them life is only about hopes of pleasure and money, fame and status - and an awareness that these never last, and are never enough - nothing like it.
And how there is nothing else: this stuff is the whole of life; and the expectation is even worse (unless death and presumed oblivion comes quickly).
This describes most of the people who run this world - and the feebleness and brittleness of Life which sustains them.
Of course, beyond and behind these people are supernatural forces of evil who are providing the overall direction and strategy and pulling the strings of the elites (and in a few instances, possessing and directly controlling them - having been invited to do so).
But you can see that the more sickening the system the elites are sustaining, the more they become sickened - the more brittle they are; the closer to wakening up to reality; the closer to a paralysing state of demotivation and despair.
Which will bring the whole edifice tumbling... no crashing, down.
Monday 7 November 2016
God knows best (and better than I do!) what we most need to trigger a spiritual awakening of The West
Things (such as Brexit and the US Presidential election) keep turning-out the opposite of what I personally want; but then, afterwards - rather like Pollyanna - I realise that things have actually worked-out for the best after all; and that the enemy have stumbled into yet another trap!
http://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/pollyanna-is-right-or-when-it-comes-to.html
http://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/pollyanna-is-right-or-when-it-comes-to.html
The way forward - spritually - is not to weaken nor to lose, but instead strengthen and expand the individual self
From a perspective of Owen Barfield's descriptions of the evolution of consciousness, given its properly Christian basis - a great deal about the failed spiritual awakenings of the past 200 plus years becomes apparent.
There is a lot of experimentation, twisting and turning, and seeking for pre-existing solutions - but while all have contained essential truths, none of been satisfactory and all have been self-sabotaging.
For example, CG Jung's idea of Individuation was a partial insight - but being lodged in a materialist and Godless world view it was useless except as a (feel better) therapy. Or; the attempt to restore the fullness and integrity of pre-modern religions addressed many of the problems of modernity - but failed to account for the weaknesses, immaturity and stultifying aspects that led them to be so comprehensively displaced by secular modernity - and in such a feeble and helpless fashion.
In sum, nothing that has been tried will suffice; and if we regard it as possible to have a future; then it can only be something unprecedented.
One problem is that the theoretical discussions of such matters takes place in an over-complex fashion, which takes for granted that human analysis and understanding is capable of complex balancing acts... I see no evidence that this is true, and much to suggest that the actual operation of spirituality and religion is very clear and simple and resistant to nuance and complexification.
Indeed, trying to make things complex either fails altogether - with complex theory being unpacked into simple practise; or else merely weakens faith, as we see all around us.
So, I conclude that The Answer we need (and seek) must be both simple and unprecedented; and the fact that Life is 'an adventure full of failures' means that unprecedented does not mean some complex new synthesis of what went before - but some simple and new principle/s.
Such things are easily misunderstood by the human propensity to deny the unprecedented, by reducing it to merely combinations, selections and extrapolations of familiar past things. Genuine creativity is seldom recognised nor acknowledged as such - perhaps because it is so individual and personal and unique (we only perceive the results, but the creativity comes from the process and is only indirectly known from the outcome).
The destined (that is, divinely hoped-for) future of Men is not through any return, but through taking the modern isolated self and not diminishing or subordinating it - but intensifying its self-awareness, its divine awareness, its individuality; while opening-out its perceptions, perspective and natural powers.
As William Arkle understood; we need to live as God (our Heavenly parents) hope for us to live; which is ultimately not in terms of living in a psychological state of dependence, worship or perpetual thinking-about God but rather in terms of living how God wants us to live.
(We are God's children - and can understand that as a good parent He does not - ultimately - want His children always to be thinking about Him, nor modelling ourselves on Him as a template; but rather to live well as unique autonomous mature grown-ups - each of us to live an unique path, and from his or her unique nature to develop towards eer-more unique and unprecedented contributions to the whole loving and growing situation that is eternal Heavenly Life...)
And this living is to quarry-out, elaborate, our own unique destiny, in practise, with trials and errors, and not according to a standard pattern or mould; guided by an increased awareness of the loving divinity within, and the objective reality of God's creation without.
Modern Man cannot but regard a life subordinate to external guidance as passive, hence negative - and this is correct; such a life is merely a temporary expedient (albeit sometimes necessary, especially in a state of immaturity).
But, just as we should not pretend to children that they will always be children and living under authority; so we must recognise that our spiritually mature goal is a situation of extreme individual autonomy and agency, in increased knowlede-of and the maximum possible harmony-with the loving world of God's creation.
We must not be afraid; in particular we must not be afraid of Life - and indeed there is no reason why we should be afraid, given our exalted status and the safety-nets provided by Christ.
So, in confidence, but also the humility of knowing we will err and need to repent, we each of us should tackle Life, starting now and from here and without awaiting the go-ahead or permission from anybody else - not needing it; and with complete confidence that this will be effectual and significant, when viewed from that larger and spiritual scope of true-reality.
Note: For more on the ideas of Barfield, you could start here:
http://www.owenbarfield.org/articles
There is a lot of experimentation, twisting and turning, and seeking for pre-existing solutions - but while all have contained essential truths, none of been satisfactory and all have been self-sabotaging.
For example, CG Jung's idea of Individuation was a partial insight - but being lodged in a materialist and Godless world view it was useless except as a (feel better) therapy. Or; the attempt to restore the fullness and integrity of pre-modern religions addressed many of the problems of modernity - but failed to account for the weaknesses, immaturity and stultifying aspects that led them to be so comprehensively displaced by secular modernity - and in such a feeble and helpless fashion.
In sum, nothing that has been tried will suffice; and if we regard it as possible to have a future; then it can only be something unprecedented.
One problem is that the theoretical discussions of such matters takes place in an over-complex fashion, which takes for granted that human analysis and understanding is capable of complex balancing acts... I see no evidence that this is true, and much to suggest that the actual operation of spirituality and religion is very clear and simple and resistant to nuance and complexification.
Indeed, trying to make things complex either fails altogether - with complex theory being unpacked into simple practise; or else merely weakens faith, as we see all around us.
So, I conclude that The Answer we need (and seek) must be both simple and unprecedented; and the fact that Life is 'an adventure full of failures' means that unprecedented does not mean some complex new synthesis of what went before - but some simple and new principle/s.
Such things are easily misunderstood by the human propensity to deny the unprecedented, by reducing it to merely combinations, selections and extrapolations of familiar past things. Genuine creativity is seldom recognised nor acknowledged as such - perhaps because it is so individual and personal and unique (we only perceive the results, but the creativity comes from the process and is only indirectly known from the outcome).
The destined (that is, divinely hoped-for) future of Men is not through any return, but through taking the modern isolated self and not diminishing or subordinating it - but intensifying its self-awareness, its divine awareness, its individuality; while opening-out its perceptions, perspective and natural powers.
As William Arkle understood; we need to live as God (our Heavenly parents) hope for us to live; which is ultimately not in terms of living in a psychological state of dependence, worship or perpetual thinking-about God but rather in terms of living how God wants us to live.
(We are God's children - and can understand that as a good parent He does not - ultimately - want His children always to be thinking about Him, nor modelling ourselves on Him as a template; but rather to live well as unique autonomous mature grown-ups - each of us to live an unique path, and from his or her unique nature to develop towards eer-more unique and unprecedented contributions to the whole loving and growing situation that is eternal Heavenly Life...)
And this living is to quarry-out, elaborate, our own unique destiny, in practise, with trials and errors, and not according to a standard pattern or mould; guided by an increased awareness of the loving divinity within, and the objective reality of God's creation without.
Modern Man cannot but regard a life subordinate to external guidance as passive, hence negative - and this is correct; such a life is merely a temporary expedient (albeit sometimes necessary, especially in a state of immaturity).
But, just as we should not pretend to children that they will always be children and living under authority; so we must recognise that our spiritually mature goal is a situation of extreme individual autonomy and agency, in increased knowlede-of and the maximum possible harmony-with the loving world of God's creation.
We must not be afraid; in particular we must not be afraid of Life - and indeed there is no reason why we should be afraid, given our exalted status and the safety-nets provided by Christ.
So, in confidence, but also the humility of knowing we will err and need to repent, we each of us should tackle Life, starting now and from here and without awaiting the go-ahead or permission from anybody else - not needing it; and with complete confidence that this will be effectual and significant, when viewed from that larger and spiritual scope of true-reality.
Note: For more on the ideas of Barfield, you could start here:
http://www.owenbarfield.org/articles
Sunday 6 November 2016
What did the Anglo Saxons do for us?
Joseph Pearce describes how JRR Tolkien might have refuted Hilaire Belloc when HB described the Anglo Saxons as 'utterly unimportant' in the history of England:
http://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/anglo-saxon-englands-contribution-to.html
http://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/anglo-saxon-englands-contribution-to.html
Why is so much of the best Tolkien scholarship written from such a shallowly-politically-correct perspective?
...When Tolkien was himself such a powerful and influential opponent of moderenism and secular Leftism; and so persuasive an advocate of traditional society and of Christianity?
I answer the question - from my own personal experience - at the Notion Club Papers blog:
http://notionclubpapers.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/how-do-tolkien-scholars-so-thoroughly.html
I answer the question - from my own personal experience - at the Notion Club Papers blog:
http://notionclubpapers.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/how-do-tolkien-scholars-so-thoroughly.html
Why is reincarnation so rare?
My assumption is that reincarnation can happen and has happened - but that it is rare and exceptional - and very far from the normal thing for most people.
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=reincarnation
I state as a starting assumption that the Mormon view of life is correct - beginning as eternal primordial essences; we were made spirit children of God (that is, children of Heavenly Parents); who chose to be incarnated into mortal life and to die in order to enable spiritual progression towards deity - and that after our mortal death we are resurrected to continue spiritual progression, if we so choose and behave thus, towards the ultimate goal of full deity.
As an implication of this, there is a distinction between spirit, body and soul. We used to be spirit beings, but on becoming incarnated into bodies - en route to resurrection to eternal beings with bodies - the soul became a combination of the spirit and the body.
This is why mortal death is a terrible thing from which we needed to be saved by the work of Jesus Christ - because after incarnation, the death of the body is a tearing apart of that which has been fused, and it leaves the remaining spirit in a maimed state. This maimed state was described in the inhabitants of Hades or Sheol along the lines of being a demented ghost, without self-awareness or agency.
Resurrection is therefore a restoration of the unity of body and spirit which we have in mortal life - but (if we accept this gift of Christ) in a perfected and purged unity suitable for eternity.
In some primary sense, resurrection is a restoration of that 'old body' which the spirit was fused with in mortal life. So that resurrection is to be reborn with the same body - but that body made divine and immortal.
My point is that therefore reincarnation can only be either one of two:
1. Restoration. A return of the resurrected (purged and perfected) person to the world of mortal life - with the 'old body'.
The resurrected soul is thus restored to the mortal world instead of going to Heaven - presumably to do some divinely-appointed task (eg. be a prophet or angel).
2. Recycling. Some situation in which the first 'attempt' at mortal life is simply 'scrapped' - and the now-maimed human spirit is resurrected (i.e. has the integrity of its incarnated wholeness restored) but with the 'old body' restored but in a non-divine form.
With 'recycling'; presumably the first 'attempt' at mortal life had been such a failure (for whatever reason - perhaps the person did not live long enough to achieve what was necessary) - and they are simply given a second chance (if they choose to accept it) to experience mortal life a second time, and with what is in some essential fashion the same mortal body they had the first time.
My point is that if reincarnation is to be a return of a person to the mortal world and with a body, then that body must be the old-body restored; either restored in divine form or restored in a non-divine form - but the same body. The fact of having-been incarnated means that it can only be the same person if he also has the same body; and anything other than a completion of the same body represents a maiming.
In other words, our premortal spirit is not incarnated into mortal life as a ghost in a body-machine (the ghost being the real me, and my body merely its temporary dwelling); but that incarnation works by a profound process in which the spirit and body are made-one so intimately and wholly that they can never again be severed without loss of identity.
This is why true eternal life of the human soul is, and can only be, in the form of resurrected beings with bodies. But the consequence of this is that reincarnation can only be a very limited process, to achieve limited goals, as described above.
What is not possible, I think; is that you or I could be reborn multiple times, in multiple bodies, in order to experience multiple lives for the purpose of some kind of stepwise spiritual progression.
This is impossible if my assumptions are taken as correct; because such a view of repeated reincarnation necessarily assumes that the soul is actually a spirit, which can - and does - inhabit multiple bodies like a diver putting-on and taking-off multiple diving suits.
The classic view of reincarnation is therefore one which requires that we are ultimately, in our essence, only-spirits - and that bodies are no more than secondary and exchangeable garments. And this seriously challenges why - if we are spirits - eternal divine life should be as resurrected and incarnate beings, instead of simply remaining as spirits.
Indeed, the reason for mortal life becomes hard to understand at all. Why should we want or need to gain experience as mortal incarnates (with bodies) if our eternal essence does not actually need a body? Why be resurrected, indeed why be incarnated in the first place?
So - my belief is that resurrection can occur, and has occurred - but only seldom and as an exception. The normal and destined progression is that each life goes through incarnate mortality only once, en route to incarnate immortality and aimed at increasing fullness of deity.
This further implies that the full benefit of mortal life can be, and usually is, achieved from a single mortal life and death; therefore, given that most humans in history have died in the womb or as young chidlren, the main and only essential benefit of mortal life must be the experience of death.
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=reincarnation
I state as a starting assumption that the Mormon view of life is correct - beginning as eternal primordial essences; we were made spirit children of God (that is, children of Heavenly Parents); who chose to be incarnated into mortal life and to die in order to enable spiritual progression towards deity - and that after our mortal death we are resurrected to continue spiritual progression, if we so choose and behave thus, towards the ultimate goal of full deity.
As an implication of this, there is a distinction between spirit, body and soul. We used to be spirit beings, but on becoming incarnated into bodies - en route to resurrection to eternal beings with bodies - the soul became a combination of the spirit and the body.
This is why mortal death is a terrible thing from which we needed to be saved by the work of Jesus Christ - because after incarnation, the death of the body is a tearing apart of that which has been fused, and it leaves the remaining spirit in a maimed state. This maimed state was described in the inhabitants of Hades or Sheol along the lines of being a demented ghost, without self-awareness or agency.
Resurrection is therefore a restoration of the unity of body and spirit which we have in mortal life - but (if we accept this gift of Christ) in a perfected and purged unity suitable for eternity.
In some primary sense, resurrection is a restoration of that 'old body' which the spirit was fused with in mortal life. So that resurrection is to be reborn with the same body - but that body made divine and immortal.
My point is that therefore reincarnation can only be either one of two:
1. Restoration. A return of the resurrected (purged and perfected) person to the world of mortal life - with the 'old body'.
The resurrected soul is thus restored to the mortal world instead of going to Heaven - presumably to do some divinely-appointed task (eg. be a prophet or angel).
2. Recycling. Some situation in which the first 'attempt' at mortal life is simply 'scrapped' - and the now-maimed human spirit is resurrected (i.e. has the integrity of its incarnated wholeness restored) but with the 'old body' restored but in a non-divine form.
With 'recycling'; presumably the first 'attempt' at mortal life had been such a failure (for whatever reason - perhaps the person did not live long enough to achieve what was necessary) - and they are simply given a second chance (if they choose to accept it) to experience mortal life a second time, and with what is in some essential fashion the same mortal body they had the first time.
My point is that if reincarnation is to be a return of a person to the mortal world and with a body, then that body must be the old-body restored; either restored in divine form or restored in a non-divine form - but the same body. The fact of having-been incarnated means that it can only be the same person if he also has the same body; and anything other than a completion of the same body represents a maiming.
In other words, our premortal spirit is not incarnated into mortal life as a ghost in a body-machine (the ghost being the real me, and my body merely its temporary dwelling); but that incarnation works by a profound process in which the spirit and body are made-one so intimately and wholly that they can never again be severed without loss of identity.
This is why true eternal life of the human soul is, and can only be, in the form of resurrected beings with bodies. But the consequence of this is that reincarnation can only be a very limited process, to achieve limited goals, as described above.
What is not possible, I think; is that you or I could be reborn multiple times, in multiple bodies, in order to experience multiple lives for the purpose of some kind of stepwise spiritual progression.
This is impossible if my assumptions are taken as correct; because such a view of repeated reincarnation necessarily assumes that the soul is actually a spirit, which can - and does - inhabit multiple bodies like a diver putting-on and taking-off multiple diving suits.
The classic view of reincarnation is therefore one which requires that we are ultimately, in our essence, only-spirits - and that bodies are no more than secondary and exchangeable garments. And this seriously challenges why - if we are spirits - eternal divine life should be as resurrected and incarnate beings, instead of simply remaining as spirits.
Indeed, the reason for mortal life becomes hard to understand at all. Why should we want or need to gain experience as mortal incarnates (with bodies) if our eternal essence does not actually need a body? Why be resurrected, indeed why be incarnated in the first place?
So - my belief is that resurrection can occur, and has occurred - but only seldom and as an exception. The normal and destined progression is that each life goes through incarnate mortality only once, en route to incarnate immortality and aimed at increasing fullness of deity.
This further implies that the full benefit of mortal life can be, and usually is, achieved from a single mortal life and death; therefore, given that most humans in history have died in the womb or as young chidlren, the main and only essential benefit of mortal life must be the experience of death.
Saturday 5 November 2016
Faith and knowledge in this 'perfect' world
A walk at dusk by Caspar David Friedrich (c1833)
People sometimes talk as if faith were the opposite of knowledge - but faith is based on knowledge: knowledge of the nature of God.
This knowledge is made possible by the fact (the perceived fact) that God is both within us as well as outside us - that is how creation has set things-up. It means that we have a direct communication with God as externally active, and also that we have inside us a divine guidance system: a spiritual compass which (if we can read it, which isn't easy) always points in the right direction.
(From this we can know that God is both real and Good; and by 'know' I mean know - as much and with as great a certainty as we can know anything.)
Why isn't it easy? The short answer is that it isn't meant to be easy - and to understand why life isn't meant to be easy we need to go back to our inner-outer understanding of what God wants for-us.
What God wants is for each of us to be an unique individual divinity - and that is the secret of this world and this life; and why there is no single answer to the problem of living. Each person's life is an unique journey, and unique experience - we start out different and we are meant to end up even more different - yet united in Love.
For this to happen our life has to be - mostly - our own; we cannot be helped to the point that we are no longer in control - we have to make our own mistakes and learn from them; and learn from the mistakes of others - learning all over the place!
How to hold-together such a multitude of differences? Well, by faith based on knowledge and confirmed by experience - that is how.
There is no point in trying to understand the unique destiny (or life path) of everybody in the world, or of large masses about which we now little and care less - but we can understand our own situation and at least some of those we know and love; or at least we can understand it up to the point at which we need to learn from our own limitations.
This world is designed for our learning; our own specific world situation is also designed for our own needs - I am not saying that either is 'perfectly' designed for there is and can be no-such-thing as perfection in these matters - or, to put it another way, the 'perfection' is in the learning and experiences - including suffering and other unpleasant and horrible experiences; but not confined to the negatives!
So in terms of doing the job it is meant to do, at the level of our immortal souls - we would be wise to assume that this world is as near to perfect as makes no difference - it will suffice.
The question is what we (and our loved ones, that circle or group of souls with whom we are intimately 'concerned') make of it.
See also the William Arkle talk here - esepcially the discussion towards the end, over the last 10-15 minutes, which is a distillation of great wisdom from a great modern spiritual teacher: http://www.wessexresearchgroup.org/digital_08.html
'When there is no dream left worth dying for, then the people die.' - John Fitzgerald at Albion Awakening
It is the
unquantifiable and intangible – not the immediate material reality – that
carries most weight.
The bare historical record tells us that Arthur ultimately failed in his mission. He was killed in battle, and his restored Roman Britain crumbled before renewed Saxon onslaughts two generations after his death.
Yet as an icon and exemplar, his achievement is unparalleled. His legacy can be glimpsed in figures such as Joan of Arc, Charles de Gaulle and Winston Churchill, individuals who set the odds at nought and fought on for their dream when surrender seemed the only common-sense option.
These themes are pregnant with significance for our own times. 'When there is no dream left worth dying for, then the people die.' Would Carausius recognize in our society the same germs of dissolution that compromised the Roman Empire? Civilisations, history tells us, tend often to disintegrate from within...
The same holds true for the creaking spiritual and intellectual foundations of the West. Enfeebled from within by a sceptical, overweening secularism, we turn our backs on our patrimony, 'refusing to inherit' (in Roger Scruton's phrase) the deposit of religious, philosophical and political wisdom handed down by our ancestors.
Our moorings have been cut, and we are without recourse to that transcendent Deity who once animated our civilisation. If my truth is as good as your truth, then all 'truths' are equally worthless, and we leave nothing more than a vacuum for our children to inherit.
Nature, as we know, abhors a vacuum. Vacuums will be filled, one way or another. In rejecting its past, the West has laid itself open for conquest and exploitation, either at the hands of a corrupted ruling class or through the ascendancy of a rival civilization with a clearer sense of mission and identity.
http://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/arthur-of-britain-last-emperor-first_4.html
The bare historical record tells us that Arthur ultimately failed in his mission. He was killed in battle, and his restored Roman Britain crumbled before renewed Saxon onslaughts two generations after his death.
Yet as an icon and exemplar, his achievement is unparalleled. His legacy can be glimpsed in figures such as Joan of Arc, Charles de Gaulle and Winston Churchill, individuals who set the odds at nought and fought on for their dream when surrender seemed the only common-sense option.
These themes are pregnant with significance for our own times. 'When there is no dream left worth dying for, then the people die.' Would Carausius recognize in our society the same germs of dissolution that compromised the Roman Empire? Civilisations, history tells us, tend often to disintegrate from within...
The same holds true for the creaking spiritual and intellectual foundations of the West. Enfeebled from within by a sceptical, overweening secularism, we turn our backs on our patrimony, 'refusing to inherit' (in Roger Scruton's phrase) the deposit of religious, philosophical and political wisdom handed down by our ancestors.
Our moorings have been cut, and we are without recourse to that transcendent Deity who once animated our civilisation. If my truth is as good as your truth, then all 'truths' are equally worthless, and we leave nothing more than a vacuum for our children to inherit.
Nature, as we know, abhors a vacuum. Vacuums will be filled, one way or another. In rejecting its past, the West has laid itself open for conquest and exploitation, either at the hands of a corrupted ruling class or through the ascendancy of a rival civilization with a clearer sense of mission and identity.
http://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/arthur-of-britain-last-emperor-first_4.html
Friday 4 November 2016
Brexit threatened... Yeoman of England - step forward!
With the excellent news that the Government's devious policy of Brexit-in-name-only has been sabotaged by rogue members of the cosmopolitan UK-ruling elite (who have decided among themselves that Brexit is 'illegal' without a vote in Parliament, which will surely defeat it)
- the English people (who favour Brexit by approx 2:1) are having their noses rubbed in the fact that the sadistic demonic upper/ professional/ intellectual class have zero intention of stepping-off the down-escalator to national destruction and spiritual suicide
- and if the English people want a different destiny they will need to get it by new means and from new directions.
Time for the Yeomen class of England to step forward, as a body - to take-over national leadership!
By Yeoman I mean the class of skilled workers, small businesses, foremen, family farmers, Non-Commissioned Officers (the Sergeants and Corporals) - the people who actually do most of the constructive work which gets done.
I wrote about this in my 2011 anti-SJW book Thought Prison
http://thoughtprison-pc.blogspot.co.uk
Under the name of the NCO class - and their moment is now.
Members of this class familiar (uncharacteristic in their fame as writers - but of this class in terms of origin and outlook) to readers of this blog would include the likes of Charles Williams, Colin Wilson, David Icke, Joseph Pearce - as Charles Williams wrote, this 'middle class' (by one definition) has always been a major source of the most significant Englishmen.
The Yeomen wre the Anglo Saxon rulers, under the Norman Yoke; William Langland as contrasted with Chaucer; Shakespeare and Ben Jonson as contrasted with Christopher Marlowe and Philip Sidney; William Blake as contrasted with John Dryden; Charles Dickens as contrasted with Anthony Trollope... and so on.
The class is not perfect, by any means - nor do all good things come from them. The Yeomanry was the origin of Nonconformism (with its many strengths and defects) the Old Trades Union-based Labour Party (likewise with virtues as well as fatal flaws) - and was latterly corrupted, weakened and subverted by secularism, materialism and Leftism.
For the past couple of generations, the English Yeomanry has become demonised in the mainstream media and among the elites by the rise of the upper class New Left of feminism, antracism, diversity... the whole package of nihilistic hedonism.
But this moment - here and now and starting today - is when the Yeoman class could be reborn as a multitude of national leaders (not one leader, but an un-stoppable, multi-headed hydra of local leaders); if they can re-find their spiritual strength and self-confidence.
IF....
This topic is explored and the theme is elaborated - sometimes very amusingly - in today's podcast by that stalwart 'yeoman' mentioned above - David Icke:
https://www.davidicke.com/article/391884/391884
- the English people (who favour Brexit by approx 2:1) are having their noses rubbed in the fact that the sadistic demonic upper/ professional/ intellectual class have zero intention of stepping-off the down-escalator to national destruction and spiritual suicide
- and if the English people want a different destiny they will need to get it by new means and from new directions.
Time for the Yeomen class of England to step forward, as a body - to take-over national leadership!
By Yeoman I mean the class of skilled workers, small businesses, foremen, family farmers, Non-Commissioned Officers (the Sergeants and Corporals) - the people who actually do most of the constructive work which gets done.
I wrote about this in my 2011 anti-SJW book Thought Prison
http://thoughtprison-pc.blogspot.co.uk
Under the name of the NCO class - and their moment is now.
Members of this class familiar (uncharacteristic in their fame as writers - but of this class in terms of origin and outlook) to readers of this blog would include the likes of Charles Williams, Colin Wilson, David Icke, Joseph Pearce - as Charles Williams wrote, this 'middle class' (by one definition) has always been a major source of the most significant Englishmen.
The Yeomen wre the Anglo Saxon rulers, under the Norman Yoke; William Langland as contrasted with Chaucer; Shakespeare and Ben Jonson as contrasted with Christopher Marlowe and Philip Sidney; William Blake as contrasted with John Dryden; Charles Dickens as contrasted with Anthony Trollope... and so on.
The class is not perfect, by any means - nor do all good things come from them. The Yeomanry was the origin of Nonconformism (with its many strengths and defects) the Old Trades Union-based Labour Party (likewise with virtues as well as fatal flaws) - and was latterly corrupted, weakened and subverted by secularism, materialism and Leftism.
For the past couple of generations, the English Yeomanry has become demonised in the mainstream media and among the elites by the rise of the upper class New Left of feminism, antracism, diversity... the whole package of nihilistic hedonism.
But this moment - here and now and starting today - is when the Yeoman class could be reborn as a multitude of national leaders (not one leader, but an un-stoppable, multi-headed hydra of local leaders); if they can re-find their spiritual strength and self-confidence.
IF....
This topic is explored and the theme is elaborated - sometimes very amusingly - in today's podcast by that stalwart 'yeoman' mentioned above - David Icke:
https://www.davidicke.com/article/391884/391884
Thursday 3 November 2016
The battle of the conspiracy theorists - Alt Media versus Mass Media - Reality v Matrix?
There is reality and then there are the mass media - but within the Mass Media there is an Alternative Media (Alt Media) that is not very 'mass' but more of a cult kind of thing.
Indeed, these are the 'Conspiracy Theorists' we have heard so much about recently. (And I embrace the title, which should be a badge of honour - given the vileness of the mainstream). Name-calling aside; the key question is whether the Alt Media conspiracy theorists are sometimes correct in their apparently extreme allegations; and the answer is obviously yes.
Small-minority audience the Alt Media may be - but there is a lot of it, in total - and what the Alt Media are writing about today (November 3 2016 - and for the past days, weeks, months...) on the subject of the US election is an entirely different 'reality' from that of the mass media; with no overlap.
These are two utterly distinct world views.
If you want to know what the Mass Media can leave-out, completely - then look at something like voxday.blogspot.com or davidicke.com. In the Alt Media over the past days and weeks there has been reported the most shocking and disgusting 'story' about Western politics, ever; but in the mainstream mass media - crickets... Not a whisper, not a rumour.
So, who are the real Conspiracy Theorists - one, or the other, or both of them? Certainly the mainstream media are more effective and efficient at what they exclude - so much so that it represents a major datum and challenge to our understanding of ow the world works when - apparently - power is so devolved: by contrast, effective power must, in practise, be centralised.
There are also implications about the degree of coercion necessarily involved in the system - total exclusion, unanimity of memes and spun stories, the sudden 180 degree turn or volte face... all these imply extremely widespread use of corruption, bribery, coercion, intimidation - probably mainly focused on keeping the most powerful people in-line and on-message.
Perhaps we will never know the reality of the current situation, perhaps we will 'know' by the time you read this - but then what is 'knowing' in a world where reality is what-is-in-the-mass-media; and if it isn't featured and endorsed, then it doesn't exist?
But I have been absolutely astonished (yet again) at the capability of the vast and apparently chaotic Western mass media utterly to exclude what they don't want people even to hear about, and to make them think about something else altogether - despite that very different and far more shocking, attention grabbing, interesting and potentially-important information is freely available to anyone with access to the internet - at the mere click of a mouse.
But media aside; anyone with a core of religious stability, normal experience, common sense and the ability to join dots; already knows more-than-enough about what is going-on in the world (the broad brush picture, not the details; the overall aim and motivations if not the exact policies and scams) to make the right decisions and to live properly.
However, in The West, now - that actually isn't very many people!
BTW: Addicted to Distraction, my 2014 book on the mass media, is free online:
http://addictedtodistraction.blogspot.co.uk
Indeed, these are the 'Conspiracy Theorists' we have heard so much about recently. (And I embrace the title, which should be a badge of honour - given the vileness of the mainstream). Name-calling aside; the key question is whether the Alt Media conspiracy theorists are sometimes correct in their apparently extreme allegations; and the answer is obviously yes.
Small-minority audience the Alt Media may be - but there is a lot of it, in total - and what the Alt Media are writing about today (November 3 2016 - and for the past days, weeks, months...) on the subject of the US election is an entirely different 'reality' from that of the mass media; with no overlap.
These are two utterly distinct world views.
If you want to know what the Mass Media can leave-out, completely - then look at something like voxday.blogspot.com or davidicke.com. In the Alt Media over the past days and weeks there has been reported the most shocking and disgusting 'story' about Western politics, ever; but in the mainstream mass media - crickets... Not a whisper, not a rumour.
So, who are the real Conspiracy Theorists - one, or the other, or both of them? Certainly the mainstream media are more effective and efficient at what they exclude - so much so that it represents a major datum and challenge to our understanding of ow the world works when - apparently - power is so devolved: by contrast, effective power must, in practise, be centralised.
There are also implications about the degree of coercion necessarily involved in the system - total exclusion, unanimity of memes and spun stories, the sudden 180 degree turn or volte face... all these imply extremely widespread use of corruption, bribery, coercion, intimidation - probably mainly focused on keeping the most powerful people in-line and on-message.
Perhaps we will never know the reality of the current situation, perhaps we will 'know' by the time you read this - but then what is 'knowing' in a world where reality is what-is-in-the-mass-media; and if it isn't featured and endorsed, then it doesn't exist?
But I have been absolutely astonished (yet again) at the capability of the vast and apparently chaotic Western mass media utterly to exclude what they don't want people even to hear about, and to make them think about something else altogether - despite that very different and far more shocking, attention grabbing, interesting and potentially-important information is freely available to anyone with access to the internet - at the mere click of a mouse.
But media aside; anyone with a core of religious stability, normal experience, common sense and the ability to join dots; already knows more-than-enough about what is going-on in the world (the broad brush picture, not the details; the overall aim and motivations if not the exact policies and scams) to make the right decisions and to live properly.
However, in The West, now - that actually isn't very many people!
BTW: Addicted to Distraction, my 2014 book on the mass media, is free online:
http://addictedtodistraction.blogspot.co.uk
Wednesday 2 November 2016
The need for saints Now - William Wildblood at Albion Awakening
William Wildblood explains how a spiritual awakening needs the leadership of Saints:
The current idea of saints seems to be that they would be super good people in terms of the humanistic criteria of the day and would love everybody regardless, but this is a travesty and a mockery of real saintliness. Saints are not 'nice' nor do they love indiscriminately. Yes, they are inspired by love, servants of love, but first and foremost this is love of God, love of truth. If something or someone goes against that a real saint will say so and react accordingly. No doubt proper saints, like Jesus, love human beings for all their faults because God is in us all but if we are blocking the expression of God by our selfish, unenlightened ways a saint would be false to his calling if he did not say so. There is no room for tolerance in saintliness. All saints carry a sword, even the meeker ones.
https://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/the-need-for-saints.html
The current idea of saints seems to be that they would be super good people in terms of the humanistic criteria of the day and would love everybody regardless, but this is a travesty and a mockery of real saintliness. Saints are not 'nice' nor do they love indiscriminately. Yes, they are inspired by love, servants of love, but first and foremost this is love of God, love of truth. If something or someone goes against that a real saint will say so and react accordingly. No doubt proper saints, like Jesus, love human beings for all their faults because God is in us all but if we are blocking the expression of God by our selfish, unenlightened ways a saint would be false to his calling if he did not say so. There is no room for tolerance in saintliness. All saints carry a sword, even the meeker ones.
https://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/the-need-for-saints.html
What can we do?... But what should we Not do?
There is far too much helping the enemy going on.
We know who the enemy is.
We know what they want to do: subvert, destroy and invert The Good, anywhere and everywhere. Indeed, we know exactly what they are trying to do; because this is both shouted at us and subtly murmured in our ears 24/7.
We know who is working for them: the people, the organisations and corporations, the institutions...
So why do we do so much actively to assist evil in so many ways?
I can understand why people may feel that 'speaking out' is too risky, ineffectual, or perhaps counter productive: but to invest our limited time, money and energy in actively-promoting the enemy's evil agenda is... well, it is wicked and ought to be avoided; and when not avoided must be acknowledged and repented.
How many times a day do you, personally assist the enemy? - not just by staying quiet when you should speak; but by positive and endorsing words and actions; by nods and words of agreement with that which you know is a scheming lie; by time spent at work or in leisure on 'implementeing' evil plans - and by doing so way beyond the minimum; without any attempt even to weaken or minimise their impact.
How often do you reach into your pocket to contribute to subversive and evil charities, NGOs and other Leftist enterprises? How often do we expend our time and efforts in helping the very organisations that we know are strategically - sometimes covertly, often explicitly - aiming to corrupt and eliminate what we consider good.
All Mainstream Modern Institutions Are Now Corrupt - all are net evil, all are (overall, in net effect) pursuing the demonic agenda - so why are you actively helping them in this?
If all those who are hostile to the secular Left plan for Western spiritual suicide were simply to withdraw their active, diligent, beyond-the-call of duty cooperation in that which they oppose; then a process of positive change would begin within days - maybe faster.
(Because they are not oppressing us; we are oppressing each other, by diligently following their instructions.)
No coordination is necessary, no master plan - this is something for everyone, as individuals; little courage is necessary (although it would help); no significant risk need be taken - this is just Basic Common Sense.
(Let them build your jail, if they can - don't assist them with your time and money and labour!)
Start Now.
When you are being marched in formation towards an existential death camp; the very least you can do is drag your feet!
We know who the enemy is.
We know what they want to do: subvert, destroy and invert The Good, anywhere and everywhere. Indeed, we know exactly what they are trying to do; because this is both shouted at us and subtly murmured in our ears 24/7.
We know who is working for them: the people, the organisations and corporations, the institutions...
So why do we do so much actively to assist evil in so many ways?
I can understand why people may feel that 'speaking out' is too risky, ineffectual, or perhaps counter productive: but to invest our limited time, money and energy in actively-promoting the enemy's evil agenda is... well, it is wicked and ought to be avoided; and when not avoided must be acknowledged and repented.
How many times a day do you, personally assist the enemy? - not just by staying quiet when you should speak; but by positive and endorsing words and actions; by nods and words of agreement with that which you know is a scheming lie; by time spent at work or in leisure on 'implementeing' evil plans - and by doing so way beyond the minimum; without any attempt even to weaken or minimise their impact.
How often do you reach into your pocket to contribute to subversive and evil charities, NGOs and other Leftist enterprises? How often do we expend our time and efforts in helping the very organisations that we know are strategically - sometimes covertly, often explicitly - aiming to corrupt and eliminate what we consider good.
All Mainstream Modern Institutions Are Now Corrupt - all are net evil, all are (overall, in net effect) pursuing the demonic agenda - so why are you actively helping them in this?
If all those who are hostile to the secular Left plan for Western spiritual suicide were simply to withdraw their active, diligent, beyond-the-call of duty cooperation in that which they oppose; then a process of positive change would begin within days - maybe faster.
(Because they are not oppressing us; we are oppressing each other, by diligently following their instructions.)
No coordination is necessary, no master plan - this is something for everyone, as individuals; little courage is necessary (although it would help); no significant risk need be taken - this is just Basic Common Sense.
(Let them build your jail, if they can - don't assist them with your time and money and labour!)
Start Now.
When you are being marched in formation towards an existential death camp; the very least you can do is drag your feet!
Tuesday 1 November 2016
2016 - year of reckoning - unfolds its choices...
From what I perceive, 2016 is indeed unfolding to be the year of reckoning which some have predicted - perhaps best understood as the year of choice; and more exactly the year of branching choices.
Starting from the triumphant domination of secular Leftism, it looks as if looks as if more and more of the Establishment are defecting from the programme - or are on the verge of doing-so, and as if the ruling cabal is afraid - very afraid - of a major backlash. Hence the global conspiracy of evil is trying to strike prematurely with their long-prepared plan of a mega-destructive World War III (starting in the Middle East); before the lower-level Establishment and the population of the West have been brought behind the idea.
The choices of 2016 can be seen as a branching system. Early choices are worth having - but only if the choices follow through (reasonably swiftly) will they do any more than somewhat delay the plan for comprehensive destruction of Good.
The first choice is:
Secular Leftism versus Not-secular Leftism
This is about as far as we have currently reached - a negative reaction against the prevailing trends.
Then there is a choice between:
Cynical nihilism versus Spiritual Awakening
Cynical nihilism is negative - and the Cynical Nihilist decides merely to operate on the basis of his gut-feelings, which he regards as subjective - so it is merely a kind of systematic selfishness. This is better than secular Leftism, because not actively suicidal - but CN is unstable and severely suboptimal. Spiritual awakening is therefore the way forward.
But spiritual awakening has happened before - eg. in the mid 1960s - and it is likely to be poisoned at source by the (Leftist) Sexual Revolution unless it leads to religion. So the next choice is either to retain the sexual revolution - leading to New Age spirituality or to reject the sexual revolution, which leads to religion (of one sort or another):
New Age Spirituality versus Religion
We know from experience the New Age spirituality leads nowhere, so Religion is the way forward. The next step is to 'choose your religion'. For Westerners this means Christianity of something-else:
Not-Christianity versus Christianity
If Christianity is chosen, at this point it refers to real Christianity, not Liberal Christianity - which is merely secular Leftism with some Christian top-dressing.
The re-adoption of Christianity by the West would be a major step in the right direction - but it would essentially be a 'rewind'; hence the question arises: would it be enough to prevent secular Leftism returning, just as it did in the past? I don't think so.
The next step is the most controversial - because there is a choice between one or many churches of Actually Existing Christianity - which is the world of the existing denominations, each of which claims (more-or-less) exclusivity and New Christianity - which does not exist and never has existed even conceptually except among a few specific individuals.
Traditional Christianity versus Evolution of a New Christianity
The evolution of a New Christianity would probably evolve from one or more of the existing churches - but not be exactly the same as any of them currently are; nor would it be any kind of Liberalisation or assimilation to secular norms.
New Christianity would be (would need to be) a correction of those flaws in past Christianity which were exploited by secular Leftism - and would indeed be a restoration of a Christianity closer to the intention of Christ and more in-line with the nature and purposes of God.
That, I believe, is the destined way ahead - that is what Christianity was supposed to do way back around 1800 at the start of the Industrial Revolution and the first outburst of Romanticism - the kind envisaged by the likes of the poets Blake, Wordsworth and Coleridge.
So, with New Christianity I am talking about Romantic Christianity.
So the final destination of 2016 would need to be
Romantic Christianity
Which comes at the end of a many branched path of choices - so the chances of us getting to that destination seem remote; and anything less will - I believe - fail to suffice.
Nonetheless, any steps along that path would be very welcome - and we are currently seeing the first step being taken by ever more people.
We therefore now have a real chance; albeit a slim chance.
Starting from the triumphant domination of secular Leftism, it looks as if looks as if more and more of the Establishment are defecting from the programme - or are on the verge of doing-so, and as if the ruling cabal is afraid - very afraid - of a major backlash. Hence the global conspiracy of evil is trying to strike prematurely with their long-prepared plan of a mega-destructive World War III (starting in the Middle East); before the lower-level Establishment and the population of the West have been brought behind the idea.
The choices of 2016 can be seen as a branching system. Early choices are worth having - but only if the choices follow through (reasonably swiftly) will they do any more than somewhat delay the plan for comprehensive destruction of Good.
The first choice is:
Secular Leftism versus Not-secular Leftism
This is about as far as we have currently reached - a negative reaction against the prevailing trends.
Then there is a choice between:
Cynical nihilism versus Spiritual Awakening
Cynical nihilism is negative - and the Cynical Nihilist decides merely to operate on the basis of his gut-feelings, which he regards as subjective - so it is merely a kind of systematic selfishness. This is better than secular Leftism, because not actively suicidal - but CN is unstable and severely suboptimal. Spiritual awakening is therefore the way forward.
But spiritual awakening has happened before - eg. in the mid 1960s - and it is likely to be poisoned at source by the (Leftist) Sexual Revolution unless it leads to religion. So the next choice is either to retain the sexual revolution - leading to New Age spirituality or to reject the sexual revolution, which leads to religion (of one sort or another):
New Age Spirituality versus Religion
We know from experience the New Age spirituality leads nowhere, so Religion is the way forward. The next step is to 'choose your religion'. For Westerners this means Christianity of something-else:
Not-Christianity versus Christianity
If Christianity is chosen, at this point it refers to real Christianity, not Liberal Christianity - which is merely secular Leftism with some Christian top-dressing.
The re-adoption of Christianity by the West would be a major step in the right direction - but it would essentially be a 'rewind'; hence the question arises: would it be enough to prevent secular Leftism returning, just as it did in the past? I don't think so.
The next step is the most controversial - because there is a choice between one or many churches of Actually Existing Christianity - which is the world of the existing denominations, each of which claims (more-or-less) exclusivity and New Christianity - which does not exist and never has existed even conceptually except among a few specific individuals.
Traditional Christianity versus Evolution of a New Christianity
The evolution of a New Christianity would probably evolve from one or more of the existing churches - but not be exactly the same as any of them currently are; nor would it be any kind of Liberalisation or assimilation to secular norms.
New Christianity would be (would need to be) a correction of those flaws in past Christianity which were exploited by secular Leftism - and would indeed be a restoration of a Christianity closer to the intention of Christ and more in-line with the nature and purposes of God.
That, I believe, is the destined way ahead - that is what Christianity was supposed to do way back around 1800 at the start of the Industrial Revolution and the first outburst of Romanticism - the kind envisaged by the likes of the poets Blake, Wordsworth and Coleridge.
So, with New Christianity I am talking about Romantic Christianity.
So the final destination of 2016 would need to be
Romantic Christianity
Which comes at the end of a many branched path of choices - so the chances of us getting to that destination seem remote; and anything less will - I believe - fail to suffice.
Nonetheless, any steps along that path would be very welcome - and we are currently seeing the first step being taken by ever more people.
We therefore now have a real chance; albeit a slim chance.
How do we know what is going on behind the lies? By observing how other people think ('the law of projection')
We can know how other people think, despite that they are habitually dishonest and live-behind an edifice of lies, because we can observe their us of what some people have called 'projection'. In other words, people accuse others of behaving in the way they themselves behave.
Projection is a misleading term (false causality) if you understand the psychoanalytic reasoning behind it; but the actuality is straightforward enough: By and large, we understand other people's thinking in terms of how we ourselves think.
We could call this 'the law of projection'.
But there is an extra spin on this generalisation - which is made very clear in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings: The law of projection applies primarily to evil.
In other words, insofar as a person (or institution) is evil - that is to say, is strategically working for the destruction of Good - their understanding is constrained by projection.
In other words, the evil can only imagine others as being as evil as themselves. In other words, we can recognise evil by the way of thinking, by the fact that their world view is constrained by imputing evil intentions to others.
The evil cannot even imagine that others may be different from themselves, may not be evil.
Thus Sauron assumes that everybody will want to seize and use The Ring and never even considers that they would try to destroy it; Saruman assumes that Gandalf is also plotting to rule The West and keep the One Ring for himself - and so on.
In sum - evil cannot imagine Good - and cannot understand the rationale of Good: cannot predict the actions of the Good.
But, by contrast, Good can imagine evil - Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel, Aragorn are all able to understand and predict the behaviour of Sauron. But why?
It cannot be merely that any Good person also contains evil aspects (and uses these to understand evil) - because the reverse also applies: any evil person also contains Good aspects, indeed often a great deal of Good and yet the evil are blinded to Good in others...
My guess is that although everyone is a mixture of Good and evil; the evil are blinded to Good, while the Good are not blind to evil. It is not the special virtues of the Good which make them wiser; it is the malformation of thought which is induced by evil intent.
In sum; we can recognise evil firstly by its projection of evil onto others, and secondly (and more important) by the fact that it evil is constrained by this projection: evil cannot imagine Good in its enemies.
But, my point is that lies, no matter how comprehensive, do not obscure evil - we can see past the lies.
Projection is a misleading term (false causality) if you understand the psychoanalytic reasoning behind it; but the actuality is straightforward enough: By and large, we understand other people's thinking in terms of how we ourselves think.
We could call this 'the law of projection'.
But there is an extra spin on this generalisation - which is made very clear in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings: The law of projection applies primarily to evil.
In other words, insofar as a person (or institution) is evil - that is to say, is strategically working for the destruction of Good - their understanding is constrained by projection.
In other words, the evil can only imagine others as being as evil as themselves. In other words, we can recognise evil by the way of thinking, by the fact that their world view is constrained by imputing evil intentions to others.
The evil cannot even imagine that others may be different from themselves, may not be evil.
Thus Sauron assumes that everybody will want to seize and use The Ring and never even considers that they would try to destroy it; Saruman assumes that Gandalf is also plotting to rule The West and keep the One Ring for himself - and so on.
In sum - evil cannot imagine Good - and cannot understand the rationale of Good: cannot predict the actions of the Good.
But, by contrast, Good can imagine evil - Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel, Aragorn are all able to understand and predict the behaviour of Sauron. But why?
It cannot be merely that any Good person also contains evil aspects (and uses these to understand evil) - because the reverse also applies: any evil person also contains Good aspects, indeed often a great deal of Good and yet the evil are blinded to Good in others...
My guess is that although everyone is a mixture of Good and evil; the evil are blinded to Good, while the Good are not blind to evil. It is not the special virtues of the Good which make them wiser; it is the malformation of thought which is induced by evil intent.
In sum; we can recognise evil firstly by its projection of evil onto others, and secondly (and more important) by the fact that it evil is constrained by this projection: evil cannot imagine Good in its enemies.
But, my point is that lies, no matter how comprehensive, do not obscure evil - we can see past the lies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)