Was Jesus responsible for Christianity? or

[chefranden]

This quote is taken from Derrick Jensen's A Language Older Than Words. Please read the quote as a starting point for this discussion. I'll pose the question after. I think that maybe this will challenge Christians and non-Christians alike.

 

Page 215.  In 1994 the Mayan Indians in Chiapas, Mexico, began a revolution, calling themselves Zapatistas.  The Revolution was a response to extreme poverty caused by control of their homeland by distant economic interest.  ("Where I live, everyone dies of illness -- they die without anyone having to kill them.")  Soon after the beginning of the insurrection, an adviser to Chase Manhattan Bank wrote a memo advising, "while Chiapas, in our opinion, does not pose as a fundamental threat to Mexican political stability, it is perceived to be so by many in the investment community.  The government will need to eliminate the Zapatistas to demonstrate their effective control of the national territory and of security policy."...

 

It is not possible to fix this culture, to halt or even significantly slow its destructiveness.  Nightmare shape shifter... this culture's destructive urges can yoke all circumstances to its advantage.  A parable of this adaptability begins with a single person.  He or she wakes up from the nightmare to reject the behavior modifications of our culture.  He or she becomes the catalyst of a popular movement advocating cooperation, sharing, and love.  Call this person Jesus, or Spartacus, or Martin Luther King Jr., or Gandhi, and this movement the Zapatistas, or the Anabaptists, or any number of names.  The response by authorities, those atop the box and the soldiers who also dream the nightmare, is swift and certain.  First, the authorities of eliminate the offending person or group, "to demonstrate their effective control of the national territory and of security policy".  This elimination has been the fate of all who effectively opposed to proceed divine right of the wealthy to control the lives of those they impoverished or enslaved: Jesus, Martin Luther King Jr., the Anabaptists, the Arawaks, the Khoikhoi, the San, and tens of millions of other individuals and groups; if we go back far enough it happened to the ancient indigenous Europeans and Middle Easterners.

 

The next and most important step in the nightmarish process of adaptation must be to co-opt and subvert the message, as Christians have done with the story of Jesus, as corporations and mainstream environmental groups do with people's desire to live on a healthy planet, as the New Age movement does with Indian symbology.

 

Here is the real lesson of the story of Jesus, the main myth of our Christian culture: oppose us and we will kill you, speak to us of love and we will mail you to a cross.  We will deify your image and ignore your words.  Within the span of three generations your precious people will be killing each other in your name.

 

The real gods of our culture -- those who are esteemed, granted great social power -- are not those who try to implement egalitarianism, who try to put in place a "siphon system*," who try to make our's into a "good" culture; the real gods are those who gain and wield control through the use of force.  The real gods are the emperors, the Kings, the presidents, the wealthy -- the Roosevelts, Rockefellers, bushes, Kennedys, Weyerhaeusers -- those who enrich themselves by just boiling land, people, everything and everyone within their reach.  The nightmare cannot be defeated on its own terms.

 

*Ruth Benedict spent twenty years trying to understand what made a "good culture." She discovered, "Nonaggression is high in societies where the individual by the same act and at the same time serves his own advantage and that of the group." Wealth is a siphon system so when "a man has meat or garden produce or horses or cattle, these give him no standing except as they pass through his hands to the tribe at large." These rules lead to "Social-institutional conditions which fuse selfishness and unselfishness, by arranging it so that when I pursue selfish' gratifications, I automatically help others, and when I try to be altruistic, I automatically reward and gratify myself."

 

You might want to pause and compare the idea of a "siphon system" with Acts 2

 

42They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. 44All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

 

Here is my dilemma. After having thought about this a great deal, (in the old days I would have said after having wrestled with this matter in prayer) I don't see that the world without Christianity would be any better than the world with it. (In the old days I would have said, "I don't see that the world with Christianity would be any better than a world without it.") So you see that this is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

 

Perhaps only my fellow old fart baby boomers will recognize the irony of this: the counterculture protest songs of my youth are now used to sell automobiles and laxatives. But this represents just what Jensen is talking about. Therefore it follows that whatever Christianity was in the beginning it is not that now. I think that it's expropriation for the benefit of Taker Culture* began with Paul and was consolidated under Constantine.

 

So finally here's the question: isn't our culture responsible for Christianity as we know it rather than Christianity as we know it being responsible for our culture?

 

*the culture clash between Taker Culture and Leaver Culture is mythologized by the story of Cain and Abel -- Abel being the representative of the Leaver Culture (usually known to us as indigenous cultures) as being murdered by Cain the representative of the Taker Culture. Even though we recognize the righteousness of Abel it is Cain who is able to expropriate the gods of the high places and consolidate them into one God who favors Kings. Taker Culture is represented by the parable of the box: " the box is full of salmon, and a man sits atop the box. Long ago this man hired armed guards to keep anyone from eating his fish. The many people who sit next to the empty river starve to death. But they do not die of starvation. They die of a belief. Everyone believes that the man atop the box owns the fish. The soldiers believe it, and they will kill to protect the illusion. The others believe it enough that they are willing to starve. But the truth is that there is a box, there is an empty river, there is a man sitting atop the box, there are guns, and there are starving people"

[Amethyst]

So finally here's the question: isn't our culture responsible for Christianity as we know it rather than Christianity as we know it being responsible for our culture?

 

When our ancestors immigrated to the U.S. from Europe, or wherever, they were already brainwashed and were descendants of people who had previously been brainwashed. Then, due to the brainwashing rules, they indoctrinated their children and so on. It's the brainwashing of the cult that is responsible for its existence and continued popularity, IMHO.

 

And it's peer pressure, too. If you're the only one in your family, including your extended family, that is having doubts, you are probably going to feel the pressure to keep believing and keep up the family tradition, no matter how hard it is. Those are the reasons I think Christianity has lasted for so long.

[indoctrinated]

So finally here's the question: isn't our culture responsible for Christianity as we know it rather than Christianity as we know it being responsible for our culture?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think this is a very insightful question and also impossible to answer. Christianity was both a product of its time and also influenced its time and culture. It has continually done this over 2000 years. So I don't think you can say one influenced the other, so much as they are intertwined and interact. I don't know what you call this. Is it symbiosis or synergy or something like that?

 

Those alternate history novels are fascinating. You know, what would the world be like if the Nazis had won the war?

What would the world be like if the Romans hadn't destroyed Jerusalem, if Paul hadn't been so successful with his gentile mission and Christianity had remained a sect within Judaism, If Constantine hadn't co-opted Christianity, and so on!

 

How can we tell?

 

Here is the real lesson of the story of Jesus, the main myth of our Christian culture: oppose us and we will kill you, speak to us of love and we will mail you to a cross.  We will deify your image and ignore your words.  Within the span of three generations your precious people will be killing each other in your name.

I am fairly sure that a first century itinerant Jewish reformer called Jesus (I'm assuming he existed) wouldn't recognise any present day form of the religion we call Christianity.

[crazy-tiger]

Strangely enough, this part sounds like a forerunner of communism...

44All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.

[Ouroboros]

Agree. I think someone, that later was named Jesus, had a very good insight in things and how things were supposed to be, but then his message was molded into a religious system to fit the users and powerhungry religious leaders.

 

If you Chef had been in that time, and preached what you are doing right now, few hundreds years later, you would have a religious group of followers that had distorted your message, and made you a semi- or maybe even a full god.

 

But I think all this goes deeper than just our culture created Christianity. I think our culture is a result of human need and greed. We just don't have it in us as a whole to create a perfect society or fairness for all. Humans created culture, culture created religion, and the want-to-have-more-s people always will use others to benefit their own greed.

 

This won't change until we have the ability to have a "multi-consciousness", were we all tap into each others thoughts on a deeper level than just words. I'm not talking supernatural telepathy here, but some day we might have the cell-phone being part of our brain, a brain-phone, were we send the thought images instead of words. Scary thought, but right now, our biggest problem is communicating ideas unfiltered to each other. Language can only go so far, and misunderstanding is a norm, rather than an exception. Will we ever get there? Is it the right way to go? I don't know. The future will tell.

[Ouroboros]

Strangely enough, this part sounds like a forerunner of communism...

Yes. There are believers that claim Jesus was the first socialist.

[Clergicide]

So finally here's the question: isn't our culture responsible for Christianity as we know it rather than Christianity as we know it being responsible for our culture?

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Both, actually.

 

On inception it was selected as a means by which to unify Rome under one belief system. Unification, of course, meaning that all would adhere to these beliefs, and these beliefs in turn would appeal to the power of the Roman leadership. It was all about control. For precisely the same reasons that Confucianism was hand selected by China to unify their provinces, so was Christianity chosen, or rather created, to unify Rome. The entire coucil of Nicea was for the express purpous of custom tailoring the doctrines to meet the essential needs of the state. China selected Confucianism because it taught honesty, respect for family (especially parents), loyalty and obedience to the state, but was presented in such a fashion that the populace would follow it. And so, it allowed the state to exact what control it needed over that populace. And like Confucianism, the mythos of Christ may have had very humble beginnings, as lessons taught to a select few, as philosophies on how to best live life. But that is not why they were chosen by governing bodies. The Dark Ages is when Christianity was working to perfection, it was doing just what Rome had intended it do...only it wasn't doing it for Rome.

 

Now, after almost two millenia of the western mindset equating to the Christian mindset..it is, and has been, responsible for our culture. The entire western world was forced on pain of death to 'believe' for centuries...how could it not but leave a lasting impression. It's negative attitude toward science, and learning still actively stands in the way of forward progress. From evolution to stem-cell research, all adamantly opposed by this fanatical obsession with the god of ignorance. The outdated, but absolute, morality that society has barely outgrown is still being preached as righteous and devine. The Christian notion that our generation is the last is clearly shown in the way the environment is treated. When our culture concerns itself with global warming, and pollution...it will be a sign that the Christian mindset has lost it's hold.

 

Christianity is all in how you define it. The Holy Bible presentation, is a creation of the Roman state. The compillation of the Judaistic laws with a promise of life everafter. But it created those before us who in turn created us. It lives on through us. And it still very much acts as the tool it was once created to be, or Bush would never have been able to weild it so effectively.

[BuddhistCommunist]

Actually, Buddhists are some of the first Socialists, I'll get back to you with a quote later

[Clergicide]

Religion is primarily a social phenomenon.  Churches may owe their origin to teachers with strong personal convictions, but these teachers have seldom had much influence upon the churches that they founded, whereas churches have had tremendous  influence on the communities in which the flourished.  To take the case that is of most interest to members of Western civilization: the teaching of Christ, as it appears in the Gospels, has had extraordinariliy little to do with the ethics of Christians.  The most important thing about Christianity, from a social and historical point of view, is not Christ but the Church, and if we are to judge of Christianity as a social force we must not go to the Gospels for our material.  Christ taught that you should give your goods to the poor, that you should not fight, that you should not go to church, and that you should not punish adultery.  Neither Catholics nor Protestants have shown any strong desire to follow His teachin in any of these respects.  Some of the Franciscans, it is true, attempted to teach the doctrine of apostolic poverty, but the Pope condemned them, and their doctrine was declared heretical.  Or, again, consider such a text as "Judge not, that ye be not judged," and ask yourself what influence such a text has had upon the Inquisition and the Ku Klux Klan.

 

Bertrand Russell "Has Religion Made Useful Contributions to Civilization?"

 

Bertrand Russell says better than I, why Jesus isn't responsible for our culture.

 

Constantine plagued the Western world with this madness. From his time until the seventeenth century people believed every syllable of Christian doctrine with the whole of their being, on pain of death. It's only been 150 years since freethinkers have begun to seriously force Christianity towards moderation. Knowledge and aquiring knowledge was sinful until just recently, and of course this retardation of science has also been a retardation of our culture. Christianity brought us undo fear and terror with it's promises of hellfire and eternal damnation. It's fed into elitism and concietedness by convincing people that God has a special interest in them, and that everything has been created for them. It excuses hatred, cruelty, and inhumanity by labeling things as wicked, evil, and unrighteous, so that this negativity can be directed at them and yet allow those directing it to feel just. It has squashed human happiness to uphold it's own twisted moralirty. It has brought us the Dark Ages, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Aryan Nation, the Ku Klux Klan, the Westward expansion, and the Conqueror of Mexico.

 

No, clearly our culture is worse off for having Christianity introduced into it. There is no chicken and egg here, just Jesus plopping a steamer in the gene pool.

[Guest aexapo]

So finally here's the question: isn't our culture responsible for Christianity as we know it rather than Christianity as we know it being responsible for our culture?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For it to be so, Christianity would have to be a benign idea capable of being used for anyone for anything -- it hasn't been so benign. Starting with Constantine, it became VERY organized -- so organized that this Imperial Department of Propaganda outlived the rest of the Empire and it's bureaucracy, and ruled the West for the next 1,000 years. It's influence continued to be massive until the protestant "reformations" which sought to liberate the mythology from it's purpose of controlling the masses for the state . . . but, in many cases, these religious liberators simply wanted to the be Pope over their own turf -- so religion in England and in Germany, etc., was still an organized tool, the Great Civilizer.

 

Religion being responsive to the changing needs of society is relatively new idea, a particularly American idea -- we made Christianity amoebic, although it's still used to control by certain religious demigogs.

 

But, you can't ignore history -- for nearly 2,000 years, it's been the pace-setter . . . it's only in the recent past that it's consumerized and responsive to the needs of the many. People made Christianity what it was and what it is, but not society at large -- just it's controllers.

 

I don't know if anything I said makes sense, but I'm tired, and I'm not going to re-write it! LOL!

[Karl-777]

....No, clearly our culture is worse off for having Christianity introduced into it. There is no chicken and egg here, just Jesus plopping a steamer in the gene pool.

 

I concur.

 

The original lies of course, are the literalizations of the OT myths, which were concocted in the 6th century BCE. Cantor, Magnusson, Armstrong, etc. have elucidated some of the details on the largely baseless constructs. Some doctrines of the early messiah-seeking zealots (there is no "messiah" and there never will be) and the utterances of some of the numerous Jesuses/Yahshuas of that era were combined with Pagan Esotericism, e.g. The Madonna and Child, which were previously extant in Egypt for at least 3,000 years, The Logos, from the Pagan Greeks/Heraclitus (c535-475BCE) and Eastern Thought, already extant in Buddhism/Hindusim. Invent the city of "Nazareth" and voila ...the literalized god-man, disciples, "genealogy", etc.! And......all of the associated "commandments" and dogmatic tripe that have been foisted upon and enslaved ignorant populaces for centuries.

 

Rome was originally a tolerant Pagan society. When it combined with Xtianity, it became one of the most hideous nightmares in all history, and Rome rotted from the inside. Xtianity was born in fascism. The fasces adorn the walls of Congress. Our Founding Fathers set up a representative government in the form of a Constitutionally Limited Republic. The increasing influence of oligarchists and fundamentalist lunatic religionists however, are indicative that our present government is no longer what our Founding Fathers intended it to be.

 

We are seeing the looting of the U.S. Treasury to the tune of billions of dollars, in part via Constitutionally illegal "faith-based" initiatives (Roberston, etc have already received many millions from the U.S. government). Here is a good read on that subject from The Nation http://www.thenation.com/blogs/outrage?pid=2145

After its highly touted unveiling, President Bush's faith-based initiative has proceeded largely under the radar. But a lack of attention hasn't shielded the program's constitutional questionability, or its brutal effectiveness.

 

In 2003--according to White House data reported by the Los Angeles Times--Bush doled out $1 billion to hundreds of faith-based groups through a little-noted executive order. More importantly, the Bush Administration used the grants to sway influential African-Americans in key battleground states and reward longtime political supporters at taxpayer expense.

 

For example, after the Rev. Herb Lusk II delivered the invocation at the 2000 Republican convention, his Philadelphia church received $1 million in federal funds. Bishop Harold Ray, who offered the invocation at a rally for Dick Cheney in Palm Beach, Florida, got $1.7 million for his South Florida ministry. In 2002 Bush personally visited Milwaukee's Bishop Sedgwick Daniels--who voted for Clinton and Gore--and later awarded him a $1.5 million grant. This fall, Daniels's face appeared on Republican Party fliers in Wisconsin, endorsing Bush as a man who "shares our views."

 

The faith-based initiatives likely played a crucial role in increasing Bush's take of the black vote, especially in targeted swing states. Funnily enough, the campaign held grant-writing workshops in St. Louis in September (when Missouri was still in play) and Miami in October.

 

Moreover, it's unclear exactly how much money is going where. The recent White House data contains a caveat that it represents all grants. Even the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's cultish Unification Church has received funding. And House Republicans allegedly blocked Democrat Chet Edwards from investigating the money flow.

 

When the initiative's first director, John Dilulio, resigned after six months on the job, he called White House policy-makers "Mayberry Machiavellis" who "consistently talked and acted as if the height of political sophistication consisted in reducing every issue to its simplest, black-and-white terms for public consumption, then steering legislative initiatives or policy proposals as far right as possible."

 

Bush plans to highlight the initiative in his State of the Union address and reintroduce the expanded legislation before the new Republican Congress. The number-one "Mayberry Machiavelli" keeps confusing holy work with partisan gain.

There it is....votes bought and paid for...with your tax dollars. Neo-con oligarchists are also cooperating with their corporate cronies in an unbridled orgy of greed, corruption and control-mongering, and like the religious leaders, grabbing and taking all they can for themselves. In other words, the same rot that initiated the dark ages is ruining this country.

 

We are already a fascist state, as per this, cited from:

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html

 

1~Powerful and Continuing Nationalism

Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

 

2~Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights

Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

 

3~Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause

The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

 

4~Supremacy of the Military

Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

 

5~Rampant Sexism

The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

 

6~Controlled Mass Media

Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

 

7~Obsession with National Security

Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

 

8~Religion and Government are Intertwined

Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

 

9~Corporate Power is Protected

The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

 

10~Labor Power is Suppressed

Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

 

11~Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts

Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

 

12~Obsession with Crime and Punishment

Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

 

13~Rampant Cronyism and Corruption

Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

 

14~Fraudulent Elections

Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

 

IMO, there are three groups largely responsible for most of the misery in human history:

1. the statist (the states is god, you may not question the state)

2. the religionist (you MUST practice my "only true" religion, in exactly my way...if you don't, you may be "disciplined" or even killed)

3. the feudal lord (which nowadays can also include corporations and drug lords protecting their "territories")

These groups have a common goal: CONROL.

They can employ a common tactic: FEAR.

 

To further illustrate the beastly dementia of the rabid fundies, one can visit this link:

http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/fundien...fundiewords.htm

 

Robertson stated:

I think George Bush is going to win in a walk. I really believe that I'm hearing from the Lord it's going to be like a blowout election of 2004. It's shaping up that way. The Lord has just blessed him.... I mean, he could make terrible mistakes and comes out of it. It doesn't make any difference what he does, good or bad. God picks him up because he's a man of prayer and God's blessing him.

....not to mention election fraud. We've heard this type of sentiment before, however:

"God gave the savior to the German people. We have faith, deep and unshakeable faith, that he (Hitler) was sent to us by God to save Germany."

~Hermann Göring ('Hitler's Elite, Shocking Profiles of the Reich's Most Notorious Henchmen,' Berkley Books, 1990)

 

As I have said before here, fundmentalism is a societal cancer which destroys humanity.

The reader will find the photo in this link highly disturbing:

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Testimonials/A...lakamy50521.htm but it is the way of the fundamentalist, regardless of religion. As per the insanity of the reconstructionists, it could very well be you experiencing a similar fate in this country. The fundamentalist has no conception of Universal Esotericisim or the Divine Within, which should be common in all religious frameworks, but only the brutality culled from the pages of a book penned by primitive barbarians, and absurdly labeled as the "word" of a deity who is "love", topped off by the fact that virtually none of it has any empirical foundation in historical or archaeological fact, and thus is not a valid authority upon which to base anything whatsoever. Today, coupled with 21st century weaponry, the fundamentalist mindset is a threat to the very existence of humanity itself.

 

Carl Sagan described one of the most brutal and savage murders in all history in his book 'Cosmos'; the killing of Alexandrian Philosopher Hypatia in 415CE by a mob of Xtian lunatics...

The last scientist who worked in the Library was a mathematician, astronomer, physicist and the head of the Neoplatonic school of Philosophy--an extraordinary range of accomplishments for any individual in any age. Her name was Hypatia. She was born in Alexandria in 370.

 

At a time when women had few options, and were treated as property, Hypatia moved freely and unselfconsciously through traditional male domains. By all accounts she was a great beauty. She had many suitors but rejected all offers of marriage. The Alexandria of Hypatia's time--by then long under Roman rule--was a city under grave strain. Slavery had sapped classical civilization of its vitality.

 

The growing Christian Church was consolidating its power and attempting to eradicate Pagan influence and culture. Hypatia stood at the epicenter of these mighty social forces. Cyril, the Archbishop of Alexandria, despised her because of her close friendship with the Roman govenor, and because she was a symbol of learning and Science, which were largely identified by the early Church with Paganism.

 

In great personal danger, she continued to teach and publish, until, in the year 415, on her way to work, she was set upon by a fanatical mob of Cyril's parishoners. They dragged her from her chariot, tore off her clothes, and, armed with abalone shells, flayed her flesh from her bones. Her remains were burned, her works obliterated, her name forgotten. Cyril was made a saint.

 

The glory of the Alexandrian Library is a dim memory. Its last remnants were destroyed soon after Hypatia's death. It was as if the entire civilization had undergone some self-inflicted brain surgery, and most of its memories, discoveries, ideas and passions were extinguished irrevocably. The loss was incalculable.....

The curtailment of stem cell research, etc., and denial of other Scientific advancements by the religionist neo-cons demonstrate that they still have this primitive, superstitious mindset. And of course, they still wish to relegate women to the status of second-class humans.

 

IMO, three of the most highly civilized societies in all history (surpassing what we have today) were the ancient Egyptians, the Minoans and the Greeks. Virtually everyone had the dignity of being a productive member of society. Most believed in a Universal Higher Power/Intelligence, and were frequently content with their own in-home shrines where they shared their Devotions within their own conceptual frameworks. They had their High Places for worship, which were infinitely more Holy than the "whited sepulchres" we see in the "high places" today.

 

In the coming conflict, blood will most certainly be spilled, as those who love Liberty and who wish to defend the Constitution and our precious Constitutionally Limited Republic and the Freedom and way of life that our Founding Fathers envisioned for us in their escape from the corrupt and tyrannical religio-statist monarchy of 18th-century England, take action. And, we WILL defend it from the deviltry of the neo-cons and religionist insanity. There will be no theocracy or biblical "law" implemented in this country.

 

Once in a while, I will lose myself in one of my favorite films, Lost Horizon (Ronald Colman & Jane Wyatt ~ 1937) If you have never seen it, treat yourself. Every time I watch it, I am reminded how very far we are from Shangri-La. I think you would probably agree.....

 

Blessed Be,

 

K