The Phora  

Go Back   The Phora > The Academy > Religion and Mythology
User Name
Password
Blog Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Religion and Mythology Believe that you can believe in beliefs, but only those of your own sect.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-12-2006, 02:40 PM
NeoNietzsche's Avatar
NeoNietzsche NeoNietzsche is offline
Have Brain, Will Cavil
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greater Judea
Posts: 1,093
Country: Israel
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr

If there is going to be any progress, it is going to happen on God's terms, not man's. Christianity has done more for the literacy of masses than any other force on earth. Pagans, on the other hand, have always believed in cyclical universe with no real "progress" or sense for the ultimate purpose for history whatsoever.
Exactly - because there is none. And the cultivation of the belief that there is has been a pretext for the maximization, rather than the minimization, of the suffering, death, and destruction that humanity must endure.

The fanatical righteousness of those who would "deliver" mankind, who would "save" humanity, leads to bloody, misbegotten "crusades" against "evil" where there is no such thing. The adjustments to, and moderations of, the intrinsic cruelty of the world which "pagans" have devised are dispensed with by fanatics who must have a God World, a Kingdom of Righteousness, a Utopia of Man.

Crusading, witch-hunting, heresy-roasting Christianity is thus the grandmother of megacidal Marxism/Communism/Bolshevism, which represent the desire for an anarchist Utopia, updated by the elimination of silly fairy tales and obvious nonsense, so as to appeal to the modern desire for "scientific" socialism by sugar-coating the anarchism with pseudo-science.

So, as long as the "progress" fanatics, the meliorists, the good-doers, the revolutionaries, the "healers" of the world, the "gospel" promoters, the Light unto the Nations - Christians, Jews, and Communists alike - seek to improve that upon which one cannot improve in essence, there will be much more of what they ostensibly don't want.
__________________
.
BEING HUMAN IS NOT ENOUGH
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-12-2006, 03:00 PM
Petr Petr is offline
Established member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 25,356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoNietzsche
Exactly - because there is none. And the cultivation of the belief that there is has been a pretext for the maximization, rather than the minimization, of the suffering, death, and destruction that humanity must endure.

The fanatical righteousness of those who would "deliver" mankind, who would "save" humanity, leads to bloody, misbegotten "crusades" against "evil" where there is no such thing. The adjustments to, and moderations of, the intrinsic cruelty of the world which "pagans" have devised are dispensed with by fanatics who must have a God World, a Kingdom of Righteousness, a Utopia of Man.

Crusading, witch-hunting, heresy-roasting Christianity is thus the grandmother of megacidal Marxism/Communism/Bolshevism, which represent the desire for an anarchist Utopia, updated by the elimination of silly fairy tales and obvious nonsense, so as to appeal to the modern desire for "scientific" socialism by sugar-coating the anarchism with pseudo-science.
Well boo-hoo, cry me a river, Mr. might-is-right Nutzi. Enlightenment-style schmaltzy wailing about the perniciously violent nature of religion is rather unbecoming from a tough guy like you.

If there is no purpose in anything, then why the heck are you advocating "minimizing suffering"? That is a purpose too, you know. A genuine, intellectually consistent heathen could well reason that maximizing carnage would be the most glorious goal of man, as many barbarian rulers have:

"The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters."


But there is a purpose, moral structure in this universe, in spite of the obsessive denials of amoralists. The Truth with big "T" does exist, and we just have to figure out where.


On the INEVITABILITY of INFALLIBILITY

Quote:
The doctrine of the infallibility of Scripture can be denied, but the concept of infallibility as such cannot be logically denied. Infallibility is an inescapable concept. If men refuse to ascribe infallibility to Scripture, it is because the concept has been transferred to something else. (Rushdoony, Systematic Theology Vol. 1, p.2)

Modern man transfers infallibility to his own reason and elevates himself as supreme judge. Man's reason is perfect, inerrant, and infallible. Although a man may err in an equation, the mistake does not abrogate the infallibility of reason. This is humanism. It's the ascribing of ultimate authority to man and his infallible word.

In this sense, life is inescapably religious. The issue is not whether or not religion should be in marketplace, but "whose" religion will dominate the marketplace? The humanist claims to use reason in his dismissal of the inerrant Scriptures, yet he never questions the integrity of his reason. Reason is untouchable because reason is infallible. For example, it is perfectly "reasonable" that an all-powerful God could preserve a perfect written revelation, but the humanist denies this as a possibility. That would open the door to a competing god.

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showth...=infallibility


Petr
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-12-2006, 03:35 PM
Petr Petr is offline
Established member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 25,356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr
If there is no purpose in anything, then why the heck are you advocating "minimizing suffering"? That is a purpose too, you know. A genuine, intellectually consistent heathen could well reason that maximizing carnage would be the most glorious goal of man, as many barbarian rulers have:
Also witness Leo Strauss - the esoteric neocon doctrine of "never-ending war" as means to maintaining a virtuous society:

http://www.secularhumanism.org/libra...drury_24_4.htm

Quote:
The Grand Inquisitor presents his ruling elite as suffering under the burden of truth for the sake of humanity. So, despite his rejection of Christ, the Grand Inquisitor is modeled on the Christian conception of a suffering God who bears the burden for humanity. In contrast, Strauss represents his ruling elite as pagan gods who are full of laughter. Instead of being grim and mournful like the Grand Inquisitor, they are intoxicated, erotic, and gay. And they are certainly not too concerned about the happiness of mere mortals. They have little pity or compassion for them. On the contrary, the pain, suffering, and tragedies of the mortals provide them with entertainment.

The Trojan wars and similar tragic atrocities were festivals for the gods, intended for their pleasure and amusement. Nietzsche thought that only when suffering is witnessed by gods did it become meaningful and heroic. Soaring high, Strauss discovered that there are no gods to witness human suffering; and finding the job vacant, he recruited his acolytes.9

Strauss thought that the best way for ordinary human beings to raise themselves above the beasts is to be utterly devoted to their nation and willing to sacrifice their lives for it. He recommended a rabid nationalism and a militant society modelled on Sparta. He thought that this was the best hope for a nation to be secure against her external enemies as well as the internal threat of decadence, sloth, and pleasure. A policy of perpetual war against a threatening enemy is the best way to ward off political decay. And if the enemy cannot be found, then it must be invented.


Nazis certainly favored the idea of perpetual war as well, wanting to Europe into one giant Sparta with Slavs playing the role of Helots - Himmler's words at Posen:

Quote:
We shall burst forth and press gradually onwards to the Urals. I hope that our generation succeeds in enabling every age group to fight in the East, so that every divisions spends a winter in the East every two or three years. Then we'll never grow soft; we'll never have uniform-bearers who only come to us because it's comfortable, because the black uniform naturally looks very attractive during peacetime. Everybody will know that if he joins the SS, there will always be a possibility of getting killed. He'll know he won't be dancing in Berlin or celebrating Carnival in Munich every other year; rather, he'll be stationed on the Eastern border in an ice cold winter. This will ensure us a healthy selection for all time.
http://www.codoh.com/incon/inconhh.html


Petr
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-12-2006, 03:50 PM
NeoNietzsche's Avatar
NeoNietzsche NeoNietzsche is offline
Have Brain, Will Cavil
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greater Judea
Posts: 1,093
Country: Israel
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr

Well boo-hoo, cry me a river, Mr. might-is-right Nutzi. Enlightenment-style schmaltzy wailing about the perniciously violent nature of religion is rather unbecoming from a tough guy like you.
I do not speak of religion in general. And the objection is to gratuitous, not pernicious, violence.

I am not a "tough guy" - but I am prepared to deliver force where it is needed, as much as is needed, by whatever means are needed.

Might is not right, but it is the source and guarantor of rights.

So, dry your tears, little Petr. Matters are not as you believe them to be.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-12-2006, 03:56 PM
Ahknaton's Avatar
Ahknaton Ahknaton is offline
Chinesium Alloy
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The road to Wigger pier
Age: 39
Posts: 17,746
Country: JollyRoger
Default

mod note: This thread is a split from here:

http://thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=11846
__________________
"Assume your adversary is capable of one trillion guesses per second." - Edward Snowden

"Truly important and significant hypotheses will be found to have 'assumptions' that are wildly inaccurate descriptive representations of reality, and, in general, the more significant the theory, the more unrealistic the assumptions" - Milton Friedman

"My life has been full of terrible misfortunes most of which never happened." - Michel de Montaigne

My thoughts on climate change: "The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature. One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future. At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after."
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-12-2006, 04:01 PM
NeoNietzsche's Avatar
NeoNietzsche NeoNietzsche is offline
Have Brain, Will Cavil
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greater Judea
Posts: 1,093
Country: Israel
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr

If there is no purpose in anything, then why the heck are you advocating "minimizing suffering"? That is a purpose too, you know.
Your statement was:

"Pagans, on the other hand, have always believed in cyclical universe with no real "progress" or sense for the ultimate purpose for history whatsoever."

I did not, in objecting to this, imply that there is "no purpose in anything".

Quote:
A genuine, intellectually consistent heathen could well reason that maximizing carnage would be the most glorious goal of man, as many barbarian rulers have:

"The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters."
I am not a barbarian - and "intellectually consistency" is not an aspect of this or any mere value judgment.

Quote:

But there is a purpose, moral structure in this universe, in spite of the obsessive denials of amoralists. The Truth with big "T" does exist, and we just have to figure out where.
Let us know when that pony in the pile turns up.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-12-2006, 04:09 PM
Petr Petr is offline
Established member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 25,356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoNietzsche
I do not speak of religion in general. And the objection is to gratuitous, not pernicious, violence.
What exactly is the difference between gratuitous and pernicious violence in your worldview?

And just why is "gratuitous violence" bad thing in your opinion?


Petr
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-12-2006, 04:11 PM
NeoNietzsche's Avatar
NeoNietzsche NeoNietzsche is offline
Have Brain, Will Cavil
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greater Judea
Posts: 1,093
Country: Israel
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr

Also witness Leo Strauss - the esoteric neocon doctrine of "never-ending war" as means to maintaining a virtuous society:

Nazis certainly favored the idea of perpetual war as well, wanting to Europe into one giant Sparta with Slavs playing the role of Helots...
Thus there's plenty of suffering, death, and destruction to be had, as a matter of administrative necessity, without multiple, gratuituous additions thereto provided by fatuous attempts to eliminate these "evils" and supposed evildoers.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-12-2006, 04:21 PM
NeoNietzsche's Avatar
NeoNietzsche NeoNietzsche is offline
Have Brain, Will Cavil
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greater Judea
Posts: 1,093
Country: Israel
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr

What exactly is the difference between gratuitous and pernicious violence in your worldview?
"Pernicious" violence is, by definition, injurious violence. Duh. Gratuitous violence is, by definition, unjustified violence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr


And just why is "gratuitous violence" bad thing in your opinion?
That is my feeling, my value judgment, my civilized counterpoise to GK's barbaric sentiments.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-12-2006, 04:23 PM
NeoNietzsche's Avatar
NeoNietzsche NeoNietzsche is offline
Have Brain, Will Cavil
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greater Judea
Posts: 1,093
Country: Israel
Default

Sorry for the tangential discussion folks, but I'm busy making myself the person from whom little Petr has learned the most.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.07201 seconds with 9 queries