Which of course allows the demonic forces a foothold on the same plane as the angelic, which is the raison d'être of the U.N. Imagine, for example, Iran on the Human Rights Commission, or Islamic countries condemning Israel as "racist." Demons in high places.
Speaking of demons in high places, we could also veer into the usual diatribe about the media/academic complex. But I want to make a slightly different point -- that we know President Trump is waging effective spiritual warfare in light of the frenzied reaction of our journalistic and tenured demons. The New York Times, or Washington Post, or CNN, don't need an ombudsman. They need an exorcist.
How do we identify demonic activity? And how do we distinguish it from the usual give and take of political conflict?
Yes, Nicolas? To scandalize the leftist, just speak the truth.
Quite the case (and we're talking about leftists here, not liberals). As we know, each leftist is a unique combination of ignorance, low IQ, dishonesty, indoctrination, and/or mental illness. One leftist might be quite intelligent but thoroughly indoctrinated to the point of tenure, while another might be stupid and malleable, yet another envious and resentful. All equally precious in the eyes of Marx!
I used to think the above gag was sufficient to explain the left, but we've seen such an acceleration of the crazy during the last 15 years or so, that some other factor must be involved. Let's first consult MOTT to see if our Unknown Friend can provide any clues.
"There are spirits whose thought and imagination are put to the service, without reserve, of that which is true, beautiful and good..." Which is precisely as it should be. We are all in contact with angelic presences all the time, or we'd be utterly lost in this cosmos. Indeed, couldn't even know that this is a cosmos.
If you have a fine intellect but aren't motivated by the love of truth, then something is deeply wrong with you. Your mind -- or soul, rather, since the soul is our organ of vertical perception -- is being influenced and possibly hijacked by something un- or anti-divine. After all, the intellect is of the same substance as the truth it seeks.
Thus, if you are one of those postmodernist cretins who don't believe in the existence of objective truth, then it follows that you don't believe in the existence of your own mind. Or worse, you willfully insist on its existence with no basis.
There are also "spirits whose will, infatuated with an aim, make use of thought and imagination so as to win others to their cause, so as to sweep them away by the river of their will." That wasn't entirely clear, but I think the main point is the misuse of our God-given freedom for anti-Divine ends.
To back up a bit, man qua man is characterized by intellect, will, and sentiment, which correspond to the true, good, and beautiful, respectively. It cannot be overemphasized that each of these -- intellect, will, and sentiment -- is an adequation; each has a proper object. If this isn't the case, then our highest gifts reduce to nothing.
Yes, literally. For if there is no truth, then of what use is the intellect? If no freedom, then what use the will? Moreover, like the Trinity, these three can be distinguished but never separated, for if we do not possess free will then we cannot know truth, and if we cannot distinguish good from evil then we cannot rightly exert or will. Likewise, if we cannot discern and create beauty, then art is impossible.
In addition to truth, beauty, and goodness converging on their own objects, the three together converge upon the highest object, AKA, God. Here again, if they don't, then there is no explanation for how and why truth is beauty and vice versa. Nor could there be such a thing as a beautiful soul.
Later MOTT speaks of two principles that must be distinguished, a serpentine one involving "opposition from which there proceeds friction which produces energy," and an angelic one involving "concordance from which comes fusion which engenders force." It is said that
"Truth springs from the clash of opinions," but actually it is not the truth which springs forth, but rather combative intellectual energy, for truth is revealed through the fusion of opinions and not through a clash. A clash certainly produces intellectual energy, but hardly ever discloses truth.
At least on the principial plane we are discussing. We're not necessarily speaking of the "prudential plane," so to speak, which is much more ambiguous. Principles are not and should not be ambiguous. It reminds me of a couple of important aphorisms:
Intelligence is the capacity for discerning principles.
And Engaging in dialogue with those who do not share our assumptions [or principles] is nothing more than a stupid way to kill time.
Notice how intelligence is rendered stupid by engaging in such argument. For example, I believe in the Constitution. Others believe in the "living Constitution," which logically reduces to no constitution at all, and its displacement (as per the above) with the will, no longer anchored in anything but force.
Or, I believe a baby is a baby, while another believes the baby is a part of the woman's body. But to even use the word "baby" (or fetus) is to acknowledge the lie. With equivalent logic one could say the mother is simply the baby's body.
Just about out of time, so we'll end with a few more aphorisms. Being that I used to be a liberal, I can certify the following as 100% true:
Let us say frankly to our opponent that we do not share his ideas because we understand them and that he does not share ours because he does not understand them.
If they understood them, then they could explain them without resorting to lies, distortions, and slander.
Two more:
The intelligent man quickly reaches conservative conclusions.
Therefore Conservatism should not be a political party but the normal attitude of every decent man.
So, what interferes with knowledge of Principles? Stay tuned.
15 comments:
Many attempts have been made to convert the middle eastern Islamist, from trading cash for oil to flat out conquering their asses. Nothing has worked. But then I happened upon this bit of scripture:
So the demons begged, “If you cast us out, send us into that herd of pigs.”
Have we tried swining and dining them?
Amen, Dr. Bob.
The reason why demons are driven out and into the heard of pigs, is so that we don't have to listen to their incessant stupid, fraudulent, amoral chatter. The NOISE needs to go away.
Hello Dr. Godwin, Anon 11:31, Christina:
With this post accusing leftists of colluding with the devil and other spirits, Dr. Godwin has arrived in the colonies circa 1618. Congratulations on Dr. Godwin's safe landing. Rest assured he will have nowhere else to go after this, being it as radical a position as any ever advanced. And retract or recant? He'd rather have a root canal.
The great people who gave rise to the Founding Fathers held similar views about witches (the leftists of their day). They managed to prosecute and execute a few. Notably they had second thoughts about it and the convicted were pardoned, some posthumously.
As a result, sorcery is not a crime in this country. Testimony involving spectral beings is no longer admissible as evidence in a court of law.
Good luck trying to reverse these rulings. "Lock her up," say ye? Nay, shall not happen.
So where does that leave Godwin? Sh*t out of luck. Ha ha ha ha.
Marinate in that Christina.
If they understood [our ideas], then they could explain them without resorting to lies, distortions, and slander.
I think some of them do understand our ideas, to a point. It’s just that they hate them; they cannot bear the implications. They resort to lies, distortion and slander because to tell the truth is to acknowledge their own sins.
Is the idea that, ethicality will always be less rewarded than sociopathy, there's nothing anybody can really do about it, but if one melds with the eternal then it wont matter?
Some may think that this idea plays right into the hands of sociopathy. Is it a lie to hope that there may be something the spiritual can do about it?
So I had a bit of disturbance this afternoon.
A middle aged lady was pacing the street, aggressively hysterical, yelling into her Bluetooth for over an hour. I live in a very quiet boring area where nothing ever happens, making this doubly disturbing. My neighbor went to calm her. Then two sheriffs arrived to calm her. They spent a couple hours with her, after which the situation seemed calmed.
Much later I went over to the neighbors house to get the scoop, when I saw that middle aged lady inside his house through the front window. Holy moley! She’s his daughter! My neighbor is as quiet and boring as the neighborhood. He’s also a Jehovah’s Witness.
Is she inhabited by demons?
Psalm 68:1-2
Let God arise, let his enemies be scattered;
let those who hate him flee before him!
As smoke is driven away, so drive them away;
as wax melts before fire,
let the wicked perish before God!
Psalm 68:30
Rebuke the company of spearmen, the multitude of the bulls, with the calves of the people, till every one submit himself with pieces of silver: scatter thou the people that delight in war.
I think one has to view that chapter within the overall context, the prescribed role for God in then-Israel's challenges with external and internal enemies. In short, worship of idolatry, covetousness and war was not the way to go.
Bob was right to post recently about concerns over a lefty professor being driven out by lefty students. The same thing has happened on the right. Mobs of people driving out their own is not the way to go.
Hi Julie, Anonymous 1:43, Christina, good morning. Yes, its Monday. Some of you were up late last night.
Julie, when you say "them", who are you talking about? Are these people you know?
Anon, your question regarding ethics versus sociopathy, as it relates to the spiritual, needs expansion/clarification. I'm not sure exactly what you meant there. It does read like a promising lead-in topic.
As for the disturbance with the woman, lets assume she's possessed rather than having an argument with someone. Possession would be the more likely scenario, right?
Christina, this here is "One Cosmos." That means God, and His enemies, are correlated as one and the same. There is only Him, and Him alone. There is nothing else.
Those who hate Him are, in fact, part of Him too. Now, if you want to argue there's more than God in existence, that means you have a disagreement with the blog author. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
It could be seen as parts of God having bad relationships with other parts. That would work in the case of the scripture quoted.
In that case, God would intercede for the parts of Himself he wanted to prevail over the other parts of Himself. Not that it would change anything in the Bible that sustains you. Congratulations on your strong faith, you will be kept safe.
Cheers,and remember all to vote Democrat. This is the time to switch over.
Sockpuppet/anon,
I think there are at least three anons here. An 'everything is God' who posts in short paragraphs (yourself), a skeptically cynical one (myself), and a third who explains Bobs posts in more detail.
I can't speak for the others, though others may accuse me of doing so. I avoid monikers since I believe that each comment should stand on its own merits. Anything else invites the ad hominem which has become all too common in todays "cognitive closure" world. As we know, bias is a strategy for conserving cognitive resources, and personal stress makes this worse. Maybe that's why that woman was hysterical, I dunno.
I'm the guy who's never met a sociopath who I thought was spiritual. Since Jesus was extremely ethical, to the point of martyrdom, I'd posit that ethicality and spirituality are close cousins. But I've met many spirituals who I perceive to have been persuaded to ally with deceptive sociopathy. Therein lies my confusion.
There are plenty of Israelis who are <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/it-s-time-to-admit-it-israeli-policy-is-what-it-is-apartheid-1.5387843?>willing to acknowledge the obvious truth of Israeli racism</a>. It isn't really controversial; the right in Israel is not as mealymouthed as the US variety, so they are openly racist. You can't run an ethnostate without racism, it turns out.
Hello fellow anonymous commentors. Welcome, good to see you here. I propose we form a coalition.
I'll be Sock Puppet #1 (SP1)
Anon 11:51, please assign yourself Sock Puppet #2 (SP2)
Third anon, please take designation Sock Puppet #3 (SP3).
You are all fine commentors, I am much enthused by the quality.
To address your post, SP2, your take on each anonymous comment standing on its own merits and not subject to ad-hominem contamination is spot on, well done. I agree Jesus is radically ethical. I do not find it surprising at all that sociopaths are unethical. I think that characteristic somewhat defines the sociopath.
Sociopaths are interesting. They have been put into cosmic play by the same Sponsor who put us in play, and you've got to wonder why He would do such a thing. I have theories.
There's a lot of things to wonder about, along the lines of "Why do bad things happen to good people?" Norman Vincent Peale wrote "your trials are meant to make you, not break you."
Poet John Keats believed the Earth was "a vale of soul-making." Therefore, I posit that life is not meant to be a pleasant experience, but it is meant to be a memorable experience nonetheless.
SP1 signing off. Good night and Godspeed.
"If you have a fine intellect but aren't motivated by the love of truth, then something is deeply wrong with you. Your mind -- or soul, rather, since the soul is our organ of vertical perception -- is being influenced and possibly hijacked by something un- or anti-divine. After all, the intellect is of the same substance as the truth it seeks."
Indeed. And a lie is what clouds, obscures, blocks your vertical perception, actively clouding, obscuring and blocking your ability of perceiving what is true. In the post yesterday, discussing the Cosmos's interior structure, it seems to me that the lie serves as spackle & wallpaper over the crystalline structure of Truth, at at some point, you go dark in some or all of your interior rooms and remain so until some Red Pill moment begins to scrape and clean the filth away so that the light can again stream in.
One of the things that is so concerning to me about Pragmatism, is that it begins with the presumption of not only that Truth can't be known, but that it isn't necessary, we only need go with what seems to 'work', work's, is moment (why... does it work? 'SSShhh!!!, and by such means small truths are spackled over into 'facts' and hung over the windows.
And the movement of 'Critical Thinking', gifted to us by those wondrous minds of Educratic Wacademics in the 1940's, is but a pragmatized spackling of Reason. Whether a matter of causation or correlation, you can track the rate of decline our schools and their products, with the cries of the need and importance of 'Critical Thinking', as unavoidable truths become encased into factoidial wallpaper, and serve to obscure the light from streaming in.
Yes, we are going dark.
Julie said "...I think some of them do understand our ideas, to a point. It’s just that they hate them; they cannot bear the implications..."
Yep, to understand them, even a little, is to become aware of the lies & distortions of their own ideas, and that cracks up the inner heat.
(Typos. Sigh. My kingdom for an edit option in Blogger comments)
Post a Comment