Christianity

[Immanuel Can]

I’m hearing here that the names of those who do all acts of life are in the book of life, and those who do acts of death are not there. Thus it follows if one acts to promote life, then one’s name is written in the book of life. And, if one acts to promote death, one’s name is not in the book of life and one is thrown into the lake of fire. Thus it follows that the names of those who awaken spirit, the spirit builders, are written into the book of life; and it follows that the names of the spirit crushers are absent.

Well, there are other verses of Scripture that help us to understand what the "book" in question is like.

For one thing, it has the names of all the living in it, and names are not added but blotted out of it, it would seem. In other words, it's the list of all those two whom God has granted life...but some refuse the life, and are expunged as a result. That's kind of unusual, because we normally think of a book as something that gets written into; but here, it's a book in which, instead, names are taken out. That's very interesting.

Picture the process of erasing accounts from a ledger. Once there is no longer a use for the calculation, or some error has been found in it, the accountant turns the pencil around, and uses the eraser to expunge the flawed or useless figures.

But the book of life is mentioned explicitly elsewhere, too. See Psalm 69: 24-28, which is itself the psalm of a crushed spirit:

Pour out Your indignation on them,
And may Your burning anger overtake them.
May their camp be desolated;
May there be none living in their tents.
For they have persecuted him whom You Yourself struck,
And they tell of the pain of those whom You have wounded.
Add guilt to their guilt,
And may they not come into Your righteousness.
May they be wiped out of the book of life,
And may they not be recorded with the righteous.

Now, elsewhere, this psalm is applied directly to Christ Himself...lthe "them," the men who deserve this judgment, have "persecuted Him whom You Yourself (i.e. God) struck." But as it also says, back in verse 9, "the taunts of those who taunt You have fallen on me." In other words, when God was pouring out His judgment on this One, these murderers "kicked him when He was down," so to speak; they poured unkindness on the Righteous One as He suffered, and "taunted" the God who had provided such a salvation. The parallels are very clear.

The basis of their being wiped out of the book of life is not mere ordinary meanness, or some paltry sin, nor even of having crushed the spirits of other mere men, but rather the sin of having rejected and poured abuse on the Son of God, while He was atoning for their sin. They have rejected Him as their provision or sacrifice, and have despised the One who suffered for them. They have taunted God. Thus, they have rejected righteousness, and have no future in the plans of God; their lives are thus of no further consequence: they have chosen an eternal death (Mark 9:47-48). Having no longer a relationship with the Source of Life itself (Matt. 7:23), they are no longer in the book of the (truly) living.

It's thus a particular kind of life one must be promoting...not just all life. It has to be faith in the Son of God, and that life that is in Him (John 1:4). And losing one's place in the book of life is not premised on mere ordinary misdeeds, but on "taunting" God by rejecting and despising HIs provision through His Son.

Again, all who go to Hell choose it. That's how they do it.

[Immanuel Can]

when I go to discuss THAT God with 'you', "immanuel can", 'you' cower, run away, and hide...

You're so funny, Age.

You actually imagine you're some kind of challenge or threat. But everybody -- not just me -- knows you're crazy and incoherent, and don't know anything close to as much as you imagine you do, and so most of the time, they just ignore most of your messages, just as I do. That's why you find yourself furiously writing message after message, to which people often do not bother to respond at all. They're not paying attention anymore.

People aren't afraid of you, Sport: they find you utterly uninteresting, because you can't actually track an argument, follow a lucid thought, or provide any insight. If you had some humility or willingness to listen, instead of just a litany of off-point objections that merely show you don't know what you're dealing with at all, they might engage with you. But you don't stay focused long enough for them to bother.

But maybe I'm the only guy who will explain that to you. Still, if you realized it, you could get yourself out of that unpleasant situation; so in the interest of helping you along. I point it out to you.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I think that there are a bunch of problems that we can all agree on despite our political differences: the growing wealth gap in many countries; the military-industrial complex and the wars it drives; the encroachment via widespread surveillance of the police state; the lack of affordable housing in many countries; the lack of meaningful political participation for the average citizen in most countries other than (at best) ticking a few boxes on a voting card every few years; and on and on they go.

Again, as I wrote many pages back in this thread: I am not convinced that the supposed victory of nominalism (over realism) those many centuries ago had any meaningful effect on the supposedly declining trajectory of Western society, whereas, that it did, and decidedly so, to our downfall, is RW's main causal hypothesis.

In my own case I see a different set of problems yet I would not exclude those you mention. I think that Weaver draws a picture of the origin of spiritual ailment. And at least to my mind, though I may be susceptible to reduction, I tend to agree that it is as a result of a loss in metaphysical grounding that a range of ills arise. Weaver is just one who explores the causal issue.

The odd thing here -- in relation to the topic of this thread -- is that I see it as needful and necessary that the metaphysical ground be defended, not undermined. And I see Immanuel, Nick and Walker as trying to hold onto the structure that Christianity certainly provides. The irony (if that is the right term) is that by opposing Immanuel in specific areas it would seem that I am trying to undermine the metaphysical principles therein. But that is not so.

Weaver, in any case, offers a way to grasp the decadence of men in relation to 'solid principles' that he describes in metaphysical terms. But because he locates a deviation so far back in time it seems to me rather impossible to be able to verify that, indeed, at that juncture Occidental civilization went off the rails.

He does a far better job in other of his works (his essays) in exploring Occidental (and American) nihilism, though he does touch on this in Ideas Have Consequences.

I wonder if you have spent any time listening to any of the videos of James Lindsay? He is one who examines the causal chains that have led to the wide penetration of acidic ideas deeply into the core of people.

The issues that you mention as important and defining (in your paragraph above) I certainly recognize as potent factors. Some would say (and I assume you believe) they are the main causes of social breakdown and conflict. So that if those were addressed the conflicts and breakdowns would resolve? Could be. But I suspect that analysis is superficial.

AJ: Unless I am very mistaken in just a few weeks (in the US) a swell of reaction will manifest itself. The tones of Culture War will increase some notches. The crisis deepen. It will get worse (as we all intuit) before it gets better.

HB: Hmm. That sounds worrying. On what are you basing this prediction?

What I can say is that there is, or there sure seems to be, a rising groundswell of reaction against the Biden presidency. Perhaps because I read widely I am aware of a gathering concentration of idea-sets that discredit the ideological platform of what we are forced to describe as *the Democrats*. It looks as though the Republican spectrum will gain control again (of the government) and when this happens I think a new wave of social and cultural conflict will burst forth. That is why I say things will get worse before they get better. Any trends toward social conservatism will not be tolerated by those committed, I think blindly, to hyper-liberal tendencies. They will flip out and when they flip out all bets are off.

The US is in the throws of an identity crisis. The very identity of the country is under assault. Newer factions want, quite literally, to rewrite the nation's meaning and purpose. It is 'culture war' and now in a far more overt phase.

Essentially, I base my prediction on the fact that wide swaths of people do not agree with the undermining influence of radical Left policies. (To grasp what I mean here I would suggest some of the talks by James Lindsay who works directly in this area of exposing *radical* ideology). There is a developing reaction against what I have termed Hyper-Liberalism. I fully regard these factions as reactionary and, like those who read Weaver and many others, they seek idea-platforms from which they can turn back the tide. There is a low-intensity civil war going on now. It cannot, in my view, be denied. I cannot see how it will be resolved.

Defining what that *tide* is and if it is good or bad or some mixture is what is difficult.

[Walker]

IC:

Fascinating. Thank you for the analysis and the supporting Christian references. Some but not all of what I’m hearing in those previous two postings to Walker, quoting Walker:

All are born pure and by their own actions, their identifying name either remains in the Book of Life or gets removed from the book. The nature of their actions determine if their identity (as name) stays in the book of life, or disappears from the book of life. If their actions comport with Christian teachings, their identity as name, stays. If not, their identity as name in the book of life, as associated with life, disappears. The name as identity gets erased if penciled in, whited-out if inked in. Where does the name go? Maybe, into one of those other books. The Lake of Fire Book.

… and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life;

Implication? The heathen who have never heard of Christianity are never-the-less written into the Book of Life by default, and by their actions will be removed if they act to crush the spirit. Acts that crush the spirit are detected by their attempts to crush the spirit of God, of which man is but a made image. Acts that crush the spirit of men who attempt to crush the spirit of God, in man, are therefore righteous acts.

Since you generously shared so much content, I’ll be back eventually, for some pondering.

[Walker]

I cannot see how it will be resolved.

I can.

[Dontaskme]

when I go to discuss THAT God with 'you', "immanuel can", 'you' cower, run away, and hide...

You're so funny, Age.

You actually imagine you're some kind of challenge or threat. But everybody -- not just me -- knows you're crazy and incoherent, and don't know anything close to as much as you imagine you do, and so most of the time, they just ignore most of your messages, just as I do. That's why you find yourself furiously writing message after message, to which people often do not bother to respond at all. They're not paying attention anymore.

People aren't afraid of you, Sport: they find you utterly uninteresting, because you can't actually track an argument, follow a lucid thought, or provide any insight. If you had some humility or willingness to listen, instead of just a litany of off-point objections that merely show you don't know what you're dealing with at all, they might engage with you. But you don't stay focused long enough for them to bother.

But maybe I'm the only guy who will explain that to you. Still, if you realized it, you could get yourself out of that unpleasant situation; so in the interest of helping you along. I point it out to you.

Of what use is a philosopher who doesn't hurt anybody's feelings?

Again, all who go to Hell choose it. That's how they do it. But maybe I'm the only guy who will explain that to you.

Quite a hellish choice of philosophy tbh.

[Walker]

I cannot see how it will be resolved.

I can.

When Lincoln took office he was detested by The Swamp of his day. He fired the Swamp on the sound reasoning that he couldn't accomplish anything while surrounded by adversity. Not long after he was gone, that power to fire The Swamp was removed from the presidency. It was removed by The Swamp's agents in government, i.e., the politicians.

So, what must be done is to return Swamp Draino power to the executive branch of government. The swamp exists at the leisure of the three branches of government. The three branches do not exist at the leisure of the swamp.

Begin with a constitutional amendment because that is a big, serious deal.

For example, that process ended government-endorsed slavery in the USofA, although there’s plenty of Brandon-enabled slave trafficking going on right now. A large number of older yutes have been illegally deposited by The Party throughout the country, and that’s probably on the low side. Where are they? Working somewhere, doing something in some form of indentured servitude.

These politicians respond to incentives for making cheap labour available … all kinds of labour for all kinds of services, by first subverting and then ignoring immigration law, and then changing procedures incrementally through regulations drafted by the swamp and empowered by politicians dodging responsibility.

Of course, it took a bloody civil war to end government-ignored slavery. God knows the price to be paid for draining the swamp that overwhelmingly votes for The Party in every election, and that focuses attention upon perpetuating The Party because for The Party, the method of government is Party before Constitution.

[Dontaskme]

when I go to discuss THAT God with 'you', "immanuel can", 'you' cower, run away, and hide...

You're so funny, Age.

You actually imagine you're some kind of challenge or threat. But everybody -- not just me -- knows you're crazy and incoherent, and don't know anything close to as much as you imagine you do, and so most of the time, they just ignore most of your messages, just as I do. That's why you find yourself furiously writing message after message, to which people often do not bother to respond at all. They're not paying attention anymore.

People aren't afraid of you, Sport: they find you utterly uninteresting, because you can't actually track an argument, follow a lucid thought, or provide any insight. If you had some humility or willingness to listen, instead of just a litany of off-point objections that merely show you don't know what you're dealing with at all, they might engage with you. But you don't stay focused long enough for them to bother.

But maybe I'm the only guy who will explain that to you. Still, if you realized it, you could get yourself out of that unpleasant situation; so in the interest of helping you along. I point it out to you.

You exude nothing but vitriol uglyness, which effortlessly gushes from your being.

[Dontaskme]

People aren't afraid of you, Sport: they find you utterly uninteresting, because you can't actually track an argument, follow a lucid thought, or provide any insight.

Age seems to be attempting to invite you and others to be in awe at the wonder and contemplation of a God, if indeed a God does exist, and what it means to be in awe and wonder of such a 'thought' ?

Not argue over God. How absurd, to argue over God, a 'thought' we can only be in awe and wonder of, but never be able to fathom such a gigantic 'thought'.

Think about it, what is 'thought' anyhow?

You have no idea, except the idea, that has no idea. Thoughts do not belong to you. There is no-way for a thing to fathom the mystery of it's being...except to ponder in awe and wonder...that's where the buck stops, right here and now.

[Walker]

You exude nothing but vitriol uglyness, which effortlessly gushes from your being.

No he doesn't. He shows remarkable restraint and balance considering what gets tossed his way. With his capacity, I don't think you would want IC on the dark side.

Don't worry about Age. No one has the power to silence Age.

[Dontaskme]

I told you I would prefer oblivion. Why wouldn't YHWH grant me that?

I can't tell you, Gary; I don't know, for sure. What we are told is that souls are not destructible in that way. I don't know exactly why, but possibly we are something much more important than we generally realize.

The one who claims to know and doesn't know only showed up a few seconds ago in relation to eternity.

Seems the dinosaurs who are known to have lived 165 million years were destructible things.

Who knows that souls are not destructible IC? ...Is this knowing You?

How did the first 'You' happen and when did the first 'You' happen, and where did the first 'You' happen?

Think on these things? and discover there is no answer to such questions. And let that be enough.

[Dontaskme]

You exude nothing but vitriol uglyness, which effortlessly gushes from your being.

No he doesn't. He shows remarkable restraint and balance considering what gets tossed his way. With his capacity, I don't think you would want IC on the dark side.

Oh lets all bow to the greatest showman on earth our dear beloved messenger of love and light. Who cries heaps of Oh believe me, please believe me, I'm begging you to believe everything I say to you, else you are the devil out to kill me.

Oh please....tell us another grims fairy fable.

The greatest projection is self reflection. Nice one! I'm so faultlessly mighty. All it takes is remarkable restraint and perseverance, and then 'hey presto', any old BS will pass for my truth.

[Alexis Jacobi]

error

[Alexis Jacobi]

Of course, it took a bloody civil war to end government-ignored slavery. God knows the price to be paid for draining the swamp that overwhelmingly votes for The Party in every election, and that focuses attention upon perpetuating The Party because for The Party, the method of government is Party before Constitution.

“Swamp” is a far too general term. It actually doesn’t mean much unless it is carefully defined. I think if you were to fill it out more your assessment could be better understood.

[Walker]

You exude nothing but vitriol uglyness, which effortlessly gushes from your being.

No he doesn't. He shows remarkable restraint and balance considering what gets tossed his way. With his capacity, I don't think you would want IC on the dark side.

Oh lets all bow to the greatest showman on earth our dear beloved messenger of love and light. Who cries heaps of Oh believe me, please believe me, I'm begging you to believe everything I say to you, else you are the devil out to kill me.

Oh please....tell us another grims fairy fable.

The greatest projection is self reflection. Nice one! I'm so faultlessly mighty. All it takes is remarkable restraint and perseverance, and then 'hey presto', any old BS will pass for my truth.

No, if he was on the dark side, you would be easy to crush.