Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Nov 22, 2022 2:22 pm
I don't know if the timing had to be exactly what it was or not. But it is certain, as the Bible says it, that there would be a nation of Israel in the Last Days. Its destiny is described in detail, in books as old as the Torah and the prophet Daniel, and as new as Revelation. How the Bible knew all of this, thousands of year beforehand, is a question you'll have to answer for yourself, I suppose.
Moreover, has it struck you what a singular event that was? There are no cases in history of a nation being shattered, enslaved and reconstituted repeatedly in this way. That's a historical anomaly that needs some explaining. You may pick your explanation as suits your theory.
But at some point, Israel had to exist again. That's Biblically mandated. Whether it was in 1948 or will be in 2048, or 3048, after yet another "diaspora" is yet to be shown. But there will be an Israel, and it will be in its own land when God brings judgment on this world. That much is certain.
Well, now we move toward what I have often called *an important core*. A
core being of course the central and the telling element.
And you are right: It is "a question I have to answer for myself".
You have surely gathered that I regard Yahweh as a 'fake' and as a literary-divine figure animated by a priest-class. I regard the
Jewish Project therefore as one self-invented and, naturally, self-directed. I take a critical perspective in regard to it and, simultaneously, I reverse-believe what has been traditionally asserted that one must believe (about Jewish destiny, selection of the Jewish nation by god, etc. etc.) In order to *see clearly* I had to have 'overcome' that tendency to see things as they have been presented. To believe the narrative. And to become subject to it through that act of subservience to it.
Here of course I will again bring up the notion of 'intellectual tyranny' and 'spiritual tyranny'. As I said previously these are real things. If you can successfully convince a person or a people at the most fundamental level that you have a right, divinely ordained, to rule over them because you have been 'selected by god' you wield with that imposed belief tremendous power. And that power is tyrannical in the true and honest definition of the word.
So what I now honestly believe is that this entire belief-structure must be thwarted. It must be dis-believed. And it must be neutralized through the assertion of a far broader metaphysics.
The central reason I differ with you and why you have been so relevant to my processes is located precisely and exactly in this area. So if this is true I then can make certain statements about you (singular) and you (plural). These statements follow
inevitably. They are not
elective. They are
necessary.
You have invested your belief in a dreadful phantasy. It is as if, in doing so, you have submitted to the will of a dreadful demiurge. Here I play upon the Gnostic terminology. What are you
really serving, Immanuel? I know that you say you are serving the Divine Lord and the 'savior'. I understand the rap. But the idea I work with involves an assertion that what you serve -- and here I borrow from the mythology of your own belief-system -- is not and cannot be 'god' or a supreme and divine being (however that is defined) but a
satanic force itself.
And in order to understand why I would say such a things one has to back-track to those terrible and terrifying statements put in the mouth of the
Imagined God Yahweh. God did not do this! Man did this and man does this. And by virtue of establishing the asserted truths within he very mouth of the Creator and the Absolute Authority -- you must see and understand this -- if one differs from or opposes that central idea one is made, by one's choice (and by one's moral choice) to stand in opposition to the entire *construct*. And when one does that, according to the necessary view of those who hold to al those core assertions, you are forced to take the side of a demonic, opposing force.
This is how these belief-systems are structured. They are traps for the mind and for the psyche. If as a child let's say you have been raised up in 'strict belief' it has been proven that it is very difficult to get out of that belief. And even if you have, let's say, intellectually overcome it, it has been proposed that you remain subconsciously and perhaps psychologically beholden to it.
So the most direct statement that I can make, right now, today, is that we must apply the model of Plato's Cave here and we must understand that when all these terrifying and overpowering images are presented to us as *absolutely real* and as *the way things really are* (you say this
all the time!) we are actually seeing shadows moving on the wall of the cave -- and it is our duty to turn around and to see what is projecting them
and why.
Do I think that this is a 'project for everyone'? I most certainly don't. You demonstrate to me that when such beliefs become so intensely concretized that it is impossible, or nearly so, to break free of them. And you are one among many many millions who are susceptible to the wielding of these terrible images.
So what I often say, because it is true, is that *I am here for my own purposes*. Must I, as a result or a consequence of what I assert here, must I abandon all that I conceive of as transcendent? That is, the *metaphysical* that I often refer to. The answer is no! But what you do, because of your investment in perverse images and assertions, is to drive reasonably-minded people far far away from what you wish them to believe! You also drive them away (I assert) from understanding highly relevant aspects to the entire issue of metaphysics. You drive them down and away from 'higher things'.
This is why I regard you very differently from how you regard yourself. You tendency to lie, to side-step genuine concerns, to twist things -- all of these are symptoms of what, essentially, you are aligned with.
Is there an alternative? Funny. I'm the only person who consistently provides the Scriptural warrant for what he says...and still, you call these "personal prejudices"?