The Antichrist promises this-worldly, here-and-now, material happiness

William Wildblood had a recent post that provoked me into some thinking about The Antichrist, and what we might expect such a Being to be like and to do in our current context. 

When he appears he will not be obviously evil like some of the despots of the 20th century. He may even appear benign by the materialistic standards we have built up over the last 2 centuries. But he will seek to divert us from true divine understanding and spiritual life. We need to understand that anything or anyone that promises happiness and fulfilment in this world, whatever it calls itself, is not of God.

This meshed together with what strike me as absurd expressions of optimism from some Christians at the prospects from Elon Musk having taken-over that most egregious of all social media: Twitter. 

Apparently; Christians are supposed to rejoice that the prime apparatus of societal corruption will now be operated more efficiently and inclusively! 

Yet, EM is, of course, precisely the kind-of-person we would expect in an Antichrist figure. That is, Musk seems to be among the more-pleasant and less-evil of the obscenely rich globalist oligarchs. His is the 'acceptable face' of the Great Reset - despite implementing the 'Skynet' infrastructure - surely one of its vilest aspects. 

My point is that Musk is just the type of individual who can serve an Antichrist function; whereas anyone who is an obvious villain or psychopath (or actively and explicitly anti-Christian) is not suitable. 

You might suppose that Christians would be alert to the problem, because Musk certainly is not a Christian. Yet, with EM, people are always adding 'but at least'...

As Wildblood makes clear; the core objective of evil in these times is materialism and denial of the primacy of the spiritual - of God and creation. To focus men's minds exclusively on this-mortal-life in this-world.

Exclusion of the spirit can effectively done by channeling concern into 'good causes', potential utopias, vast social aspirations... as well as the more usual tyrannical oppression, induced self-hatred and 'gaslighting'.  

I don't believe that EM is the Antichrist - but Antichrist is a type; and Musk is of that type. 

If or when 'The' Antichrist does emerge onto the world stage - we should expect him to appear as just such an apparently personable, Christian-friendly, social idealist.  

Where are universal 'inner worlds' such as the 'dwat' or 'collective unconscious' located? - and can we participate in them, as well as observe them?

A question that recurs to me, is how top conceptualize (visualize, imagine) the 'location' of inner world concepts. The ancient Egyptians had a core and vital concept of the 'dwat' or underworld, where lived gods and the dead. Every living being had dealings with the dwat, and indeed it was the ultimate reality. 

Yet it has become very difficult to imagine the reality of something with such properties as the dwat - something which is 'inside' everybody, and yet also everywhere. 

A more recent example is the collective unconscious of Jung; a realm of universal archetypes, which is supposed to be accessed in dream and artistic creation, to be expressed in myth, and to emerge during insanity. 

I found it very difficult to imagine how the collective unconscious was supposed to work - where it was located, how we could get access to it...

Such difficulties are compounded when one wants to add that each of us as individuals are capable to changing the content of the dwat, or the collective unconscious. It is easier to imagine merely observing a kind of diffuse sea of mythic archetypes and gods floating around and doing things - of coming to 'know' the contents of such inner worlds or underworlds. 

But that you or I might potentially alter this collective reality; and to do so my some 'inner' act of ours, such as thinking... well it seems difficult to imagine even how such a thing might work (leaving aside the secondary issue of whether it is possible or plausible). 

I find, when pressing on this problem; that the whole thing has a tendency to become very abstract and detached, and unconvincing to myself. 

My conclusion is that there are very deep and difficult-to-eradicate assumptions in my way of reasoning that block a kind of basic human understanding, which was once widespread. 

For instance, it brings-out the extent to which we moderns almost 'cannot help' imagining our thinking as going-on in our brains and inside our skulls - with no possible way of really interacting with any kind of universal domain.  

It also brings-out the corresponding assumption that thinking is cut-off from the world; so that we cannot imagine our own thinking affecting the world... Except, maybe - in a crude sci-fi sort of way - as something like a 'telepathic beam' of 'thought energy' that affects matter (which we don't believe actually happens, or else it would be detectable and measurable). 

It seems, it feels, 'obvious' that the contents of 'my' thinking is something cut-off from the world; such is the nature of our alienation.

And yet I can recall young childhood when it seemed equally obvious that my thinking could be known to others, and that it could affect the world. For example, fear on my part could attract the attention of bad beings, bad events - and in that sense could make things happen. 

Or my secrets could be 'read' by others - I could not contain them 'inside my head', even when I wished; but they could only remain secret if I was able to 'forget' them.

Thus in early childhood, I naturally understood the way in which all Men (and god/s, spirits, angels, demons, the dead etc) could indeed be both within and also everywhere - albeit I could only envisage this as a passive and one-way process. 

I could not imagine - or believe - that I myself could, by my own thinking, affects this 'collective spiritual underworld'; including affect it for the better. 

I am talking here of the way of thinking variously termed positivism, materialism, scientism or reductionism; and the problematic phenomenon I describe above is what Owen Barfield called RUP - meaning the Residue of Unresolved Positivism which modern Man has as a deeply-ingrained habit; and which is so very difficult to eradicate even among those who - theoretically - fully-recognize the incoherence and evil of positivism. 

It is not too difficult to detect RUP in other people; but a far more difficult/ impossible prospect to eradicate it from our-selves. 

My best guess and hope for doing so is to try and re-discover, learn and extend ways of thinking that correspond to the 'animistic' thinking of ancient history and early childhood - that is, a world populated by intentional, conscious, living Beings - in a web of relationships. To try and translate the positivistic conceptions into these terms. 

But I still tend to 'feel' this in a passive fashion; and have not succeeded in achieving a way of understanding that corresponds to the active and creative engagement of the individual with The World that is Final Participation.    

Although I believe Final Participation is real, and I recognize when it is happening/ has happened; and it is a major aim in my life - it is certainly a disadvantage Not to be able to think-about or conceptualize it in a way that I find both convincing and comprehensible. 

Work yet to do...

The System as a pseudo-spirituality-simulacrum

Since it has penetrated, and dominates, almost everywhere in the realm of finance, the media, economics, politics, the military and police, law, religion, science, arts, health etc; it is easy to regard The System as a physical entity only; and to neglect that The System has also come to replace the spiritual by a simulacrum. 

In other words; for most people The System provides their only escape from alienation - their only sense of belonging, connection, participation in the world around them. 

This is one deep reason why the masses will believe whatever The System is currently telling them - no matter how incoherent, vile and inverted; because only by joining-in with today's-frenzy of communications can they escape their profound existential isolation and feel a part of the world, the community. 

Of course; it is only a very partial and temporary alleviation; but that fact merely fuels the addictive dependency - and explains why social media have become integral to life for so many. 

What we are instead supposed to be doing is consciously to participate in the world of God, angels, spirits, and other Men's 'divine-minds' by voluntary and chosen acts of our individual consciousness. 

Then; individual men may know directly and by personal experience the wider world outside their own minds. 

But for this to happen, we must (first) believe that such a world is real and accessible - and not merely a delusion, a manipulation, or wishful thinking. 

We must also have realistic expectations of 'what it is like' to access such a world; in particular setting aside any fantasies or hopes of reversion to a prehistoric/ primitive/ tribal (or early childhood state) of passive and unconscious immersion in the group mind. 

We also need to eschew any covert hope that such access will bring us personal power, statsu or other kind of success; and also forget any notions that we can (or should try to) convince other people about what we discover in such experiences. 

The essence of what is possible (and desirable) is that each needs to do it for himself. 

These are, I believe, the only two possibilities: Either we accept The System as 'our god' and salvation from the existential horror of alienation; or else, we decide to reconnect with the wider world by means of our chosen conscious thinking activity. 

By The System we are densely-connected - but any connection is indirect (via language, image, symbol - which must be interpreted). 

But by the deployment of our chosen conscious activity, we dwell in the wider world of Beings directly and unmediated - we may live-in that spiritual world, for a while. 

Harsh spiritual and psychological lessons from my recent illness

Without going into details (and making clear that it was in-no-way life-threatening); my recent illness was an existential challenge, and unique in my life so far. 

This was because it combined the most extreme malaise I have experienced (exhaustion, demotivation, anhedonia, anorexia); with at least two simultaneous unremitting and severe forms of pain/ dysphoria (of several types, throughout). 

(Note - I use dysphoria to mean the opposite of euphoria - as a generic term that includes all types of pain, but also all other acutely-unpleasant pain-like symptoms such as nausea, heaviness, and that drained and 'washed-out' sensation characteristic of 'flu').

Consequently, for a week, I was always in an acutely miserable state; plus I always lacked energy, concentration and drive. 

The horrible result was that for that week I was horribly selfish and self-centred; and insofar as the wider world impinged on me, my attitudes to everything were wholly negative and pessimistic. I was disgusted at myself for this; but such disgust merely added to the negative-mix - it did nothing to combat the fact. 

The fact that I understood, theoretically, just why this should be: why (in a pathological sense) it was happening; this was of surprisingly little or no help - certainly it did not make me feel significantly better. Thus I could only escape the horribleness of the closed-world of selfish-self-centredness for a few moments - after which the default state inexorably re-imposed itself. 

Furthermore, I was reduced to an almost-wholly non-spiritual level of functioning. Meditation and (meaningful) prayer were eliminated; all the perspectives of a joyous and hopeful nature were experienced as mere forms-of-words or futile actions - and anyway lasted only for very short periods before the mind would return to its miserable brooding. 

Some of the lessons I took from this included that there are situations when circumstances are stronger than resolutions and convictions; and where positive efforts are so feeble and short-lived as to be swamped. 

I see how some kind of illness, sufficiently sustained, could easily overwhelm whatever defences were in place; and could poison even long-term and deep patterns of good attitudes and behaviours.

I hope that in future this makes me more empathic towards those who have become narrowed and petty as a result of sickness or circumstances, too strong and lasting for their resources to resist.  

In retrospect; the experience has confirmed my understanding of this mortal life as a time for spiritual learning - and not (or only very seldom) a phase of solid, incremental, spiritual progression. 

In other words: theosis is properly understood in terms of what we have learned spiritually during mortal life on earth, being recognized of value to our immortal resurrected life in Heaven. Theosis is not, therefore, about making ourselves better Christians throughout mortal life - such spiritual improvement being detectable and evident during mortal life. 

If I had previously supposed that I had made significant spiritual progress as a Romantic Christian - then it would have been devastating to see it all swept-aside so 'swiftly and effortlessly' by a combination of physical symptoms. 

Instead (now that I have emerged from it) I can see that this state of malaise-dysphoria (during which I could find no positives and was crushed by negatives) functioned as an experience that was intended to be learned-from - but learned not while-it-was-actually-happening; instead, learned in retrospect. 

My main conclusion is that life can get the better of us! 

We can find ourselves in situations where no amount of positive thinking and spiritual hope (nor of medical intervention) can alleviate the situation. 

Unavoidable suffering just-is part of life, part of the divine plan for each of us (and for some more than others). 

We will sometimes find ourselves 'inside' an inescapable adverse situation - and while that situation continues we can do nothing more than cope as best we may. 

The challenge comes afterwards - looking-back; when we are called-upon to make sense of it. 

That is when our Christian faith should come into its own.  

Note: I am here trying to draw general conclusions from a personal experience - I am not soliciting advice or sympathy. Also I will not publish any comments that aim to be reassuring or consoling: that is not the point of this post. Nor am I looking to compare notes with others having had what seem like similar experiences, except insofar as they contribute to this overall aim. 

Placeholder post

I have not been blogging for while because of a spell of debilitating illness/ illnesses; from which I seem gradually to be recovering now. I intend to resume posting as and when possible. 

Doubling-down on the motes: The traditionalist, church-orientated Christian dilemma

It is a very difficult time for traditionalist Christians, whose churches have already aligned with the evil global agenda and who are becoming more converged all the time. 

In times like these a strong, secure and really-Christian church would be more valuable than ever; but such an entity is not on offer. 

The large churches are net-evil-aligned, and the only 'pure' churches are small and weak - in worldly terms (and there may be none of these available, even if such would be regarded as acceptable). 

The dilemma I wish to discuss is that it has been noticed (e.g. by Rodney Stark) that the successful churches of the middle 20th century were demanding of their members - that is, they demanded significant changes to lifestyle. 'In return' such churches gave significant social support; so that membership 'made a difference'.  

By contrast, those churches that did not demand any significant changes or sacrifices from members ('liberal' doctrine, any lifestyle tolerated) were declining, collapsing; becoming numerically heavily-dominated by older women - and without many men, families or the children that are signs of a thriving church. 

But this is (or rather was) a sociological explanation for strong churches - not primarily a spiritual one. And the recently-strong churches have over more-recent years (and especially since the birdemic) suffered (or had imposed) a disconnection between the church as a social group, and the church as a genuinely Christian group. 

In other words; group-cohesion of the church has been maintained by social/ lifestyle elements and at the cost of spiritual Christian elements. 

This means that church-orientated Christians find themselves in a repeated dilemma where the church authorities introduce anti-Christian practices - but to oppose these will cause fracturing and schism of the church. 

In different words; church cohesion is maintained only at the cost of core Christian values; while maintaining core Christian values will tend to break apart churches, and will also entail that the church members must discern and discriminate within the church - perhaps even rejecting most or all of the leadership (priest or pastors).

This is something that very few traditionalists are willing to do - especially not explicitly; because it goes against the (inevitably) group-ish explanations regarding the special and distinctive rightness and truth of their own churches.  

One reaction I have noticed is traditionalists advocating a doubling-down on the tougher and more demanding aspects of their church - which tends, or until recently tended, to reinforce group strength. 

But the problem is that these lifestyle or theological aspects are (mostly) only 'incidentally' Christian, should not be regarded as core to the faith; and are practices that distinguish and divide the various Christian churches. 

So - at a time when Christianity is at just about its weakest and most corrupt in history, and when the (small) minority of faithful Christians who have resisted the socio-political convergence of (for example) the Litmus Test issues; some of the traditionalists among these faithful Christians are dividing this small remnant of sincere and courageous believers by their core insistence on that which makes their own church different. 

I think this doubling-down on the inessentials (and the consequent hostility among Christians) happens as a way of 'dealing with' the traditionalist problem of evil-aligned leaders and the need for discernment within the church. 

By this means, the church leadership can continue to be supported by traditionalists - because the leaders mostly sustain the cohesion of the churches while discarding core Christian alignment with God, creation and The Good - by retaining and emphasizing 'church order' issues that emphasize the specific distinctions between types-of-Christian.  

The 'beam' of vast and escalating core-corruption in one's own church is thereby neglected by this doubling-down on the 'motes' of lifestyle micro-issues and church-order/ church-unity matters. 

This strikes me as an insidiously-effective demonic strategy for further weakening and corrupting what (comparatively-little) remains of the Christian churches after the repeated onslaughts of socio-political Litmus Tests; by ensuring that Christians in traditional denominations expend a great deal of their time and energy on emphasizing their differentness-from and superiority-to other types of Christian - to the point of denying that the other types of Christian really-are Christians. 

Jesus's fulfilment of prophecy - is it essential here and now?

As great a thinker as Blaise Pascal (1623-1662; in his Pensees) mentioned the miracles and fulfillment of prophecy as two of the most significant evidences of the truth of Jesus Christ. Yet in the centuries since, these lines of argument have all-but lost their effectiveness as Christian evidences. 

In particular the idea that Jesus fulfilled the prophecies concerning the Jewish Messiah is greatly enfeebled. To regard this as sufficiently strong evidence that one can base a strong and enduring faith upon it, now requires so many assumptions - such a lot of learning, so long a chain of inferences (few of which are nowadays accepted implicitly)... that it is hard to imagine that such a consideration could 'work' in creating or sustaining a Christian life. 

While Jesus's fulfillment of prophecies certainly seems to have been a very important fact in the conversion of the Apostles and many other early Christians; the situation now is very different. 

Before reaching such a conclusion; one would need to know the Old Testament, and understand and believe it - and the contextual significance of the Messiah. One would need to accept the claimed match-ups between the words of what was prophesied of Messiah, and what was reported actually to have happened to Jesus. 

One would need to consider the prophecies that did not seem to have been fulfilled - and in particular the prophecies that seem to say the Messiah was going to be the literal King of the Jews, and lead his people to freedom and a this-worldly paradisal political state. 

And one would also need to have some way of explaining why so many Jews at the time, and after, did Not accept that Jesus had fulfilled the prophecies. 

In sum - the argument from prophecy has - after 2000 years - become extremely complex; and (unlike 2000 years ago and among Jews) has also come to rely upon a great deal of scholarship, translation and detailed reasoning and careful discernment; such that it seems unlikely that fulfilled prophecy would nowadays be the basis of a conversion or the bedrock of faith.

At most, it would be accepted on the basis of trusting some external authority. In other words, if one has already, on other grounds, accepted the authority of a particular Church or tradition, and accepted that holier and more-informed people of the past have decided this matter on the basis of evidence and reasoning of which we our-selves are incapable - then the prophecy argument can be accepted as part of the 'package' of that church.    

Indeed, rather than proving Jesus's validity; the modern mind is more likely to reach the opposite conclusion. Looking back over so many years, and so much contention; I think it probable that a modern person would not be fully-satisfied by some or other link, somewhere in this great chain of reasoning and evidence. 

The result would be that an emphasis on prophecy would therefore be more likely to lead a person to reject Christianity than embrace it; if a church was to insist (as many do) that evidence of prophecy must be believed - if it is insisted that this was an essential aspect of the work of Jesus Christ.

(As well, this insistence is usually part of a mistaken emphasis on the essence of what Jesus did and how.) 

What do I personally think? Well, the role of prophecy has receded and receded in my own faith, to the point that I regard it as inessential. Indeed, although he was a Jew - I would regard this as a contingent fact about Jesus - that might have been otherwise without imperiling his cosmic gift to all of mankind.

That Jesus was a Jew made a difference, clearly - and the difference may be, probably was, one that was helpful to the propagation of Christianity; as was the fact that Christianity grew in the Roman Empire.  

I think that if Jesus had not been a Jew, and had not fulfilled any of the Jewish prophecies - he could nonetheless perfectly well have done what he came to do for us. 

Which is Just As Well, given the way that the vast background of the Old Testament including prophecy has all but ceased to be comprehensible or authoritative... except second-hand, and taken on trust - from external institutions who cannot and should not be trusted with the fundamentals of our faith. 

The way it works now is almost the opposite of the way it once worked. We need to be Christians from our own direct experience (Romantic Christians). 

From this, we may choose to accept aspects external authority; but always retaining discernment and never uncritically as 'a package'. Part of this may be acceptance into our faith of Jesus's fulfillment of prophecies - as when we choose to trust an authority (e.g. a particular theologian, scholar or Holy Man) who, we are satisfied, has taken all relevant evidence and discerned it as valid. 

But this is secondary to our personal choice to trust a particular authority - at least to trust it in this respect. And may choose that this should become an element in our faith. 

However, prophecy is not Now likely to be an instance of that direct and personal kind of knowing upon which a modernity-resistant Christian faith is founded.

How can I know it is true? Simple, existential validation of Christianity

How does a person know "Christianity is true"?

I was reading of a famous person who rejected the Christianity of his childhood because (to summarize) he experienced it as a vast list of things that must be believed and must be done just-so - reject one, and you are not a Christian. 

Yet, the 'liberal Christian' response of relaxing, removing, and reversing more-and-more items from that vast list - has proved to be a disaster in every respect; leading to the assimilation of churches into mainstream leftist (hence, ultimately evil-motivated) politics. 

A different response to the problem was 'mystical' whereby the Christian would assert an incommunicable belief based upon religious experiences. Essentially saying: "I am a Christian, but I will not say what that means or implies - because mystical knowledge is ineffable, hence cannot and should not be expressed". 

This strategy has demonstrated that, in the first place, it does not make someone a Christian (it cannot say why there is anything necessary about the person of Jesus Christ); and experience has shown that such attempted at total-spirituality or complete unworldliness has proved itself radically-unable to provide the clarity and courage needed to discern and resist the waxing evil in this world - as it infiltrates and pervades ever more of our lives. 

Paradoxically, the assertion of complete indifference to This World, and the attempt to become wholly-detached from worldly concerns, supplies no reason to resist assimilation to the ideas and behaviours of This World... To the modern mind; 'mysticism' means that one "might as well" go along with the core, dominant, and coerced ideologies of 2022 - and that is exactly what happens, in practice.   

On this Easter morning; the question recurs as to how some supposed events of two thousand years ago can be known as true; and known in such a way as to provide a sufficiently solid and personally-compelling foundation from which to think, speak and choose truly. 

It seems to me that most attempts to achieve this by asking for acceptance of external truths - whether truths from a church, scholarship, or in ritual, scripture, theology or any other social and complex discourse - have all foundered and failed; have proved themselves inadequate.

I have concluded that what is required is an existential knowledge of 'Christian reality'. By which I mean that (for a strong and discerning faith) we each must attain a conviction that is rooted in the apprehension of our own Being in direct contact with the divine Being of Jesus Christ.

Of course, a Christian must have a contextual metaphysical belief in God and creation, and this will surely be of too great a complexity and difficulty to be apprehended all-at-once. 

But Christianity seems at its heart to be saying that there is a simple way though all such complexity by the person of Jesus Christ - who is eternal and who has a living and direct, here-and-now relationship with anyone who seeks it (this immediate and personal relationship being what is meant by the Holy Ghost).

What this means is that it is possible - for any person, now or at any time - to have a direct knowledge of whatever is needed for Christian faith; and that this knowledge comes in the form of a contact-in-thinking between 'the self' of Jesus Christ and 'the self' of individual Christians.

By 'direct' I mean that it is not mediated by any perceptions, or by language - but may be understood as two distinct beings and persons that 'share thoughts' - so there is no gap between them. 

So, the idea of mystical knowledge as being ineffable, inexpressible etc is an 'abstract' (impersonal) distortion of this 'solid' fact of two actual personal Beings that (here, now) know each other, and know that they know. 

And in this knowing of persons; we are able to attain the solidity and conviction needed to underpin whatever discernment and guidance we require in our daily living in this world.   

Such a basis can be called intuition or various other names; but what makes it distinctively Christian is when it happens between one of ourselves and the spirit of Jesus Christ. 

The great thing about this is that is renders time and history irrelevant - because it is immediate. It bypasses the complex and controversial edifices of social-discourse; it removes the uncertainties of language and interpretation. Yet at the same time it avoid the problem of incomprehensible and uncompelling abstraction - of great soaring schemata with no place for our-selves - to which most 'mysticism' is prone.   

Of course; such knowledge is not much use for communicating truths to other people! Indeed, it implies that the saving truths cannot be communicated to other people - beyond general indications of what is being aimed-at, and what kind of thing might be expected as a result. 

Furthermore, such knowledge is only satisfactory and compelling while it is happening - after which it becomes 'just a memory' - at least so far as this mortal life is concerned... 

But, Jesus's central message is (as may be confirmed) that there is also an immortal and resurrected life which may be attained by 'following' him; and from that perspective is more than memory. 

Thus, existential validation of Christianity by direct knowing is Not to be confused with the kind of permanent transformative change promised by 'enlightenment'. To know, here and now, in our mortal body, is Not (by intent or possibility) to be transformed into a higher, more spiritual, more divine entity.

We may transform and improve as people - but we may not. Transformation is not the essence of what Jesus came to do for us.  

Instead we are here in this mortal life to learn; and that learning is meant For our immortal life - will be retained for that purpose, and not be forgotten by our true selves. 

Because that is its purpose; mortal life will continue to bring us learning-experiences - including problems and failures, diseases and disabilities - and the intent is that we will continue to learn for as long as we live. 

Mostly, we are meant to work things our for ourselves; but sometimes we need guidance - and guidance is available - existential guidance which is neither internal not external but both, simultaneously. 

Wrong explanations of bad things that assume error instead of malice

It's a bad sign when so many smart people expend so much time and 'ink' on explanations of - for example - war, economic collapse and monetary inflation - when these explanations are invalidated by their assumption that such things are a mistake rather than deliberate. 

Especially now that Global Establishment strategies (such as Agenda 2030/ The Great Reset/ Build Back Better) have been made public and widely endorsed by political and corporate leaders. We know Their intentions (at least, at some level). 

All such plans entail destroying the economy, currency trade, transport, energy etc - as a preliminary to (supposedly) 'replacing' them with something that the Establishment pretend will be better. 

e.g. The current inflation is (presumably) an absolutely deliberate consequence of 'printing' vast quantities of 'money' during the birdemic - while collapsing the economy etc. 

This is not an 'error' when the people responsible have also said that they intend to confiscate all private property ('own nothing') and replace all money with a 'digital currency' under direct central control.  

This is official international policy - not some kind of unintended consequence of well-meaning/ recklessly-panicked decision-making. 

Now of course not everything that happens is pre-planned and intended; because the demon-serving 'elite' are not all-powerful, nor are they infallible, and they do subvert their own strategies - as is inevitable with evil entities (who hate each other almost as much as they hate the masses).

Also, this self-subversion directly renders them incapable of implementing their plans - for example, The Great Reset cannot happen because the capability of the rulers is being crippled more quickly (e.g. by the birdemic-response, antiracism, climate-excused wrecking and the sex-trans-agenda) than they can create the totalitarian structures with the necessary omni-surveillance technologies.

Uncontrolled destruction will overwhelm any genuine intention to construct a fully-totalitarian world under central command.  

Plus, some of the beliefs current among globalists are sheer wishful-thinking - like the commonly expressed idea that soon people can and will be controlled (rather than threatened, disabled, diseased and killed) by drugs/ gene-engineering/ implanted electronics and other 'transhumanist' methods.   

And - because there is a closed information loop between supposed-interventions and the fake-reality of the media; backed up by an almost-wholly-credulous mass population - the success or failure of policies is mostly just decided and allocated. 

The Real World that we know by personal observation, experience and common sense is officially regarded as bizarre or evil conspiracy theories, emanating from idiots, terrorists or hostile foreigners; and apparently nearly all the intellectual class and most of 'the lower orders' are willing to believe this (and anything else they are being told today).  

So what matters to nearly-everybody is whatever the System currently insists-upon. 

Yet even this will be subverted by the rampant evil that dominates public discourse - since the mass media will collapse along with everything else ordered - and universal chaos can be the only eventual outcome. 

In the mean time, for those Christians who recognize the spiritual war; it is clearly necessary to assume evil intent rather than well-meaning error when it comes to the core strategies and policies of the dominant Establishment. 

Unless we operate and live-by such assumptions - we are, indeed, part of the problem; by our provision of plausible-deniability for acts of malice.

We live in a demon-dominated world - so, how come we are not Already in a global war?

For the last couple of years since the coordinated birdemic-peck program was launched, it has become obvious that we live in a totalitarian world - therefore an evil world; and the nature of this evil is increasingly extreme (as must and will happen when evil dominates - evil feeds-upon itself).

Why, then, do not the world-ruling evil powers not just get-on-with-it and launch a world war? ...Considering that so many of the political, media, bureaucratic and corporate leaders are obviously so very keen on the idea. 

The Global Establishment could easily start a war at any time, if they really wanted. So why don't they? 

Of course, it may well happen, and may happen today; given the way that the large and strong elements within the Western powers are incrementally provoking and escalating the situation - indeed, there is already more than sufficient reason, and has been for several weeks. 

But this merely emphasizes that we need to understand why it has not already happened. Given the evil of the Global Establishment; why are we still at a stage of restrained and localized conflict, of proxy war - of remote and deniable actions rather than explicit, direct unrestrained aggressive interventions? 

Surely - we may think - a world war would be the best possible way to promote evil and the damnation of Men in vast numbers? If so; why the restraint? 

The global leadership class are not at all 'restrained' in their other coercive behaviors - so why should they be restrained when it comes to war? 

  

The outline answer is, I believe, given in that wise book by CS Lewis, The Screwtape Letters. 

Screwtape, an experienced chief devil, writes to a junior demon concerning the outbreak of the Second World War (the following excerpt has been edited by me). 

Notice that Screwtape exemplifies the inverted-value system that are shared by our current world leadership - what Screwtape regards as positive and desirable, Christians regard as evil - and vice versa. 

You say you are “delirious with joy” because the European humans have started another of their wars. I see very well what has happened to you. You are not delirious; you are only drunk. 

For the first time in your career you have tasted that wine which is the reward of all our labours—the anguish and bewilderment of a human soul—and it has gone to your head...

I must warn you not to hope too much from a war. Of course a war is entertaining. The immediate fear and suffering of the humans is a legitimate and pleasing refreshment for our myriads of toiling workers. 

But what permanent good does it do us unless we make use of it for bringing souls to Our Father Below? The Enemy [God], true to His barbarous methods of warfare, allows us to see the short misery of His favourites only to tantalise and torment us. 

Because, war has certain tendencies inherent in it which are, in themselves, by no means in our favour. 

We may hope for a good deal of cruelty and unchastity. 

But, if we are not careful, we shall see thousands turning in this tribulation to the Enemy [God], while tens of thousands who do not go so far as that will nevertheless have their attention diverted from themselves to values and causes which they believe to be higher than the self. 

I know that the Enemy [God] disapproves many of these causes. But that is where He is so unfair. He often makes prizes of humans who have given their lives for causes He thinks bad on the monstrously sophistical ground that the humans thought them good and were following the best they knew. 

Consider too what undesirable deaths occur in wartime. Men are killed in places where they knew they might be killed and to which they go, if they are at all of God's party, prepared. 

How much better for us if all humans died in costly nursing homes amid doctors who lie, nurses who lie, friends who lie, as we have trained them, promising life to the dying, encouraging the belief that sickness excuses every indulgence, and even, if our workers know their job, withholding all suggestion of a priest lest it should betray to the sick man his true condition! 

And how disastrous for us is the continual remembrance of death which war enforces. One of our best weapons, contented worldliness, is rendered useless. 

In wartime not even a human can believe that he is going to live forever. 

God’s human partisans have all been plainly told by Him that suffering is an essential part of what He calls Redemption; so that a faith which is destroyed by a war or a pestilence cannot really have been worth the trouble of destroying. 

So, Lewis's impersonation of the devil Screwtape provides an insight as to why (probably, plausibly) the evil strategists of the Global Establishment have, so far, reined-in the impatient and lustful clamour of lower-level demons and sadistic humans among national politicians and in the mass media - those who see no further than gratifying their own state of delirious delight at the prospect of massive human aggression and misery. 

After all, the real and causal war is spiritual - not physical - as the senior devils well-know; and the cause of evil in the spiritual war may (as Screwtape explains) substantially be set back by a global and physical war. War may encourage net spiritual Good. 

It is likely that the high-level strategists of evil greatly prefer the current faked, proxy, manipulated media-war - promoted to The West as infotainment, and a novelty 'crusade'; an opportunity for spitefulness to masquerade as principle, virtue-signalling to pretend to boldness, and servile credulity to suppose itself wise. 

High-level Strategists of evil therefore prefer to avoid, if possible, the spiritual dangers of a war in which courage is en-couraged, and where personal experience of existential (not virtual) realities might awaken masses of people to the truths of this world, and the next. 

As Screwtape said: In war not even a human can believe he is going to live forever. 

Yet the demonic strategists are themselves very keen on inflicting extreme and widespread human misery; and at any point may prove unable to resist for longer the pressing temptations of short-term, selfish indulgence attainable from unleashing chaotic evil. 

In the long-term; the short-term will sooner-or-later prevail. 

Review of the biography of JRR Tolkien by Colin Duriez

Can be found over at the Notion Club Papers blog - my conclusion is that this is the best first-to-read biography of Tolkien that I have encountered. 

Recommendation of a new audiobook version of Charles Williams's The Place of the Lion

This can be found at The Notion Club Papers blog. 

Proper motivation must precede Good action

One of the most profound ways in which my understanding changed was when I realized that people did not want what-was-Good. 

For most of my adult life, I operated under the assumption that many or most people wanted what-was-Good but did not understand how to get it, or were too timid to put their desires into action. It was not until the first decade of the new millennium that I gradually realized that The Problem was much deeper and more serious - because it was the motivation for Good that was lacking. 

Before I became a Christian I was unclear about the nature of Good - and I was mostly concerned with material Goods - so the above insight came when I was advocating to defend pretty mainstream Goods; such as the honesty and integrity of medicine, teaching and scholarly researches against the corrupting effect of managerialism and bureaucracy. 

The first insight was that my motivation to defend such mainstream material Goods was actually based on transcendental values - values that went beyond the material. 

For instance, that my defence of science was rooted in a transcendental (not practical, material, everyday) believe in the value of Truth. Or that my defence of the conditions necessary for human creativity, or genuine education, were rooted in a conviction that this was a Good Thing in itself - not just as a means to some material end. 

The second insight was that my own idealistic identification with transcendental Goods implied that there must be a personal creator God, and I must actually 'believe-in' Him. Or else, if not, then the only rational course was to forget delusory notions of Truth and the like; and optimize my career and lifestyle - as nearly-all my acquaintance among doctors, teachers and scientists were doing. 

(In other words, unless there really-was a personal creator God; then my convictions were irrational - and instead the corruptest of my colleagues ought to be regarded as role models.)

What this amounted to was a recognition that extremely few people (extremely few) are significantly motivated towards Good action, towards a Good world - and this is why it doesn't happen, but instead the opposite. 

If this was not already obvious by the bureaucratic subversion and linkage of the world's major institutions/ corporations/ organizations in the decades preceding 2020 - it became so after the birdemic was used to excuse a worldwide totalitarian takeover. 

The fact that there was near-zero resistance to the birdemic-excused changes in human life from politics, the legal profession, the Christian churches, universities, the police and military etc etc - but instead eager compliance and advocacy of the gross lies used to justify psychological and social destruction - is consistent with the interpretation that what happened was what they wanted to happen. 

In sum: global totalitarian evil has been rolled-out rapidly, under the feeblest and most obviously incoherent and dishonest of pretexts - birdemic, peck, climate, antiracism, transagenda, and now the fight against the Fire Nation. This strategy has received enthusiastic support from almost every person and organization with power/ status/ influence. And this shows the real and most-dominant motivations of Men. 

The world is getting what the world is wanting - and although nearly-everybody will hate the consequences of what-they-want: there is no doubt that the world has overwhelmingly asked-for-evil, and overwhelmingly rejected any alternative Good understandings. 

No action will be taken to prevent or reverse world war, economic destruction with starvation, endemic violence, genuine-plague - or any other Apocalyptic crises that the demon-allied leadership chooses to inflict on the masses. 

No action will be taken - but Not because of the practical or logistical difficulties of taking action; but because there is no real motivation towards Good. 

Things will Not get better - things will not even cease to get worse... because people do not want that. 

The motivations of the masses are towards their own destruction - most obviously physical destruction, but ultimately and primarily their own spiritual destruction. 

Unless we can comprehend and acknowledge that fact, and allocate responsibility accordingly; we will fail to understand the world collapse and catastrophe that is being both engineered by leaders, and yearned-for by the led. 

What is required is change of motivation, which entails a change in ultimate aspirations and beliefs. The spiritual is primary - and the material catastrophe will not even be addressed (let alone improved) until after Men's motivations are reversed and redirected from their current affiliation with evil, towards alliance with Good (which is God). 

How much does it matter (ultimately) that nowadays nobody on earth lives in a Christian society?

It is a huge fact, yet one that is seldom made explicit, that nowadays nobody on earth lives in a Christian society. 

Of course, it could reasonably be said that - judging by the highest standards, as we should judge - nobody ever has! 

Nonetheless, there have been, throughout history and in several places, whole empires or nations where the rulers and the principles by which they ruled were explicitly Christian -- starting with the Roman Empire from Constantine and its descendants in Orthodox Eastern Europe and Catholic Western Europe; then later Protestant societies in Western Europe and its diaspora... and other relatively recent places such as Deseret (Utah) under Brigham Young. 

But now no such situation exists anywhere in the world, so far as I know. Furthermore, the world-as-a-whole has become actively anti-Christian - and operates a strategy of subversion, destruction and inversion of Christian churches and states that has now reached an advanced stage. 

Nobody now lives in a Christian society - and every Christian is experiencing the consequences of the ongoing corruption and 'convergence' of self-identified churches and (especially) church leaders; as these become assimilated to a Satan-affiliated global bureaucratic-media System.  

How much does this matter - ultimately? That is, in terms of our personal salvation and theosis? 

(In terms, that is, of our ability to choose to follow Jesus Christ to Heaven, and to learn the lessons of life that divine providence places in our path.)

Well, it matters greatly and fatally if we assume that our Christianity comes from without - if we assume that salvation and theosis are meant to be a matter of individual Men following the rules and practices of the society in which they find themselves.  

If salvation and theosis really depend on us obeying the sources of social authority around us - then in a world without Christian societies, nations or empires - there does not seem to be much, or any, chance of being a real Christian. 

Yet, if we assume instead that God (who is the prime creator) is able to create a divine providence for each individual one of His children; and if this personal concern is assumed to extend to providing the necessary means of salvation and the life-lessons for theosis - then it may not matter ultimately what kind of 'society' we dwell in. 

It would then be the case that God would simply take 'whatever this world has to offer', and shape it such that each and every Christian (who has chosen to follow Jesus Christ to Heaven) will get enough of what he needs from The World to be able to achieve his heart-felt goals...

And that this will be the case whatever kind of society that Christian happens to dwell-within. 

This is certainly how I see it. 

While I certainly do yearn-for, and try to attain, a Christian society (instead of - as I regard our current world - By-Far the most evil society that ever has been in human history)... 

Nonetheless, when my faith is strongest; I trust that God is always working via ongoing-creation to provide whatever I personally require for salvation and theosis; using those materials with which Men's evil choices have supplied Him. 

And that what applies for me, applies equally for all of God's other children whose desire is to follow Jesus. 

Why is a cerebrovascular accident (CVA) called a Stroke?

Probably elf-shot

The term 'Stroke' for what is nowadays called a cerebrovascular accident (CVA; meaning blockage of a the brain arterial supply by a thrombus or embolus; or brain destruction from a cerebral hemorrhage) derives from the term "Elf-Stroke" or "Fairy-Stroke". 

The belief was that when a person collapsed with a paralytic seizure, and immediately or soon died, he had been struck with Elf-Shot (from a flint-headed arrow or dart) or some other kind of elf-blow. 

His real body and soul had been invisibly taken by the elves, and replaced with a 'Stock' - perhaps a piece of wood, or a replica; which if not already inert would soon cease to move.  

This information comes from A Dictionary of Fairies by Katharine Briggs, 1976. Dr Katharine Mary Briggs - MA, DPhil, DLitt Oxon. - (dates 1898-1980) was President of the English Folklore Society. 

The waning of Original Participation in my life - the later development of Final Participation

Are we doomed to dwell always on the surface of life? 

Looking back, I can now perceive that Original Participation provided an unconscious and spontaneous direct-link with The World, and other people and Beings, until late in my twenty-second year. 

Through childhood, adolescence, and up to that point, there was a baseline (albeit dwindling) sense of 'belonging in the world' that sustained me, and enabled me to connect with nature and life; despite that I had developed extreme atheist and materialistic (scientistic, positivist) philosophical assumptions. 

But from that point I began to feel alienated, cut-off from things, trapped inside my head, unable to 'lose myself', forget myself, or stop thinking; except when intoxicated in one way or another, or passively-immersed in music or literature - which was presumably a temporary illusion... 

At any rate it could not be sustained and was incompatible with the business of mundane living 

My reaction was partly to accept the situation, and adopt an 'hedonic' approach to my life; in hope that continuous pleasurable activities (and maximum freedom from suffering) would suffice. The aim was to live well until, at some point, I died - preferably instantly, without realizing it.   

Life was something to be got-through - as pleasantly as possible. Nothing more.  

But as the years rolled-by, nostalgia for the lost Original Participation became stronger, and I developed a very powerful (including scholarly) interest in the disenchantment of life, alienation - and yearned for the immersive animism I regarded as normal for our ancestral hunter gatherers - as well as young children.

Yet such a state was seldom, and mostly weakly attainable by even my best efforts.  

In the middle of this I became a Christian; however, at first this conversion did not significantly provide an answer to the problem of alienation - because mainstream Christianity barely recognizes, and does not address, the problem. However, it does uniquely provide the potential to do so - if one is prepared to venture beyond the orthodox. 

It was not until about 2014 that I began to be aware that there was another way of organizing my efforts in life. The choice was not only between an immersive and unconscious absorption into living versus the typically modern and alienated detachment... There was also what Barfield Termed Final Participation. 

It took me a while to grasp what this meant; and to do this I needed to tackle the daunting business of reading Rudolf Steiner's early philosophical works focused on a kind of thinking in which Final Participation was (implicitly) achieved. 

I also, by providential synchronicity, rediscovered William Arkle - who approached this same matter from the different angle of levels of consciousness; and the possibility of attaining (for periods) a level of consciousness in which thinking was real and creative. 

And finally came the understanding that this mortal life was a time for learning (learning needed for our for resurrected eternal life); so that what mattered was learning-from experiences - rather than trying to attain and stay-in any particular state. 

The fact that it was impossible to live always (or even mostly) in a state of Final Participation did not detract from the value of those times when FP was possible, and did happen - so long as we learn from them. It is the learning that can be permanent! 

This is where Christianity comes in; because this mortal life is (among other things) a learning phase before eternal resurrected life - and Final Participation is the divine way of thinking and being. 

(That is why it is correctly termed 'Final' - because divine living is what is aimed-at.)  

So to participate 'finally' - in thinking - was both a foretaste and a preparation for Heaven; therefore an extremely important life-experience to learn-from. 

That is - broadly - how matters stand. Romantic Christianity has emerged as a term to describe that Christianity in which participation is regarded as crucial, and taken with primary seriousness. 

In other words, Christians need to acknowledge and overcome alienation; and work to experience the world, other people and Beings directly; in thought. And know that that thinking is reality.  

What I have observed in myself in recent years, is that the surface of thinking - with thoughts rapidly changing and lasting from fractions of seconds to a few seconds - is not much different from what it always was. There is a constant and superficial play of images and ideas - which are heavily influenced by immediate concerns, the environment, and System manipulations. 

The Real Self experiences this level of consciousness as if a pond skater moving across the surface of water that is constantly changing its colours and patterns - but which can never be penetrated; can only be known indirectly and by observation and reasoning...

But as well as this there is a participative thinking, which moves more slowly (minutes, hours, days...). This is like the flow of a stream, and the thinking of Final Participation is not on the surface of, but instead a part of this flowing stream yet capable creating and of adding to the flow - something from itself.  

Final Participation is unimpeded by the surface of the stream; because it operates at the level of consciousness that includes air, surface and water - yet we, as incarnate Beings, remain many and distinct - loving and creative - selves. 

So, although surface alienation remains, moment by moment; there is an underlying direct participation which lies on the edge of my consciousness, and of which I can become aware at (almost) any time; but which, even when not actively attended-to - constitutes a healing of the rift between my-self and the world which opened up some months before my twenty-second birthday.  

The simple message of Christianity - emphasized at least twenty-nine times in the Fourth Gospel

If the Fourth Gospel (named 'John') had been accorded the primacy of authority that it deserves; then Christianity would be understood differently, and much more simply. 

Because that Gospel repeats in different words and explains in different ways the core of Jesus's work - which is that Jesus offered us eternal life through belief in him. 

I have listed below twenty-nine instances from the 'John' Gospel in which this matter is referenced. 

Of course this immediately raises the questions of what is meant by eternal life; and what is meant by believing in Jesus. 

Most of the rest of the Gospel provides these explanations - for example that believing in Jesus is like a sheep following a shepherd - that Jesus will lead us to eternal life. 

Or that eternal life is a resurrected life and therefore only attainable by passing through the portal of death. 

And that this life eternal is qualitatively superior to this mortal life - this indicated by analogies of the life eternal with (for instance) bread, 'meat'/ food, water... but of an inexhaustible and wholly-satisfying nature, beyond anything possible on earth. 

But that core message of Jesus Christ's teaching - of life eternal, and that this life eternal comes via Jesus, is emphasized over-and-again. 

In the past couple of thousand years, Christianity has been elaborated (and distorted) from this simple core and into a variety of vast and complex systems - often focused on morality and behaviour; and with many and various justifications. 

All kinds of other things than life eternal have (in most times and places) become emphasized far more strongly than the core message. 

The simple, direct and personal relation between Jesus the Good Shepherd and those who love and wish to follow him, has often been made indirect - mediated by some interpretative source as the church, theology or scripture. 

Yet the Fourth Gospel shows us that we can answer the question 'What is Christianity?' or 'What is a Christian?' by a single sentence... Albeit it will probably take many sentences and much honest thinking to clarify what that sentence means - especially in the context of Modern Man whose consciousness and assumptions are so very different from those of the time and place of Jesus. 

As Easter approaches - when the complexities of Christianity reach a kind of climax - we might wish to try and keep this core of Jesus's teaching near the front of our minds. 

Twenty-nine indications of eternal life 

from the Fourth Gospel

1. That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 

2. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 

3. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. 

4. But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. 

5. And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together. 

6. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. 

7. And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. 

8. Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. 

9. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed. 

10. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. 

11. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 

12. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. 

13. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. I am that bread of life. 

14. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. 

15. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 

16. It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. 

17. Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. 

18. Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. 

19. The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. 

20. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep. 

21. Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 

22. And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 

23. Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. 

24. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. 

25. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak. 

26. Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. 

27. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. 

28. As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 

29. But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Philip K Dick's vision of God - 17 November 1980 (From The Exegesis)

From Exegesis [1:301] - I have slightly edited this for clarity and emphasis:

Strange to say, when I look back to 11-17-80 what seems to me now the most proof that it really was God is not so much the bliss but the distinct individual personality (with its intense love); the distinctness, the uniqueness, the individuality of the personality. 

I could then and still can imagine what he would look like were he physically visible: an old man in a robe, very old, very dignified and wise, but, most of all, loving and kind and gentle (yet firm, very firm) - but not as he is usually pictured, not a patriarch in the usual sense.

More, perhaps, like a magician - in contrast, though, to (say) Gandalf; much darker: gray and brown and black, in shadow, yes: in shadow, like Michelangelo painted him in his creating Eve. Yet not so, but close to it. 

Not heroic, as Michelangelo painted him, and not Hebrew. More supernatural. 

Really sort of physical, not “spiritual.” Yes: physical and supernatural, not a king or patriarch, all dark. Like a druid or humanist: learning. Not classical. Like a tree or a scholar. 

I know: like a book! Hence made of parchment, tree, branches, paper, cloth. 

He was not a type, like “the wise old King,” not an archetype, not like a statue; he was an individual, not man but a given specific man (in contrast to sort of Platonic eidos). It was as if the universe had been created by one given specific individual man. 

Book. Robe. Tree. Gray. Brown. Dark shades and fabric. 

There was nothing generic about him. No so to speak DNA. No latency; all was actualized and distinct. 

As if you had gone from the physical, material realm of specifics to the Platonic archetypal—and then back to the specific man! Like a complete circle. 

Strange. He was like all ontogeny! As if a wise old scholar, a sage, had conjured-up creation. Not God as we normally think of him, but a scholar of love and tenderness, but of vast learning. 

Again I see a book.

*

For those who do not know PKD's Exegesis; it comprises about eight years worth of the copious notes he made for himself; triggered by several Christian religious experiences that began in February of 1974 - trying to analyze and explain these experience using a wide range of often-contradictory schemata. 

The work is therefore not cumulative, is incoherent, and has no overall arc or conclusion. 

The Exegesis is, instead, a series of insights of many different types and degrees of quality; but characterized by extreme honesty and earnestness. The best of them I find extremely worthwhile and stimulating; and I am inspired by the actuality of this long-term and deicated 'project' of Dick's. 

Here; Dick describes a visionary experience of God as a person - which has close resemblances to my own (Mormon-esque) understanding of the nature and being of God. 

Note on The Exegesis. A large selection from this (edited by Pamela Jackson and Jonathan Lethem and others; none of whom are Christian, which is significant) was published in 2011. 

I own the Exegesis as an e-book, the paper copy; and as an audiobook - which is superbly narrated by Fred Stella, and is 52 hours long (yet only costs one credit to buy...)! 

In passing, we owe the survival of Exegesis mostly to the timely, decisive (and dubiously legal) actions of Tim Powers - then a young student friend of PKD, and now a successful SciFi-Fantasy author (and a lifelong, traditionalist Roman Catholic). 

The imaginative failure of cynics: Why so many people fail to perceive the purposively destructive motivations of the ruling Establishment

I continue to be astonished by the inability of most people to perceive the increasingly obvious destructive motivations of at least a substantial proportion of the most powerful and influential people in the world today. 

This inability is most striking among those who consider themselves to be suspicious and cynical types; those who delight to 'see-though' hypocritical masks to the self-seeking natures beneath. Such are adept at stripping away moralizing rhetoric, to reveal a sordid world of bribery and corruption, and self-gratification. 

However, these cynics suffer a complete failure of imagination when motivations are seriously evil in nature - rather than merely selfish: when the motivations are actively destructive. The cynics continue to explain the world on the basis of selfish-interest even when the rulers have explicitly stated their destructive intent! 

This imaginative failure is due to the in-practice atheism of cynics - cynics do not live by-God (a Christian cannot be a cynic, nor a cynic a Christian) and therefore cynics lack the discernment to know real evil. 

For cynics; evil is just normal human selfishness - amplified by operating unconstrained. 

In a strange sense, the blind-spot of cynics therefore derives from their residual natural and unconscious goodness! Cynics are 'normal' people, who imagine themselves in a position of great power; and then imagine how they-themselves might behave... 

Cynics thereby come-up-with some schema by which the assumed-normal people who are actually in power behave. Like all Men; cynics are significantly motivated by self-gratification - yet recognize that this is anti-social - and so self-interest forms the basis of their understanding. 

Yet the flaw in cynicism - as a species of atheism - is that not all motivations are 'normal'; the ruling Establishment are not 'normal people'; and therefore self-interest is not the most profound of Establishment motivations. 

This is a profound difference between the world situation Now and at any earlier time of history. There has never been a time like now when the Established rulers were essentially not mostly-'normal' people, with mostly-normal selfish motivations.  

We are alive in a time when value-inversion has becomes (and is increasingly) the basis of global strategy. Value-inversion is precisely not-normal; and its roots are not-human - they are instead demonic, Satanic.

This is why it has become absolutely essential to acknowledge and believe the reality of purposive supernatural evil in the world; because only thus can the real motivations of the Global Establishment be understood.  

A key fact about supernatural evil is that it does not depend on the essentials of human life: it does not need warmth and shelter, food and drink - it does not want marriage, family, children; it does not desire truth, beauty and virtue. 

Instead; supernatural evil's desires, its pleasures, are in the inversion and destruction of such things. 

Evil needs to be understood as oppositional: evil does not want any particular state-of-affairs to prevail; instead evil wants to destroy particular things - in particular to destroy Good things.

And that is the key to understanding the world today. 

If one can grasp that the Global Establishment is most-deeply motivated by a destructive animus - then it becomes simple (albeit horrific) to comprehend what they are up to. 

As a single example that ought to be obvious but is missed by almost everyone; there is a strong motivation being implemented to destroy the world economy.

If we - like any cynic - set-aside the supposed but falsely altruistic 'justifications' for destroying the world economy - such as 'fighting' the birdemic, climate change or the Fire Nation - we can see that what lies behind all of the major initiatives and strategies is (quite simply) the motivation to destroy production and distribution of 'goods'. 

While some individual human beings, and even a few small groups, can perhaps benefit from such destruction, for while; such selfish reasoning is both conjectural and fraught with uncertainty - and is not at the root of motivation.  

We need to notice that - whatever today's supposed-problem happens to be - the long-term, strategic, 'answer' is always includes some version of mass economic destruction.

(Although naturally, since all major policies require mass compliance, and because economic destruction entails the suffering and death of billions of humans; wholesale economic destruction can never be explicitly stated as a primary objective - but only as dressed-up in the disguise of a fake-means towards some humanly-desired end - controlling the birdemic, preventing climate emergency, promoting equity/ diversity/ justice etc, etc yawn...) 

The problem for a world of atheists and cynics; is that actually to desire wholesale economic destruction as a priority and for itself, is a motivation that makes no human sense - therefore it is not noticed by humans who deny the supernatural. 

And so - what ought to be obvious is denied as absurd - and anyone who notices the fact is regarded as crazy, as insane!  

Because it would indeed be insane for humans to desire wholesale economic destruction; normal people assume that therefore it doesn't happen. But when demonic-evil is in control - the insane becomes normal. 

Another thing about destruction is that it is easy! 

In this mortal work dominated by 'entropy'; creation is very difficult, but to destroy that which is-being, or has-been, created is easy - a child or an animal (or dud computer programme) can do it. Therefore; people can easily be tricked into doing the work of destruction under pretense of creating something impossible or incoherent, improving something, or any 'change for the better'. 

Almost the entirety of Leftism, through its history, has been a series of such vague, half-baked or impractical 'altruistic' schemes - the legacy of which is always... destruction. 

All of these schemes are, from the perspective of supernatural evil; merely con-tricks to mobilize energies towards destruction. 

For instance; currently The Great Reset is exactly such a scam; whereby some of the richer and more powerful Establishment figures are being 'tricked' into a colossal and coordinated effort...

The outcome of which is sheer destruction - yet hypnotized by an incoherent and impossible daydream of themselves as benign dictators of a 'sustainable' and utilitarian world of omni-surveillance on micro-control - the here-and-now destruction is explained-away as just a step towards a 'better' world. 

All the Reset schemes are immediately destructive - reduced production, reduced trade and transport, reduced energy supplies, reduced labour, degradation of money - while this gross fact of actual, ongoing destruction is concealed (even from themselves!) by vaguely conjectural aspirations of 'building back a better world' - sustainable, Green, equitable, peaceful - blah, blah, blah...

This is exactly what must (therefore will) necessarily happen when Men reject God and deny creation - therefore cannot perceive, understand or resist the operations of supernatural, demonic evil. 

Active destruction is all around us, yet explained-away over-and-again as merely accidental incompetence (but why are errors always in the same direction?); the mistakes of 'weird' ideology (but why has the world embraced weirdness?); the consequences of selfishness (but why does modern selfishness take such inverted forms?) - and so on. 

Nothing can or will be done to stop or reverse the gross destruction; because the purpose behind the destruction is outwith the explanatory models of a Modern Man. Modern Man - maimed in his soul by choosing to be cut-off from reality - has made himself utterly helpless. 

Meanwhile, those who recognize supernatural evil at work; can only watch the vast and deliberate - yet invisible - collapse of the world, with mingled astonishment and horror. 

Can Christians build a Good counter-culture?

No! - it is way too late, anyway; but the developed Christian counter-cultures (e.g. Roman Catholic, evangelical, Mormon) have all failed, converged, and gone over to the enemy - as have the churches themselves. 

Why suppose new counter-cultures would do better, with less backing and under far more adverse conditions? 

And when people say 'we' should build alternative (Christian, or 'right wing') institutions - it needs to be asked who exactly is this 'we' who are going to build and fund them? Is it the same 'we' who instantly and eagerly falls into line with whatever is today's media-stoked frenzy? 

It is the the same 'we' who - on the mere say-so of the most global, dishonest and evil-controlled media in history - last month instantly adopted an historically-unprecedented pseudo-moralizing frenzy against the Fire Nation. 

And a few months before that it was a climate emergency, or systemic racism, and the birdemic and its peck - each took a turn as the most overwhelmingly important issue ever. 

Or perhaps the 'we' that is so aggressively enthusiastic about the necessity of poisoning and mutilating and grooming more and ever-more and ever-younger children (aka the transagenda). 

Or the 'we' who quietly go along with subsidizing more and ever-more millions of migrants; intentionally directed by globalist billionaires to subvert, disrupt and overwhelm all Western nations?

Where are the 'we' who are numerous and organized enough to resist these grossly and urgently destructive campaigns - by serious and deep thought and understanding, by words, by non-cooperation, by taking any kind of personal risk, or making any kind of up-front personal sacrifice?

Surely not the legions of internet posters and commenters who are too intimidated even to use their own names? Can we seriously expect pseudonymous tough-talkers to stick their heads above the parapet and make a counter-culture, when the 'shooting' starts and sacrifices must be made? 

If there are many such 'we' then they are certainly keeping quiet about it. 

  

The deep problem is that - here and now - culture is itself secular, leftist - hence demon-affiliated. The counter-culture cannot help but be 'culture' - and it will thereby be coerced and bribed into ideological conformity. 

Culture - by whatever definition - has comprehensively failed. It is, indeed, culture that is the major agent of evil. 

The Christian who recognizes the purposive and dominating evil of these End Times will search in vain for even the germ of a counter-culture to cut-off-from and join-the-fight-against the mainstream; because all the self-styled alternative cultures are lethally compromised by their complicity in the mainstream culture (which is itself The Problem). 

How can a genuinely 'counter'-culture become established and thrive when law, finance, corporations, politicians, educational systems, the major churches of all denominations, and the coordinated mass media are All against them? 

It is up to individuals to resist the evil, leftist Satan affiliated culture - which they can do, in a thousand ways, large and small - every hour of every day; by thought (primarily), word, and deed.

Yet too many Christians are crippled in this task by their residual loyalty and obedience to some or another fragment of the evil-culture; which they have dishonestly convinced themselves (without a shred of plausible evidence) can be reformed and reoriented from evil to God; despite the lack of recognition or repentance from the organization and their leaders, of their many and deep sins. 

It is as if Christians imagine our God is a magical mind-controller, who can 'save us' by casting a spell to 'make everyone Good'; rather than a creator who has always worked through the free agency of Men.

And without individual Men who choose to repent their complicity with evil, and tear away from the vortex of damnation into which culture and its institutions have enthusiastically-jumped; without individual Men who will lend their personal insight and efforts to God's work - then God can do nothing to help us. 

God can, does and will keep on giving us chances - but if we consistently refuse these chances: God can do nothing. And we will endure the consequences of our apostasy (and even then will fail to recognize that this is what we have our-selves chosen). 

God can only help those who first choose (as individuals) to help themselves. 

God can also help groups or cultures who help themselves - however, at present, there are none such; not of any size and power. 

But for those who choose again-and-again to believe, obey and follow evil Men, Groups and The Culture down the path of damnation - God can do nothing. 

Is this world a moral gymnasium? Bernard Shaw, William Arkle and Colin Wilson

Your pious English habit of regarding the world as a moral gymnasium built expressly to strengthen your character in, occasionally leads you to think about your own confounded principles when you should be thinking about other people's necessities.

From Man and Superman by George Bernard Shaw

In Man and Superman, Shaw makes Tanner jeer at Octavius's "pious English habit of regarding the world as a moral gymnasium built expressly to strengthen your character in...", but this is precisely how Arkle does regard it, ultimately.  

From Colin Wilson's introduction to A Geography of Consciousness by William Arkle.

The idea that this world is a 'moral gymnasium' seemed so absurd to Bernard Shaw - so obviously refuted by experience - that he merely needed to identify its covert presence it in order to refute it. 

The idea seemed absurd because Shaw was assuming that this mortal life was the only life - and therefore "other people's necessities" (implicitly their material necessities - shelter, food, decent standard of living) in this mortal life, ought always to be regarded as more important than the self-satisfactions of individual moral improvement. 

This was assuming the truth of a pragmatic and materialist viewpoint which has been - in fact - an unconscious metaphysical assumption for many people only since the nineteenth century and in The West. 

Thus Colin Wilson, born some three generations after Shaw and writing in the 1970s, likewise unconsciously and unthinkingly assumed that when his friend - the spiritual philosopher William Arkle - discussed this mortal life in terms of its being a 'university' for individuals in which individuals might learn - he was talking of the same thing as Shaw. 

Yet there was a vast and crucial difference between Shaw and Arkle - because what Shaw was mocking was the idea of the world being 'designed' to make better men during this mortal life and before their death; Arkle was talking of experiences in this mortal life contributing to spiritual (including moral) improvement after this mortal life and biological death. 

Shaw and Wilson were both taking for granted that Men were extinguished at death; but Arkle explicitly stated that Men lived eternally. 

Of course, at another level - and when he was thinking about things more consciously - Wilson knew perfectly well that his friend Bill (who he visited and stayed with many times) believed in a life beyond death; indeed Arkle believed in multiple reincarnations (perhaps in multiple universes) leading up to some Men becoming fully divine-friends and co-creators with God, the primary creator. 

But I think it is a telling lapse of Wilson's that he forgot this vital distinction when writing about Arkle - and I believe that Wilson forgot it because he did not (at that time, anyway) share Arkle's belief in life after death; and in particular Wilson did not share Arkle's conviction of a personal creator God who had designed this world as a 'university' within-which Men might have experiences from which they would incrementally learn to become higher and more divine spirits. 

Or perhaps Wilson remembered after he had written that section, which was why he added (but did not explain) "ultimately" - because that was indeed was Arkle meant. 

In conclusion - I agree with Shaw and Wilson that this world is not a moral gymnasium designed to make Men better in this life; but I also agree with Arkle that this is indeed, and ultimately, a kind of 'gymnasium' in which we can (if we choose) learn to improve our-selves - with the important proviso that that improvement is manifested, not in our mortal, but in our eternal life. 

Why The Empire of Evil will Not destroy real Christianity - despite that it desires and intends to do so (with reference to Acts of the Apostles Chapters 21-28)

In the closing section of Acts of the Apostles, from chapter 21, there is a rather absurdly-detailed story; a complex and confusing rigmarole of events that begin with Paul being mobbed by Jews at the Temple in Jerusalem, and ends with him being tried, and released! by the Romans in Rome. 

The author of Acts (who was with Paul, throughout) is apparently trying to explain how it was that Paul - and by extension the early Christians - were Not destroyed, and the faith eradicated; despite that the Empire and the Jews both wanted this, and held all the worldly power. 

Philip K Dick wrote an astonishingly insightful meditation on this theme -  in his Exegesis notes from 1980. Dick considered that this episode of Acts was, in a this-worldly sense, an opposite narrative to the crucifixion. 

Whereas Jesus was mobbed, captured, interrogated, tried and executed - Paul went through the same stages...  yet was released!

The release of so dangerous a man as Paul, seems a remarkable thing; given that it was in the interests of both Romans and Jews that Paul either be killed and eliminated, or at least imprisoned and absolutely prevented from continuing his work of evangelism. 

At one level, we can see the hand of divine providence at work in the many and varied encounters of Paul; yet in another sense the worldly odds were stacked against him - and in fact he suffered beatings, chaining, imprisonment and many other tribulations - that were more than sufficient to silence a lesser man. 

Divine providence was 'not enough' to protect Paul from the many and terrible persecutions that Man's free will could inflict; how, then, could this same providence secure Paul's liberation? 

We could therefore ask more specifically how it was that divine providence was able to navigate a path through such apparently overwhelming and irresistible hazards leading to Paul's release in Rome. How was it that "the prisoner slides through the fingers of the Empire" (as PKD said).   

And this same question is again, Now, urgently relevant for Christian survival in a totalitarian global System which dwarfs the Romans in size and power; and holds and enforces an ideology of value-inversion that is far more existentially hostile to Christianity than the pagan Roman Empire ever was.  

(By contrast; the Roman's hostility to Christianity was mostly merely expedient - they disliked any group that tended to cause trouble for the Empire.)

The answer is that there is not one single answer; but that The System is, in actuality, very limited in what it can do - and is continually, and increasingly, sabotaging itself. 

And this applies with particular strength to an incoherent, self-hating and self-destroying Empire - such as the Global Establishment in 2022. 

As PKD wrote:

The Empire has lost the ability to state its case; it cannot close the trap. The later history of this archetype will be that the Empire will lose even more power; eventually it will not even be able to arrest its victim, let alone crucify him.

What matters in such circumstances is Not a detailed understanding of how the Empire works, nor any detailed strategy of how to elude its grasp; but strong faith underpinned by the courage that comes from hope of resurrection. Given that, and when an outcome is necessary or desirable to divine providence - God will find a way to accomplish the 'impossible'.