Friday, 17 September 2021

Why were these End Times predictable from so long ago?

How was it that the End Times were (broadly) predictable so long ago? Why was it clear that evil would (sooner or later) prevail in this world?

The basic reason could be that the demonic powers are immortal spirits while Men are mortal. And this was, of course, a fact well known to our ancestors - who drew conclusions that were, perhaps, much clearer and more obvious (at least, to the more thoughtful and insightful among them) then they are nowadays.  

This fundamental asymmetry means that evil is able to plan and scheme on a timescale across the whole history of the earth and multiple human generations; whereas, by contrast, each human generation must (in a sense) start afresh with learning about the world. 

Thus, the demons tend cumulatively to out-strategize Men. 

Another ways of thinking about it is that this mortal world is ruled by entropy. Although we are created-creatures in a created-world, and God is still create-ing; nonetheless we are mortal incarnates, and entropy must win-out eventually.  

Over time, entropy will overwhelm mortal creations. 

However; evil spirits are excluded from Heaven; and in Heaven, Men are eternal incarnates: There is all-creation and no entropy. 

Therefore, as  this mortal earth wears-down, the odds increasingly favour evil; and the End Times were always inevitable. 

But in Heaven... well, there things are very different. 

Thursday, 16 September 2021

Memory versus forgetting in old age

It is especially a feature of Old Age (from the early fifties, typically) that some have a strong memory while others forget - some live in the past, others in the now.

I believe that those who survive to old age do so for a reason - they are sustained by God to learn something important to them. 

Crudely put, to acknowledge and repent their sins, but perhaps a particular sin which threatens salvation - which may provoke them to reject resurrection and Heaven, to refuse to follow Jesus after death.

Everybody who is alive, remains alive for Reasons - and these reasons are spiritual, and these reasons shape our situation.

One who has a strong memory and lives in the past probably has something in need of acknowledging and repenting. Not to feel Guilt for sin (feeling which is akin to fear and itself a sin indicating lack of faith), but to recognise, and ask God for forgiveness.

One who forgets, and whose disposition is to live in present and future, might need to examine motivations. 

One whose drive diminishes and motivations dwindle, may be being encouraged to set aside hopes placed in worldly plans and schemes.

in sum, our actual situation and condition are shaped by The Creator so that we have the best possible chance to learn what we most need  - need Spiritually. 

We Are Alive for reasons, all of us - and learning the reasons is a vital aspect of why we are still alive.

Tuesday, 14 September 2021

It is that which is eternal plus that which is divine in us, which enables the choice between Good and evil

All Men are capable of choosing to join with Good or with evil, for two reasons. 

The first is that we are eternal Beings whose primordial existence preceded creation - so we know primordial chaos by experience.

Secondly, we are all children of God who each inherit something of that divinity which created our reality. So we know the reasons for creation, its purpose and meaning.

The choice between Good and evil is the choice between affirming and commiting-to the purpose and meaning of creation; or rejecting these (and the divine in us) which is implicitly to desire a return towards chaos.

This is a real choice, based upon experiential knowledge of the goals of evil and of Good. 

And ultimately it is a binary choice.

Monday, 13 September 2021

Not colluding in phobic and OCD birdemic behaviour

It seems obvious that many people are phobic, clinically so, about the birdemic; that is, they are unreasonably afraid and practice avoidance. This merges with obsessive compulsive symptoms (unpleasant, intrusive ruminations) and compulsions (to practice ineffectual ritual behaviors).

All of these are curable by 'behaviour therapy' - which is just practicing doing whatever evokes the phobia; and Not doing whatever is the compulsion (and acknowledging that the obsession is an evil).

As with more mainstream neuroses, the essential component in recovery is to want it; and, again as with mainstream neuroses, this desire to get well is often absent or very weak.

Because people cannot reach the sunny uplands of cure without passing through the tough country of anxiety. In other words, things have to feel worse (for a while) before they get better.

You probably can't make a birdemic neurotic want to get better, but you can avoid colluding in their avoidance. Simple acts of normal behaviour, cheerfully done (or Not done) can therefore be helpful. 

...While your continued compliance makes the neurotics feel better in the short term, but at the cost of entrenching and exacerbating their pathology.

Sunday, 12 September 2021

Why does the ruling ideology of the world Not have a name?

This question has often been asked, but the answer is simple and clear. The answer is that the ruling ideology of the world is Evil - and evil has no positive definition. 

The name of Evil does not derive from what it wants but from what it opposes; and that is Good, which is God and divine creation.

Evil is not something you Are, but a cause you serve. It is not a specific group, but one side in a Spiritual war; a war where each individual can and must choose which side he supports. (No abstention is possible.)

The problem with giving a name to Evil thus understood is that it constitutes the entirety of world and national governments (all parties), the mass media, and the (cross-linked) bureaucracies of all major social institutions (including 'Christian' churches).

For most people, Evil thus understood also includes almost every person they know.

So the problem of naming Evil is the problem of acknowledging its overwhelming prevalence and power.

Friday, 10 September 2021

Trial and error is needed in life (from William Arkle)

And now another factor can be looked at, and that is a process in our education which will give us the necessary strength in the upholding of this unique individuality and its objective system of values. And here again, our intelligence will tell us that, if such strength is to be real unto itself, in order that the individual can carry the reality of Divine friendship for another, then such strength can only be gained by encounters with opposition. 

The definition of strength, in this respect, is that it is the ability of the individual to express and have faith in the most valued qualities of its nature. If the individual can lose sight of such qualities, or knowingly resign responsibility for them, then this would be a mark of insufficient strength in that individual.

This type of strength is not the lower order one which we are more often aware of in this world; which is considered to be, like a steam roller, concerned to go its own way at the expense of crushing and pushing aside all opposition. This is not strength but force and, while the former is allied to spiritual integrity, the latter is only concerned with having its own way...

Another way of drawing attention to the significance of strength is to realise that, if we believe that we possess a particular valuable quality, but discover that a situation arises in which we lose it, then that quality was never properly possessed by us. In other words, we only properly possess qualities of character when they are so embedded in our nature that they can never be lost. Such ‘possessions’ are an intrinsic part of our ultimate unique Divine Individuality and we are not strong in that reality until it is unassailable. 

 It would be quite wrong for us now to jump to the conclusion that God has encouraged ‘evil’ in His University in order to supply this very encounter of opposition as a part of the curriculum. The reality must be much more subtle than this, and very important for us to understand.

It would be a harsh and ungracious person who would create a system of education in which he deliberately cultivated evil for his children to face. It would not only be a violation of love towards the children who opposed it, but it would be an even greater violation of love towards those in whom the evil was cultivated.

But there is another way in which evil can arise in the educational system which does not contradict the nature of the educator, and that is to allow the full function of freedom of initiative, invention and exploration, for this will surely lead to mistakes occurring, out of which the quality of evil will quickly grow, as we have mentioned before. In this way, the recognition of the wrong use of our Divine Nature, and the experience of the unpleasantness of the repercussions, will lead to a desire to correct the error. 

Thus the full cycle of divine integrity and responsibility can be experienced in which error breeds evil, which is recognised as distasteful and which leads to the discovery of the means of correction.

...So we have arrived at the need for, and proper allowance for, the principle of trial and error.

I have William Arkle to thank for the clearest understanding of what God was aiming for when He designed (created) this mortal life; and (from the opposite, human, perspective) how this actual life as we personally experience it, can be understood as well-designed for God's purposes. 

Here Arkle is talking about the need for 'strength' which can also be termed 'courage' - and the distinction between mere personality-level strength/ courage (in service of within-mortal-life goals); and that divine and spiritual strength/ courage which has to do with preparing us for heavenly life as children of God. 

It is important to recognize that: we only properly possess qualities of character when they are so embedded in our nature that they can never be lost.

But Arkle understood Men as having to develop and 'perfect' this indomitable strength through many situations in multiple incarnations. While I, on the other hand, believe that (because of the work of Jesus Christ) we only need to understand and desire this strength - and we do not personally need to achieve it in life.  

When it comes to the possibility and choice of resurrection, after this mortal life; it is enough for us to recognise the need for such a fullness of spiritual strength - and it will be granted us by resurrection. 

The purpose of learning in this mortal life is therefore to know what is Good: to learn True Values. It is neither an intention nor a possibility of this life - nor of multiple such lives - to attain any kind of perfection; whether in strength/ courage nor in any of the of the essential virtues.

Strength/ courage is offered, indeed, as an inseparable part of 'the total package' of resurrection; and resurrection is wanted by those who love Jesus Christ and wish to follow him to Life Everlasting (by means of our resurrection). 

Strength is one necessary attribute of being divine - and the need for strength is something that some of us need to learn in mortal life; while others of us already know it before we are incarnated as mortals; or else our love of God and of divine creation is already so strong that it encompasses all the essential specific attributes.    

Thursday, 9 September 2021

In this global spiritual war, seek your compensatory strengths

That this world is one of spiritual warfare seems more obvious now than ever. Furthermore, the side of Evil - the side of Satan, demons; their slaves, servants and dupes; the side that opposes God, divine creation and The Good - is very obviously triumphant on a global and institutional scale. 

Especially since the global totalitarian coup of early 2020; the self-identified Christian churches are revealed as weak, corrupted onto the side of evil, and also in rapid decline (with international sustained closures, and near-cessation of core Christian activities).  

But because value-inversion* is more advanced than at any time and place in history; this situation is concealed from consciousness among the mass of people. 

(*Value-inversion is the inversion of Good and Evil, by which truth, beauty and virtue are replaced by their opposites; and where lies, vileness and sin are by mass-propaganda, officially and legally promoted.) 

Any honest appraisal of the current situation by an individual serious Christian will know all this. 

But there are compensations! Inevitably and necessarily!

How can I be sure? Simply because God is Good, God is The creator (and always creating), we dwell in God's creation; and God loves each of us as his children. 

Therefore, God will ensure that all who choose to take his side in the spiritual war will be granted the strength to do so. 

When the whole, global public realm has been corrupted and inverted to the active pursuit of evil and destruction of The Good; then (obviously!) God will ensure that each individual who wishes to defy evil and adhere to Good will be enabled to do so

So, if you are a Christian who is not yet aware of the compensations of these times; then perhaps you should seek and discover them in your condition?

Because they are Now a fact of life: a fact of your life. 

Wednesday, 8 September 2021

If hobbits were still alive... What then?

When I first read Tolkien in my early-middle teens; I had a yearning desire that hobbits, elves, dwarves should still be alive in the world. I felt that - if this could only be the case - then life would become magical and beautiful... or would it? How exactly?

Nowadays, I regard this as one of the traps of materialism. When half of us 'knows' (because we are materialists) that there are no other speaking peoples than man, no giants or dragons, no magical wizards or ghosts... 

Then the other part of us - which remains spontaneously and naturally spiritual - automatically concludes that If such things were real For Sure, our world would be magical, re-enchanted, romantic...

And in this half-way house of hope-less yearning - we Get Stuck. 

Because, it would not really be the case that hobbits would make a better world - not unless our way of thinking also changed. 

Because the reality of hobbits somewhere in the world would not transform our condition any more than the reality of the pygmies; the reality of magical sorcerers would just be a different kind of 'science'; the presence of invisible fairies would be just some novel electromagnetic phenomenon... 

Because we are so materialist, so mundane in our way of thinking, that these would be just more facts about the dull, thin, alienated reality which we perceive asif looking-out at a TV screen from inside our brains. 

This, indeed, is exactly what happened with New Age spirituality - it just became another (mundane) alternative-science - based on consciousness understood as vibrations, frequencies, energies or fields (a quasi-physics, mostly); and a branch of 'therapy' - but using acupuncture, crystals and shamanism instead of surgery, drugs and counselling.   

Even meditation - which used to be regarded as the most advanced form of mystical spirituality - is now materialized to the mundane activity of 'mindfulness' (and taught with state approval by mega-bureaucracies). 

Fundamentally; the problem is not in the world, but in our-selves; or rather our lack of real-selves. 

It is because we-our-selves are self-aware at a superficial and externally-imposed level of thinking: our personality, our thoughts, and even our thought processes are passively assimilated from our environment; and our environment in one that is officially dead, meaningless, purposeless; and operating on the basis of some mindless mixture of causality and randomness. 

We take the world, ideas and concepts, and our experiences; and we make them mundane.  

The first step in escaping this Black Iron Prison is to cease assisting in its construction and maintenance. Every thing, all knowledge and understanding, entails mind; so our miserable and pointless world is mind-made; made (partly, and essentially) by our own minds. 

We are our own jailers and tormentors. It was we who painted ourselves into this corner from which we perceive there to be no possible escape. 

Habits are hard to break - especially when it is habitual thinking - as such - from-which we need to escape. 

Yet it can be done; and we can recognize and value when it is done - and repent when it is not. We can understand our lives as the best times when we know the world to be alive, conscious, created; and that the other mundane materialist times are an evil spell with which we collude. 

The materialist mundane miserable reality is real; but only because we help to make it real. The enchanted romantic reality is also real, but only when we acknowledge it as such. 

As usual, it is a choice; and nowadays (and increasingly - for most people) a binary choice. 

Cease hoping for rescue

By hobbit and elf, 

By dragon or spell;

And repent our complicity

In the thinking of-Hell. 

Tuesday, 7 September 2021

What is the meaning of Establishment language? Manipulation versus communication

When you hear a politician speak, read a press release or a media headline; you are not dealing with an attempt to communicate the truth about reality; you are dealing with language as calculated manipulation ('language' here including visual, symbolic, audio and other media). 

Manipulation is language intended to shape attitudes, thought-processes and actions

Such language could also be termed propaganda - that is, language intended to have a particular effect on others; albeit the usage of 'propaganda' tends to be rather narrower than what I intend here by 'manipulation'.  

This is why the Establishment are liars. They are not even trying to communicate information - let alone accurate information; They are always trying to affect our behaviour. 

Their purpose is to get us to do what They want. All 'communication' is just a means to that end.

Real conversation treats 'the other' as a person with agency; however manipulation regards 'the other' as an object to be controlled. (So, for Them, agency is an obstacle to be overcome.)  

They will of course mislead and lie to whatever extent they judge to be helpful to the goal of shaping us. Untruthfulness ranges from subtle distortions, through selection and exaggeration, all the way up to complete fabrication; as when a person with a false identity simulates fake emotions to tell a total lie - in order (successfully) to manipulate public opinion. 

They do not regard themselves as purposive and habitual 'liars', because They are not even trying to tell the truth. 

They are using 'communications' in order to manipulate other in ways They deem to be desirable - and truth simply doesn't come into it. 

The distinction between truth and untruth does not exist for Them, because their language is directed at manipulation, not communication. Lies, truths, or any mixture of them, are simply means to an end - and that end is manipulation. 


This is also why one can neither debate nor even discuss things with anyone representing or serving the Establishment. 

While you or I might be attempting to communicate information to Them, They are trying to change us. There is a total asymmetry of intent. 

Which is why it is futile to engage with linguistic emanations from government, bureaucracy and the media. It is a category error. It is treating manipulations as if they were communications; it is treating intentional dishonesty as if it was an attempt at honesty. 

(I first recognized this when dealing with the university bureaucracy, when I was asked why I did not comply with some directive; and I gave honest answers backed by logic and factual evidence... But They were only interested in my answers as potential ammunition to make me do what They wanted. My communications were being regarded as counter-propaganda merely; and a possible source of clues suggesting how better to manipulate me. So I stopped arguing and discussing and explaining; and from then on simply stated that I would not comply unless I was compelled.)  

So, how should we understand Establishment linguistic manipulations? What is the specific meaning of a particular press release, announcement or mass media product? 

The first step is to discern when another party is manipulating us, when he is producing propaganda to change our behaviour rather than communications so that we may better choose. This is easy nowadays, because all major institutions and their leadership are always engaged primarily in manipulation.

Easy... so long as we are not misled by the common tactic by which the Establishment (dishonestly) pretend manipulation is communication. Typically, Their propaganda is constructed to be deniable as such. 

Propaganda is not self-labelled, it does not come to us in a marked package. We must each make an inference by our personal judgment. 

Luckily, such discernment is an easy matter (for a serious Christian); but we-our-selves must do it, nobody else can be relied-upon to do it for us... 

(On the other hand, They pretend that any honest communication which tends to oppose Their manipulations is actually propaganda. In other words; They pretend that their own propaganda is information, and pretend that others' information is propaganda. They are not constrained by Truth!) 

We can (usually) understand manipulations by discerning the effect on our-selves.

For example, much official and media language (such as the NEWS HEADLINES) is nowadays intended to induce fear. By the fear that is induced in us (albeit maybe transiently) we know the purpose of that language. 

Other times it is despair that is being intended, perhaps leading to an impulse towards hope-less compliance. Or resentment - where the intent is to make someone feel himself a victim.

Also typically; the induced negative feeling of (say) fear, despair, or resentment is shaped towards a fake positive feeling

So that my fear is reconceptualized as an abstract form of 'altruism' (I'm not afraid for myself, but for other people"; my despair into 'realism' ("it will happen whatever, so we might as well make the best of it"); my resentment into a concern with 'justice'; my self-interest into redressing 'oppression' (as with much socialism, feminism, antiracism and the sexual revolution). 

I believe that we all need to wake-up to explicit consciousness of what should be a clear and obvious distinction. 

The distinction between that language intended to manipulate - which is what we get from Them (from all authority and institutions, 24/7)...

And that language intended to communicate reality truth-fully - which is nowadays typically personal, private, and within a very small social circle. 

Note: This distinction in the use of language was crystalized for me by watching some videos by Christopher Michael Langan

Friday, 3 September 2021

Living Jesus, historical Jesus (or, Romantic Christianity in a nutshell)

It is a distinctive aspect of Christianity (as I understand it) that Jesus was an historical person, who changed the world - such that things were qualitatively different after Jesus than before. 

Being located in history, Christianity is a religion that has a time-line. For Christians, time is quite naturally understood as sequential - before Christ; his life and death, and what came after. 

This is why I find fundamentally wrong the long-standing, classical and mainstream theology, desire to make Christianity into a quasi-Platonic spirituality, rooted-in a God conceived to exist in timeless/ out-of-time eternity.  

However necessarily historical, Christianity is also about the living and future Jesus Christ. This is expressed in many ways - but the essential point is that Jesus is alive and active in this world; and can be felt by those who follow him as a daily, hourly, influence, guidance, inspiration.  

The historical and living Jesus have mostly been combined by practices like Holy Communion (whether as re-enactment or as memorial), reading the Gospels, reflecting on the life and teachings of Jesus, and by iconography and symbolism. 

But all these share the primarily backward-looking perspective: the living Jesus is experienced by first attending to the historical Jesus. Whatever the subsequence experience, this is to regard Jesus at one remove, the present seen through the past. 

And therefore all these share the disadvantage of requiring assertions about the past, which have by 2021 become extremely clouded by a vast accretion of rival interpretations - whether theological, traditional, scholarly, or whatever...

My conviction is that from here and now we need to strive for a contact with the living Jesus Christ that is primarily direct, and therefore independent of the historical evidence and theories. 

Having established such primary, direct, living contact; it can (and for most people will) be strengthened and enriched secondarily with whatever is found valuable - and this is where scriptures, churches, and the vast mass of practices, symbolism and art through the ages may come-in. 

But some will probably find that many or most of these referents of the historical Jesus are unhelpful or counterproductive; and certainly a primary focus on the historical Jesus can be very off-putting to the prospective convert, for whatever reason - anything from personal or aesthetic preferences to socio-political prejudices; or simply from the confusing and disorientating morass of controversy that surrounds every statement. 

The search for Jesus Christ has thereby, I feel convinced, become an unprecedently personal and experiential matter. As such, there is always the danger that Jesus will simply be invented to support pre-existent socio-political assumptions. 

Yet nowadays this is less of a problem than ever before; since the evil of the mainstream, official and dominant socio-political assumptions is so extreme and separate from that Good which we know by inner intuition of our divine selves and from direct contact with Jesus Christ (by the Holy Ghost); that confusion and conflation by a sincere, truth-seeking and virtuous spirit is ever less likely, with each passing month. 

Also, the kind of person who wants a Jesus to fit and sustain the assumptions of this modern world is not likely to want Jesus very much; except as an expedient pseudo-belief to support a job or position: that is, as a religious leader. And we observe that Christian leaders (as with leaders of other religions) are almost all exactly thus corrupted. 

But for someone seeking Jesus for himself or herself and who will not profit by it in terms of salary or status; there is a greater chance of knowing the truth of Jesus primarily by inner and direct intuition than ever before. 

Note added: the above can serve as a brief encapsulation of what I mean by Romantic Christianity

Thursday, 2 September 2021

Audiobook version of Look Who's Back - by Timur Vermes (read by Julian Rhind-Tutt and translated by Jamie Bulloch)

I first noticed this book when it was published in 2012, simply because of the classic artwork on the cover - and after browsing a little, bought a copy. I later watched the movie, and listened to the Audiobook version. 

Look Who's Back has emerged, over the subsequent years and several readings/ listenings, as one of my favourite high-comic novels (at the level of such as Lucky Jim by Kingsley Amis, Changing Places by David Lodge, or Towards the End of the Morning by Michael Frayn); and the only one which is a translation; although one would never for a moment suspect it - demonstrating the superb job done by Jamie Bulloch. 

(I usually find translations of novels, even by prestigious translators, to be leaden - and need to 'make allowances'. Not here. It is as well done as William Weaver's version of Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose)  

The subtlety and twining-complexity of the humour, as well as the frequent belly-laughs, is first rate; and the whole is beautifully shaped and paced; and (that rare thing) has a satisfying ending. 

The set-up is that (for never-explained reasons) the real Hitler appears in modern Germany, near to the remains of the Fuhrer bunker; and sets about to explore contemporary Germany and rebuild his power. This leads to a lot of very amusing satire, but a great deal more; although it is easier to say what it is not, than what it is. Indeed, the novel is (like all the best books) unique and unclassifiable. 

Julian Rhind-Tutt does a tremendous job of narrating the book. Hitler is given a distinctive but slight, clipped German accent; while the other characters are allocated Received Pronunciation/ Estuary English or Cockney-'Mockney' voices according to social class and position (the Mockney - faked-Cockey - accent is very common in British mass media circles). In other words, with the exception of Hitler's narrative voice, the setting is by implication 'translated' into English, as well as the words. 

Therefore, unless you dislike audiobooks, I would recommend this version above the written text; since Rhind-Tutt is able to guide the listener to the most apt 'tone' by which the novel can be appreciated. 


Wednesday, 1 September 2021

Afghanistan - Arhimanic mistake or Sorathic strategy? And so what?

The recent business in Afghanistan is something most of us know only via the mass media; which means that the meaning of the events has been distorted in order to manipulate us, and key facts are also certain to have been changed or omitted. 

In what follows I am therefore making the assumption that it is true that the Western powers recently withdrew from Afghanistan in something like the disastrous manner reported (i.e. with extremely rapid collapse of the West funded/ trained state military, uncontrollably overrun by the insurgents, leaving behind significant numbers of US citizens, with colossal capture of US (at least) military materiel, and with a mass population transfer of Afghans (mostly men of military age and experience) into The West.

This has been almost universally regarded as a disaster for the Leadership of the Western Powers, a sudden and catastrophic loss of status as a global power, evidence of a collapse in military effectiveness etc. And ushering in a new period of global 'instability'.

The assumption seems to be that all this happened (assuming it did) against the wishes of the Global Establishment. On those grounds, some Christians regard it as A Good Thing. 

This is what I doubt. Good is not an 'emergent property' from evil motivations!

I see the events as further evidence for the ascendancy of a Sorathic tendency of deliberate destruction, of encouraging chaos; and that this 'strategy' is rapidly taking-over from the Ahrimanic strategy of making the whole world into a 'high-tech', Matrix-like, atheist-leftist-totalitarian media-bureaucratic super-state; where the masses are maintained under close and continual surveillance, and subjected to detailed behavioural control. 

I see this as a further step in the breakdown of the high point of global coordination and consensus which was reached early in 2020, and an increase in the evilness of evil from the domination of 'lawful evil' to more and more 'chaotic' evil of the escalating war of each against all.  

In sum; this 'catastrophe' may indeed both be a genuine catastrophe (i.e. an increase in the domination of evil), and yet it may also be a intended outcome of decisions from within the Western powers to whom the events are 'a catastrophe'. 

As always; even this is (for Christians) no reason at all for increased fear - because fear is a sin, and very obviously what They (the demonic powers) want from us. Nor is it a reason for despair; because Christian hope is indestructible and lies beyond this world and mortal life - and is eternal. 

They also want us to 'think globally', to be deeply interested-in and concerned-by 'foreign policy' and geopolitics; to identify-with nations, large abstract 'humanitarian' causes and commit to ideologies. All these are traps for a Christian. 

Our business is (primarily) with our salvation and theosis, with the love of God then our 'neighbour' which means actual humans beings to whom we have a genuine personal commitment. 

In practice, we cannot help but 'have an opinion' on these mass media 'talking points'; but we need to keep reminding ourselves that all of these (and everything we think we know about them) are primarily attempts to manipulate us in ways that benefit the agendas of one or other of the factions among the evil-serving leadership.   

So - although the above is my interpretation of what has happened, I am not wedded to these conclusions, and my main effort is not to 'care' about matters which I can only be concerned with be falling-into ways of thinking that are specifically designed to corrupt me onto the side of Satan and against God.

My faith should be that God - as the creator - can and will always ensure that I can know from personal experience, by my own discernment and the direct guidance of the Holy Ghost, what I need to know for my task in this mortal life.  

When our faith is solid, we need not deny or defend ourselves against pessimistic projections about what might happen if. 

(Those 'might-happens' picked-out and pushed at us from among the boundless and incalculable possibilities of 'might-happens.)

Our task is with what does happen - All this kind of stuff - as it impinges-upon-us is a challenge from which it is intended we may learn. 

But this learning should be directed at eternal resurrected life; and if it is Not in that context, then we will indeed live in fear and despair, and at the mercies of the worldly-powers. 

Resurrection metaphysically supersedes Reincarnation

Reincarnation seems to imply (if not to entail) the eternal primacy of spirit life (unembodied, 'pure' spirit) above incarnation (embodiment). 

That is; with reincarnation Men are primarily - first and last - spirit forms; and the history of a Man's being begins with being-a-spirit and ends with being-a-spirit. 

This spirit undergoes a series of incarnations which may be (eventually, according to some versions of reincarnation) aiming-towards eternal status as a spirit. The spirit learns-from - or is otherwise affected-by - an incarnation; however, it is only the spirit which persists. 

Or else there is an unending cycle of (re-) incarnations (and perhaps transformations, for instance to other beings such as animals) through-which the spirit moves serially. But, equally; only the spirit is eternal, with the multiple incarnate forms being left-behind. 

But the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and his promise of resurrection to all who follow him, implies a final incarnation. 

Resurrection (which is an eternal embodied state) is thus implicitly regarded as having a higher status than that of pure spirit. 

For me this means that when someone becomes a Christian, he expects (or at least hopes) that his death will be followed by resurrection; and therefore Not by another reincarnation. 

Against this understanding are ranged several of my spiritual mentors such as Rudolf Steiner and Owen Barfield, and perhaps William Arkle. Steiner and Barfield are explicit that the ultimate and eternal aim of Man is to be a pure (discarnate) spirit; and that incarnations are 'merely' a series of 'descents' into the material, from-which the spirit is intended to learn. 

I can only regard this combining of Christianity and reincarnation as an error - a metaphysical* incoherence. A failure correctly to discern and understand the core teaching of Jesus Christ and the demonstration that was his life, death, resurrection and ascension.   

And I think the source of this error lies in the (common, almost universal) failure to regard the Fourth Gospel (termed 'John') as the primary Christian scripture; because this text seems to state quite explicitly (and repeatedly) that followers of Jesus can expect resurrection to life everlasting after the death of their mortal bodies: which clearly (so it seems) excludes the possibility of reincarnation. 

A Christian who built his faith from the Fourth Gospel would (surely?) cease to expect - and to want - any further reincarnation? 

*Note - By metaphysical incoherence I mean a matter of incompatible primary assumptions; which therefore has nothing to do with 'evidence' or 'observation', because metaphysical assumptions frame the nature and status of evidence and observation.

Further Note - I am not saying that there never was reincarnation; in the contrary I assume that it certainly has happened in some times and places, and possibly continues to happen. What I am saying is that following Jesus Christ to Heaven necessarily terminates the cycle of reincarnations. 

X-Men - Days of Future Past (2014) in retrospect

From Quicksilver's kitchen scene - one of the most brilliant and memorable sequences of any movie 

There is something I like about the X-Men movie series, which makes them stay in my mind with a pleasing flavour despite that most of them are only moderate movies. In other words, they have grown in recollection.

The best of the actual X-men movies is probably Days of Future Past (although Logan from 2017, which is about Wolverine mostly, is probably better). 

The basic 'situation' of these movies is a simple question, but without a simple answer. Should the mutant population of X-Men try to live in peace with the normal humans? Or; should mutants accept that the normal humans will (sooner or later) try to enslave or exterminate them (which would suggests that the mutants should strike pre-emptively to do likewise)?

The movie plots are driven by two frenemies: Professor X - Charles Xavier - believes in peaceful coexistence; and Magneto - Eric Lehnsherr - believes that the X-Men should rule the world, lest they be ruled. 

Despite that Magneto's views or explicitly linked with the death of his Jewish parents in Auschwitz and the Holocaust; which, in Hollywood would usually be a sign of a dumb plotline based on the innate superiority of this type of victim; instead here Eric's moral authority, his sincerity, is repeatedly undermined by his willingness to sacrifice other mutants (even those he loves the most) to 'the cause' - but not sacrificing himself. 

There is always the suspicion that Magneto aspires merely to be a totalitarian dictator, and that his pro-mutant cause hides (even from himself) the demonic nature of his real motivations.  

While Charles's vision of a peaceful future (with his idyllic school/ college of mutants; set in a beautiful country house and grounds) is also undermined by his tendency to control people towards this end; especially by his ability to read minds and implant motivations. 

There is a suspicion that Professor-X is fighting against his own more politically-correct style of totalitarianism - full of vague idealism, but actually creating social instability and hedonic weakness and passivity. 

However, Charles is overall the 'goody' - not least because of his real care for people, his self-sacrifice, and his capacity to learn. 

As for Days of Future Past; I will say nothing specific - except that has Tolkien-like resonances concerning free will and providence: in this case applied to the science fiction problem of changing the past to aim at a better future. It turns-out that to change the past by violent coercion is ineffective - the evil past merely corrects itself. Evil cannot defeat evil. 

The only way that matters can be made better is by the free choice of an individual; and at the specific instant when that personal agency is used in line with 'divine providence'... the whole world is transformed for the better.

Yet without the knowledge of the participants. Disaster has been averted by an inner act of thought - but the participants do not realize it...

This strikes me as one of the most important lessons we need here-and-now. 

Monday, 30 August 2021

A walk through Charlton country (North Tyne valley, near Bellingham)

Recently, my wife and I took a delightful walk through the upper North Tyne valley, in Northumberland; which is where my Charlton ancestors come from. 

This walk has several especially appealing aspects, and on this particular day things were at their best. I didn't take a camera, and the (functional, rather than artistic) photographs below are taken from the web pages. 

There is a walk up to the ride on the east of the valley, that makes a turn at a boulder where we once had a picnic. There is a view up the river towards its source on the Scottish border, that I find very evocative both of the poetry of the border ballads, and the harshness of the border reivers (poetry and violence side by side; the genuine heroic era of Britain).

Coming down off the ridge, there is a beautiful copse of relict ancient oaks called Riding Wood, in which we stumbled across what looked like an ancient stone enclosure, with evidence of several round buildings. On that day, this place had an atmosphere of extraordinary intensity and brooding. 

Later research revealed it was dated to Romano-British time - in other words, it was a Celtic defended dwelling, from around the time of Arthur and (more relevantly) Merlin - in his Scottish border origin of Lailoken: the mad prophet and seer of the Caledonian forest. Hence, presumably, the enchantment hanging about the place. 

Then across a footbridge over the long-since abandoned railway line:

And down to the banks of the idyllic River North Tyne.

Across the river could be seen Hesleyside Hall - beautiful Georgian residence of the head of the Charlton surname ('clan'), with its landscaped gardens by Capability Brown  

And then back to Bellingham. 

Sunday, 29 August 2021

Why did so many devout, church-involved nice-good Christians end-up actively supporting the Satanic global totalitarian Establishment agenda?

Such a failure of discernment from So Many of those who might - until 2020 - have been regarded as The Best Christians seems to demand explanation. 

How could the devout, church-involved nice-good Christians not notice the totalitarian coup, the evil motivation behind the birdemic and its peck, the actual intent of antiracism/ multiculti/ mass migration, the reality of the climate change agenda?

Such colossal failures invalidate any amount of 'good' stuff; in the same way and for the same reason that a single un-repented sin self-excludes from resurrection and Heaven. 

The failure to know sin leads to no repentance. And enthusiastic embrace and zealous promotion of any of the above evil-motivated ideologies and projects is even worse. 

I think we need to engage in an act of imagination to see what happened, from the perspective of a church-involved, nice-good Christian. And, after all, most Christians have tried to be this at some point, and have admired those who achieved it so much better than we ourselves could manage. 

My understanding is that this failure indicates that their church-discernment was overwhelmingly external and social - and boiled-down to mere obedience to some kind of institution that self-identified as a Christian church

This would include those who claimed to 'follow scripture' in their lives; but reveals that they were in truth just following scripture-as-interpreted-by-some-institution

Church Christians have sometimes noticed (especially in relation to sex and sexuality) that value/ moral-inversion was now official, and increasingly mandatory (legally and via employers and service providers - evil is the new Good, and vice-versa

And some of these that devout church-goers have noticed this is sustained (in part or in whole) by all political parties, bureaucracies and the mass media.  

Yet these same self-identified Christians have enthusiastically and zealously embraced one or all of the agendas of birdemic-peck agenda, climate change, and antiracism/ mass migration - which emanate from exactly the same Establishment source; 'evidence' for which has exactly the same origin; and which form elements of the same ideology of leftism.

I think this is probably due to the way that Christians have come to regard Christian morality as a legalistic, quasi-bureaucratic checklist; imposed-upon naturally evil and self-deceptive individuals from without, and sustained by social mechanisms. 

The individual is regarded as the root of evil; kept in check only by the group. God's inspiration and guidance is seen as coming to the group, and reaching the individual only via the group - at least, when it concerns major and serious matters. 

Individual revelation (from the Holy Ghost) is allowed in some personal matters that aren't covered by explicit rules and regulations; but not for matters of the group: whether that group be global, national, institutional or church group. 

In serious matters, individual revelation and personal discernment is regarded as merely/ always/ necessarily a cloak for self-interest and self-justification of sin. 

The idea that each Man's primary guidance could (let alone should) derive from the divine within each of us (by virtue of our status as Sons of God) and from the direct knowledge of the Holy Ghost - is seen as a snare.

Ultimately, Man's duty is to subordinate himself willingly to A Group - and the only legitimate question is Which Group? (for which specific matter)? 

For devout, church-involved nice-good Christians; individual discernment is a sign of stupidity, mental illness or evil when it conflicts with the group. 

It is literally nonsensical and incomprehensible to such folk that The World including all the major institutions, and the leadership of all major churches - could be wrong; and that some very small proportion of individuals would nonetheless be right. 

For these church Christians, there is no debate, no issue to be addressed; they have decided as a fundamental assumption Not To Trust Themselves; but to surrender their judgment to some or many institutions. 

And because they regard obedience to groups as the only true virtue; the possibility that all groups are evil cannot be allowed even as a possibility; therefore no amount of evidence of evil could ever convince them it was the case.

Friday, 27 August 2021

The demonic strategy of equality - William Wildblood explicates

 Equality is only one of the strategic ideologies that the demonic powers have used to take-over world government and the major functional social institutions; but equality was one of the first and most influential of such principles. 

For example; socialism/ communism has been a vastly powerful force of increasingly net-evil since the 19th century; until now 'equality' (whatever it is supposed to mean) is regarded as platitudinously true, to the extent that anyone denying equality explicitly is officially treated as a moral monster. Suicidal altruism - often, but not always, in the name of 'equality' - had become the officially-sanctioned and -imposed religion of the masses. 

Now, of course - as with all leftism - the concept of equality is incoherent and implemented only as expedient; so that equality policy often creates deliberate inequality, supposedly in pursuit of a higher and ultimate equality. Yet through all this, equality is maintained as a metaphysical good-by-assumption. 

For some time now; William Wildblood has been probing-away at the concept of equality, and exposing the evil of its roots and application. 

He has recently reached what seems to me a very deep understanding of exactly why equality has proved so adept to the purposes of evil, so comprehensively hostile not just to all transcendental Values or Goods (i.e. virtue, beauty and truth), but more fundamentally to God and divine creation.

Wildblood's most recent post suddenly made this clear to me, in a few words (excerpt):  

Equality is the great dogma on which liberal Western democracies are built. It might have seemed like a step forward at a time when the gap between rich and poor, powerful and weak was as great as it was, and the movement towards less inequality surely did bring certain benefits in the short term. 

But the flaw that lies at its heart is now being revealed. If equality, and equality alone, is taken as the foundation of a culture then that culture will collapse into the lowest common denominator and it will eventually collapse altogether. 

Equality is totally contrary to human nature and to enforce it is to force human beings to live against both their natural and their spiritual instincts. It becomes a tool to push the higher down to the level of the lower. 

This does not mean that the higher should dominate the lower (except spiritually) but liberty and equality are not natural bedfellows despite what the ideals of the Enlightenment may pretend, and it is liberty that is the great spiritual quality as far as human beings are concerned. 

Equality is often said to be rooted in Christianity. If it were how strange it is that it is never mentioned in the Bible and was only discovered to be a Christian virtue 1800 years after the time of Christ. Oneness in Christ is a Christian virtue but that is not equality which is a materialistic distortion of it. 

Equality is actually a property of unformed matter, matter untouched by the creative breath of spirit, which is why you see it most at lower levels of evolution. The more life evolves, the more unequal it becomes because the freer it becomes and yet within that inequality there is also a spiritual oneness. 

To realise the truth of this apparent contradiction is one of the major goals of the spiritual path. It and it alone explains the mystery of love.

I have highlighted the key phrases. For them we can see what lies behind the drive for equality - a spitefully destructive hatred of creation itself; the desire to reduce creation to chaos. 

This is exactly the core motivation Tolkien attributed to Morgoth (Melkor) - the Satan of his universe.

Thus equality - which sounds to Modern Man as an obvious and major virtue; is actually an instance of ultimate evil. Characteristic of which, is exactly this kind of value-inversion - where an ultimate virtue is actually an ultimate evil.  

And a world where such value-inversion is ever-more mainstream, official and compulsory; is exactly what is meant by the End Times. 

Thursday, 26 August 2021

Four steps to understand these times

1. Totalitarian

2. Global

3. Evil

4. Supernaturally evil

1. It is an observable fact that we live (for 18months) in a world where there is (leaving aside supposed reasons for it) more and more surveillance, control and compulsion - extending into what used-to-be regarded as private and autonomous life. Society is objectively totalitarian.  

2. This qualitative increase in totalitarianism happened everywhere in the world at pretty much the same time (a span of a few months); compatible with this being globally coordinated and administered.

3. The vast, repeated, systemic, un-repented lying of the leaders and representatives of the global totalitarian system is solid evidence that they are purposively evil.   

4. And this purposive evil is primarily of supernatural origin. The global totalitarianism has no coherent materialist plan - too much chaos is encouraged to be aiming at total-order; is too bureaucratic and controlling to be wholly aimed-at destruction; the 'elites' are simultaneously feathering and fouling their nests. This is explicable if human leaders are functioning as the servants and dupe of supernaturally evil demonic being.  

The above is intended as a potentially-helpful model to clarify your existing understanding; it is not meant to be an off-the-peg template for evangelical purposes. 

The specific identity of God and Jesus Christ is a fact (not logically necessary and nor entailed)

There is one God who created this reality. That is the proper meaning of 'one' God - despite that I believe the one God consisted of the dyad of Heavenly Father and Mother

Beyond this, and apparently since shortly after the death of Jesus Christ, Christians often feel a need to argue monotheism - that there can only be one God, that the oneness of God is entailed, that God is an indivisible unity.

However, my metaphysical understanding is that the oneness of God is a simple matter of fact. The fact that one God created this reality within which we dwell. 

There is one God because there is one God. 

What about Jesus Christ? There was one Jesus Christ who - again as a matter of fact - was the person who made possible our resurrection and ascension to Heaven. 

Before Jesus, resurrection was not possible; after Jesus it was possible (including for those who lived and died before Jesus). 

But did The Christ have to be Jesus - or could it have been someone else? 

What 'qualified' the pre-mortal individual spirit called Jesus to become incarnated and become The Christ? 

My understanding is that Jesus was the first and only pre-mortal spirit who could become The Christ, who could do the job. God always knew there was this job to be done, presumably this was known among the pre-mortal spirits; and it was some time before any of the pre-mortal spirits were ready and capable of doing the job. 

Jesus was the first and (at the time) only pre-mortal spirit to be fully-aligned with God's plan of creation - to be willing to do the job in full accordance with the plan. 

So Jesus was - as a matter of fact, but not a matter of necessity - the saviour. 

But... if that particular personage of Jesus had not been the Christ, then presumably - later on - somebody else, some other pre-mortal spirit - might have been able to do the job. 

I regard it as a deep philosophical error that so many Christian, for so long, have felt the need to argue that the oneness of God and the oneness of Jesus are necessary in some kind of ultimate philosophical-metaphysical sense; rather than as matters of fact. 

This error apparently came into Christianity quite soon after the death of Jesus - but after the writing of the Fourth Gospel; which is our only written source of what Jesus did and said written by an eye-witness, and one of the closest disciples. 

I presume (but don't know) that what became the Fourth Gospel was not known by Paul or the authors of Matthew and Luke - who provided the philosophical basis of later theologians (plus their carry-over of fundamental assumptions from Judaism and/or Greek-Roman pagan philosophy).  

By my understanding, the explanations of God and Jesus ought to be much simpler and more common-sensical than they have since become. There is one God because one God made this creation and we dwell in a creation made by one God. And there is one Jesus Christ because he was the first pre-mortal spirit who could do the job and wated to do the job - and now the job has-been-done, so there will never be "another Christ": jesus was the one and only. 

Is God good? Two common errors by/about Christians

To answer the question Is God Good? requires first understanding what God is trying to do with creation. Many/ most people get this wrong. 

People try to evaluate whether God is Good by examining this world and drawing up a balance sheet of good-things versus bad-things - and seeing which comes out top. They ask questions like whether this is 'on average' a good world; or whether the good things that happen/ have-happened outweigh the bad. 

They assume that God sent Jesus Christ to make a better mortal world, and they try to evaluate the truth (or success) of Christianity by 'calculating' whether the world was a batter place after Christ; or whether Christian people or places are better than non-Christian.

And implicitly judging 'better' by criteria - usually 'utilitarian', to do with inferred mass happiness or suffering - that are assumed to be above (or prior to) the truths of Christianity.

But this line of thinking is nonsense - as would be obvious except that Men have been misled for a long time. 

Jesus came to bring Men the chance of everlasting resurrected life - not to make this a better world (let alone perfect, or a paradise). 

So, the first common error is to regard this transient mortal life and world, as if it was the aim and end-point of God's creation. 

The second common error is to regard this mortal life as merely preparation for admission to eternity.

The idea that nothing matters about our mortal lives except that they prepare us to take a test set by God, to pass a judgment by God. 

The background assumptions to this error is that everybody in the world and who has ever lived wants to go to Heaven. Earth is a 'pre-school' that prepares us for that divine examination which all Men want to pass. But God only allows those worthy to proceed to Heaven - the rest are consigned to Hell. 

This is wrong because not all men want to go to heaven, and many or most Modern Men in particular reject Heaven prefer to choose Hell. 

The proper way to understand this mortal life and world is as a place of opportunities for learning - a 'school'. Like an idealized school, the basic rationale of what happens in mortal life is directed toward the eternal life after 'school' - i.e. Heaven. 

The main thing we are supposed to learn is about love - love of actual persons, typically starting with the family. Heaven is for those capable of love, who commit to put love first - eternally; which is what we mean by love of The Lord, and of Jesus Christ. 

There the school experiences of this mortal life, and what we have learned from them, are not forgotten; but are brought into eternity. 

So, this life and world are created for those who want to go to Heaven - this world provides each of these with experiences from which they can learn and which will prepare them for Heaven. 

But this world contains many Men who are not sure that they want to go to Heaven, and some who have already decided that they do not want Heaven. 

For them this world, the school of mortal life, has a different purpose - which is to provide the experiences from-which they can learn whether or not they want Heaven. 

All Men are free and each decides his or her own fate - decide whether to accept the gift of Heaven - or whether they want... something else, which may be (and in 2021 probably is) hell. 

Mortal experience cannot make somebody want Heaven - certainly not if they are incapable of love or reject love. 

But it can provide each person capable of love with experiences from-which they may become clear about their decision concerning what happens to them after death. 

God can engineer a situation in which this choice is made conscious - albeit perhaps only briefly; so that every-Man is compelled to make a choice, but no Man is compelled to choose one way or the other. 

So, the second common error is to regard God as a gatekeeper of a universally-desired Heaven - permitting some to proceed, and casting others down. 

The reality is very different. All those who really want Heaven, who are capable of love and prepared to make an eternal commitment to put-love-first, will go to Heaven. 

Admission to Heaven is not by examination; but by self-selection. 

God wants as many as possible to choose Heaven, and God's problem is that many reject it. 

Therefore, this mortal life is designed to encourage as many people as possible to choose Heaven after death - each soul in its own way, each person's mortal experience designed for such goals; and this mortal life was created for that purpose. 

Wednesday, 25 August 2021

Why not convert to leftism? (You know it makes sense...)

Why don’t you convert to leftism? 

Since you can't do anything about global totalitarianism, why not just make the best of it? 

Why not exploit the situation instead of moaning about it? Do what is expedient - why not? 

Why not make a successful career out of leftism - like so many others? Why not surrender your private mind to leftism, in the same way as you have already surrendered your public behaviour? By having any reservations at all, you are making yourself miserable - why not simply cast-aside those reservations? 

Just say an inner yes to what you will, anyway, be forced to do (sooner or later)... 

Since you necessarily inhabit the thought prison that is leftism – then why not, at least, become one of the ‘trustys’ among the inmates – to assist with the smooth running of the gaol, and get yourself a few privileges? 

Why not, indeed, strive to become one of the prison guards? Somebody has to do the job? Maybe you could temper the severity of the regime? 

(And herein lies the particular temptation for the intellectual elite – a temptation few resist. That (literally) soul-destroying pragmatism by which (for eminently sensible reasons) we quietly, by gradual degrees, change sides in the spiritual battle of the world: that unseen warfare between The Good and that which opposes The Good.)

Well why not? 

There is no earthly reason why not. 

In a world of pervasive and powerful PC, there is really only one compelling reason for holding back and resisting in any way, shape or form - which is that embracing leftism will shrink your soul

If you do not believe in the soul, this reason will carry no force at all: so by your own calculations you are stupid to resist leftism. Or, if you believe the soul is inviolable, and that nothing you think or do can affect the soul: then also, by your own calculations, you are stupid to resist leftism. 

If you do not believe in Natural Law (innate knowledge of The Good), and that breaking Natural Law harms the soul: then logically you should learn to love leftism. 

If you do not believe in the reality of transcendental good - then you might as well go with the flow, allow yourself to be re-programmed: learn, by regular practice, to re-label lies as truth, ugliness as beauty, evil as virtue; until leftism has entered into your heart and soul, as well as pouring into your ears and out-from your mouth. 

But leftism is nihilism; therefore it is not merely political: it is also existential. 

To fight against political correctness is therefore ultimately an existential act: a battle to preserve the eternal soul. 

But if you do not believe that political correctness will harm your eternal soul: then you would be well-advised to suck it up. 

Why not?...

(The above is adapted from the closing passages of my 2011 mini-book Thought Prison.)