(Even if you do not know, and cannot be bothered to find-out, specifically how these particular policies are important elements of an organized agenda of purposive evil - their provenance and the way in which they are pushed on us should immediately tell us that they are evil by intent and in effect.)
These are not really the problem so much as the failure to repent.
I really don't see why self-identified Christians find this repentance so impossibly difficult!
I can certainly understand that someone would comply with the peck, tell lies, pretend antiracism, or fail any of the other Litmus Tests. Most especially (and especially for women) there is the spontaneous and instinctive human fear of social ostracism. For men; the fear of poverty, scapegoating and low status. So it is easy to understand why people - including Christians - cannot resist sinning.
But I don't understand why Christians find it so difficult, apparently impossible, to acknowledge that they yielded to sin and need to repent.
Surely, all Christians recognize that we all sin many times every day, for many reasons (both defensible and shameful); and that we are indeed orientated towards sin (ie. away from God's will and purposes) for much or most of the time.
Surely these sins are no different? We are all too weak, and the temptations too strong, for anyone to avoid sinning. But for Christians that should be a given, and is certainly no barrier to salvation If Only we acknowledge and repent our sins.
Probably the problem is that too many Christians are clinging to the churches, in their human and institutional manifestations, with loyalty and obedience; as if churches were immune to the sins of Men!
Thus - men ignore, and indeed deny, those many sins which churches do not actively specify, and for which churches do not require specific repentance; perhaps most especially the characteristically Satanic sin of lying, untruthfulness, dishonesty and deliberate misleading (a sin of which the churches are themselves such egregious offenders).
Any individual Christian can repent from his own God-given powers of discernment and the guidance of the Holy Ghost - but Not if he has handed-over discernment to some external authority...
But sinning is about our orientation: our choice of sides: our affiliation with either the side of God, or the side against-God.
There are innumerable sins, but orientation is what makes a sin a sin.
And to join the side of evil is to sin, and in a particularly compounded fashion - because it is a strategic denial of sin, that therefore denies the need for repentance.
Of course; all the above depends upon a Christian's ability to recognize the side of Satan; to recognize that the dominant, mainstream world-system of Western politics, Big Finance and Corporations, Mass Media and all the major institutions such as law, churches, science, education, health, police and military etc... That these are - overall, and overwhelmingly - the lieutenants, servants and dupes of demonic evil.
But if a Christian cannot recognize that - can he really be a Christian?
Can he really be said to have chosen to seek salvation by following Jesus Christ - when In Fact he serves The Enemy in all the respects that The Enemy regards as most important?
I think not.
Thanks to my pen-pal Serhei for help with this argument.
I think a big factor may be the break down of language, the tower of Babel problem. Not only can people not communicate a desire to repent, but they can't articulate to themselves what, why, how repentance.
Language is a kind of miracle, and maybe repentance is impossible without it. It occurs to me that it's like what you said in your previous post about prophecy. The ability to prophesy is linked to freedom the way repentance is linked to language. I need to think about it.
I think it has to do with thinking about sin as a crime rather than as corruption. It's thought about as a matter of asking for forgiveness, acknowledging social wrongdoing, rather than as a purging of corruption similar to a medical treatment. It's wrapped up with the Confession situation.
There's also the church-given list of sins that are probably appropriate to a world of primarily luciferic evil, rather than ahrimanic and sorathic. "Immodesty" comes to mind; what I see as I walk about the streets of the modern West is certainly not immodest, it has an extreme slavish character to it. Almost the opposite of immodesty, a sort of autosadism, autoatrocity. But it's wedged into the immodesty category.
That is certainly a problem. If you ask many Christians how often they sin in a day, they would probably tell you once or twice - or that they try their hardest not to at all.
It might be helpful if we view sin more as misalignment with God and Creation, and recognise in that regard we sin nearly every hour of every day, and that is what needs acknowledgement and repentance.
@Lucinda - At some level, nowadays it seems almost like a problem with memory. The world we live in seems to impose (and demand) a memory wipe every day. People seem to forget (actively forget) their own previous evaluations and discernments from even just a few days, certainly a few months, before. Their attitude is almost "Why bring up that stuff? It's ancient history; I'm not that person any more..." - which leads to the idea that repenting is a waste of time, doesn't make any difference, has no practical value here-and-now. But in truth, the failure to repent - explicitly, in language as you might say - is a failure to learn.
@ben - Excellent comment. I agree.
The immodesty idea struck true, although I hadn't articulated it. The essentially slavish quality was emphasized by the willingness to wear a face mask. The ultimate cause of the rampant immodesty/ sexualization of the modern West lies at the level of the arbiters of 'fashion', and their demonic agenda wrt sexuality and sex, marriage and the family.
@DE - Absolutely right. The reason we are here is to learn from these experiences - learning that we are misaligned with God, recognizing when we are aligned - and choosing to commit to alignment.
General comment - For some reason I can't unravel, Blogger is currently preventing me from commenting under my own name, even though I am logged-in. This just happened a few days ago, accompanied by a changed display. I'm assuming this is a side-effect of one of their 'updates' and will eventually be fixed - as usually happens.
Funny enough, I hadn't even thought of the masks; I was referring to the sexualisation as slavish rather than immodest.
And as you probably already know, I see things as less top-down and more coming from every direction. For example, it's my impression that much of the sexual revolution "innovation" comes from everyday people with no major media platform.
@BC - Under Blogger Settings - Comments, it might help to change Comment location from Embedded to "Full page", which in my experience is less prone to error.
Also, at the very bottom of the Settings page is "Use Blogger draft" - if this is enabled, then your blog will always use the beta version of the software which may have issues.
@David Earle - Thanks very much! - that's fixed it. I think it was My fault, after all (apologies to Blogspot).
I wonder if it has to do with the unspoken terror people have of running afoul of the seemingly-omnipotent malevolence that runs our societies at the moment. The same kind of terror psychopaths train into their co-dependant slave-victims.
@Epi - I think that is quite likely. Which is why I keep reminding myself that fear is a sin - as well as a motivation to many other sins.
@DavidEarle-That is a perfect way of describing sin. It's not a list of broken rules, but a matter of a misaligned heart. None of us will ever be perfectly aligned w/ God and creation on this earth. I remember reading a case of an Orthodox saint who despite living a very righteous life was not ready to die. He wanted more time as "I have not yet even begun to repent". I don't commit a list of crimes every day, but my heart is seldom completely in tune w/ God. However, anyone can be saved if one desires to be rid of sin in the resurrection.
@Ben-That is a great point about an overemphasis on traditional sins of the flesh can miss the point. Chesterton described the type of Ahrimanic evil in his poem about Higgins the "heathen". Unlike ancient pagans who focused on women, wine, and song, modern heathens like Higgins focus on a love for stifling bureaucracy. The slavish devotion of masks, lockdowns, and peck passports being a case in point. While unrepented luciferic evil is problematic, the greater danger lies in Ahrimanic evil that poses as a virtue.
My point was that the sexual sinning of moderns is self-harming, greed?-based, slavish, sorathic sin, rather than pride-based, luciferic sin.
The modern *sexual* sin won't fit the "immodesty" category. The motivation isn't the same.
Dr Charlton, I believe you posted about this sort of thing years ago with women getting themselves drunk in order to see things through. Commenters had a basically luciferic, evolutionary psychology explanation, but you dismissed it (correctly) as unworkable.
The sexual revolution isn't a luciferic outburst having to do with adaptive primivity, it's a sorathic death-frenzy having to do with anti-adaptive suicidality. The 60s being the collapse into total social and sexual dysfunction, mouse utopia and all that. I'm pretty sure I'm getting this stuff from Charltonian blogs...
The sexual horror exists for the same reason as the masks, and for the same reason as the West imposing self-destructive sanctions on the Fire Nation. There's a substrate of self-harm running underneath all of it.
@ben - Whether or not you got this from me, it's what I believe is true.
Post a Comment