#the belief that all humans are inherently good and holy (as opposed to sinful and needing to be saved) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

melias-cimitiere · 4 years

Text

MORAL REJECTION OF ABOMINATIONS

I detest all types of negative discrimination (aimed to demonize and persecute minorities and other parts of the population) based on color, gender, creed, country of origin, ideology etc. I include racism, ageism, and all types of sexual and religious persecution in these categories. The reason why I detest this (which may differ to the reasons others oppose it) is that I am aware of myself as resident in bodies (shells) in different times and ages, so to condemn someone on the basis of color, gender etc is hypocritical. I’ve been all over the place concerning the spectrum, so I cannot condemn people who happen to be born in a way different to mine at this present age. There is no inferior or superior race, creed, nation, gender etc. Of course, I am still allowed to condemn any practice, viewpoint or ideology that I find offensive, dangerous or twisted enough to cause severe threat by its malice. By doing this I don’t attack the people that sometimes are born to such ideas, but instead my attack is on the ideas themselves.

I detest all dogmas, for they assume to be true in all ways and they have no regard for personal experience and testing. But more often than not, dogmas tend to corrupt their defenders into going to a witch-hunt or pogrom to exterminate all opposition. It is inherent to their nature to hold that the truth is property of those dogmas, and not existent anywhere else outside their approved belief system. Therefore they create a climate of hostility towards non-believers and animosity towards foreign ideas and viewpoints.

I detest puritanism and the whole idea that only marital sex is pure, the rest is up for condemnation. Sex, like food and other things natural, responds to need and often, to pleasure. When needs are condemned as impure, and pleasure is viewed as sinful or evil, problems tend to arise; psychological ones with regards to the person, and societal ones with regards to cultural groups. History has shown that such oppression leads to violent outbursts sooner or later, or to serious psychopathology. A healthy sexual life contributes to wellbeing and to a balanced lifestyle; there’s nothing evil or reprehensible happening between consenting adults. Nothing should be blamed as deviant, outlawed or viewed with contempt when it harms none but is part of one’s personal life, or between a couple or group of consenting adults.

I detest Idealism as it is a distorted way to view reality. A pragmatist would more likely accept a form of Sinister Realism (my own term) as a way to rationalize with an irrational, often contradictory world. Also an idealist will more likely conform to dogmas that seek validation through idealistic lenses, whereas a sinister realist will choose a healthier paradigm based on some form of evidence instead of Ideas.

I detest all types of blind faith, for two reasons: a) because it’s blind, and has no room for reason; b) because it is an inferior type of spirituality, as attested by evidence of my peers and my own personal experience; bound to a dogma, it has no room to grow and expand, and it suffocates the genuine seeker.

I detest all religions because they serve a watered-down version of spirituality that is more easily palatable by the masses. In doing so, they promote their own dogmatic ideas as “truths” and reject anything new, fearing change and fearing to lose privileges. I detest all Abrahamist religions in particular; stemming from a tradition steeped in racial hatred (that they are elites, unique by their god making them over anyone else upon Earth), stolen ideas from various cultures and mythologies more ancient than them (look for evidence in Mesopotamia, Egypt and the Phoenician peoples, including Pythagorean and Neoplatonist ideas in Kabbalah), misogyny (numerous examples in their own scriptures) and spiritual blindness (everything that doesn’t feature in the pages of their dogmatic books is condemned as having demonic origin). Abraham was a traitor to the Mesopotamian spirituality and destroyed his father’s cult figurines, aiming to cut all bonds with the Chaldeans and start the journey to the Levant. He prostituted his own sister whom he had married, and then benefitted from her when the truth came out; his example was followed by his son Isaac. Abrahamist religions are the source of much of the world’s plight; holy wars, crusades, Inquisition, torturing and killing hundreds of thousands and terrorizing millions, they are solely responsible for the darkest times in human history. Their absolutist dogmas and totalitarian religious regimes persecuted truth and real spirituality for the last two millennia. They created the spiritual blueprint of something that perpetuates guilt and misery, and makes a person weaker than his or her natural state, simply by submitting to their ideology.

I detest the validity of the statement “it’s right because the majority believe it or elected it”. The multitudes never held truth or attainment in high regard, only conveniency and safety. They call brave those that defend their safety, but they condemn as fool-hardy and heretical those of the same mentality as their defenders, who seek out new paths off the beaten track. Likewise innovations are good if they serve their conveniency but dangerous when probing new scientific avenues. The masses tend to follow trends like fashion and leaders like a flock does to a shepherd; originality, uniqueness and innovation are alien concepts to them. Superstition, submission and apathy is the path they choose.

The way I see it, a promethean Lucifer is the torchbearer of Illumination for the Spirit and Mind, a rebel Satan is the catalyst of socioeconomic, cultural and political Change, a portentous Leviathan is the instigator of Progress and Innovation in sciences and all things that Reason governs; and Set, the dynamic agent of Manifesting and Becoming. All of them are teachers through adversity, all of them mentor willpower to triumph over the odds. This is something we may believe in, a form of allegiance to take us forward to the next millennium, to the stars and into our destiny.

Melias, 2020

#luciferianism #promethean #morality #left hand path #theistic satanism #witching philosophy #demons

89 notes · View notes

alphacenturian4 · 5 years

Text

Is Christianity and Catholicism compatible with Feminism and Socialism.

By Ramon Aguilar IV

As a Philosopher, a Catholic, and an American I have made a few view videos refuting and disagreeing with certain popular Catholic youtubers on the these grounds as my beliefs on these subjects are tied into my identity. This will be my strongest refutation of these men and their views to date. As recent issues in the Roman Catholic Church have raised their reactionary rhetoric to mutinous levels. Dr Taylor Marshall, Timothy Gordon, and Michael Voris, are Schismatic rabble rousers. Who are ultra-traditionalist disguised as YouTube scholars and theologians, exploiting current real and ugly controversies and scandals to grow an audience, get published and gain their works exposure. These men are doing more damage than good for the American Catholic community. Creating division were there should be unison against a growing tied of apostacy and blasphemy. As I can think of no worse blasphemy than evil priests using the name of God to justify sinful and wicked acts.

As of recent, these men have made certain claims about Catholicism, Christianity, Feminism and Socialism as they relate to each other in a type of pseudo, or proto, or postmodern-Liberation Theology that I would like to refute by looking at a definitional understanding of these terms. I used the Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary (1996), the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (2016), and Hardon’s the Pocket Catholic Dictionary (2013) to check my definitions, verbiage, and usage against.

Let us start with their claim of Catholicism being a religion of unchangeable doctrine best expressed in Latin vernacular.

For me, as is backed up by my sources mentioned above Catholicism: Is the faith, ritual, and morals of the Roman Catholic Church with Jesus as its head, the pope as its mouth piece, and its faithful members of the Church as its body. Intended for all human kind it is the general universal of broad, liberal, inclusive, practical, and metaphysical applications, Tradition, and doctrines through the lens of Christian theology. As for the Name Catholic being appropriate to this entity called the Roman Catholic Church it was coined by St Ignatious of Antioch between AD 35-107. While pertaining to the whole Christian body; it makes exclusive claims and has exclusive characteristics of Truth, Unity, Sanctity, & Apostolic Succession that includes the adherents to such faith and its Organization. It is the part of the Christian body that recognizes the Papacy and the other Patriarchs but is not Protestant. It also means that it is inclusive of Customs, Doctrine, and Dogma as long as those elements are considered to be Orthodoxy as defined by and explained by the Apostolic Fathers and continued in its Tradition as overseen by the Bishops as distinguished from heresy since the time of Christ. And it originally referred to the Undivided Church before the Great Schism of 1054.

Thus, their almost slavish dedication to the Oral Tradition as it is recorded in doctrine and dogma is equivalent to the Protestants’ devotion to Sola Scriptura.

Their claims about Christianity do not hold up much better as they describe a judgmental, wrathful religion with tyrannical doctrines, making them sound more Calvinistic than Augustine in their views of what Christianity is.

While what I have learned and been taught is that Christianity is the particular Christian religious system that claims faith in the Jewish Messiah Jesus Christ and the deposit of faith thereof, including its teachings, morals, & spirituality as relates to the beliefs, practices, principles, and conduct of the people who follow Jesus Christ. These people claim Christ Jesus as their Lord, God, and Savior and recognized the Trinity: that is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as defined by the Apostolic Church Fathers and expressed (that is, evident) in the canonized Gospels and Epistles of the New Testament Biblical Scriptures.; including the rites and mainstream branches of Western Catholic, British-North American Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox Churches as well as its minor branches of Oriental and Coptic churches.

These men: Dr Taylor Marshall, Timothy Gordon, and Michael Voris have categorized Socialism, Communism, and Feminism as absolute evils and grave mortal sin and have all but accused Pope Frances as being members of or at least subject to theses movements and their philosophy. But what are these philosophical political systems and are they by definition diametrically opposed to Christian-Catholicism as these men claim?

Socialism: Is the theory and political system of social organization in which the means of production are not in private hands but under social control, as relates to wealth and power. This system demands the collective ownership of means, interest, production, and control by the community as a whole and advocates for the equal distribution of capital and land among said community. Usually as prescribed by Marx, Lennon, or Mao.

And while Marxism is opposed to Christianity by its very nature of being anti-religious, elements of socialism are compatible with Christianity just as elements of progressive social reform and social justice are compatible, utilitarian, and complimentary to democracy.

And what of its twin cousin Communism.

Communism or Collectivism: is a socioeconomic theory and system of communal self-government in which each connected community forms a federation based on state-ownership of property distributed down ethnic, gender, cultural, or economic lines expelling free-market mechanisms of control, supply, and demand. The is the exercise of the political principle of centralized, social and economic control.

And while the argument can be made that this type of political system leads to a type of social tyranny where every man and woman is their own tyrant the Church has stood up for Monarchy, Republicanism (representational governments), direct democracies, and other forms of National Governments its members have been subject to throughout the years. After all we render on to Cesare what is his, our souls belong to God not to the state.

But what of feminism. An evil movement that promotes abortion, promiscuity, the emasculation of men, and an end to motherhood and an end to traditional families. Well, lets take an homes and simple look at what Feminism is, or what the types of feminisms are at their core. Feminism philosophically speaking are the doctrines that advocate for social, political, and reproductive rights for women, and the organizations and movements who advocate for those rights. Feminism being originally concerned with the asymmetrical distribution of powers and rights that leads to the biases that subjugate women to subordination, and disparagement. And their goal being the end of that subjugation, subordination, and disparagement.

There is much here that is compatible with old and new testament, that is compatible with Judaism and Christianity. The incompatibility comes from two places, Genesis and Paul’s Epistles. And while some may point to Deuteronomy or Leviticus as the points of contention the principles and the place to find the potential reconciliation thereof lays in Genesis and the Epistles. As both men and women are asked to submit to God and to each other in obedience and respect.

That is without denying hard and even harsh realities.

So lets look at masculinity and femininity. Are they truly incompatible?

Masculinity: is that pertaining to the traditional attributes, characteristics, and qualities inherent to men and male individuals as relates to strength, boldness and gender.

While, Femininity: are the qualities of feminine womanliness seen collectively as a whole, as pertains to traditional female attributes as relates to sensitivity, gentleness, and gender.

I think it is a mistake to look at these means as virtues or vices on their but instead it is more preferable to look at these trait sets as simply quantifiable quantities that are complementary to each other. And while one sex or gender is more prone to one set or the other that does not make either set mutually excusive to the other.

But what are Catholics defending when we defend the Patriarchy, is it manly masculine Authoritarianism? No, here is what Catholics, Theologians, and Doctors of the faith mean by Patriarchy.

A patriarch is simply the male head of a family, tribe, rite, or Church. This is the founder or personage who has authority over other members of his group. For the early Church these were the Holy Fathers of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, and Jerusalem who ruled over Catholic Sees as well as the heads of later Catholic sees such as The Coptic-Ethiopian, Nestorian, Armenian, and Russian sees. But more broadly these are the male elders of a community as a whole.

But does having a male only priesthood mean that we are against female leadership or a Matriarchy. Well, let’s look at what Matriarchy is. A Matriarch is simply a female head of a family or tribe, or a woman who is a founder of a community or a group. And a Matriarchal system or community where is one where a matriarchate has developed. This would be a family, society, community or state governed by a matrix (by the mother).

Now, the church has both mother’s and father’s of the faith, and women have been powerful doctors of the faith just as men have been. So, the idea of Matriarchs and Patriarchs ruling and guiding together is not antithetical to our faith. As both the masculine and the famine should be respected and protected. While a misogynist and misandrist order would not be tolerated by the church. So while I see and acknowledge the tension I do not see them as unreconcilable as I will now expand upon returning to the topic of feminism.

The goal of social, political, and reproductive rights for women, the right for women to organize and gather as a group, is something most Catholics throughout time would agree upon as a good. And again, most Catholics would agree to the goals of ending or preventing the subjugation, subordination, and disparagement of women. It only mater the aim and degree of the goal. For instance, if reproductive right is framed as ending State Mandated Abortions and giving women the right to choose to keep her child in societies where such right are not granted as self-evident then yes Catholics would and do support that, within that framing. Suffrage and having the right to vote is another universal most catholic would support for all women of the age of reason being weighted the same and equal to men of the age of reason. Just as Catholics support and fund monastery for monks so Catholics support and willingly fund convents for nuns. This framing and reframing can go on and one, but you get my point.

Yet there is another phase or factor to this refutation. These men Taylor, Timothy, and Michael have said that part of the problem were not just the isms but the toxic soup that they make called Liberation Theology. So what is Liberation Theology. Liberation Theology is a Christian and more specifically Latin American Roman Catholic movement that makes criticism of oppression, and the mission of social justice its central tasks. Its adherence seek justice and rights poor, minorities, and women. As well as, sometimes violent retribution against racism, sexism, oppression, and economic imbalance. The justify these goals and actions by emphasizing Biblical themes of liberation, social Christianity, and the preaching of the “Red Letter” social gospel. This religious socialism is based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as taken separate from the Epistles or the Old Testament. Making a New Bible out of just the Four Gospels. These “Christians” believe capitalism to be idolatrous, rooted in greed, and a mortal sin. Christian socialists identify with the suffering inequality of the marginalized, minorities, and the oppressed. It is a synthesis of Christian theology and liberal socio-economic political theory, particularly Marx. Such theology found fertile ground in the 1970s in regions such as Peru, Brazil, Uruguay, and Spain. The evangelical context of liberation theology emphasizes evangelism and social responsibility. Similar theologies have developed in repressed and poverty-stricken areas such as the so-called Black Theology of South Africa and some US ghettos, PLT in Palestinian, Dalit in India, and Minjung Korea. Unfortunately, Liberation Theology reinterprets the bible in new ways departing from recognized Catholic, Christian, & Apostolic tradition. These are radical, revolutionary, anti-capitalist sometimes anti-governmental sects who have incorrectly and only partially interpreted the message of Jesus. They do this misinterpretation by divorcing the message of Jesus from the rest of the bible, viewing him as opposed to that more complete message most Christians and Catholics accept.

While I am sympathetic to Liberation theology, its cause and its main goal, I cannot deny that it is a perversion of Christianity. And to this point I must consider to these men, that in this toxic brew there are version of radical feminism, of Socialism, Communism, and Matriarchood that are incompatible and antithetical to Roman Catholicism there are also so called Christainties which are too. These Christianities fall outside of the definition I gave earlier and include Mormonism, Jehovah Witness, and Oneness Pentecostalism. But as religious and faithful we do not judge all of theism on the actions of Hindu Cult leaders, nor on the action Radical Muslim Sects, nor Christendom on the actions of the Witch Hunters or the incidents in the wars between Catholics and Protestants or Baptist and Anabaptist. So, we should not judge feminism, progressivism, nor even collectivism by the actions or goals of some of or even many of its more radical members.

#christanity #catholicism #socialism #comunism #femenism

5 notes · View notes

epistolizer · 3 years

Text

Setting Ablaze Paraphernalia Of False Belief Not The Best Outreach Strategy

In a video posted on Facebook, a legalistic evangelist set a flame of a pair of Mormon ceremonial undergarments. The evangelist claimed that the action was Biblically justified.

Acts 19:18-20 reads, “Many of those who believed now came and openly confessed their evil deeds. A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly.... In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power.”

From the text, readers can deduce a couple of things. To set down such a decree regarding such requires the believer to look at both the context and content of the passage. Only then can a more definitive policy be put in place.

Because of this account, those figuratively on fire for God insist taking the flame to any doctrinally dubious object is not only permissible under Scripture but actually required.

These items were not snatched by authorities out of the hands of those wanting to keep them.

Rather, it is emphasized that those bringing the occultic works forward for destruction were those once owning them that no longer wanted this dark influence in their lives.

Furthermore, what we see in the passage of Acts is an historical account of how a specific set of believers decided to implement a particular set of Christian principles.

Though in particular circumstances their example would be a noble one to emulate, the account is not presented as that of a command that must be adhered to in every circumstance where the Christian finds himself confronted by religious paraphernalia with which they are at doctrinal odds.

For others, it may simply be enough to dispose of the object if they are its owner without raising considerable hoopla or fanfare.

It is usually admonished that Christians hold to the principle that Paul is to serve as the Christian's example in terms of ministry. As such, though the customs and traditions of unbelievers troubled him, it is debatable whether or not he would be that deliberately abrasive in attempting to persuade in regards to matters of error and truth.

The approach used by Paul in dealing with competing belief systems is found in Acts 17:16-34. In this passage, the Apostle is disturbed by the amount of idolatry he sees around him in the city of Athens.

To confront this distressing situation, Paul sets out to present the saving knowledge of Christ in those places in the foremost city of the Western world whose very name is synonymous with discussion and argumentation. In verse 17, we learn that Paul did not shy away from controversy as he took the Gospel into the very hearts of Mediterranean cultural life such as the synagogues, marketplaces, and forums.

We are not privileged to have a comprehensive transcript of the exact dialog that took places in those learned circles. However, we are given a summary with quotes of what Paul talked about and the response of the Athenians to it.

Upon hearing Paul's message, a number of Epicureans and Stoics inquired, “What is this babbler trying to say?... He seems to be advocating foreign gods.” Scripture then clarifies, “They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.”

From what the Holy Spirit decided to preserve of that encounter in the pages of redemptive history, one does not get the impression that all that much time was spent criticizing (at least in a condescending way) the shortcomings of Greco-Roman mythology. Instead, the Apostle to the Gentiles emphasized the distinctive particulars of the Christian faith.

However, Paul's homiletical approach did not avoid the beliefs he hoped to persuade as to the error and insufficiency of. If anything, Paul actually utilized aspects of Classical thought to show how all truths that humans might deduce or stumble upon are ultimately God's truths.

One might dispute this from the way in which Paul began his oration before the learned gathered on the Aereopagus. Paul pronounces in Acts 17:22, “Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.”

From where we stand along history's unfolding drama, both the triumph of the Judeo-Christian tradition and the Scientific Revolution are behind us in terms of being events that have forever altered the way entire civilizations perceive reality.

As such, to our ears, to be labeled “too superstitious” sounds almost like an insult. However, a number of other versions translate the text as Paul commenting on the religious nature of the Athenian intellectual class. Irrespective of where numerous exegetes come down on this interpretative issue, from that point forward there is virtually no debate as to the approach Paul takes.

Those whose missiological approach consists of literally setting ablaze whatever paraphernalia offends their religious sensibilities would have had Paul rip to shreds the inconsistencies and shortcomings inherent to paganism in general and polytheism in particular. There is certainly Biblical precedent for such a strategy where, in Romans 1, Paul holds nothing back regarding how forsaking worship of the one true God to worship nature rather than nature's Creator leads to the most pronounced of carnal sins.

Yet in Acts 17, the Apostle shows that the message can be tailored to fit the nature of the audience addressed. Paul went about this by pointing out the commonalities between Biblical beliefs and Greek philosophy. In terms of apologetics, this phenomena is known as a point of contact.

Paul shares in Acts 17:23, “For as I passed by ... I found an altar with this inscription, 'To the unknown God'. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him I declare unto you.” From that point, Paul proceeded to point out other commonalities between Judeo-Christian and Greek thought.

In verse 26, Paul declares, “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell upon the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed and the bounds of their habitation...:” He emphasized that this simply wasn't the ramblings of a crazed Hebrew babbler Rather, as we are told in verse 28, “For in him (God) we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, 'For we are also his offspring.'.”

As such, in his conclusion Paul does not ridicule the Greeks into capitulation and compliance. Instead Paul commends what the Greeks got right in their philosophy as a reflection of the law written across the heart as spelled out in Romans 2 as to what the Greeks ought to set aside of their pre-Christian thought as they come to Jesus in repentance.

The act of setting ablaze the revered and venerated object of a faith outside the parameters of Biblical Christianity is without question a very provocative act. Even if one opposes the faith, worldview, or creed that the object represents, only the most fanatic would fail or refuse to admit how such a deed does more to alienate rather than woo those one is taking such a course of action to gain the attention of.

For example, it is doubtful many Christians are convinced to the alleged doctrinal error within their own positions of faith when ACLU lawyers descend upon nativities across America and abscond with the ceramic baby Jesus.

Often many a Scripture verse is invoked to justify all kinds of shocking actions.

For once, it would be edifying to hear a minister of solid reputation to go out on a limb emphasizing those passages extolling individual conscience and determining for oneself those things not quite so clearly spelled out in stone.

By Frederick Meekins

0 notes

kingdomofthelogos · 4 years

Text

Eyes for Meaning

Read Nehemiah 2

Evil is eating our culture like a snack, and it’s time for us to find our back bone and stand for holy principles. We need eyes that look for God's meaning and not just waiting to respond to the festering chaos of the world. We have to pursue deeper meaning, and in this message we are going to examine the differences between feelings and meaning. Nehemiah stood up to decay and destruction, and so should we.

Nehemiah had eyes for excellence and meaning, not just the feelings of a moment. His God is the holy author of meaning, and therefore Nehemiah should be holy and achieve great and meaningful things. What do you have eyes and ears for, do we have eyes that even value achievement? The idolatrous spirit possessing our culture has eyes for destruction, and the People of God must defeat it with something better. God cares how we organize our lives and whether or not we pursue excellence and achievement, and He has taught us that influencing the world can only happen when we have our personal lives in order.

What are your aspirations and goals in life? Do you have eyes and ears for excellence and achievement, or only eyes and ears for the topics that the idolatrous god of this age wants you to talk about? Even when considering the topics our world demands we talk about, do we discuss them through the lenses of the Gospel or on the terms that the world presents you? If you are willing to have the conversation with the serpent on whether or not the fruit is good for food, then you have agreed with the serpent that his eyes and ears that focus on this aspect of the fruit are correct. Therefore, you have surrendered yourself to his scam that takes you closer to evil and death. We need to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. The eyes of this world want to bring you down and see the world the way it does, but God wants to bring us up to His Kingdom and see the beauty and nobility He designed for us. The spiritual warfare we are enduring is a battle of belief systems, and it comes down to you and how you know God. Nehemiah wasn’t having the conversations the world wanted, because he had eyes to see something deeper, eyes to see Godly opportunity in a world filled with destruction.

Giving people meaning is not the same thing as giving people want they want, or affirming their feelings or desires. As one grows in wisdom, we discover that meaning and joy often come from things in life that we thought we would never desire; moreover, the wiser we get the more we discover meaning in the things that are opposed to our carnal desires. Having eyes for meaning will grant us long term sight.

When the paralyzed man was brought to Jesus by his friends, Jesus asked the question, “which is easier to say, ‘your sins are forgiven,’ or to say ‘get up and walk?’” (Matthew 9:5). In truth, both are impossible to truly say by human authority, and both give freedom and meaning. Both liberate a man from a life of pitiful desperation and give him opportunity for something higher. When Jesus deals with the demoniacs in Matthew 8, He says not a word to the demoniacs, and only the word “upagete,” meaning “go,” to the demons. Jesus does even not ask those afflicted in these stories what they feel they need, but instead liberates them so they can pursue goodness in life. Jesus opens the door for them to pursue meaning, and doesn’t just sedate them with a momentary comfort.

The battle between feelings and meaning is a crucial one in our culture’s spiritual warfare. Our young people are being fed a belief system and worldview that has an oversized emphasis on feelings and momentary concern. Rather than being challenged to rise above one’s naturally felt desires and our momentary analysis of the world, the spirit possessing our culture tells people to fully embrace whatever seems right in the moment. Tragically, the idolatrous god of this age has infected all of our institutions with this method of thinking, including our Christian institutions, and it holds us captive to the most emotional and empathetic messages of the world. Moreover, it demands we bow to an empathy that is counterfeit because it is cut off from truth. It is through counterfeit virtues that we have been robbed of meaning.

There is a fundamental difference between emphasizing feelings and pursuing meaning. One cannot be given a trophy for achieving nothing and also be encouraged to achieve at the same time. The pursuit of meaning comes at a cost and requires us to change the way we organize our lives. Nehemiah cannot be a cupbearer to a Persian king and build the wall in Jerusalem at the same time. The king wants to know when Nehemiah will return, but in truth, Nehemiah will never return. Nehemiah will never be the same man after these events unfold. Pursuing meaning in God requires him to give up the comforts of an unsuspecting servant who travels with the king to taste his food. He must become a man covered in the blood and sweat of construction work and sword wielding.

When people do not have meaning in their life, they are easy prey for evil. You are easy prey for manipulation when you lack aspiration. Evil’s desire is for you, and it has a conscious and motivated desire that has always been for you. Sure, it will use the platforms and institutions of this world to bring chaos and confusion, but in the end it comes down to you and what you allow in your heart. The Gospel is a threat to all worldly belief systems, and that is why it wants to talk about topics on its terms and without the question of sin and holiness on the table. The world wants you to believe that that human nature is inherently good, but this is tragic, and it leaves people open to despair and easy prey for evil to eat them.

The absence of meaning and elevation of emotion has produced terrible fruits. It has produced a culture where suicides are common, marriages are down, and our young men and women lack aspirations to achieve. Rather than looking up to great and noble achievements, our youth are told to find meaning in equality through the only means that humans can create equality, by reducing all to their lowest commonality, by erasing history and removing meaning from the public sphere. This mentality doesn’t give us conviction to find deeper meaning, because it tells us we are good enough as we are. It gives us a trophy for existing, but doesn’t want us to taste joy by truly living.

Why can’t Nehemiah be satisfied with broken and burned walls? Why can’t he be like all of the other Jewish men and women and deal with the ruins? God is holy and therefore he must be holy. He knows that chaos spreads and grows, it will not subside on its own; thus, the righteous must rise against it. Keep in mind, Nehemiah is a cupbearer to the Persian King. He was the sort of man that would be overlooked in the palace. He was supposed to be more of a translucent fixture who was unnoticed and unknown to officials and experts than a great and noble man whose name would mark a book in the Holy Scriptures.

Nehemiah had eyes that saw nobility beyond the luxuries of being a cupbearer to the king. He didn’t have a particularly masculine occupation, yet, he was nothing of a wimp. He happened to be the only man willing to step up to the plate and fight a battle that his Jewish brothers wouldn't acknowledge as serious, even though it was. He saw that the years of decay had slowly crept along and eroded the uniqueness of the People of God. Their symbols of excellence fell to visible shame and weakness. Our God is a strong and awesome God, and since we are created in His Image, we are called to reflect His nature.

Jesus teaches us that goodness and nobility begin between you and God. In Matthew 7:3-5 Jesus says 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. Moreover, this is the biblical model for finding meaning and affecting our world; and it is something our world doesn’t want us to know. Our world wants us to pursue change through top down models with representatives and experts, but not as individuals transformed by the renewing of our minds. God challenges us to pursue noble and honorable goals as we structure our lives with Him. This is how we change the world, not by having all the answers that the world demands.

We cannot wait on others to act, but we must be personally involved in the spiritual warfare of our time. We need to prioritize investing in our young men and women, teaching them to have eyes and ears for the meaningful nobility that God has designed for them. We must give them aspirations to achieve, and live model the role of holiness and not be wavering in our faith. We must have a backbone that understands how to live by Godly principles. We fear God, and God alone, we aspire to be righteous before Him, and we must go out of our way to dissolve the dishonest gains in our world.

#Nehemiah #Christian #Holiness #Faith #Pastor #Christ Jesus #Church of the Nazarene #Bible Study

0 notes

vaultboyp · 8 years

Text

Questions for Christians from an Ex-Christian

I used to be just like you. I used to attend church every week. Maybe even three times a week. A Baptist church. I used to attend a Baptist university. I used to be unquestioningly devout. I invited Jesus into my heart at the age of 16. I lived my life to be used by Him. I believed I was a true believer, not one who was deceived. I remember believing the Bible as the literal Word of God, applicable and relevant to our everyday lives.

So I know what you might think reading this, that it's evil and you shouldn't let darkness penetrate your heart. I certainly remember walking away from articles that seemed to be against what I was taught about Christianity, the Bible or God. But I want you to read this. I want you to really listen to what I'm saying. When I say something challenging or upsetting, I want you to sit in it, not walk away from it. Christianity today teaches that questioning or doubting Christianity is the same as doubting God. But remember how Jesus challenged the Pharisees? Told them that basically everything they had ever been taught was a lie? I'm not going that far, but I am going to challenge you a bit. So if you read this far, let's dive right in.

1. Most Christians I know are devout republicans, citing their Biblical stance on the sanctity of life and protecting the unborn (Psalm 139:13). Every life is created by God and for God, right? How do you reconcile supporting the Republican party who protects the unborn, yet ignores refugees, oppose caring for the poor, and largely do not serve "the least of these" (Matthew 25:40)? When do the lives that God created no longer matter? After birth? After the 'Age of Accountability'? After they make the choice to reject Jesus? If they have never heard of Jesus?

2. If I remember the courses I took on hermeneutics, there are several ways to interpret the Bible. Literally, figuratively, and allegorically, to name a few. How do you determine how verses are to be interpreted? Did you determine it at all, or did someone tell you what it means and you believed them? Christians generally agree we should not literally interpret Jesus' commands, such as to not pray in public or to gouge out our eyes that make us sin (Matthew 6:5; Mark 9:47). But we do believe that the Bible, and therefore God/Jesus, literally commands us to forbid women from teaching, or the Holy Spirit literally enters our body at the moment of salvation (1 Corinthians 14:34; Acts 1:8).

3. Somewhere, right now, a car accident happened involving multiple parties. All individuals involved in the crash died, except one. The survivor was blessed by God? If so, that inherently implies the others were not blessed, or favored, by God. God still has plans for the survivor? That implies all the wonderful things the others had planned were not God's Will. Do these common phrases sound cruel to you? Would you still say them if it were your loved one who got killed while someone else lived?

4. The sensation people describe when feeling the presence of the Holy Spirit is often described as warmth in the chest, chills, overwhelming love and passion. Others would describe it as an inkling or a nudge in a certain direction. Have you experienced these sensations in some capacity outside of the context of a Holy Spirit encounter? You probably have, as those are common biological reactions to the release of pleasure chemicals in the brain, which can be triggered by intellectual or physical stimulation, or by your brain simply connecting synapses and past experiences to inform current ones. That's right, the Holy Spirit and describing your first time having sex are oddly similar sensations.

5. I often hear theologians explain that the only way to truly understand the Bible is to understand the context in which it is written and the original meaning of the text in the Greek/Hebrew/Latin. Greek/Hebrew/Latin are scarcely used languages that very few 21st century people know how to read, write, speak, understand, or interpret. With only the Bible and to rely on, which has been retranslated dozens (if not hundreds) of times, what could you possibly understand about a cultural context you have never seen, experienced, read in the original tongue (that you cannot understand), heard from someone directly descended from an individual living during that time and place, or read in any other texts from the time? How much could you possibly know about China's culture if you are not Chinese, do not speak Chinese, have never been to China (or Chinatown, even), know no Chinese people, and have never experienced Chinese food, traditions, emblems, or ideas? Not much. Multiply that by over 2000 years of separation.

6. If you're an American, odds are you are Christian, your family is Christian, your friends are mostly Christian, your community is mostly Christian, your state is mostly Christian, and even your country is mostly Christian. However, if you are from Egypt, odds are you are Muslim, your family is Muslim, your friends are mostly Muslim, your community is mostly Muslim, your city is mostly Muslim, and your country is mostly Muslim. Why is it that the religion you believe is heavily reliant on the social, geographic, and political landscape of your environment?

7. Both Muslims and Christians believe their god is the One True God. How convenient is it that you were born in a nation that believes in the right One True God? If you were born in Egypt, Iran, or Morocco, would you still be Christian?

8. Yes? Because God has chosen you to be his Child and He has a plan for your life? If God knitted each individual on the planet in their mother's womb, as per the sanctity of human life belief suggests, doesn't God have a plan for every life? Was it God's will for those people born in nations without widespread Christian influence to never become Christian? Thereby, never bring saved? Thereby going to Hell?

8. How do you reconcile that it is God's will for every man to be saved, but at the same time...

Anyone who does not profess Jesus as the Christ, even if they had never heard the name of Jesus in their life, will go to Hell (John 14:6; Romans 10:9;

Few will enter the kingdom of heaven, thereby many will go to Hell (Luke 13:24)

Some believers who believe they are believers aren't really believers and will go to Hell (Matthew 7:22-23)

It is nearly impossible for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven, so therefore, most "rich" people will go to Hell (Matthew 19:23)

Anyone who lives an unrepentant gay lifestyle will go to Hell (1 Corinthians 6:9)

Anyone who is divorced will go to Hell (Matthew 19:3-12)

Anyone who is sexually active outside of marriage will go to Hell (

Jewish people, God's chosen people, will go to Hell (Deuteronomy 7:6; John 14:6)

The list could go on for hours.

I left Christianity because the answer "God will reveal His truth to us in time" is not sufficient. Believing 100% of the pain and suffering in the world exists because not enough people are following Jesus doesn't make sense to me anymore. Christianity is the world's most followed religion, most accessible religion, and yet, the war is riddled with war, poverty, hate, bigotry, and darkness. Christians often pray for people inflicted by tragedy instead of getting their hands dirty and trying to help needy people like the Bible teaches. Christian leaders are riddled with scandal and moral distaste, corrupted by power. Many Christians use the Bible like a get-out-of-jail-free card while they play Monopoly with the government. Many Christians attack groups of people crying out for love and compassion and understanding and acceptance, the ideals Jesus embodied. Most Christians cherry pick verses to believe that are consistent with their world view instead of thinking critically about what is good and true and real. I know what you're thinking, "Not All Christians", but most Christians see this happening and remain silent.

After reading this, if any Christians made it this far, I know I will be attacked. I will be told I was never a true believer.. I will be reminded of my sentence to Hell. I will be told nobody who has been touched by the life changing power of Jesus Christ could act or think like me. But I did. And I understand your stance.

I used just like you.

#christianity #christian #faith

2 notes · View notes

love-god-forever · 6 years

Text

Take a Firm Stance in Welcoming the Second Coming of Jesus Christ

Xiewen

In our daily life, we often see that when faced with something, the ambivalent people are obsessed with right and wrong and torn between two possibilities without taking a firm stance, and afterward, they will be very bothered and regret what they have done. Today, in the important matter of welcoming the second coming of Jesus Christ, many believers also hesitate at the crossroads, following the herd without taking a firm stance. If this goes on, what then will be the consequences? Let’s read a story:

In ancient times, there was a man in the State of Qi. One day, he went to sell a donkey with his son. After going out, he asked his son to ride on the donkey while he walked and led it. On the way they met a man, and the man sneered, “What an unfilial boy! Your father is an old man, but you let him walk and you are riding on the donkey!” Upon hearing this, the boy immediately got down from the donkey and asked his father to ride, and he walked. After a short while, they met another man, and the man said, “What a cruel old man! You yourself are riding on the donkey but let your poor little boy follow as best he can on his own legs.” At his words, they dared not ride the donkey anymore, so they walked and led it. Before they hadn’t gone far, they met another man, and he said, “What a pair of fools! They trudge along the road when they might be riding!” After hearing this, they two immediately mounted the donkey. However, they hadn’t gone far when they met another man, and the man said, “They are so cruel-hearted. Both of them are riding on the little donkey. You see, the donkey is dead tired!” Hearing this, the father and son hurriedly dismounted the donkey, and discussed what they should do. Then they said, “We’d better carry the donkey.” Again, they hadn’t gone far when they met a crowd of people, and these people all said, “How stupid they are! They are carrying their donkey rather than riding on it.” At the moment, the father and son got stumped, “The donkey cannot be ridden: when one of us rode on it, we were criticized by others; when both of us rode on it, we were blamed. When we carried it, they said us to be stupid.” It happened that they saw a well at the side of the road, so they threw the donkey into it for fear of being judged by others.

This story is short, but it is thought-provoking. The father and son were unable to think for themselves, had no discernment, and were afraid of others’ criticisms, so they complied with the opinions of various kinds of people and brought a lot of troubles on themselves. In the end, they threw their donkey away alive instead of selling it. They completely lost their donkey because of their vanity and self-respect. This reminds me of a fact: Today there are many people who have heard the news that the Lord Jesus has returned to flesh and does His work in China, and they have even heard the word of the truth and read the personal utterance of God. They think that they are in accordance with what the Bible prophesied and acknowledge in their heart that they are from God, but they believe the words of their pastors and elders and reject God’s salvation in the last days because of having no place for God in their heart and adoring and looking up to man. There are many, too, who cannot maintain a firm stance after hearing the rumors of the outside world formed on mistaken premises, and they eventually follow the crowd and shut the door on God. Don’t these people who have no discernment and stance reject God’s salvation for fear of being ridiculed and slandered? This is the same as what happened in the Age of Grace. At that time, the Lord Jesus came to the world to spread the gospel of the kingdom of heaven, and He bestowed upon man abundant grace, healed the sick, cast out demons, and performed many deeds of God, such as the great miracles of “feeding five thousand with five loaves and two fish,” “resurrecting Lazarus,” and so on. The people knew that all that the Lord Jesus did was unattainable by an ordinary prophet, and they all agreed and admitted in their heart that the deeds of the Lord Jesus were extraordinary. However, when the chief priests, scribes, and Pharisees attacked, condemned, and slandered the Lord Jesus, and judged that He performed miracles and cast out devils by the prince of the devils, many muddled people had no discernment, so some of them, because of admiring the leaders, others, for fear of being persecuted, and still others, because of following the general trend, denied all that the Lord Jesus had done, and followed the Pharisees to reject and resist Him and even nail Him to the cross. As a result, they were condemned by the Lord Jesus and the nation of Israel was subjected to destruction. These were the consequences of their lacking discernment and having no stance and following the herd in dealing with the great matter of the Lord’s coming. In the last days, God has been incarnated again to speak utterances among man. He has carried out a stage of work to judge and purify man upon the foundation of the work of the Age of Grace, expressing the words of life to supply man. In order to free us humans completely from sin and make man holy, now the words spoken by God in the new age are already made public to the whole world on the Internet, and the work of God in the new age is testified through various means, including a great variety of books, movies, hymns, and dances, so that all those who truly yearn for the appearance of God can receive the rich supply of life prepared for us by God, live under the personal guidance of God, and enjoy a life on earth akin to heaven. But those muddled believers, who follow what others said and have no discernment and stance, believe all kinds of rumors of the outside world and are subjected to various kinds of restraints. They dare not accept God’s work in the last days for the sake of safeguarding their own interests, and hence are classified as ones standing on the side of the evil one, and they will ultimately live in the disaster that has scarcely been seen through the ages. This is determined entirely by the righteous disposition of God. Therefore, as Christians who have been longing desperately for the Lord to come, how should we treat the great matter pertaining to our end and destination? Should we follow the herd and gain nothing like the father and son who were on their way to sell the donkey or be the wise virgins who take a firm stance and go out to meet the Bridegroom when hearing the news of His coming? To welcome the second coming of Jesus Christ, we must actively seek the truth and gain discernment, and be able to hear and recognize God’s voice. Only in this way can we witness the appearance of the Lord.

God says: “If, in the pursuit of God, man does not have his own position to stand by, and does not know what truth he should hold to, then it means that he has no foundation, and so it is not easy for him to stand firm. Today, there are so many who do not understand the truth, who cannot distinguish between good and evil or tell what to love or hate. Such people can hardly stand firm. … Those who do not understand the truth always follow others: If people say that this is the work of the Holy Spirit, then you, too, say it is the work of the Holy Spirit; if people say it is the work of an evil spirit, then you, too, become doubtful, or also say it is the work of an evil spirit. You always parrot the words of others, and are incapable of distinguishing anything by yourself, nor are you able to think for yourself. This is someone without a position, who is unable to differentiate…. It is actually the work of the Holy Spirit, but you say it is the work of man; have you not become one of those who blaspheme against the work of the Holy Spirit? In this, have you not opposed God because you cannot differentiate?” (“Only Those Who Know God and His Work Can Satisfy God”). From God’s words we see that if a believer in God does not have his own position to stand by, he will be a failure in his belief in God, for he can follow others to do evil and resist God. So we should draw a lesson from the failure of the Jews who blindly adored and followed the religious officials and the Pharisees. We should not parrot the words of others and follow the herd, but should stand our ground, seek the truth and rely on God, and be able to discern what is the true way.

God says: “Distinguishing between the true way and the false way requires several aspects of basic knowledge, the most fundamental of which is to tell whether or not there is the work of the Holy Spirit. For the substance of man’s belief in God is the belief in the Spirit of God. Even his belief in God incarnate is because this flesh is the embodiment of the Spirit of God, which means that such belief is still the belief in the Spirit. There are differences between the Spirit and the flesh, but because this flesh comes from the Spirit, and is the Word become flesh, thus what man believes in is still the inherent substance of God. And so, in distinguishing whether or not it is the true way, above all you must look at whether or not there is the work of the Holy Spirit, after which you must look at whether or not there is the truth in this way. This truth is the life disposition of normal humanity, which is to say, that which was required of man when God created him in the beginning, namely, all of normal humanity (including human sense, insight, wisdom, and the basic knowledge of being man). That is, you need to look at whether or not this way takes man into a life of normal humanity, whether or not the truth that is spoken of is required according to the reality of normal humanity, whether or not this truth is practical and real, and whether or not it is most timely. If there is truth, then it is able to take man into normal and real experiences; man, furthermore, becomes ever more normal, man’s human sense becomes ever more complete, man’s life in the flesh and the spiritual life become ever more orderly, and man’s emotions become ever more normal. This is the second principle. There is one other principle, which is whether or not man has an increasing knowledge of God, whether or not experiencing such work and truth can inspire a love of God in him, and bring him ever closer to God. In this can be measured whether or not it is the true way. Most fundamental is whether this way is realistic rather than supernatural, and whether or not it is able to provide the life of man. If it conforms to these principles, the conclusion can be drawn that this way is the true way. … If you grasp these several key principles, then whatever happens you will not be deceived” (“Only Those Who Know God and His Work Can Satisfy God”).

From these words of God we see that it requires principles to distinguish what is the true way. It requires us to tell whether or not there is the work of the Holy Spirit in this way, whether or not there is the expression of the truth in it, whether or not it can make our conscience and sense become ever more normal, and whether or not we can obtain a knowledge of God in experiencing such work and truth. If there’s the work of the Holy Spirit, we will become ever more normal, will have an increasing knowledge of our corrupt satanic disposition and substance, and will be increasingly transformed in our corrupt disposition. At the same time, we will understand more and more truths and grow in life, have a deeper knowledge of God, recover our reason and conscience, and come ever closer to God. If there are these results of the Holy Spirit’s work following, this way is undoubtedly the true way. For example, in the Age of Grace, the truths expressed by the Lord Jesus could supply what His followers needed in life, so when the disciples spread the gospel, they didn’t revile in return when reviled or strike back when struck. They were full of faith, love, tolerance, and patience, and could endure the ridicule and slander of various kinds of people to carry out God’s will and cooperate with God in preaching the gospel to save man. Judging from the humanity they lived out, their sense and conscience as well as their knowledge of God, they were the very ones who followed God’s work. Today, The second coming of Jesus Christ has expressed all the truths that enable man to know God and be saved, including the inner truths of the three stages of God’s work, the mystery of God’s incarnation, the significance of God’s names, God’s disposition, and what God has and is. Meanwhile, He has also revealed the truths and mysteries concerning our substance corrupted by Satan, the true condition and root of our corruption by Satan, the end and the destination of us humans, and so on. Through experiencing God’s words of judgment, we can gain some knowledge of our satanic nature and corrupt disposition of arrogance and conceitedness, treachery and craftiness as well as selfishness and baseness, and we can also obtain a knowledge of God’s righteous and unoffendable disposition, so that we will have a heart that fears God and be gradually transformed in our corrupt disposition, and eventually we will be completely set free from sin and made clean. All these can fully prove that the work of God is the true way. Although condemned by the religious world and suppressed and in danger of being captured by the CCP government, the believers in God, under the guidance of the work of the Holy Spirit, have spread God’s gospel of the kingdom to all the nations by their faith and love toward God, and have established many churches in dozens of countries and regions, which is completely the result of the Holy Spirit’s work. I believe that from this the wise virgins will be able to hear the voice of God, welcome the bridegroom and feast with Him!

#Jesus Christ #the second coming

0 notes

elwright13 · 7 years

Link

The Black Church is the gateway for humanity’s destruction.

In this final post on John Carpenter’s In the Mouth of Madness, I’m going to explore the film’s take on religion in general and Christianity in particular. I’m a bit surprised that the film has not drawn fire from Christian media watchdogs. Perhaps the film flew under the radar of most Christian viewers, but my Christian friends who have watched it don’t seem to regard it as particularly offensive.

In the Mouth of Madness makes a number of overt claims that would be regarded as heretical. In the church confessional booth scene, horror author turned deity Sutter Cane informs protagonist John Trent, ” Do you want to know the problem with places like this? With religion in general? It’s never known how to convey the anatomy of horror. Religion seeks discipline through fear, yet doesn’t understand the true nature of creation. No one’s ever believed it enough to make it real. The same cannot be said of my work.” He goes onto explain that his books have been translated into 18 languages and have sold over a billion copies. “More people believe in my work than believe in the Bible… It’ll make the world ready for the change. It takes its power from new readers and new believers. That’s the point. Belief! When people begin to lose their ability to know the difference between fantasy and reality the Old Ones can begin their journey back. The more people who believe, the faster the journey.” Later, Cane informs Trent, “I’m God now.”

Popular horror author and deity Sutter Cane

The idea that belief create reality is a subversive one, especially if that means that people create gods and not the other way around. It calls to mind occult theories of tulpas and thoughtforms.

What’s potentially more inflammatory than the overt text is the subtext. It became apparent to me–after many viewings–that In the Mouth of Madness is actually about Calvinism. And it presents one of the best arguments against Calvinism, at least if one has any investment in the belief in free will and in God’s inherent goodness.

For those unfamiliar with the term, it was named for the 1500’s theologian John Calvin, whose ideas were branded heretical by the Catholic Church. Calvin’s ideas still hold some weight among some Protestant denominations, though are hesitant to embrace all of its tenants. (Hence, you hear people describe themselves as four-point Calvinists as opposed to five-point Calvinists.) The big issue with Calvinism is that it opens a big can o’ worms regarding the nature of evil and whether God is good. Other forms of Christianity address these issues by stating that God is absolutely good, but evil exists because God allows his creations to have free will. Free will may be limited, because all people are born into sin and are incapable of absolute holiness, but people still have a great deal of freedom to make choices. In this model of Christianity, humans also have the free will to reject or accept the salvation offered by Jesus Christ. Therefore, God does not damn anyone to hell. Rather, some people elect to be sent there. It’s a decent explanation for why the world is so awful without besmirching God’s goodness.

In contrast, Calvinism posits that all of humanity is absolutely depraved and have no free will to avoid sinning, nor to freely accept or reject salvation. Instead, God “predestines” some for salvation and others for eternal damnation. (This is not the same as an all-knowing God knowing the outcome of every human choice before it happens.) Adherents who fail to see the nightmarishness of this have simply not followed the logic through to its natural conclusion. A belief in zero free will and in predestination cuts to the heart of any argument in God’s inherent goodness and justness. After all, how just and righteous is it to eternally damn a large segment of one’s own creation when they never had a choice to do wrong in the first place, nor the choice to reject an offer of salvation? It seems that such a God would be damning people for the lulz, or as Calvinists would prefer to say, “for the good pleasure of His will.”

Trent takes a deeper look into the Word of God.

Trent protests, “God’s not a hack horror writer.” But a purely Calvinistic God surely would be. How else could one explain the entirety of human history, which reads like a long list of atrocities? Such an account only fits in the horror genre, and is nastier than anything conceived by even the most extreme writers. God would be an like an author who develops characters and scripts their every action in advance, writing out their ultimate ends in His infallible Word. His creations can consult his Word to see how it all turns out, but have no free will to exercise in the outcome. This is exactly what happens in In the Mouth of Madness, in which Cane, the Creator, does all of this with the added sadism of giving his creations consciousness and allowing them to labor under the illusion that they are real people who have a will of their own. Which is, I guess, also the same sadism present in Calvinism and other versions of theological determinism.

Continuing the analogy of Sutter Cane as God, John Trent could be read as a perverse and inverted version of Christ, “the Word made Flesh.” This is where In the Mouth of Madness departs from Calvinism or any other form of Christianity, because Trent doesn’t deliver salvation to anyone. Rather, he is the unwitting and unwilling carrier of Cane’s “new Bible,” which will doom the entire human race. And for the people who don’t read, there’s a movie version.

Christian iconography abounds in “In the Mouth of Madness,” and Trent’s adornment with crosses signifies his role in Cane’s “new Bible.”

Of course, not everyone takes offense at the notion of a sadistic puppeteer god who pulls the strings of creations who falsely believe they have a self, as we’ll see in my review of Thomas Ligotti’s Conspiracy Against the Human Race.

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

elwright13 · 8 years

Link

The Black Church is Sutter Cane’s home and the gateway for humanity’s destruction.

Popular horror author and deity Sutter Cane

The idea that belief create reality is a subversive one, especially if that means that people create gods and not the other way around. It calls to mind occult theories of tulpas and thoughtforms.

Trent takes a deeper look into the Word of God.

A funny meme (author unknown) offering a gentle reminder to anyone seeking to make anything great again.

Continuing the analogy of Sutter Cane as God, John Trent could be read as a perverse and inverted Christ, “the Word made Flesh.” This is where In the Mouth of Madness departs from Calvinism or any other form of Christianity, because Trent doesn’t deliver salvation to anyone. Rather, he is the unwitting and unwilling carrier of Cane’s “new Bible,” which will doom the entire human race. And for the people who don’t read, there’s a movie version.

Trent adorned with and surrounded by crosses

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes