Mysticism: The Thing Itself

For thousands of years, time uncounted, humanity got on just fine under mystical assumptions. I reject the notion modern Western rationalism is any improvement at all. The whole question is answered too often from the circular logic which assumes Western rationalism is the only fit basis for judging in the first place.

The fundamental question mysticism answers is the human soul is not tied to what the body and intellect alone can handle. There is this thing we call the “subconscious” — a nebulous term for anything not entirely conscious. The term itself implies the conscious intellect is the highest plane of thought. A more accurate term is “non-conscious.” While we do find in that territory a great deal of brutish and unreasoning emotion, that is hardly the whole content.

Indeed, the beginning usage of that extra built-in processing capability is to drag out the unexamined emotional content. If you don’t know what you feel, you’ll never find out why, nor can you hope to free yourself from the dangerous and self-destructive demands. While the job is never finished, building the habit of self-honesty in examining those feelings is absolutely necessary for any progress at all. The term “neurosis” is largely a word for the habit of avoiding digging into the basement of the soul. You might be saddled with some serious emotional baggage, but you don’t unload it until you know what it is.

Once you have begun tagging that source of non-conscious input, you are in a position to approach the task of discerning between what is literally sub-conscious and what is hyper-conscious. I know most Westerners reject from the start the notion there is anything higher than the rational process, but pure logic is a relatively recent concept, and so far, hasn’t yielded much more than shallow material progress. We don’t really understand the universe any better than ancient man, we just have some of the mechanics worked out. They would say we don’t get the meaning, and would further assert there certainly is one. The reason so many Western philosophers reject it is because Western rational forms are completely unable to process meaning on that level. The whole point of mysticism is engaging something above the mere intellect.

At some point, you aren’t trying to gather facts, but decide what to do with them. Facts don’t give themselves meaning. They have to be ordered by some outside consciousness. The purely rational intellect won’t get you very far. The first step to a higher level of consciousness is recognizing logic isn’t the only path to decision. Go ahead, and lay it out as far as logic will take you, but realize it has reached that limit, and you need something more. Having to some degree developed a means of ferreting out mere emotional input, we are in a position to add intuition.

At the simplest level, intuition means not having to process the entire chain of decision in a fully conscious mode. It’s more than just a short cut, but that’s where it seems to start. Someone with, say, a talent for intuitive mathematics need not calculate, but can process the numbers somewhere outside the conscious thought channels. But when it comes to harnessing thinking for the sake of grave decisions, math alone won’t get it. The parallel should be obvious. There is a part of our human intelligence which does not operate out in the open, because it’s much faster and arguably less cluttered. Not infallible, but reliable enough in the sense it’s as good as you might get through conscious reasoning. At some point, tuning this alternative system results in something more reliable.

Naturally, part of that means not just emotions, but digging up things you can’t walk away from, such as values on things you tend to impute absolutely. That is, it’s not a simple question of rational good or bad (i.e., usefulness), but a matter of whether you can or cannot take some choice without betraying your own mental stability. Once you realize some of the fundamental causes of neurosis, and take more conscious control of how they feed into your decision process, you begin to identify things you cannot change. Your intuition will always bounce off those core values. Once you can understand with some degree of clarity what you cannot do, or what you must do, you can trust the results of letting the intuition run across that core without having to drag out each piece in the light of conscious reasoning, because you know it won’t change your decision.

It’s not as if those core values are immutable, but they tend to operate that way. Simply becoming aware of those things, laying them bare, as it were, will eliminate a lot of implausible things you need not consider. This does not make them wholly part of the rational process, because they often are not rational at all. The trick is deciding that’s okay, that’s normal, that’s they way human nature is designed. Once you draw that outline, you’ll find influences totally beyond your control, and often not entirely yielding to conscious discovery, will cause those things to shift a bit. The shift will register the next time you run something through the same intuitive channel, but only if you remain consciously aware of that possibility when the process of decision comes back up to the level of awareness.

Yeah, we don’t really have a good set of terms for dealing with this, do we?

That’s because the biggest part of this remains outside the intellect. Words are the handles of the mind. We can, at best, outline the contents of the upper level of the soul. A critical element of growth in this direction is the simple act of getting off to a quiet place, settling down and letting your mind roam free. Take at least an hour. Nobody can make this work for you, and descriptions of various disciplines don’t transfer well between individuals. It either works or it doesn’t. For some, it helps to occupy the conscious mind with low-level routine tasks, drone labor, something which distracts the frontal awareness so the background can work unhindered. You can’t really monitor it, so don’t try. But if you make it habit to give your soul a break that way, whatever can happen will happen.

No, things like TV and music won’t do it. The former, along with any other flickering display media, will simply shut down the non-conscious, along with most of the conscious. It is hypnotic, and there is no good thing coming from that direction. If you can’t wrestle the conscious mind with full capacity, you can’t do anything at all. Music tends to exercise a portion of the non-conscious processes itself, so keeps it distracted. Just silence, in a place which helps you feel insignificant and alone — that’s essential to the process.

If nothing happens, you aren’t harmed in the long term. Frankly, the only folks I know who get nothing from it have still too many obvious internal conflicts to resolve. It’s not just our imagination; seasoned mystics can tell. That’s part of what you build. You gain enough internal peace to sense conflict, and the true nature of it, externally. It’s not a matter of really having all these wonderfully sage answers to world problems; it’s more of simple awareness. The non-conscious does eventually begin feeding back into the conscious, because your internal deep self really does want to fix up the messes. It’s not happy with all that trash in there. So in order to answer questions of meaning, it has to gain room to operate. The intellect becomes the servant, not the master. Inevitably, it results in the ability to detect conflict in others. Not the smart-alecky, always analyzing others, expert psychologist or psychoanalyst, but the genuine friend who wants you to find your own peace. Those other types want to enforce their brand of fake peace on you, but mystics are content to let you find your own.

So clearly, the closest we can come to talking about this usefully is at the level of intuition. Human language breaks down quickly before we actually get very far through that doorway. But this way of viewing life was around way back from the beginning of human existence. Indeed, the Bible — from start to finish — assumes this intellectual culture and orientation. Trying to read the Bible from the Western rational frame of reference is beating your head against stone. The results aren’t very pretty, and all these wonderful organized religions which claim a piece of the name “Christian” are proof of that.

Posted in religion | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Mysticism: The Thing Itself

Raping the Minds of Children

It won’t ever stop until it’s finished. Western Civilization is crumbing around us, and we should grasp the necessity for it, even as we stand in stunned silence at the costs. The costs are high because the fraudulent foundation, upon which the vast empire has been built, cannot support the investment. We were sold a bill of shoddy goods labeled “virgin wool,” all neatly folded and looking so nice and warm.

Brace yourself; it’s only going to get more brazen. I’m pretending for the moment this story is accurate as posted on Makow’s site. Some school official carries forward the elitist plan of debasing childhood innocence. But because of racial sensitivities, she is being defended. “She’s one of ours, and you can’t touch her. We don’t give a damn about what it costs you.” So you can be certain the offended parents are being told to shut up and accept this intrusion of adult subject matter on their girls.

Let’s see if we can sort this out according to the true biblical standards.

First of all, Jesus made clear there is only one place for sex: the marriage bed of one man and one woman. Marriage in His mind was defined as a covenant sworn before God, binding until the death of one or both human parties. Obviously, we should choose very carefully, and modern Western notions about being in love are inherently foolish. Every other form of sexual expression is evil. Thus saith the Lord.

Second, the Bible makes no direct statement about the proper age at which a female is ready for marriage. That’s because it’s up to the families to decide. Naturally, that is built on a vast horde of assumptions foreign to us. When is she physically capable of bearing children? Menarche has been shoved back down the age curve by both good nutrition and pharmacological pollution, so modern mankind as a big mess here; ancient females seldom experienced menarche until much later than is common today. Most families then would consider a prospective husband too young and irresponsible until at least his mid-twenties, and it was exceedingly rare to marry off your daughter to fellow less than a decade her senior. The modern obsession with age-mates is actually quite foolish. The other mistakes built into modern Western thinking on this are too numerous to cover here. We are both more prissy and silly, and at the same time too loose and immoral on these things.

Third, render not your children unto Caesar. No part of a child’s existence is any business of the government. That is the fundamental assumption of God’s Laws. That’s because there were two primary divisions in government: social and civil. There is only one reason — one — for vesting anyone with significant claims (or controls) on your property and service: a serious physical threat. God knows we could get lost in that one, but the point is all the other concerns of your daily life fall under the social concerns of your household. How you raise your kids, and whether you fail to do so rightly, is of no concern outside the extended family household, which would naturally mean every generation still living, in direct descent. Households would divide only upon the death of the last living patriarch. Otherwise, you should all be within the same fenced yard, so to speak. Can’t do that? You are already in sin. But by no means should the civil government have any interest in children. No community or civilization can righteously pass that issue over to the civil authorities for any reason, ever. Thus saith the Lord.

At this point you realize there is no good solution for the folks in that school district. The whole situation has for so long traveled down the wrong path, disaster is the only possible result. Frankly, my counsel would be an exodus from the public school system at the very minimum. It doesn’t have to be individual household home schooling. Set up a co-op based in a church, where different adults share the burden of instruction in areas of their own competence. Generally, as long as each adult is related to one child in the program, it’s legal. Chances are, this will almost surely lead to harsh confrontations from the civil authorities, because we can see especially in this case, the local government is hostile to parent’s concerns. The alternative is to keep letting people shape your children into mindless sinners, and facing God with the burden of guilt for failing His stewardship of those kids.

Posted in religion, social sciences | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Raping the Minds of Children

Pragmatic Spiritual Difference

I maintain there is a clear line of departure between the worldly and spiritual domains. I further maintain the Law Covenants (Noah and Moses) were distinct and separate from the Spiritual Covenants (Abraham and Christ), in terms of how they apply. Finally, I maintain that, without a spiritual awareness, you cannot possibly tell the difference.

Let’s take a look at this through the eyes of Apostle Paul. I’ll leave it to you to dig out the references if you don’t recognize them. Reading things in context is absolutely critical, so giving you an address to this or that verse is not a good practice. It requires a spiritual awareness — a living spirit raised by God’s divine power — to be in a position to process how that works out. We can move closer to that understanding when we examine specific examples.

Paul had problems with the Corinthian church. Of all the various communities, they had the greatest trouble grasping the sharp departure between worldly and spiritual concerns. The latter rules the former, but laws cannot accomplish the work of the Spirit directly, only make it possible. We must have some organizational structure, with organizational methods for keeping things intact. But that structure must serve the spiritual purpose, such that sometimes you’ll have to do something which makes no sense on the organizational level. Paul corrected major problems in the church by first using spiritual, then organizational leverage.

Paul made two long visits to Corinth, as far as we know. Between those visits, he wrote the two Corinthian letters we now have in the Bible. We read of his interactions with them. One problem in particular he noted so shocked him, there were no words. What did he do? He fell on his face in front of the whole congregation and cried out to God for mercy on that body. It was a spiritual act. No one was coerced or even verbally corrected. He simply prayed for them in their presence. The result was a miracle — God moving them to shame, then a determination to correct things.

He acted that way because the threat was spiritual in nature. For another threat which was almost purely a matter of the organization, he counseled the church leaders to employ ostracism. Notice, there was no coercion beyond the mere act of removing privileges. The sinner lost his status as a full member of the spiritual family. We learn later it worked all too well, as the man was probably suicidal, and Paul asked the church to welcome him back on terms of repentance.

Notice the man who was taken in sexual sin was committing a spiritual mistake, but the real threat was organizational. Sexual misconduct is no small matter, but the issue is covered by God’s Laws as a measure affecting social stability. It requires using the leverage of the organization, the elders. Had the church not yielded properly, it would simply mean a division and separation into two groups. You can see Paul had no trouble with that, when he broke from meetings in the synagogues and pulled the one group away which chose to follow Christ. This, even as he condemned dissension and division over lesser issues.

But the other matter, which was entirely spiritual, had no organizational solution. We might think, observing on purely rational grounds, Paul used emotional manipulation, but that would be wrong. Normal human reaction would be to harden and withdraw from Paul as a gadfly, or break up the group entirely, essentially killing the church. For the correction to work at all, it had to be a work of God upon the hearts of those whose spirits were alive. If it didn’t work, then it was God’s problem, and Paul would have started from scratch. But it did work, so there was hope God was not finished with them.

Churches are of necessity human organizations, operating by the Laws of God. If that’s all we have, then God isn’t really involved directly. Thus, the teaching and prayers should all be limited to what falls under the Law Covenants. But if there are living spirits involved, then we need to stay ready to suspend organizational rules entirely. And when we do so, it must absolutely not be a new set of rules, a temporary “martial law” thing, but a miracle of God. Those with a sensitive spirit must simply stop their involvement of all normal activities and wait on God to do things His way.

Posted in religion | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Pragmatic Spiritual Difference

Genesis Living

I’m gonna start a club, a movement. I’ll call it “Genesis Living.” That way we can put a stop to this Paleo-Lifestyle nonsense.

The Bible says the hunter-gatherer was not the original human lifestyle. That was the folks who were kicked out of the original lifestyle, which included sheep herding and growing grain. Remember Cain and Abel? The original second generation of humanity. The guys who got into trouble by sinning was the bunch who separated, driven away from the family home. So we had guys living in tents and raising cows, and another bunch who developed technology, and lived in cities.

The original families back near Eden lived in huts, raised herd animals and farmed. You won’t find evidence of them in archaeological digs because they didn’t bother with artifacts which could be preserved. So if you live to leave no lasting trace, peacefully in rather sedentary communities with a tribal social structure, maybe you can find what mankind was designed for — at least, if you go by the method of reasoning the Paleos use.

Or, you can just embrace God and do your best to remain loyal to Him according to His known laws, abstracted for your situation. He promised health and long life, reasonable prosperity, safety and security if you obey His Laws.

Posted in health, social sciences | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Genesis Living

This Is a Test #1

Hopefully this will be the first in a series.

Situation: You and your buddy are doing something together which holds the rest of the world at a distance. He turns to you and mentions he suffers from a peculiar problem: pedophilia.

Do you:

1. Run screaming away, telling everyone to hide the children and dogs from this evil man.

2. Secretly dial 911 on your cellphone hoping they’ll capture and record this confession.

3. Make plans to consult someone with an apparent position of social responsibility for a referral, expecting your friend will be steered or forced into treatment.

4. Knowing that, except for the grace of God, that could be you, listen and ask intelligent questions to make sure you understand and pray for guidance in helping him live with this awful temptation.

Notes: Not a one of us is free from weaknesses, but we all tend to think ours are less threatening than those of others. That’s a natural reflex, but utterly mistaken. We are all broken, fallen, fully capable of horrendous evil. If we have not spent sufficient time examining our own hearts, we will carry around a load of ticking time bombs just waiting for the right jostle to explode. Only if we are consciously aware of them can be begin the work of disarming them.

If you trust the avowed professionals of this world to have any useful answers, you are already so deeply compromised as to make you a serious threat to everyone around you. That’s because all of them are founded on the intellectual assumptions of Western Civilization, which I’ve often pointed out is a massive collapse waiting to happen. You’d be safer building your house out of wet sand. While these professionals and experts might know a thing or two, the entire foundation on which they operate is contrary to God’s Word. At the most fundamental level of thought process, they assume things contrary to what God has revealed.

I don’t even trust the most well-intentioned pastoral professionals, because they all suffer the same basic errors. At least, I don’t trust them with things like the foregoing test situation. God’s path to fighting sin is not through coercive surrender to some external controlling force. The hair-brained civil government which holds pastors accountable for passing on information of vaguely possible criminal intent, while at the same time funding and promoting the likes of Kinsey and his cadre of child molesters, is not a reliable guide to how we ought to act.

Nor do I trust myself to know all there is to know about such things. What I need to know is the number one priority is not justice on human terms, but justice on divine terms. My buddy suffers from an all too common evil desire, and he is the only one who can stop himself from acting on it. Hysterical fears of massive damage to some child has nothing to do with it. If we act on fears, we will surely do more damage to our kids than some pervert.

The path to freedom, safety and God’s justice is where your buddy started, by telling someone he trusts. It doesn’t require knowing too awful much about sexual perversions academically (though I do). It requires knowing and understanding the divine principles of deliverance from the power of sin — all sin. It requires you understand we are all shot through with many painful weaknesses, appetites which can be met righteously, but which have been twisted into raging monsters demanding satisfaction in ways God will not permit.

The path to freedom is dismissing the whole mess, by aiming to flee all of it. You don’t fix sin by picking at individual weaknesses, just because society is okay with profligate sexual exploitation, just not with kids. No, in the wisdom of our modern Western society, we spend a fortune hotting up little girls like prostitutes and training them to act like tarts, but you aren’t allowed to want some of that action unless you are a kid, too. It’s a trap, and it should be obvious social convention is under the rule of Satan. Reject all of it.

Surrender yourself to eternal longings, a focus on escaping this world. This isn’t mind over matter, nor some mighty moral battle, but the miracle power of God doing things for you which you utterly cannot even want. On a human level, yes, laws and fears are the path. But if that’s all you have, what do you do when the enforcing authority goes wrong? If you can’t want what’s right from inside, if there is no power of God turning your desire toward Him, there is no hope.

The correct answer to this test should be obvious.

Posted in religion, social sciences | Tagged , , | Comments Off on This Is a Test #1

Deception by Any Other Name

Hiding the truth is evil. God said so; I’m just trying to bring everyone up to date on that.

Fundamentally, deception is aimed at getting someone to act according to false information. It’s manipulation, interfering in the process of decision making, a form of enslavement. It’s dehumanizing the other person. God won’t allow that to prosper in the long run, so any use of deception is removing whatever protection you might otherwise gain by observing God’s Laws.

When Jesus warned about casting your pearls before swine, He was speaking within a specific context. He was hammering the Pharisees about having embraced Hellenism and rejecting their own Hebrew intellectual assumptions. So when they read the Torah or any other part of the Hebrew Scriptures, they always missed the point. His comment was about entrusting the mission of revealing God to people who had no clue about it. It was not about whether you should be honest with everyone. And the question of civility is a matter of not burdening others with information they can’t use for good purposes. Information overload is just another form of deception, since it denies others the opportunity to evaluate for themselves what they must do.

On a human level, ignoring God and morality, it would appear deception is quite effective. For example, the current price of raw petroleum at $80/barrel is not an honest price. We have whole tankers loaded with oil sitting at docks waiting to unload their liquid cargo because the fixed storage tanks are full. Nor is it about refinery capacity, since many were shut down for no reason other than to reduce supply and force the price up. Yes, it was a cartel agreement; they lie about competing against each other. Actually, demand nearly died last year, compared to what it had been previously. Honestly sold, oil would be closer to half that price. Market speculators have created a climate of fear so that less informed market players — the majority — would bid up the price of oil. They have manipulated the market; they are lying and it’s profitable for them.

It’s the same trick used to lie about the alleged threat of Islam. Let’s get real; if the billion or so Muslims in this world really wanted to take over, they could easily and it wouldn’t take long. Just so you’ll know: Not a single “Muslim terrorist” in this world would be active were it not for secret provocations by the CIA or some other clandestine service for any number of governments. Every Muslim terror threat to the US is created and controlled by our own CIA. The idea is to keep us all fearful and worked up so we’ll go along with the measures of increasing the police state.

Want to talk about the threat of Iran’s growing nuclear technology? Come back and talk to me after Israel starts playing by the same rules as everyone else, particularly regarding their own nuclear industry. There is only one terrorist government in the Middle East, and it’s the government of Israel. Compare their actions with the definition of terrorism: the attempt to use fear and terror, threats of violent force, to affect government policies. Hamas was freely elected despite Israeli interference in the election process. The only meaningful opposition to Hamas is Abbas, a known client (employee) of Israel’s government. Oh, and Israel created Hamas in the first place, but it seems to have gotten away from them.

It’s not just individuals; the Laws of God are specifically aimed at governments, and only secondarily at individuals. So prohibitions on deception apply more to governments than to individuals. But it seems to work. For now. No, wait… God’s wrath is falling on the US right now. Earthquakes, anyone? Crazy weather? Massive increase in pests resistant to pesticides? Major diseases resistant to medicine? Stupid-evil-crazy politicians? God could easily stop any of that, but He’s got a very good reason to keep it going. We refuse to play by His rules.

And we lie about it.

Posted in religion | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Deception by Any Other Name

Consider Snail Mail

Many of us have found friends on the Net. Virtual friendship is not stupid or harmful, provided it’s genuine friendship. The nice thing about the Net is it helps us find likely friends due to the grouping of interests, not some random accident of geography. It’s a good thing, provided you take full advantage of it.

But I’m not entirely sanguine about the future of the Net as we know it. Unrestrained surfing has already disappeared in some places, and threats of the same are invading Western nations. Further, economic instability and disruptions could easily close down a wide range of companies providing infrastructure. Sudden changes in utility rates could price us all out of the market for home connections. There is a wide range of uncertainties which could affect what we do real soon.

Now would be a good time for virtual friends to begin exchanging snail mail addresses and phone numbers.

Granted, a great many Net friendships depend on the Net for most of their meaning. You are the only one who can decide if there really is a need to keep in contact with anyone under other circumstances. I have a link to my resume from my “About” page, so readers should have no trouble getting mine; for your own sanity, you should shorten the name shown there. You’ll find an email address there, too, so you can send me yours if you think it’s worth the trouble.

It won’t be any more secure than email, in the sense if anyone is really trying to keep an eye on you, they can easily intercept your paper mail, too. That isn’t the issue. Aside from exchanging encryption keys physically, or exchanging a set of one-time pads and a common dictionary, or some other method like those, there is little you can do to keep communications secret any more. The idea is not entirely the issue of privacy, but an exchange of information by alternative means. That’s how you’ll decide if it matters, when you consider whether the exchange currently taking place on the Net is worth the trouble of printing and mailing.

Posted in personal | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Cataloging Evil Is Evil

I get lots of links sent to me about this or that horrific evil plot. I don’t doubt most of them carry at least a kernel of truth. An awful lot of folks out there would love to rule their world, and aren’t too concerned with what it takes to get there, as long as the costs are borne by others. In a certain sense, that’s how most of the human race operates.

There remains a tiny core of elites capable of carrying out such wishes, but even they suffer from limits. After all, evil people are defined as those with weaknesses in which they indulge. Evil isn’t power; it’s failure. That failure may rope in a lot of innocent victims, but that’s one of the mysteries we aren’t permitted to understand.

Still, if we waste a lot of time trying to understand how it is these people intend to harm all their victims, we would never have time to focus on the mission of escaping that evil. We escape evil by embracing the call of mysticism. Don’t be fooled into thinking mysticism is some peculiar intelligence; it’s not. It’s commitment to what cannot be put into words, to what cannot be understood by simple intellect. If you can understand it, it’s not mysticism. Mysticism is that wordless drawing up from this world.

While I do attempt to indicate something about it, talking of such things as my three pillars — transparency, empathy and disentanglement — a mystic would recognize them as simply facets of the truth itself. You can probably come up with your own words, and be just as useful. If you strive to grok the fullness of what is demanded of you in rising above yourself and rising above this foul plane of existence, you won’t need to catalog what’s here. The moment you think you have a name for it all, someone will come up with a new flavor. Don’t rely on lists.

And don’t try to catalog the evils of the ruling elites of this world. Sure, we can probably discuss the particular weaknesses of this bunch — Zionism, pedophilia and other perversions, war, deceptions — but what about the next bunch to come along? What about the mundane evil on your own street? If you get too wrapped up in the tactics, you find yourself crusading against a moving target. Fix one problem and up pops three more, probably worse and harder to fix. If you simply draw harder to truth, anyone who can be helped will be helped by the sharp discord of your refusal to let evil own you. You can be fully engaged without compromising.

Chasing demons ties you to them. The very art of not being owned by them is the whole message of breaking free, the whole service of God in making Him known. Evil will become obvious by the good which follows you around. Every step you make with a mystical heart is like ripping the fabric which separates this world from the next, and light and love comes pouring out in your wake.

Don’t be surprised or shocked by any evil men do. Sure, sorrow and suffering touches your soul, but you don’t have to let it own you, or it will chain you. Know it and feel it with the victims, but keep your orientation beyond it all. You can’t beat evil by paying homage to it.

Posted in religion | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Cataloging Evil Is Evil

More What We Can Do

This post continues the theme from yesterday’s What We Can Know versus What We Can Do.

I left off with the assertion you should attempt or aim to live by the ancient tribal social structure as much as possible. Not the popular image of clannish and hateful distrust of anyone outside your extended family household, that was never the biblical concept. You’ll notice even today many Near Eastern folks are still quite hospitable, trying to be helpful to strangers who are no obvious threat. That is a carry over from ancient times when God’s Laws were widely known and practiced. We aim to cultivate that sort of graceful living, even if we must modify it some for a context in which human predators are far more likely to be active. You can be guarded without hatred.

So does that guarded-but-gracious living mean avoiding like the plague all interaction with an evil government? Of course not. That would call for entirely too much effort for too little gain. On the one hand, we justly regard all government agents with suspicion. For example, I have no trouble referring to TSA as ridiculously expensive security theater, with absolutely zero benefit in terms of actually making things any safer. By God’s standards, the whole thing is a complete ripoff, because the people in charge know it’s not doing any good, and they are blatantly lying about it. And so it is with almost every form of enforcement activity, because the theory is perverted, the people running at are often singularly arrogant and unaccountable, and far too many LEOs you encounter will simply act the part of armed thug. I’ve always said don’t ever dial 911 unless you are ready to die, or at least lose everything you value. But, you shouldn’t jump through a hundred hoops to avoid every encounter.

If what you do in this world calls for encountering the idiots who work for TSA, then do so with grace and peace. There is nothing to gain by forcefully standing up for your rights, simply because what those rights may be on paper hardly matters in the real world any longer, if they ever did. We are justly cynical and skeptical any of them can ever learn from even the most glaring court victories. We’ve seen TSA only backs down when they are utterly shamed on YouTube or the like, and it has nothing to do with what is just or right. Even when they know they are wrong, it won’t change their determination to exercise their authority with the most egregious petty abusiveness. Plus, we have substantial evidence they have no conscience in the first place, which seems to be a condition of employment. Resistance might serve some purpose, but it’s not very practical. If you decide you must resist, go right ahead, because nothing I write will help you.

By no means do I counsel you to ignore it all, and pretend it’s okay. What I’m hoping you’ll understand is not allowing their petty meanness to rule you. The danger here is building a system of social interaction which assumes truth is objective and concrete. It is not, but only those who have the insight of mysticism realize it. Western Civilization is but a passing fling, a seduction of humanity into some insane notion reality can be fully addressed from mere concrete logic, that the human intellect is capable of handling all truth. Mysticism admits right away things that really and truly matter most are beyond words, and certainly beyond human logic. The best we can hope for is a tolerable negotiation for any given moment between Ultimate Truth beyond logic and some particular necessity to act and react for this moment. Yes, all human governments today, so far as we know, are utterly abhorrent to God, but it’s His problem. He is crushing them each in turn, according to His own agenda and schedule. It’s not in your hands.

So when you walk through the see-you-naked scanners at the airport, what can you really do? It works best if you act as if it won’t matter — because it doesn’t. That is, unless you have some obsession with fixing everyone else’s problems. Sure, write your congressional delegation, agitate for political change, write ugly things about TSA. But don’t expect that to fix anything. Instead of making a scene, find out what is most likely to get you through quickly and adapt. Let it all slide off.

Have you ever seen slate floors? People can walk on them with almost anything on their feet, but after literally years of heavy foot traffic, a slate floor is hardly even worn. Give it a couple of decades, and about the most you’ll see is the slate surface is polished and shiny. A couple of centuries and maybe it will be thinned just a bit. People are going to walk on you, but you get to decide whether you’ll be slate or something much weaker.

Indeed, not only do I recommend gracious interaction with the Police State, but you can even take a government job. It won’t hurt to have a few mystical minds making someone’s day just a little sweeter. Of course, you know if you remain true to the mystical nature, it will annoy your fellow government employees. It might even get you fired. But neither taking nor losing that job should make any difference in you.

The best you can hope for in this insane world is simply keeping yourself sane by not taking it too seriously.

Posted in religion | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on More What We Can Do

What We Can Know versus What We Can Do

“Well, the solution is obvious.” No, it’s not.

Just because we can see harm, we should not assume we know the actual cause. Much less should we assume we know how to fix it. We see poverty as people unable to offer anything in exchange for food, clothing, shelter, etc. Simply putting money in their pockets is not the answer in every case. Much depends on how they got there, the system around them, and a host other factors we often cannot see. We might be guilty of rejecting the existence of those factors, especially if something we do contributes to them.

Some could be familiar with the propaganda trick of painting the scene of poverty with such rich sorrow as to presume a solution which is not spoken. “Don’t think! Just react! Oh, and I’ll tell you how to react.”

It’s the same flaw in the propaganda on the other side.

We can easily see how government agencies tend to act as if the humans they govern are mere property. We can see how government people speak and act as if all that we need to know is whatever they wish to tell us. If there is a notion they didn’t tell us, it is by definition a lie. And those who dare to speak that lie require silencing, even if it means death. So we have this agitation which says back to the government figures it is they who require silencing, even if it means death.

We have all this grand theorizing and explaining how the current ruling regime is far, far from the US Constitution. Correctly we note that fact is self-evident. But what can we do about it? Is there any reasonable hope of steering the system back on its proper course? What would it take?

Get enough voters to support the right people — people with the right theories and plans — and we win, right? I have serious doubts that can be done. Did the will of voters stop the TARP bailout? Nope. We can prove with firm legal certainty Congress was derelict. Did the voter support get Ron Paul his nomination for President under the Republican banner? Nope. We can prove in a court of law the criminal actions which combined to deny him that fair chance. Not only did he simply fail to win, he never was allowed to compete because key individuals broke their own rules, and even federal and local laws, to make sure of it. But the system has been slanted to make it too hard to even address that. Instead, we are offered a steady diet of candidates who are always thoroughly unfit to serve in any position, people who will never tell you the truth they are hostile to what we want, nor what is required by their oath to the Constitution.

Okay, so the system is fixed against truth and right actions. Do we find some other path? Isn’t that the obvious answer? Honestly, that is a legitimate question. Given the broad sweep of human history, it’s not just fancy words when we note those governments which reject peaceful change are demanding violent change. Is there any question change is necessary? Regardless of your particular persuasion, you surely believe things must change one way or another. So maybe we come up with some forceful action short of armed revolt by which we replace the evil army of elitist thugs running the country. What has changed?

Not much. First, those who permitted things to go so wrong are still the dominant life form in this country. Can they be persuaded to support a reinvigorated Constitutional government? Not on your life. While individuals vary widely, the bulk of the citizens together don’t understand what it even means. Further, they lack the means to understand, and are too far gone to get it. Just making that claim — which claim isn’t that hard to prove — will be rejected in the first minute after we begin to act on it. The bulk of Americans aren’t just ignorant, but have been conditioned to reject the facts. You can’t fix that, not even in one full generation. I know this because I have worked in education on several levels. Can’t be done.

Instead, we will have a mass of idiots who remain vulnerable to the same manipulation which got us into this mess. In just a matter of hours after setting things right, the agitators will be pumping up the crowd to demand things be wrong.

Okay, so maybe if we just outright killed everyone who is making things so difficult — armed revolution to “take back our country.” That would be an awful lot of killing. Then you would have to oppressively force people to do what is in their own best interest. How is that different from our current oppressive regime? What if the bulk of the US citizenry really don’t like living under a truly constitutional government? Frankly, they won’t. They aren’t intelligent enough to know, so they reject it and a lot of other things they don’t understand.

For example, take the aforementioned poverty issue. I can prove it is utterly impossible to end poverty in this world. Can’t be done. Humor me, because it would take a large book to prove it for most folks. No power on this earth can manipulate conditions to the point everyone will have their “fair share.” The very idea assumes things already proven false. You personally can voluntarily alleviate poverty within the limits of your resources, but there does not exist in this world the means to persuade the rest of humanity to buy into such a thing. Furthermore, the kinds of action and the system necessary to produce material advancement precluded even results. The moment you try to even things out, the very means of bringing that material into existence goes away. Fact. If it weren’t for greed and evil desires, there would be no material improvement.

But Americans as a whole still carry around this residual belief — in their fractured and inconsistent mental frame of reference — that we simply must do something about poverty. It’s a matter of sentiment divorced from reality, but it’s very solid. And an awful lot of them, if not entirely conscious of it, assume when things are bad for themselves someone darn sure better pony up to alleviate their misery. Never mind how utterly impossible it is in the long run, they demand it due to several generations of false civic religious training. They even have the audacity to blasphemously insist this is what God says.

Do you understand these things? Then perhaps you also understand you cannot, utterly cannot ever, conceive of an honest political solution to human misery. You cannot possibly tweak it and reform it and improve it until it covers all the bases, nor even most of them. The moment you begin to adjust, the conditions will change and make it invalid. It all comes back down to one literally damned notion: Central government is a good idea. God demanded under Noah there be government, but He promptly thereafter destroyed the Tower of Babel. Obvious that was heading the wrong direction, was the wrong type of government. What’s left, then? Family, clan, tribe.

Read between the lines. Ask yourself: What is the one greatest threat to bad government? Competing loyalties. What is the one primary feature of “government” within a household? Competing loyalties. While it makes ruling a household difficult, you at least have a bond of love to make everything negotiable. Under non-family government, there is no room for that, neither love nor honest negotiation. At the Tower of Babel, Nimrod demanded loyalty and control which was not his. At the very least, his rule was a symbolic attack on God’s authority.

Can we really return to the dictum: No one has any business controlling or ruling you who isn’t related to you by blood or marriage? God demands it, so there must be some level at which it is valid. We can know this. What can we do about it? We can expect the human civil government to seek to crush every effort to bring that back. But God has promised when we aim for that ideal, He will bless it, even if we don’t perceive it easily. By no means should we dream we will displace the modern state, though we should surely expect it to collapse periodically. Indeed, entire civilizations will collapse cyclically. But the basic Law of God regarding human government by kinship ties is built into our very instincts, and will always return even as civilization collapses around us.

Don’t expect to win, just try. That’s the standard.

Posted in religion, social sciences | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments