Abrahamic religion and the old gods

i know we’ve only just met, but i’d like to see your box, pandora. i’ve searched your post history and i’m finding a lot of activity in the pseudo-sciences. so what’s in the box? a bead collection, a copy of the rigveda, a few olive branches, some smoky quartz crystal… what?

‘unique’ relationship? it seems that way, duddint it? but it really isn’t. the differences in symbols and rites and rituals and passages does not make the actual interaction with the environment unique to a specific people. these narratives could have been anything, but still the same things would be considered sacred; marriage or union, sex, child birth, passage into manhood/womanhood, the harvest, the hunt, preparing for battle, and whatever other ordinary activities people engage in are ritualized. so if the eskimos are more or less doing the same thing everyday as the vikings, what makes each culture and its relationship to the environment unique, other than the bizarre ways they might behave when conducting their ceremonies and rituals?

the people aren’t unique. the environment isn’t unique. the interaction with the environment isn’t unique. the only unique thing is the ritual… which could have been anything… and still they’d do the same thing. dance around with feathers in your hair, toss a magical rock into the river, or stick a bone through your nose, doesn’t matter. you’re still showing appreciation, respect and reverence for [insert whatever sacred thing], something all human beings do.

now i’m not saying the anthropology of cultural religious practice isn’t neat. it certainly is. people do some pretty amusing stuff when they get all spiritual. like the greeks when the have those dionysus festivals. everybody gets drunk and runs around naked. now that is something i’d like to see.

anyway, what i’m saying is that the age of this stuff is coming to an end and those people from that other inferior, false religion over the hill are QUICKLY APPROACHING YOUR BORDERS. now what are you going to do? read some jung to em? hand em some runes and read their horoscopes? i certainly hope not.

I think we are all diamonds in the dirt, it’s just a lack of understanding that separates us from them and yes of course, I love pink floyd. I got to see roger waters us and them tour live in 2016-2017 summer, was awesome. Holographic pyramid and wall from animals album.

I am still figuring out what I want to do other than understand more to guide others to education properly or peak curiosity. I appreciate you all and your diversity even if we ever disagree, for I could never evolve without you and struggles we all face. I believe you though, I can only imagine. I have a sg epiphone cherry/wine red guitar I really need strings for so I can practice, I just put it off, I seriously need to commit to routine, never know who the next hendrix could be if we never practice to find out, ya know. lol

I don’t think it’s coming to an end because Science has become religious in a sense, dogmatic, systematic and is beginning to not follow it’s own philosophy of “evidence being consistent through result”, they refuse to connect the dots for unexplained phenomena or what seems like “Magic”, magic is merely unexplained science and it is only still unexplained because they do not want to invest time into it because they are also controlled by capitalistic, ego blinded groups of rich bankers.

Understand that the mythology and abrahamic religions, all of it… is unique expression of one or perhaps multiple individuals, it is the language that is unique due to the individual being shaped by genetics and environment that cannot be exactly replicated (Diversity), no man, stone or creature is identical to the other, nothing is, this is for a reason. Our unique expression of this knowledge on repeat is merely art, back then they did not understand it was a projection onto the material world of their own psyche or perhaps they did and merely tried writing it and we mistakenly misinterpret it since most people have adopted this “literal only stylized thinking” since Science has told the masses to, it is laziness and not wanting to accept responsibility… So in technical terms, people don’t kill people over religion, people kill people over misinterpreting it since it is “I am responsible for what I say and do, not your comprehension of those things.” similar to guns don’t kill people, people do. They are willfully ignorant in the masses and this is why people die.

The way I describe mythology and religion is my unique way of correlating things due to my being unique. This is what makes it very much still valid, present and important to understand. It is merely mankind’s willful ignorance due to psychological manipulation by society/culture, if they understood and took a step back from their narrowed viewpoint they could begin to see and understand this, I think people are waking up but still have a bit of a way to go to fully understand this all.

The knowledge stays the same, our interpretation and explanation of such is what changes due to perception diversity. It is not new, merely remembered and expressed via language and art. I hope this makes sense the way I am trying to connect it. I do this all and write not only to learn more but because I need more people with me in understanding… it is the only way.

This is why Plato or Socrates stated, “Ignorance is the root and stem of all evil” because it truly is.

I used to hate religion and fought against it myself but now that I have taken a step back to understand it I see it for what it truly is, expression of psychology in the only language they knew when they wrote it and it is merely our lack of trying to understand it fully on multiple pedestals of thought.

Well when they come to my doorstep and attempt at asserting their will upon mine I will fight to the death for that is tyranny, to assert will upon one who deems it fine to assert will is justice. I am the embodiment of nature and will react accordingly. They do not understand and are trapped. What I would do is not out of malevolence but of valuing my perception and intentions more than theirs due to the fact that theirs is corrupt and their actions would show such. The ancient gods of war will take over in form of archetype and I will fight.

Understanding is when one attempts to translate/interpret the context of what one writes, correlation of already old knowledge to reach unique understanding/expression. This is the difficulty in being diverse and separated manifestations of the collective consciousness.

I’m no champion and want no worship for worship does nothing for me other than make me feel comfortable which I urge others to escape from and seek enlightenment through struggle and understanding. Learn or ‘know’ from the insight gathered out of light, reflect in the dark when in solitude to correlate or ‘understand’. I agree we may have to resort to violence and war to overthrow the corrupt tyrannical government but ultimately we will leave that decision up to them so they may be the tyrant and we may be the hero. They have done us great injustice and only will continue to if we never set our foot down and as time moves forward we will move backwards and it will become harder and harder to resist or overthrow them due to their agenda of breeding passivity as well as limited thought/idea in the species through cultural genocide and the unification/lack of appreciation for diversity in culture.

I also agree that we evolve faster under active threat or when we have an achievable objective set. Which we have none at the moment, other than the tyrants who run this near inescapable society which enslaves individuals through social status/indoctrination of authoritative ideology. I think we should appreciate diversity instead of fighting each other though, ultimately… It will lead to less ego involved and more understanding/true knowledge.

I couldn’t tell if you were being facetious or not through text by the comments “all hail Artimas or saying it better than another philosopher” lol but I would hope not, I understand this could be my own projection of ideas upon what you have stated.

I think you have a good grasp on the intricacies of how religion/mythology work as well Pandora, as unique expression of man. I feel it is merely a matter of us reaching the level of being able to appreciate diversity and genuinely attempt to understand others unique expression that will progress us as a species, I don’t think fear alone or fear at all can progress us more due to fear being the main motivator for this society, which it is not very motivating(outside of learning, which there are apparently few of us who seek to understand) to be honest, this much is obvious through how people function now and even have in the past. Our job is not to fight and kill over diversity in expression but to attempt at correlating it so we may lead ourselves to new thinking styles, which in turn leads to more idea’s coming to us psychologically.

Is Abrahamic religion evolved or devolved from paganism?

Does Abrahamic religion not demonize and shun the sciences/alchemical principles more so than paganism, is this not a clear indication of it being a devolution?

Is being able to manipulate more people through fear successfulfully, if one uses a literal sense of thinking in attempt to know or understand but fails too, due to this style of independent thought being promoted, a sign of devolution? If it was meant as a weapon, is this not devolution of thought on a mass scale due too ignorance and willful ignorance being more consistent/abundant? Since we destroy environment the way we do now ignorantly and how Abrahamic religion could have played a role in the collapse of Rome and of the entering into the dark ages, should we assume so? Or is it an assumption out of misconception?

Or are we, independent thinkers, a sign of evolution of it by being able to understand both sides, were there not great and understanding men in history as well though…

And yet, we have also evolved to speak 6,000 different languages. These minute differences, which you want to downplay, are important enough. You may disagre, but history repeatedly shows that the moment the unifying communal systems shift or disappear, people, even with minute cultural difference (or ethnicities), even within same families (especially ruling) are at each others’ throats.

And it is not fair to compare Vikings to Eskimos (or Sami), as they do not have the same cultural histories. You tend paint with very broad strokes.

yeah but professor big chom tells us there’s a universal grammar that provides structural rules for all languages. so we ought to be more concerned with the nature and use of the vegetable rather than the fact that you call it a tomato and i call it a tomahto.

that’s not the only thing i do with very broad strokes.

omg i can’t believe i just said that.

Language evolves too, through diversity. We will get to understanding the vegetable but first we must understand how to grow it, nurture it, before taking it to the lab. Due to it not being available in an objective form like what reality is (objective vegetable) (objective reality being easier learning) and what modern day science is based on but instead we may only get there through subjectivity (diversity of words based on unique expression) and our attempt at understanding it.

Mind is the embodiment of nature it is merely the connection between multiple facets of which understanding is lacking, for the masses or common Joe’s.

If someone says a word differently from me and I don’t understand why (environment/culture) and their being shaped by such, it could matter, that’s why it is important to always attempt understanding of semantics from all angles(unique expression).

Semantics and language are tied heavily into symbology and also psyche, should be blatant.

in order to sustain any enduring cooperation between the peoples of the world, the myth that their cultural distinctions are something that make them unique, has to be dispelled once and for all. and to dispel this myth, one doesn’t have to make much effort. one only has to find the foundations that such cultural diversity can be reduced to. call it anthropological reductionalism. what you’ll see is that human beings are physiologically similar enough to propose an underlying and universal form and content to their ‘culture making’ behaviors… so that while specific details of culture are different, the function of the behavior and the understanding of particular concepts (novel or not) serves the same purpose.

so let me give you a crude example. people x invent metaphysics 1 to handle their anxiety of death, and people y invent metaphysics 2 to do the same. metaphysics 1 and 2 each contain distinct features of belief, but the purpose of the metaphysics is the same… to alleviate that anxiety. this anxiety is something hardwired into the mind of man, in the same way the basic rules of grammar are hardwired into our use of language.

now, it means little to say culture x is unique and quite different than culture y, unless by that we mean trivial contingencies. but it’s these very contingencies that people are holding onto so dearly to define themselves and their identities in contradistinction to other cutures doing the same. result: conflict. but not just any ol’ conflict. this conflict is an especially stupid one, because the things each people believe distinguish them from the others are of the most minor significance. am i really going to deny you because you worship the flying spaghetti monster while i worship the flying lasagna monster? or, because you bury your dead in the earth while we dump ours in the ocean? or, because you eat cows while we don’t? or, because you practice polygamy while we practice monogamy?

none of these behaviors are intrinsic to the people and could just as easily not have developed in any specific culture, and you’d change nothing fundamental about the people. in fact, the very notion of ‘culture’ is a kind of hermeneutic vanity… a systematic misinterpretation of what constitutes universal human nature, something that is inherent despite the cultural diversity that might evolve among geographically different peoples.

now none of what i tell you here is very important yet. i am writing from a future that is coming, sooner rather than later. i am to anthropology what green energy is to fossil fuels. in the future, schools will teach about a period that spanned thousands of years in which man, who was still at that time in his metaphysical infancy, got almost everything about what, and why, he was, wrong, and with flying colors. this period will be known as the second and final ape-stage of humanity, and what we today are most proud of will be in the future an embarrassing story told in classrooms of children with IQs of a buck-thirty or more.

This is what I was saying as well, we’re in agreement, just of different words. Semantics become an issue to one who doesn’t seek to understand or perhaps doesn’t have the vocabulary to discuss in which they want, which is unhappiness. I agree a united people will be stronger but not through cultural genocide. Cultural appreciation, people need to be educated and if they do not wish to be educated then they should not be able to have a say in governance. This will create a response hardwired in them to act violently or to learn but ultimately it is up to them but ignorance is bliss but what they do not know may kill them, tyrants get defeated by the hero.

Unique expression is important for evolution, we make more words to describe complex things. Natural selection in a sense, creating stronger language.

You will not get rid of conflict that way. In the world where humans are increasingly dependent on technology for their continued existence, it will be level of technological advancement that will determine between have and have nots. The idea that life-sustaining or saving technology will be shared equally among all is too optimistic. Technological comparison will be the new race science for the new (and newer) versions of humans.

We need a system balanced between nature and technology. Technology is a luxury not a necessity and humanity must come to terms with that and understand it or we will be a glass cannon of a society/species. We must all learn to be on the same page through training the mind to seek inconsistencies in language so one may be able to better understand another, the point after all, is to understand what is heard or what one knows, otherwise one only speaks mere rhetoric.

Technology may be the end of us. I will not sacrifice my humanity to be robotic in the end, I’d rather die and achieve another step closer to immortality.

There is no escaping the contrast which is death unless through ascension of understanding and correlation. Mankind will attempt to deify the ego but not through the methods of which will make them stronger, one through balance and understanding of both sides, not just the physical side of things, the literal. When one becomes too literal, we have what we have today, robotics and “immortality” through technology will not be an evolutionary step for man, merely more delaying of the inevitable. I am proud to be a living fragment and the embodiment of nature, so why seek to be different? Are they not proud to be gods? I don’t think that’s the case but more so, they reject god because they do not comprehend the level of thinking and understanding in order to achieve such thing, they do not want to accept the responsibility of being one and so they reject the premise altogether to try and force it to not exist, even when it does. It’s another form of cognitive dissonance, to reject information without first attempting to learn or understand it further.

Once people accept responsibility of self and begin their first step of evolving as a human, we will make fast progress but man is in a race against the destructive chaos of nature, it is tired of repetition, be it man or abutting for that matter, it wishes to grow and we would do well to heed it’s symbolic warnings through dreams, intuition and the permanent urgency we feel right now that we must change for the better, to seek to understand and evolve.

We must figure out how to dumb down language to the point that everyday man can read and comprehend whilst incorporating psychology, scientific laws, philosophy, history, aspects of the first full vision of spirituality and explain the correlations between religion/mythology and our current understanding of it today. We must blend the ancient gods with the new one, for both are what is. The head of the old gods, Odin, Zeus, etc, was symbolic for subconscious but the monotheistic version from Abrahamic religion as just “god” a single would do better to fit that position of subconscious and the ancient gods would fit the diverse mixing of ego and personalities, the archetypes. I feel both can be incorporated into one to better explain psychology in a way of which can spark curiosity. A seed to be planted in the mind of the ignorant and unknowing, a flame to grow hungry and consume more, the light/knowledge spreading like a plague as did the opposite of it, ignorance and misinformation.

The very idea of “god” and the monotheistic versions that are most often misinterpretations by people whom have adopted a style/model of thought through laziness, biased ego, fear, comfort and authority cannot prove or disprove anything other than a division between the ignorant and the understanding.

This model of thinking does not work in the proving or disproving of what it actually is, it leads one down a path of willful ignorance. The reason why one cannot prove it so in the way of which one believes or thinks it is, is because it /isn’t/ from the beginning, at least it isn’t in the way of which they view it. So the message has been missed and their will and hearts are thrown away towards a literal interpretation that holds no value of existing, only so in the sense of how they perceive it.

So then how can one disprove what one already couldn’t prove what is, when their model based off of misinterpretation/misconceptive thought, isn’t?
The medium between something being a belief or something being known, is an understanding.

Both sides of that argument are futile and lead to no power of/to self, a redundant loop of enslaved will of which is not recognized by the will that has been enslaved unless one has some degree of humility and a willingness to understand others. It is natural selection you see, what one does not know or understand, may kill them and for a lot of them, they already live as death, for living for anyone else except self is death, you cease as your unique ego, which the point is to experience as it and build it justly and through an ever-growing understanding, this-in is where true power/knowledge lies.

I try to help the ignorant only for my hand to be bitten and chunks of my sanity chiseled away by a mass of rhetoric and lack of will stemming from enslavement of the fool, bred ignorance to manifest as egos incarnate.

One must choose to help themself by understanding how evolution works and understanding themself. The only path of power is that of being humble, for one cannot accept this power without this humility.

It is simple to understand if one takes off their glasses of which blinds the will to see and of understanding properly.

any idea of ‘god’ is as ridiculous as it is unverifiable/unfalsifiable… but that’s the very reason why the idea still persists in the form; 'well, you can’t prove ‘god’ doesn’t exist, so…"

however, insofar as the idea does still persist, the monotheistic logic is far more consistent, more mature, than the polytheistic logic. which is to say, a monotheistic religion is a little less ridiculous than a polytheistic religion… though certainly not as cool. this is why the new infidels are the pagans; they’d rather adhere to a cooler version of nonsense than a more rational version of nonsense.

in any event, there were several logical problems in the lines of reasoning that led to the belief in many gods… problems the philosophers worked out quite thoroughly. dudes like aristotle, augustine, ghazali, averroes, aquinas, anslem, maimoniDEES NUTS, spinoza, leibniz… these guys looked critically at what kind of mess would result if there were several ‘gods’ running the universe, and so allocated power to one boss. it was the logical conclusion. but this was already intuited by the bronze age arabs and the jews long before… only they didn’t produce any formal ‘philosophical’ arguments for such a belief. that had to wait until the period preceding the medieval era and the period directly thereafter.

The ‘god’ that is spoken of is only symbolic of man’s consciousness of subconsciousness, it’s an evolved state of duality. The power we seek through understanding is the same power that demands a /just/ obligation. Do you see? The power is the very “god” you reject as being false… It’s a matter of semantics, they had no language for subconsciousness back then, no psychological terminology, they made due with what they had. It is mans misinterpretation of the tool (religion) offered, in which damage to reality occurs.

These aren’t meant to be taken literally, only as aspects to, of and for mankind. It’s psyche, to become enlightened one must willingly seek light, one must truly care and not just for him/herself. But understanding of such may have /literal/ effects.

The intellect isn’t sufficient to address the gods.
It can at best discover its limits, and identify what it can’t control or explain. From thereon out the heart can take charge and lead us where the mind, eternal bystander, can’t navigate; our actual being.

No godless man ever knew himself.

I agree, the terminology doesn’t matter, there is something observing reality, the proof of that is the subconscious and how it is externally giving us feedback, through a sort of correlating method of consciousness/perception and body.

The only way to understand and know god is to know yourself, it is simple yet complex. We experience and interpret things subjectively, this is the reason why.

The intellect is evolving. That’s what is going on here. We reveal more grand imagery the more we teach and as generations progress. It’s a matter of helping others understand themselves by peaking of curiosity. It is why it’s important not to get lost in language.

Diversity brings evolution. New eyes on old issues bring solutions or new correlated subconscious ideas, one must remain balanced between mind, heart and stomach to the best of their abilities.

yes, but the big pitfall of the New Age is that it would have you believe Gods are merely forms of your own self.
Thats like thinking your parents are merely forms of your own self, your imagination, your mind. Its dangerous solipsism, causes people to lost the most valuable connections to themselves that they have.

Not everything is just us. Were not THAT great. We can be pretty great, but not so great as to encompass the Gods.
Its just not the case.

Gods are as real as us, and many have been around for a lot longer.

The silly New Age aunties can’t bear the idea that there are things greater than them, things they don’t have control or authority over. With people like me, the Gods rebel agains the New Age aunties.

Scientifically, it is pretty obvious that most of the gravity in the known universe is not from EM giving stuff, it is thus from stuff that “doesn’t exist”, in terms of how things are supposed to behave according to godless “scientists”.

Urkkkh, Sorry man. I shouldnt have gotten involved. Theoretical debates over Gods are like theoretical wine tasting.

Well I agree with that too. People are often lost in ego, thinking it is god but god is past the ego, it is a state of understanding and also some aspects of the understood you see, animals and anything with a subconscious but not conscious of their subconscious(instincts) are innocent and the closest thing to god you can see in physical form, we are conscious of the subconscious and so we may communicate with and understand it, consciously.

The issue is that a lot of people take these terms as literal and look externally for god, while missing the entire point of actual understanding of what it is.

God is “omnipotent” because you’re here, aren’t you? Did you ask to be here? No? Then is that not the very omnipotence of which some say doesn’t “exist”? To be bound by something external to us (conscious identity) is the omnipotence of it. To argue for determinism and our being externally bound is to in a sense, argue for omnipotence of god and it’s grand architecture.

God is All knowing because these ideas are not my own, the subconscious controls ideas, dreams, etc, therefore, this knowledge is not my own, this understanding is not fully my own. It is merely my being diverse of which is mine, my unique existing and my ability to be able to correlate in a different way than others and them as well.

We are both the spectator and the spectated but in understanding this, you work for god. The obligation one feels after understanding ‘is’ the god that is worshipped as well as hated.

Ego is the identity of which changes based on environment. It is not being conscious. One can be conscious of the ego, this is the wise man, he knows his environment effects him while also understanding that he can choose his environment, hence, choose his own evolution and the speed of its manifesting.

You very much are welcome to be involved, diversity is how we evolve, criticism is how we learn.