It turns out that DNA is modified by the cell throughout life - epigenetics - and modified by the environment, via viral gene insertion. Then there are parts of the cell that have their own genes - mitochondria - and parts that develop independently of genes entirely - cell membranes. DNA is less the brain of the cell than a library of useful blueprints for building proteins.
Then there's the issue that tissue growth can't be explained via genetic programs. Cells somehow seem to know where they are in the body, what kind of cells they should become, how they should grow, etc., all in a way that absolutely cannot be explained via genetic determinism. There just isn't enough information in the genome.
All of which points to morphogenetic fields being a real thing.
That is one of the explanations for meridians; they can be likened to the old telegraph line connections that still exist in the US, for example (versus countries that developed much later which went straight to land lines or, even later, cell towers). Because of this field, cells know whether to be noses or big toes, bones or viscera etc.
On a direct experiential level we know that anything we make comes first from the idea and then the intention to make it. The Darwinian narrative assumes that building blocks perform some sort of bottom-up miracle.
It's the same delusion that allows people to buy into the fantasy that a revolution forced upon society by the workers can possibly end well.
Lobsang Rampa spoke of this as well, nations and peoples having an over-self. Additionally, National Over Soul theory is the only thing that makes sense for explaining situations like that Australian who woke up from brain damage unable to speak English, but fluent in Chinese.
His brief, brief study of Chinese in High School brought his soul slightly in contact with the Chinese gestalt. When the brain damage he received cut his body (and thus body-bound soul) off from his Astral Cord to the Anglosphere, rendering him unable to communicate or even think in English, it sent an emergency spiritual (electro-magnetic) signal through the silver cord, and managed to force through a connection on an available thread: the one connecting to the Sino-gestalt. Thus, an Australian man wakes up fluent in Chinese.
"Many Germans were in denial about members of their family having being Nazis and felt a deep sense of shame about their grand-pappy forcing Jews to be eaten by electric bears and masturbated to death by Himmler’s patented “rub and tug” machines during WWII." Your writing is inimitable, Rolo! You often leave me smiling from ear to ear, in addition to calling many useful and important concepts and writers to my attention, e.g. John Carter.
As far as I know, the Church fathers and theologians have not given much thought to the nature of the human soul. The only reflection I know of are the competing theories of the duality of body and soul vs tripartition into body, spirit and soul. There is no reflection either with respect to animals. As for the equality between souls, it is to be understood as God wants to save all souls and equally desires their salvation.
Within Christianity exists the concept of guardian angels to whole countries, to provinces, to cities, to villages. You may turn to them for help and guidance. It has not been taught for ages though and they cannot play the role of a collective oversoul as you describe it.
Still in Christianity, the union of body and soul has a consequence in that what you do to your body, you do to your soul. Good or bad. A speculative extension of mine is that the organic nature of the body does have influence on the soul. So if you are a white European, raised as a white European, and behave as a white European, your soul takes a white hue in the European fashion.
As for what you describe as the racial databank, similar ideas exist and nowadays are stated as the conscience is not limited to the body. A great many intelligent and scientifically trained people espouse the idea, though it is anathema in SCIENCE!
You confuse Roman Catholicism with Christianity. It is not. God elects whom he will to spare from eternal wrath. Salvation from the eternal wrath of God the Father cannot be earned. The propitiatory act of Jesus is the efficient and sufficient satisfaction for the Father's perfect justice. Any "good" works - and God defines what those are - are done out of gratitude for salvation from the consequences of sin, sin being disobedience and dishonor of God,
That is Christian doctrine, pure and simple, not Jewish in the slightest. The Jews hold that being descendants of Abraham is their ticket to heaven. Judaism is the Talmud, not the Torah. and has nothing in common with Christianity. Any Jew who actually believes the bald and bizarre pronouncements in the Talmud has a screw loose anyway.
Rather glib of you to dismiss Calvin as though you were his theological or intellectual equal. Perhaps you missed an earlier book by Martin Luther titled "The Jews and Their Lies". Another illuminating book is The Judeo-Christian Tradition by Gary North.
Calvin was Jewish and Protestantism is based on following the Old Testament more closely than Church tradition i.e., Judaism for goys.
Martin Luther only got red-pilled years before his death. Perhaps you missed an earlier book by Martin Luther titled "That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew" wherein he argues that the Jews are doing it right and the Christians wrong and that if we open ourselves to learning from the Jews, they'd convert and Christ would resurrect.
Furthermore, Jews have never renounced the Torah and have a better claim to it than you ever will seeing as they're the ones who wrote it and its written about Jews and for Jews exclusively.
Calvin did not adhere to Judaism. At most, he ignored it while pursuing his life's work of codifying Christian doctrine. He was a bona fide Christian. How a man finishes defines the man, not his birth or bloodline, and The Institutes of the Christian Religion are the proof.
Yes, but Luther was relieved of his presuppositions about the Jews when they made him aware of their doctrine and their machinations. His last word on the Jews, as I pointed out, was "The Jews and Their Lies". The later books are the conclusion of his experience and thought.
The Jews abandoned the Torah, the law they could not keep, in favor of their traditions, the rewritten law they could keep. I have every right to read and quote the Torah. The Holy Bible is God's revelation of himself to his creature mankind. The Torah, the Old Testament, is not some exclusive Jewish document barred to all others. It is ridiculous to suggest that the Jews "have a better claim" to the Torah. Genesis is the preview of the rest of the Bible. In Genesis God promised Eve he would provide a Redeemer who would rescue mankind - her progeny - from the evil she and Adam has injected into the once perfect creation.
The Jew clings to the Talmud alone, which teaches insane things such as that God cannot understand Yiddish so they can talk secretly behind his back so to speak, that Jesus is being boiled in a vat of semen, etc. Totally extra biblical bizarre nonsense which offers no explanation for the origin of the universe and life.
>How a man finishes defines the man, not his birth or bloodline
He remains a Jew, no matter what voodoo rituals you perform to pretend that it isn't so. I know that the faithful have a problem with basic biology, but this is getting to be ridiculous.
>The later books are the conclusion of his experience and thought.
The damage was already done. Protestantism was born. The original Prots were called Old Testamentarians. I'll give you three guesses as to why that is the case.
Also Luther was a very immoral character. He and his friends raped nuns, bro.
>The Jews abandoned the Torah, the law they could not keep
So you claim. They do not think so. Who should we trust in this regard? Imagine an African coming to China and telling the Chinese that they misunderstood Confucious and that he and his people were now the true inheritors of Confuscionism. It boggles the mind, but that's what Christians do. They try to claim that they are the inheritors of Old Testament Judaism even though the Old Testament, a rip-off of the work of the Greeks and other cultures, almost certainly written no earlier than the 2nd century BC, was written by Jews, for Jews and in worship of a Jewish demon called Yahweh.
>In Genesis God promised Eve he would provide a Redeemer who would rescue mankind - her progeny - from the evil she and Adam has injected into the once perfect creation.
No he didn't lol.
>Totally extra biblical bizarre nonsense which offers no explanation for the origin of the universe and life.
Wrong. From Kabbalah we got black holes and the primordial soup of life theory and all the other assorted voodoo SCIENCE! gibberish that is accepted in modern society.
The truth is regardless of the passport you carry or the philosophical/theological brand that has captured you we are not all the same. We've evolved physically, mentally, intellectually differently as we all hail from different parts of the globe. To make a broad generalization that somehow we're the same or all men :are created equal: make no sense. Equal before the law perhaps but equal no. Even before the law a net worth millionaire has a better chance at getting a lighter sentence or probation than an illiterate from a trailer park or inner city housing project. But that's for another essay. As I've said before "God" is not "religion" God the Father of us all, religion is business and needs customers why exclude potential revenue streams. Hence missionary work is in essence is basically a traveling salesman operation. Don't believe me ask Joel Osteen or Joyce Meyers their "business" is booming! Jews for sure don't believe in the equality of peoples, and Hindus don't. Muslims and Christians disdain heretics and non-believers the truth is people are tribal. They prefer their own kind and the culture, literature, foods and appearance of their tribal brethren. Now can people of different tribes create a tribe (multi-racial/ethnic state) yes but their must be a very strong glue. In the USA it's "the American dream" now a nightmare, or in Imperial Russia autocracy and Orthodoxy. Without it that multi-populace will crack and fall apart. Tribal societies still stay tribal even after catastrophe might hit them. There is a difference.
It is neither racist (a worn out useless term) nor xenophobic no recognize this. I study an admire many cultures it doesn't mean that I'm going native. This is something I noticed in martial arts dojos. A guy trains in a fighting style and suddenly he goes "native" starts to not just study the art but embraces the culture of the nation the art originated in. He starts eating their foods, buys their furniture, listens to their music and the ultimate starts to date women from the nation. There's no need I can study martial arts and still remain a Eurocentric nationalist. No need to abandon your birthright for a trophy, a belt promotion or a romp in bed.
The proof of this is what's happened to western Europe and now the USA. I saw a tragic post on fakebook AKA facebook "Austria is ceasing to be Austrian" that says it all. Tragedy I love Vienna. we're witnessing the diminution of a culture and people before our eyes it doesn't bode well for the future.
As far as polytheistic paganism goes, I think it was Hinduism which professed reincarnation proceeded upwards or downwards through becoming more or less complex animals, according to the meritorious deeds of the last previous life? A soul who made a good run as a cockroach would reincarnate itself as a rat, a rat as a pigeon, a pigeon as a cat and so on up to non-native Hindus, then up the various Indian castes from Dalit to Brahmin. A good and pious Brahmin would finally ascend to their version of Paradise.
It was possible also to be relegated if your last life's moral performance was not up to standards.
Also truly exceptional runs were exceptionally rewarded by the wheel of fate, and such cases were in fact thought to be readily observable, for instance a mentally unstable or criminal Dalit (untouchable) was taken to have been something like a very accomplished cockroach in its previous reincarnation.
This would explain how each individual varies in abilities and moral constitution, and would also present an explanation for the case wherein a person did not match the standards of his caste. The resiliency of such a societal order I think is self-evident: it is virtually bulletproof lest the reincarnation belief itself, which is at the core of the system, gets criticized.
The rest of the post is lysergic more than Lysenkoist, but at any rate I understand it is not practical for Humanities students to take classes in Math, Physics and only afterwards Biology...
>As far as polytheistic paganism goes, I think it was Hinduism which professed reincarnation proceeded upwards or downwards through becoming more or less complex animals, according to the previous life meritorious deeds? A soul who made a good run as a cockroach would reincarnate itself as a rat, a rat as a pigeon, a pigeon as a cat and so on up to non-native Hindus, then up the various Indian castes from Dalit to Brahmin. A good and pious Brahmin would finally ascend to their version of Paradise.
Evola said that the animals were the run-off from the process of the forging of the human soul. Or, if one imagines a piece of metal being hammered, they are the bits of impurity that are beaten out.
First, I never much considered souls until recently. Perhaps because a Buddhist teacher used to crack jokes about it (as part of teachings about egolessness, i.e. no permanent self) and also that the English School Church of England spirituality I grew up under didn't resonate on the inner level though I always enjoyed the services and even sang in a choir for a while. But then recently, by happenstance I stumbled on the works of a little known I Ching Master, a Westerner trained in the Sudden Enlightenment School (Daoist and Buddhist) and appointed the lineage successor. He then was adopted by a Mexican Shaman. Following his Daoist teacher's instructions he has re-sequenced the I Ching for this Age, the first time since the King Wen sequence about 3,000 years ago (which was not the first sequence). He calls it The Toltec I Ching and not only is the order different but also many of the trigram values (Earth changes to Moon for example) and the entire thrust of the commentary.
William Douglas Horden has also published many other books including two autobiographical in which he recounts how since he was a child growing up next to a cemetery he has communed with dead people. He then had an extended NDE in his fifties in which he went to the other side and spent considerable time with his Masters. The long and short is that he has developed an extensive personal and theoretical understanding of Soul. Fundamentally it relates to how we are all part of the same One but each a particular manifestation of Many. So on the ultimate level there is no form differentiation but on the relative, manifest level there is infinite particularization. And of course this is a very personal, living dynamic, not just abstract formulation. So the most important aspect of this life is how our soul journey is progressing, either moving towards Union with the One or moving away and becoming increasingly dense and confused, similarly effecting other souls with whom it comes into contact. He has also written entire I Ching versions reflecting this Higher Soul / Lower Soul dynamic. Interesting man. As it happens, strangely, his daughter lives in the same tiny town in rural Mexico I live in so will meet him soon.
Maybe like a tree. Each leaf is unique but each part of the same tree. But some leaves are attached to sub-branch A, part of Main Branch 1, others part of Main Branch 2 part of Trunk 2, others part of Main Branch 3 on Trunk 1 and so forth. Endless variegations of the family or ethnic lineage principle you had such fun with.
Emotional transmission: not to argue with you thesis/contemplation, but one way trauma can be transmitted generationally is via empathy. When a loved one is upset we feel upset. (Or just anyone we see or meet for that matter.) If a family raised by traumatized parents is going to pick up on that trauma all the time incorporating it as part of their own psycho-social gestalt. This works on individual, family, societal and nowadays even international levels. Now scientifically we may have a hard time explaining exactly what empathy is (they probably fantasize about chemicals or some such), but we all know about how feelings can be shared so no need to twist knickers about it. Actually, I suspect it's a good way that we can all easily witness how there is more to experience than only the physical. But the soul notion goes into even more formless territory than immediate shared feelings. Still, I suspect it's on the same essentially non-material continuum.
Lastly, I think like with most things it's good to avoid either-or thinking, as in either the soul exists or it doesn't, either the soul is one thing or another. Rather, there are variables in the mix, different layers and levels like there are always with everything. So there can be family soul influences, emotive influences, perhaps metaphysical entity influence (saints or gods or the effects of black magic), influences from other species with whom we share space and time (the Ant Kingdom, Bee Kingdom, Rat Kingdom, Bacterial Kingdom etc. with all of whom on some levels we are in constant contact.
This leads into Buddhist notion of Codependent Origination (praticcha-samutpada) wherein everything that arises is the result of an endlessly interconnected chain of endlessly interconnected causes and conditions. The same is the same for any sort of 'soul'. As a concept it works to simplify things for the purposes of communication and understanding, but ontologically/existentially it's an oversimplification just like everything else we label, things like trees, clouds, humans, breakfast.
Well genetically speaking of course, but I’d never considered it from a spiritual point of view.
I suppose my catholic upbringing prevented me from ever considering the possibility that souls are unequal and in part derived from familial over-souls...
I think a lot of psychological terminology is just mystical terminology recast in post-Enlightenment language.
Schizophrenics could be said to be beset by fell spirits. Materialist science doesn't really have any explanations that make sense and the only "cure" that scientists have come up with is to lobotomize them either surgically or chemically.
Our imaginations seem to be designed to concoct explanations even (especially?) when evidence fails, and it can be difficult to avoid the temptation to regard such imaginings as real. In particular, there's a tendency to use spirituality to explain material things we don't understand. But just because the spiritual is mysterious doesn't mean that all mysteries are spiritual.
Nevertheless, this tendency has led to formalized religions: early humans couldn't simply accept ingorance of thunderstorms and leave it at that, but had to devise not just basic hypotheses (a la science), but elaborate mythologies that anthropomorphise the phenomenon (Zeus). Furthermore, great importance was placed on the details of these superficial fabrications, leading to warfare over disagreements in ideation. (30 Years War, e.g.)
I propose that this tendency toward mental elaboration distracts us from authentic spiritual intuitions (for intuitions of spirituality is really all we have to go on.) I can accept personal experiences of prayer and ancestor worship, but I attribute meaning to them only with the greatest delicacy.
For instance: what we mean by "God", at least for myself, evokes a sense of over-riding power and beneveolence. But I'm not even sure that I've already gone too far: I intuit that evil and demons have an independent existence as negatives, but I have the terrifying feeling that justice and goodness might not. Perhaps goodness is something for which we bear responsibility, and that a "God within us" is actually the only force in the universe opposing evil.
This illustrates my problem: since I can't even get much beyond these basics, postulating that my spiritual identity resides in some sort of "soul", and then attributing properties to it, feels like a construct meant to do an end-run around my own ignorance. I just don't think that recognizing spiritual differences requires a soul as a container. Without the soul for an object of discussion, we have to face the much harder issue of what these differences actually are, on a more basic level where reality is more dimly-apprehended.
I think honest spirituality involves a great deal of believing without knowing. The latter invites temptations that entangle us in distractions.
Psychology, psychiatry, social sciences, are a hoax. Sociology is statistics and so is not tainted with the subjective brush of Freud, Skinner, Rogers, et al.
Romans 1:16-25
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.
Amen.
Otherwise explain the origin of the universe and of living things.
Islam has an interesting perspective on some of these questions. Regarding why different races exist, the answer is “that you may come to know one another”. That this ACTUAL diversity is sort of a spice of life intended to make living more interesting and also help us empathize with and understand people with different characteristics.
Also, humans are tethered to jinns who, like humans, are of varying nations and constantly seek to subtly influence our thoughts. This seems relevant.
Islam is a fake. Mohammed was nothing more than a robber, a murderer, and a child abuser. There is nothing whatever divine or coherent about Islam, a political system for world domination.
Moses did not write the Ten Commandments or the case law in Leviticus and Deuteronomy which Jesus, very God and very man, exposited in the Gospels.
You will always be stuck with explaining the origin of the universe and the origin of life until you admit that the only answer is in Genesis 1: God created it without effort or exertion which is the meaning of omnipotent. If you think there is another explanation, I invite you to go to Creation.com and use the search engine.
The OT was written by Jewish priests who were ripping off and inverting Greek source material at the library of Alexandria in the 2nd century BC.
>God created it without effort or exertion which is the meaning of omnipotent.
Yahweh is blind, as evidenced by the fact that he loses sight of Adam and Eve. Furthermore, he reneges on his promise to not flood the world by flooding it twice. Yahweh and the Jews are defeated by northern chariot-rider tribes, proving he is not omnipotent. Yahweh is clearly a volcano entity. Moses had horns, and Paul denounces "the curse of Moses" and claims that he spoke to (dark) angels, not to God on Mt. Sinai (which is clearly a volcano).
There is indeed an omnipotent Higher God. But he has no relation to the demon Yahweh.
It seems to me that what you are describing in this essay can be done without all the twists and turns of Jungian mysticism or Sheldrakean magic. As any anthropologist can tell you, it is called cultural inheritance. So what gives? Ancestor worship is one of the many ways of ritualizing it to give it status and stickyness across the generations. It does not require denial of genetic inheritance, although unfortunately too many social scientists adhere to a blank slate theory of human nature that does try to ignore genetics and the uncomfortable subject of race.
It turns out that DNA is modified by the cell throughout life - epigenetics - and modified by the environment, via viral gene insertion. Then there are parts of the cell that have their own genes - mitochondria - and parts that develop independently of genes entirely - cell membranes. DNA is less the brain of the cell than a library of useful blueprints for building proteins.
Then there's the issue that tissue growth can't be explained via genetic programs. Cells somehow seem to know where they are in the body, what kind of cells they should become, how they should grow, etc., all in a way that absolutely cannot be explained via genetic determinism. There just isn't enough information in the genome.
All of which points to morphogenetic fields being a real thing.
That is one of the explanations for meridians; they can be likened to the old telegraph line connections that still exist in the US, for example (versus countries that developed much later which went straight to land lines or, even later, cell towers). Because of this field, cells know whether to be noses or big toes, bones or viscera etc.
On a direct experiential level we know that anything we make comes first from the idea and then the intention to make it. The Darwinian narrative assumes that building blocks perform some sort of bottom-up miracle.
It's the same delusion that allows people to buy into the fantasy that a revolution forced upon society by the workers can possibly end well.
Lobsang Rampa spoke of this as well, nations and peoples having an over-self. Additionally, National Over Soul theory is the only thing that makes sense for explaining situations like that Australian who woke up from brain damage unable to speak English, but fluent in Chinese.
His brief, brief study of Chinese in High School brought his soul slightly in contact with the Chinese gestalt. When the brain damage he received cut his body (and thus body-bound soul) off from his Astral Cord to the Anglosphere, rendering him unable to communicate or even think in English, it sent an emergency spiritual (electro-magnetic) signal through the silver cord, and managed to force through a connection on an available thread: the one connecting to the Sino-gestalt. Thus, an Australian man wakes up fluent in Chinese.
"Better a Chinaman than Empty, Dumb and Mute."
"Many Germans were in denial about members of their family having being Nazis and felt a deep sense of shame about their grand-pappy forcing Jews to be eaten by electric bears and masturbated to death by Himmler’s patented “rub and tug” machines during WWII." Your writing is inimitable, Rolo! You often leave me smiling from ear to ear, in addition to calling many useful and important concepts and writers to my attention, e.g. John Carter.
Yet another interesting writing of yours, Rolo.
As far as I know, the Church fathers and theologians have not given much thought to the nature of the human soul. The only reflection I know of are the competing theories of the duality of body and soul vs tripartition into body, spirit and soul. There is no reflection either with respect to animals. As for the equality between souls, it is to be understood as God wants to save all souls and equally desires their salvation.
Within Christianity exists the concept of guardian angels to whole countries, to provinces, to cities, to villages. You may turn to them for help and guidance. It has not been taught for ages though and they cannot play the role of a collective oversoul as you describe it.
Still in Christianity, the union of body and soul has a consequence in that what you do to your body, you do to your soul. Good or bad. A speculative extension of mine is that the organic nature of the body does have influence on the soul. So if you are a white European, raised as a white European, and behave as a white European, your soul takes a white hue in the European fashion.
As for what you describe as the racial databank, similar ideas exist and nowadays are stated as the conscience is not limited to the body. A great many intelligent and scientifically trained people espouse the idea, though it is anathema in SCIENCE!
You confuse Roman Catholicism with Christianity. It is not. God elects whom he will to spare from eternal wrath. Salvation from the eternal wrath of God the Father cannot be earned. The propitiatory act of Jesus is the efficient and sufficient satisfaction for the Father's perfect justice. Any "good" works - and God defines what those are - are done out of gratitude for salvation from the consequences of sin, sin being disobedience and dishonor of God,
>God elects whom he will to spare from eternal wrath
Calvinism is just Judaism in disguise.
That is Christian doctrine, pure and simple, not Jewish in the slightest. The Jews hold that being descendants of Abraham is their ticket to heaven. Judaism is the Talmud, not the Torah. and has nothing in common with Christianity. Any Jew who actually believes the bald and bizarre pronouncements in the Talmud has a screw loose anyway.
Rather glib of you to dismiss Calvin as though you were his theological or intellectual equal. Perhaps you missed an earlier book by Martin Luther titled "The Jews and Their Lies". Another illuminating book is The Judeo-Christian Tradition by Gary North.
Calvin was Jewish and Protestantism is based on following the Old Testament more closely than Church tradition i.e., Judaism for goys.
Martin Luther only got red-pilled years before his death. Perhaps you missed an earlier book by Martin Luther titled "That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew" wherein he argues that the Jews are doing it right and the Christians wrong and that if we open ourselves to learning from the Jews, they'd convert and Christ would resurrect.
Furthermore, Jews have never renounced the Torah and have a better claim to it than you ever will seeing as they're the ones who wrote it and its written about Jews and for Jews exclusively.
Calvin did not adhere to Judaism. At most, he ignored it while pursuing his life's work of codifying Christian doctrine. He was a bona fide Christian. How a man finishes defines the man, not his birth or bloodline, and The Institutes of the Christian Religion are the proof.
Yes, but Luther was relieved of his presuppositions about the Jews when they made him aware of their doctrine and their machinations. His last word on the Jews, as I pointed out, was "The Jews and Their Lies". The later books are the conclusion of his experience and thought.
The Jews abandoned the Torah, the law they could not keep, in favor of their traditions, the rewritten law they could keep. I have every right to read and quote the Torah. The Holy Bible is God's revelation of himself to his creature mankind. The Torah, the Old Testament, is not some exclusive Jewish document barred to all others. It is ridiculous to suggest that the Jews "have a better claim" to the Torah. Genesis is the preview of the rest of the Bible. In Genesis God promised Eve he would provide a Redeemer who would rescue mankind - her progeny - from the evil she and Adam has injected into the once perfect creation.
The Jew clings to the Talmud alone, which teaches insane things such as that God cannot understand Yiddish so they can talk secretly behind his back so to speak, that Jesus is being boiled in a vat of semen, etc. Totally extra biblical bizarre nonsense which offers no explanation for the origin of the universe and life.
>How a man finishes defines the man, not his birth or bloodline
He remains a Jew, no matter what voodoo rituals you perform to pretend that it isn't so. I know that the faithful have a problem with basic biology, but this is getting to be ridiculous.
>The later books are the conclusion of his experience and thought.
The damage was already done. Protestantism was born. The original Prots were called Old Testamentarians. I'll give you three guesses as to why that is the case.
Also Luther was a very immoral character. He and his friends raped nuns, bro.
>The Jews abandoned the Torah, the law they could not keep
So you claim. They do not think so. Who should we trust in this regard? Imagine an African coming to China and telling the Chinese that they misunderstood Confucious and that he and his people were now the true inheritors of Confuscionism. It boggles the mind, but that's what Christians do. They try to claim that they are the inheritors of Old Testament Judaism even though the Old Testament, a rip-off of the work of the Greeks and other cultures, almost certainly written no earlier than the 2nd century BC, was written by Jews, for Jews and in worship of a Jewish demon called Yahweh.
>In Genesis God promised Eve he would provide a Redeemer who would rescue mankind - her progeny - from the evil she and Adam has injected into the once perfect creation.
No he didn't lol.
>Totally extra biblical bizarre nonsense which offers no explanation for the origin of the universe and life.
Wrong. From Kabbalah we got black holes and the primordial soup of life theory and all the other assorted voodoo SCIENCE! gibberish that is accepted in modern society.
The truth is regardless of the passport you carry or the philosophical/theological brand that has captured you we are not all the same. We've evolved physically, mentally, intellectually differently as we all hail from different parts of the globe. To make a broad generalization that somehow we're the same or all men :are created equal: make no sense. Equal before the law perhaps but equal no. Even before the law a net worth millionaire has a better chance at getting a lighter sentence or probation than an illiterate from a trailer park or inner city housing project. But that's for another essay. As I've said before "God" is not "religion" God the Father of us all, religion is business and needs customers why exclude potential revenue streams. Hence missionary work is in essence is basically a traveling salesman operation. Don't believe me ask Joel Osteen or Joyce Meyers their "business" is booming! Jews for sure don't believe in the equality of peoples, and Hindus don't. Muslims and Christians disdain heretics and non-believers the truth is people are tribal. They prefer their own kind and the culture, literature, foods and appearance of their tribal brethren. Now can people of different tribes create a tribe (multi-racial/ethnic state) yes but their must be a very strong glue. In the USA it's "the American dream" now a nightmare, or in Imperial Russia autocracy and Orthodoxy. Without it that multi-populace will crack and fall apart. Tribal societies still stay tribal even after catastrophe might hit them. There is a difference.
It is neither racist (a worn out useless term) nor xenophobic no recognize this. I study an admire many cultures it doesn't mean that I'm going native. This is something I noticed in martial arts dojos. A guy trains in a fighting style and suddenly he goes "native" starts to not just study the art but embraces the culture of the nation the art originated in. He starts eating their foods, buys their furniture, listens to their music and the ultimate starts to date women from the nation. There's no need I can study martial arts and still remain a Eurocentric nationalist. No need to abandon your birthright for a trophy, a belt promotion or a romp in bed.
The proof of this is what's happened to western Europe and now the USA. I saw a tragic post on fakebook AKA facebook "Austria is ceasing to be Austrian" that says it all. Tragedy I love Vienna. we're witnessing the diminution of a culture and people before our eyes it doesn't bode well for the future.
As far as polytheistic paganism goes, I think it was Hinduism which professed reincarnation proceeded upwards or downwards through becoming more or less complex animals, according to the meritorious deeds of the last previous life? A soul who made a good run as a cockroach would reincarnate itself as a rat, a rat as a pigeon, a pigeon as a cat and so on up to non-native Hindus, then up the various Indian castes from Dalit to Brahmin. A good and pious Brahmin would finally ascend to their version of Paradise.
It was possible also to be relegated if your last life's moral performance was not up to standards.
Also truly exceptional runs were exceptionally rewarded by the wheel of fate, and such cases were in fact thought to be readily observable, for instance a mentally unstable or criminal Dalit (untouchable) was taken to have been something like a very accomplished cockroach in its previous reincarnation.
This would explain how each individual varies in abilities and moral constitution, and would also present an explanation for the case wherein a person did not match the standards of his caste. The resiliency of such a societal order I think is self-evident: it is virtually bulletproof lest the reincarnation belief itself, which is at the core of the system, gets criticized.
The rest of the post is lysergic more than Lysenkoist, but at any rate I understand it is not practical for Humanities students to take classes in Math, Physics and only afterwards Biology...
>As far as polytheistic paganism goes, I think it was Hinduism which professed reincarnation proceeded upwards or downwards through becoming more or less complex animals, according to the previous life meritorious deeds? A soul who made a good run as a cockroach would reincarnate itself as a rat, a rat as a pigeon, a pigeon as a cat and so on up to non-native Hindus, then up the various Indian castes from Dalit to Brahmin. A good and pious Brahmin would finally ascend to their version of Paradise.
Evola said that the animals were the run-off from the process of the forging of the human soul. Or, if one imagines a piece of metal being hammered, they are the bits of impurity that are beaten out.
Very good piece, thank you.
First, I never much considered souls until recently. Perhaps because a Buddhist teacher used to crack jokes about it (as part of teachings about egolessness, i.e. no permanent self) and also that the English School Church of England spirituality I grew up under didn't resonate on the inner level though I always enjoyed the services and even sang in a choir for a while. But then recently, by happenstance I stumbled on the works of a little known I Ching Master, a Westerner trained in the Sudden Enlightenment School (Daoist and Buddhist) and appointed the lineage successor. He then was adopted by a Mexican Shaman. Following his Daoist teacher's instructions he has re-sequenced the I Ching for this Age, the first time since the King Wen sequence about 3,000 years ago (which was not the first sequence). He calls it The Toltec I Ching and not only is the order different but also many of the trigram values (Earth changes to Moon for example) and the entire thrust of the commentary.
William Douglas Horden has also published many other books including two autobiographical in which he recounts how since he was a child growing up next to a cemetery he has communed with dead people. He then had an extended NDE in his fifties in which he went to the other side and spent considerable time with his Masters. The long and short is that he has developed an extensive personal and theoretical understanding of Soul. Fundamentally it relates to how we are all part of the same One but each a particular manifestation of Many. So on the ultimate level there is no form differentiation but on the relative, manifest level there is infinite particularization. And of course this is a very personal, living dynamic, not just abstract formulation. So the most important aspect of this life is how our soul journey is progressing, either moving towards Union with the One or moving away and becoming increasingly dense and confused, similarly effecting other souls with whom it comes into contact. He has also written entire I Ching versions reflecting this Higher Soul / Lower Soul dynamic. Interesting man. As it happens, strangely, his daughter lives in the same tiny town in rural Mexico I live in so will meet him soon.
Maybe like a tree. Each leaf is unique but each part of the same tree. But some leaves are attached to sub-branch A, part of Main Branch 1, others part of Main Branch 2 part of Trunk 2, others part of Main Branch 3 on Trunk 1 and so forth. Endless variegations of the family or ethnic lineage principle you had such fun with.
Emotional transmission: not to argue with you thesis/contemplation, but one way trauma can be transmitted generationally is via empathy. When a loved one is upset we feel upset. (Or just anyone we see or meet for that matter.) If a family raised by traumatized parents is going to pick up on that trauma all the time incorporating it as part of their own psycho-social gestalt. This works on individual, family, societal and nowadays even international levels. Now scientifically we may have a hard time explaining exactly what empathy is (they probably fantasize about chemicals or some such), but we all know about how feelings can be shared so no need to twist knickers about it. Actually, I suspect it's a good way that we can all easily witness how there is more to experience than only the physical. But the soul notion goes into even more formless territory than immediate shared feelings. Still, I suspect it's on the same essentially non-material continuum.
Lastly, I think like with most things it's good to avoid either-or thinking, as in either the soul exists or it doesn't, either the soul is one thing or another. Rather, there are variables in the mix, different layers and levels like there are always with everything. So there can be family soul influences, emotive influences, perhaps metaphysical entity influence (saints or gods or the effects of black magic), influences from other species with whom we share space and time (the Ant Kingdom, Bee Kingdom, Rat Kingdom, Bacterial Kingdom etc. with all of whom on some levels we are in constant contact.
This leads into Buddhist notion of Codependent Origination (praticcha-samutpada) wherein everything that arises is the result of an endlessly interconnected chain of endlessly interconnected causes and conditions. The same is the same for any sort of 'soul'. As a concept it works to simplify things for the purposes of communication and understanding, but ontologically/existentially it's an oversimplification just like everything else we label, things like trees, clouds, humans, breakfast.
If there is indeed an oversoul which we inherit from our ancestors, what happens if people are of mixed race?
A person who is half white, half Japanese would have “files” from both?
What if those “files” are contradictory? Does the person suffer mentally somehow?
Interesting read...really got me thinking.
Well, yeah mixed race people are beset with psychological problems. Identity crises and just regular health problems. Hybrid vigor is a lie.
Well genetically speaking of course, but I’d never considered it from a spiritual point of view.
I suppose my catholic upbringing prevented me from ever considering the possibility that souls are unequal and in part derived from familial over-souls...
I think a lot of psychological terminology is just mystical terminology recast in post-Enlightenment language.
Schizophrenics could be said to be beset by fell spirits. Materialist science doesn't really have any explanations that make sense and the only "cure" that scientists have come up with is to lobotomize them either surgically or chemically.
Our imaginations seem to be designed to concoct explanations even (especially?) when evidence fails, and it can be difficult to avoid the temptation to regard such imaginings as real. In particular, there's a tendency to use spirituality to explain material things we don't understand. But just because the spiritual is mysterious doesn't mean that all mysteries are spiritual.
Nevertheless, this tendency has led to formalized religions: early humans couldn't simply accept ingorance of thunderstorms and leave it at that, but had to devise not just basic hypotheses (a la science), but elaborate mythologies that anthropomorphise the phenomenon (Zeus). Furthermore, great importance was placed on the details of these superficial fabrications, leading to warfare over disagreements in ideation. (30 Years War, e.g.)
I propose that this tendency toward mental elaboration distracts us from authentic spiritual intuitions (for intuitions of spirituality is really all we have to go on.) I can accept personal experiences of prayer and ancestor worship, but I attribute meaning to them only with the greatest delicacy.
For instance: what we mean by "God", at least for myself, evokes a sense of over-riding power and beneveolence. But I'm not even sure that I've already gone too far: I intuit that evil and demons have an independent existence as negatives, but I have the terrifying feeling that justice and goodness might not. Perhaps goodness is something for which we bear responsibility, and that a "God within us" is actually the only force in the universe opposing evil.
This illustrates my problem: since I can't even get much beyond these basics, postulating that my spiritual identity resides in some sort of "soul", and then attributing properties to it, feels like a construct meant to do an end-run around my own ignorance. I just don't think that recognizing spiritual differences requires a soul as a container. Without the soul for an object of discussion, we have to face the much harder issue of what these differences actually are, on a more basic level where reality is more dimly-apprehended.
I think honest spirituality involves a great deal of believing without knowing. The latter invites temptations that entangle us in distractions.
Psychology, psychiatry, social sciences, are a hoax. Sociology is statistics and so is not tainted with the subjective brush of Freud, Skinner, Rogers, et al.
Romans 1:16-25
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.
Amen.
Otherwise explain the origin of the universe and of living things.
Islam has an interesting perspective on some of these questions. Regarding why different races exist, the answer is “that you may come to know one another”. That this ACTUAL diversity is sort of a spice of life intended to make living more interesting and also help us empathize with and understand people with different characteristics.
Also, humans are tethered to jinns who, like humans, are of varying nations and constantly seek to subtly influence our thoughts. This seems relevant.
Yeah jinns appear to be like daimons.
Islam is a fake. Mohammed was nothing more than a robber, a murderer, and a child abuser. There is nothing whatever divine or coherent about Islam, a political system for world domination.
https://www.politicalislam.com/
Agreed. Moses too.
Moses did not write the Ten Commandments or the case law in Leviticus and Deuteronomy which Jesus, very God and very man, exposited in the Gospels.
You will always be stuck with explaining the origin of the universe and the origin of life until you admit that the only answer is in Genesis 1: God created it without effort or exertion which is the meaning of omnipotent. If you think there is another explanation, I invite you to go to Creation.com and use the search engine.
The OT was written by Jewish priests who were ripping off and inverting Greek source material at the library of Alexandria in the 2nd century BC.
>God created it without effort or exertion which is the meaning of omnipotent.
Yahweh is blind, as evidenced by the fact that he loses sight of Adam and Eve. Furthermore, he reneges on his promise to not flood the world by flooding it twice. Yahweh and the Jews are defeated by northern chariot-rider tribes, proving he is not omnipotent. Yahweh is clearly a volcano entity. Moses had horns, and Paul denounces "the curse of Moses" and claims that he spoke to (dark) angels, not to God on Mt. Sinai (which is clearly a volcano).
There is indeed an omnipotent Higher God. But he has no relation to the demon Yahweh.
It seems to me that what you are describing in this essay can be done without all the twists and turns of Jungian mysticism or Sheldrakean magic. As any anthropologist can tell you, it is called cultural inheritance. So what gives? Ancestor worship is one of the many ways of ritualizing it to give it status and stickyness across the generations. It does not require denial of genetic inheritance, although unfortunately too many social scientists adhere to a blank slate theory of human nature that does try to ignore genetics and the uncomfortable subject of race.
>It seems to me that what you are describing in this essay can be done without all the twists and turns of Jungian mysticism or Sheldrakean magic
But where would be the fun in that!?