Apocalyptic alarmism, salvation through “coercive purging”, and mass-death outcomes.

Why tackle apocalyptic mythology, and its Johnny-come-lately offspring- environmental alarmism?

Notes below are based on research of apocalyptic millennial historians Richard Landes (Heaven on Earth), Arthur Herman (The Idea of Decline In Western History), Arthur Mendel (Vision and Violence), and David Redles (Hitler’s Millennial Reich), among others.

Mendel said that “apocalyptic was the most violent and destructive idea in history”. How so? The threat of the end of the world (destruction and death) incites the basic survival fear in populations and the demand for salvation, for action now before its too late. Inciting apocalyptic hysteria then leads to rationalization for abandoning democratic processes just as too many are arguing today. If we are about to pass the final “tipping point” to catastrophe (“imminent apocalypse”), then there is no more time for debate or argument. We have to act now to save the world and this panicked urgency becomes an assault on freedom and democracy. Example: Former US AG Loretta Lynch, among others, has tried to criminalize skeptical science https://www.wsj.com/articles/punishing-climate-change-skeptics-1458772173. The ongoing efforts to silence critics and healthy debate over climate science are no different from the Medieval Church trying to silence the skeptics to the Medieval consensus, Galileo and Copernicus.

Arguments for silencing critics, based on disproven claims to “settled science” and “97% consensus”, are evidence of humanity’s age-old totalitarian impulse emerging once again. Disproven? Check the list of almost 32,000 scientists that signed the Protest Petition- http://www.petitionproject.org/ and note how the 97% figure was arrived at- https://www.thegwpf.org/…/Warming-consensus-and-it-critics1…..

Media that self-identify as “Truth-tellers” ignore the robust disagreement over the actual causes of climate change and almost exclusively take the alarmist/apocalyptic side. For detail, see David Altheide’s “Creating Fear: News and the manufacture of crisis”. Altheide says that news media are not truth-tellers but are entertainers that are competing with the rest of the entertainment industry. And what dominates entertainment? Apocalyptic. Someone noted that over a recent short period Hollywood put out 100 major movies that embraced some version of apocalypse.

Once the apocalyptic narrative takes hold in public consciousness, you also then begin to see arguments for the “instantaneous transformation” of society, for “coercive purging” of some imagined threat to life. This illustrates Mendel’s point on apocalyptic inciting violence and destruction. In Marxist apocalypticism, there was the incited urgency to save the world from “destructive” capitalism. In Nazi apocalyptic narratives it was the urgency to save Germany and the world from Jewish Bolshevism. Now in environmental apocalyptic the demand is for coercive purging of the imagined threat of fossil fuel-based industrial society and the instantaneous transformation of life, as in the push for immediate “decarbonisation” of our societies.

The outcomes of contemporary environmental apocalyptic have already been equally destructive as the previous apocalyptic alarmism in Marxism and Nazism. Examples: Rachel Carson’s apocalyptic narrative in Silent Spring led to tens of millions of deaths, many children, in the wake of the ban on DDT (‘The Excellent Powder’ details the history of DDT). Add here anti-GM alarmism and the deaths of 8 million children over a recent 12-year period (see Lomborg article https://nationalpost.com/opinion/bjorn-lomborg-trashing-rice-killing-children). Anti-fossil fuel activism has already resulted in rising fuel prices and fuel poverty, with related rising mortality rates among the most vulnerable people, the poor (Global Warming Policy Forum reports on fuel poverty and rising mortality in countries like England, Germany, and US).

Note:

Climate scientist Roy Spencer in a recent article (Nov. 18/2019) bemoaned the fact that science does not appear to be winning the battle with climate alarmism https://www.drroyspencer.com/2019/11/climate-extremism-in-the-age-of-disinformation/. While good science is still critical to counter the exaggerated apocalyptic scenarios of alarmists, it will not likely be the deciding factor to change minds. Because we humans are emotional creatures and we are swayed more by the core beliefs that we hold. This applies everywhere, even in the “hardest science”, the most fundamental science of all- physics. See, for example, Sabine Hossenfelder’s Lost in Math, or Jim Baggot’s Farewell to Reality.

Even hard-core materialist types tend to cross the science/philosophy boundary in their search for answers. This is because we are most essentially beings that are oriented to a primal meaning impulse. That impulse, along with the beliefs that we choose to affirm our personal sense of meaning, determines what evidence we will accept as credible and what we choose to downplay, discredit, and dismiss outright (i.e. confirmation bias).

For this reason, this site goes after the core ideas/themes that have always dominated human consciousness across history and across all the cultures of the world. Note Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives below. The alternatives respond to humanity’s undeniable orientation to Mind, Consciousness, Self/Personhood, and Purpose/Meaning, as vital to our understanding of greater reality.

And yes, climate alarmism, as part of a more general environmental alarmism, is history’s latest outbreak of apocalyptic madness.

Note

The real battle today, in the marketplace of ideas, is between the old apocalyptic narrative of life as defined by primitive themes like punitive, destroying core reality (e.g. angry God, vengeful Gaia, angry Planet, payback karma), bad people deserving punishment through nature (for ruining some original paradise), and the trajectory of life as defined by the distorting mythology/ideology of Declinism- i.e. life declining toward disastrous collapse and ending.

And on the other side, we have the new narrative of life that is backed by amassed evidence affirming that life is rising and improving. We reason from that evidence to the conclusion that there is no core punitive, destroying reality and that we are more creators than destroyers- good to the bone.

Big picture, long-term trends

Look beyond today’s climate alarm debate, and even beyond the more general environmental alarmism movement. Note the themes that you hear repeatedly coming from these movements. This will get you to the real issues behind such movements- the meaning and belief issues.

What are those common themes? Here are some of the more prominent ones: The past was better (original paradise mythology), but bad people have ruined the better past (industrial civilization as the great destroying evil). Life is now heading toward some great disastrous collapse and ending (apocalypse mythology seen previously in global cooling, mass starvation and resource depletion, now warming apocalypse). Frightened populations, feeling intensely the alarmist inciting of their survival impulse, now feel obligated to embrace the salvation schemes offered by alarmist prophets- i.e. to “save the world”.

The salvation schemes involve “instantaneous transformation of societies through coercive purging” of some imagined threat because the end of days is always imminent, and the crisis is so bad (note the endless date-setting of apocalyptic prophets). This panic-driven sense of urgency results in the unleashing of the totalitarian impulse and the undermining of freedom/democracy. All such crisis-driven narrative seeks to restore some imagined lost paradise (better past world).

But the alarmist narrative is completely wrong, upside down, backwards, an Alice-in-Wonderland distortion of the true state of life. Life has never been better and the great trajectory of life has been improving over the long term. Amassed evidence and good science has affirmed the rising/improving trajectory of life and human civilization. See, for example, Julian Simon’s Ultimate Resource, Greg Easterbrook’s A Moment on the Earth, Bjorn Lomborg’s Skeptical Environmentalist, Indur Goklany’s The Improving State of the World, Ronald Bailey’s The End of Doom, Szurmak and Desrocher’s Population Bombed, and Hans Rosling’s Factfulness, among others.

They all show that good science does two basic things in order to get to the true state of things. It (1) looks at the complete big picture of evidence, and (2) it look at the longest-term trends (e.g. paleo-climate evidence as the real historical record of importance). See also HumanProgress.org for lots of good updates on the ever-improving state of life.

Evidence also shows that rising average world temperatures and rising levels of CO2 (the basic food of plant life) are the two best things happening now to nature. For the past millions of years we have been in an abnormally cold ice-age era (average world surface temperatures today at 14.5 degrees Centigrade, barely above ice-age averages). And CO2 levels have been dangerously low for plant life. Just 350,000 years ago CO2 dipped below 200 ppm and we missed a real disaster as plant life would have died if CO2 had continued down to the 150 ppm level. So both trends today- rising temperatures and rising CO2- are beneficial to life and need to rise even more toward a more normal and optimal states in order for life to flourish more. Past optimal temperatures for most of the past 500 million years were temperatures at 19.5 degrees Centigrade. And plants prefer 1000-1500 ppm CO2 levels.

Quotes from “Basic Climate Facts project” (full version further below)

“Basic Climate Facts project– a list of the most basic climate facts that overturn the alarmist apocalyptic narrative on climate and give the true state of climate history. Intent: Counter the distorting “climate crisis” hysteria of today. Affirm hope based on the best evidence available. Overall point? Earth today is in an abnormally cold, and therefore sub-optimal and unhealthy state for life.

Paleo-climate facts:

“We are currently in one of the coldest ice-age eras in Earth’s history- the Quarternary ice age with repeated cyclical patterns of extended glaciation and inter-glacial periods. We are now in the coldest 1% of this ice age era.

“Average global temperatures today are only 14.5 degrees Centigrade which is 5 degrees C below the normal and optimum temperatures of the past 500 million years at 19.5 degrees C (67 degrees Fahrenheit). (see https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/03/earths-ice-ages/, “The Earth’s normal or optimum global average temperature over the past 550 million years is about 19.5 degrees Centigrade… this is over 5 degrees C. warmer than today”).

“For most of the past 500 million years (roughly since the Cambrian Explosion of life), over 90% of this 500 million year period, the Earth has been entirely ice free. That is a normal, optimal world- with no ice. Researchers have discovered the stumps of tropical trees in the Arctic, showing that during warmer periods animal and plant life enjoyed extended habitats that covered most of the Earth’s land area.

“CO2 levels during this ice-age era have been dangerously low. Some 350,000 years ago we just missed a real potential catastrophe as CO2 levels descended below 200 ppm. Plant life dies at 150 ppm. See https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/06/climate-alarmists-winning-the-war-of-words-despite-evidence-that-nothing-unusual-is-happening/

“For much of Earth’s history, CO2 levels have been in the healthy range of 1000-2000 ppm (and often higher, with no catastrophic impact on life). To the contrary, plant life has thrived under such conditions of more plentiful plant food. CO2 is the basic food of plant life. It is not a pollutant or poison. I feel an embarrassing “Duh” in stating this Grade One science fact.”

Today, alarmists have the story of life all wrong. They are presenting warming temperatures and rising CO2 as the two greatest threats to life when they are, actually, the two best things happening to life. Greens, instead of demonstrating against rising temps and CO2, should be holding demonstrations to celebrate more warmth, and the fact that with more CO2 the planet is greener today (Fact: With just the small increase in CO2 to 400-plus ppm, since 1980 plant mass across the planet has increased by 14%. The Earth is greener and healthier today).

But the widespread alarm over rising temperatures and CO2 shows how apocalyptic mythology deforms human consciousness with false alarmism.

Topics below: “The influence of the apocalyptic myth on mass-death movements”; “Bill Maher on Joe Rogan’s podcast” (picking a few bones in an otherwise good discussion); “A brief on human story” (my struggle with the defects in the Christian God and Paul’s Christ myth); “Facebook post” (the central discovery of the Near-Death Experience- i.e. the core Reality is a stunning ‘no conditions love’); “Slay the Beast… or stick a stake in it” (go to the core of human systems of meaning- i.e. deity ideas- and bring down the sub-human features long embedded there)…

Further topics… “Paleo-climate facts” (Don’t fear more warmth and more plant food. We are in an abnormal and sub-optimal cold era on Earth with life’s basic food- CO2- at dangerously low levels); “Auto-bio stuff”- leaving my religion; “Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives”; “History’s greatest religious contradiction”- the difference between Jesus-ianity and Christ-ianity, or the unconditional theology of Historical Jesus versus the highly conditional theology of Paul/Christianity, and more…

A “short version” list of “Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives (More detailed versions, with sources, are below in this section and the next section “New Story Alternatives to Declinist/apocalyptic mythology”)

1 Old story theme (the core theme): The myth of God as an ultimate judging, punishing, and destroying reality.

New story alternative: The stunning new theology of God as an inexpressibly wondrous “no conditions” Love (i.e. no judgment, no punishment, no destruction in apocalypse or hell).

2 Old story theme: The myth of a perfect beginning (Eden) and a God obsessed with perfection and punishing imperfection (i.e. God angry at the loss of perfection).

New story alternative: The world began in imperfection (was purposely created imperfect as a learning arena for human struggle and development) but has gradually improved with emerging complexity and organization.

3 Old story theme: The myth that humanity began as a more perfect species but has “fallen” or degraded into something worse over history.

New story alternative: We have emerged from the brutality of an animal past to gradually become something better across history- more human/humane.

4 Old story theme: The myth that the trajectory of life declines toward something worse (i.e. toward some great collapse and ending).

New story alternative: Life has improved across history, especially with creative human input and guidance.

5 Old story theme: The myth that natural disasters, disease, human cruelty, and death are expressions of divine punishment.

New story alternative: While there are natural and social consequences all through life, there is no punitive, destroying deity behind the imperfections of life.

6 Old story theme: Humanity has been rejected by the Creator and has become separated from the Source, and now must be reconciled to God.

New story alternative: No one has ever been separated from the unconditional Love at the core of reality.

7 Old story theme: The myth of dualism in Ultimate Reality (i.e. a Good God versus an evil Force/Satan). This myth has validated the division of humanity into opposing groups of “true believers/unbelievers”, “saved” and “lost”, good guys versus bad guys/enemies, and other tribal divisions based on race/ethnicity, religion, ideology, nationality, gender, and so on.

New story alternative: We all come from the same originating Oneness and we are all equals in the one human family. The apparent dualisms of this material world do not represent any ultimate dualism.

8 Old story theme: The myth of looming apocalypse and the final destruction of all (i.e. God as ultimate Destroyer).

New story alternative: There are problems all through the world but no looming threat of final destruction and ending of life.

9 Old story theme: The threat of an imminent end to the world incites the panic-driven demand for “instantaneous transformation” of life (versus “gradualism” in the development of life). Threat of imminent collapse and ending incites the demand for urgent action to save the world, for “coercive purging” of some imagined threat.

New story alternative: There is no end of days on the horizon and consequently no need for coercive instantaneous transformation. We improve life gradually as we solve problems democratically.

10 Old story theme: The demand for a salvation scheme, for some sacrifice or payment.

New story alternative: Unconditional means absolutely no divine demand for debt payment, no conditions. None. No demanded sacrifice or punishment.

11 Old story theme: Retribution or payback is true justice.

New story alternative: Unconditional affirms restorative justice that is victim-centered and holds offenders responsible, but forgives and treats all humanely.

12 Old story theme: The myth of future or after-life judgment, exclusion, and punishment/destruction.

New story alternative: Unconditional includes all in the end (sun and rain given to all, to both good and bad people). There is no ultimate judgment, punishment or destruction (no such thing as Hell).

13 Old story theme: The myth of a hero messiah that uses superior force to overthrow enemies and purge the world so that he can coercively install a paradise for his “true believer” followers.

New story alternative: Authentic love does not intervene or overwhelm with force that violates the freedom of others. Further, the only savior/salvation that we can expect will come from ourselves. The only salvation that we need to be concerned about is to get busy solving problems in our world and improving life in some way. That will “save” life and the world.

14 Old story theme: The myth of Biblicism- i.e. the belief that religious holy books are more special and authoritative than ordinary human insight and writing.

New story alternative: There is no special religious authority above common human insights, such as in human rights codes or constitutions, or as found throughout ordinary human discussion and writing.

15 Old story theme: The myth of God as ruler, judge, Lord, or King (expressed via priesthoods and religious authorities).

New story alternative: There is no domination/subservience in God relating to humanity, or human relating to deity. God relates horizontally to humanity.

16 Old story theme: The myth that humanity is obligated to know, serve, or have a relationship with invisible reality (related myth- “humanity created to serve the gods”).

New story alternative: Our primary loyalty is to serve real people and their needs, in here and now reality.

17 Old story theme: The absence or silence of God in the midst of natural disaster or human cruelty. The Holocaust is the iconic example of such silence.

New story alternative: There is no Sky God somewhere up above the world. God has never been absent or silent but has always incarnated in all humanity and is seen in all human raging against evil and suffering, and all human effort to make life better.

18 Old Story Theme: The myth of the moral and spiritual superiority of the simple, low-consumption lifestyle (self-produced, using only local resources).

New Story Alternative: The search for a better life is the fundamental urge of love- to responsibly improve one’s life and the state of one’s family. Enjoyment of life (i.e. free choice in consumption), along with the benefits of worldwide free trade, has been a huge boon to all humanity.

Added note: Holding the belief that God is a no conditions reality (i.e. all are forgiven and included in the end) does not nullify the common-sense need for us to restrain violent people and prevent wrongdoing in this world. And likewise, our responsibility to restrain bad behavior in this life does not nullify the ultimate reality of God as unconditional love (all forgiven, included, and loved in the end).

Note some engagement further below with Joseph Campbell’s basic framework for human story. It offers insight into the meaning of human experience in this highly imperfect world, including new insight into the meaning of human suffering. Spoiler alert: Its very much about the human exploration of love, and learning/innovating better ways of loving through all the creative diversity of uncountable human stories.

Insert: The single worst pathology in human consciousness across history has been that of punitive, destroying deity (i.e. most notably in apocalyptic mythology). This pathology continues to find new expression in contemporary gods (e.g. vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, retributive Universe, or payback Karma). Threat theology has wreaked incalculable harm deforming lives with unnecessary fear, anxiety, shame/guilt, despair/depression, and even violence (see psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God).

This worst of all bad ideas sets the background for humanity’s single most profound discovery ever- that ultimate reality is a stunningly inexpressible “no conditions Love”, an insight that potently transforms and liberates human consciousness. And yes, it spells the end of religion as a conditions-mediating institution.

Some autobio stuff- Leaving my religion (The contradiction between Christ-ianity and Jesus-ianity. Start taking Historical Jesus seriously. Most Christians don’t. For more detail see articles at the bottom of this section on “The great contradiction”)

I remember somewhere in the Oughts when the scales fell, and the critical relationship became clear. Earlier in the 90s, I had taken an Asian Studies course at the University of British Columbia and the prof had us read an article by anthropologist Clifford Geetz on Bali, Indonesia. The Balinese had this behavior/belief thing. They fashioned their houses, their villages, according to what they believed was the divine model or pattern.

That was in the background of my memory. And I had also read, somewhere in the 90s, a book by James Robinson on the “stunning new non-retaliatory theology of Jesus” (no more eye for eye but love your enemy). That non-retaliatory theology, Robinson said, was abandoned a generation later by the emerging Christian movement under Paul’s domination and his retaliatory theology.

In the mid-to-later Oughts I had been asked to work on some essay about apocalyptic. The associations are complex and fuzzy, how we move from one thing to another thing in our thinking and ideas/conclusions form in our heads. But I was reviewing Matthew 5:38-48 and I finally saw it- the behavior/belief connection, the “ethic based on similar theology” relationship in that Matthew passage.

Jesus had said, “You have heard of an eye for eye. But I say no, instead Love your enemy…. Because God does (the behavior based on similar belief). How so? God gives rain and sun (the good gifts of life) to all, both to good people and bad people”. God does not engage eye for eye retaliation toward the bad guys. That means no punishment. All are forgiven and included in God’s no conditions love. The bad guys are included just as the good people are (This is my paraphrase of the point that Jesus was trying to make).

Jesus was using the very behavior/belief relationship that Geertz had noted. Again, don’t retaliate (eye for eye) because God does not retaliate. Do this instead- love your enemy- because God does this- God loves the enemy also. You see this in that God gives sun and rain to all… to good and bad people. The whole section can be summed in six words as- “Love your enemy because God does”. History’s single most profound insight into being authentically and maturely human, how to be just like God. How to love as God loves. Kinda like what Mandela did (i.e. his signature statement, “Let us surprise them- our opponents/enemies- with our generosity, our forgiveness, inclusion, love”).

It was an ancient human pattern, this behavior based on similar belief. The Hebrews had exhibited it throughout the Old Testament. They built their temple according to what they believed was the divine model. And they ordered all things in their lives according to what they believed was the law, word, or will of their God. Down to details of daily life like where to shit, what to eat or wear, and even sexual things.

Christ. I had read this Matthew 5 section hundreds of times over my previous Evangelical life. And never saw it. God was indeed “no conditions love”. God did not punish or exclude anyone. Undeniably, no conditions love means universal love.

And the unraveling or disintegration of my Christian religion was pretty much complete. At least my personal adherence and subjection to it all. It had been part of my family inheritance. The full and clear recognition that God was no conditions love was a further and more final step in a decades-long process of liberation of spirit, of transformation of consciousness. And it was such profound relief because I had sincerely embraced the themes of a threat theology religion with its ideas of future after-death harm (i.e. threats of judgment, condemnation, exclusion, punishment/destruction- i.e. hell).

Hell, there was no judging, punishing, destroying God. There never has been any such reality. That mythical monster has reigned far too long in human consciousness and must be brought down. It has anchored an extended complex of related “bad religious ideas”. It had taken me, overall, several decades (roughly 1970s/80s) to free my mind from the religious themes that had worked their tentacles into all areas of my worldview and profoundly impacted my thinking and emotions. That had to do with the “personality deforming influence of cruel God ideas that engender unnecessary fear, anxiety, shame, guilt, despair/depression, and even violence in people”- see psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God).

In my experience, embracing a no conditions deity was liberation from a highly conditional salvation religion with a full complex of mythical themes/ideas that supported the threatening deity at the core. My salvation religion had told me how to escape the threatened harm (i.e. the angry God that demanded the condition of blood sacrifice as payment/punishment, a necessary making of wrongs right before that God would show mercy). Now, a no conditions God was liberation from all sorts of religious conditions attached to such atonement mythology- e.g. required faith in the human sacrifice offered to appease the threatening God, and embracing the demand to follow the religious life-style that is oriented to pleasing and celebrating the threatening God. Add here the demanded condition of telling others of the threat and that they must join my salvation religion if they also wanted to be saved from the threat. These conditions/”bad ideas” were a burden that no human spirit should have to endure.

The larger context of the Matthew 5 material had buried the stunning new no conditions theme of Jesus just as Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy had bluntly stated. They summed up the New Testament problem in their comments that the “Diamonds/pearls of Jesus were buried in dung, muck, or slime”. Matthew, for instance, buried and distorted Jesus’ core no conditions message by adding condition-laden statements to Jesus’ teaching: “Your righteousness must exceed that of religious folk if you want to get into heaven”. Or “You must be perfect as your Father is perfect”. Matthew was obsessed with righteousness as the condition for acceptance and salvation and so he inserted his own statements into the teaching of Jesus.

Luke (6:27-36) did better with the same body of teaching, getting the gist of what Jesus said, in stating “Be unconditionally merciful as your father is unconditionally merciful” (added “unconditional” mine). He got the essence of the previous Jesus statements about a love that “just gives, expecting nothing in return” (i.e. no conditions love).

But even more, Christianity overall had buried this no conditions God of Jesus with Paul’s Christ myth that demanded the supreme condition of the sacrifice of a god-man, a condition that had to be met before God would forgive anyone (Hebrews 9:25, “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness). Christian conditions were all through the New Testament (e.g. Romans: you have to believe- have faith in- Paul’s Christ myth in order to escape the wrath of God). Such conditions had buried this no conditions God that Jesus was teaching. How contradictory.

Paul’s theology, his God theory, was so entirely opposite to that of Jesus. That is evident in statements that Paul made in places like Romans 12:17-20 where he clearly uses the same belief/behavior connection (ethic based on validating theology) to state that his God was quite opposite to the God of Jesus. He said, ”Do not retaliate (he appears to agree with the non-retaliatory ethic of Jesus but this is better understood as saying, “hold your lust for retaliation in abeyance”) because… here is your hope… God will retaliate for you”. God will do the retaliation thing for you and fulfill your hope and longing for eye for eye justice. Paul then quoted an Old Testament statement to affirm his eye for eye retaliatory deity, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord”. He rejected the non-retaliatory theology of Jesus entirely and re-established a retaliatory God at the heart of emerging early Christianity. He buried the gospel of Jesus with his Christ gospel. Christianity then became Christ-ianity, not Jesus-ianity.

This is what the search for Historical Jesus has been about- discovering what the historical person actually taught as distinguished from all the other stuff in the New Testament. Much of the material in the gospels is conditional stuff that has been put in his mouth (attributed to him) that contradicts Jesus’ core theme of no conditions love. Historical Jesus is the diamond/pearl that has to be pulled out of what Jefferson and Tolstoy called dung and muck.

A no conditions God changes everything. And the conclusions came quickly and in bunches. No conditions God means just that. Absolutely no conditions. None. No judgment, no threat, no demand for sacrifice/payment/salvation. No exclusion of anyone, not even the bad guys. No punishment or destruction (i.e. no such thing as hell). Marinate your mind in this for a while.

How scandalously offensive this no conditions reality is to the minds of good, moral religious people that are oriented to justice as some form of fair payback (i.e. reward the good, punish the bad). This point was made in the short stories that Jesus told, about all-day vineyard workers that were pissed that the last-hour guys were given the same wages as them due to the unconditional generosity of the vineyard owner. Or the older brother pissed at his father’s generous forgiveness and unconditional welcome of his wasteful younger brother. Where was fairness and proper justice as some form of traditional eye for eye payment? Such are the feelings of the good guys that are pissed at a generous God giving sun and rain to the bad guys also. The vineyard owner and prodigal father illustrated the God of Jesus that did not exhibit traditional eye for eye justice but was about the stunning new theology of no conditions love.

All across history, religion has been most essentially the social institution that has communicated divine conditions (i.e. right beliefs, correct rituals and necessary religious lifestyle), based on great conditional deities. Religion, as a dominant human social institution, has never communicated to people the stunning no conditions reality that is God. Conditional religion can not communicate an unconditional reality.

It was a final, critical piece to my previous-decades journey out of religion, this realization that God was a stunning no conditions reality. It was the final click-into-place liberation of consciousness.

Notes: The Matthew 5:38-48 section is central to “Q Wisdom Sayings gospel” research as the core of the original teaching of Jesus (see books of James Robinson, John Kloppenborg, Stephen Patterson). Much of the rest of the NT gospels (written decades after Jesus’ death) contain added material from the gospel writers that they put into the mouth of Jesus. But that additional teaching cannot be his authentic teaching because it contradicts his central theme of a no conditions God. And yes, to take Jesus seriously spells the end of religion, certainly the end of Paul’s supremely conditional Christ myth, the very heart and soul of highly conditional Christianity.

By the way, another critical conclusion in the mix- there will be no apocalypse. Because the God of Jesus is not apocalyptic. How so? A God that does not engage eye for eye justice will not engage the ultimate display of eye for eye justice that is the final great apocalyptic destruction of the world, the ultimate display of vengeance and punishment against the bad guys. Simple, eh. And further, rejecting any such eye for eye theology means that Jesus was not an apocalyptic prophet.

When you reject the myth of an apocalyptic God (i.e. punitive, destroying deity) you then overturn the core theme that holds the entire apocalyptic complex of ideas together. It will transform entirely your worldview.

A non-apocalyptic God directly challenges the dominant ideology of today- Declinism (i.e. the belief that life is declining toward something worse, toward some great collapse and ending).This ideology is the direct historical offspring of Christian apocalyptic (Paul’s apocalyptic Christ- see his Thessalonian letters). Declinism is the ideology of environmental alarmism today, notably climate alarmism (see Arthur Herman’s The Idea of Decline in Western History). The environmental alarm movement is not about science but is very much about mythology and religion, meaning and belief. It is a Johnny-come-lately apocalyptic movement. Note the endless prophecies of the apocalypse (i.e. end of days) coming from the leading prophets of environmental alarmism. Examples: James Hansen prophesying in 2008, “Its all over in five years”. Stephen Hawking prophesying its all over in 100 years. Or OAC prophesying it’s the end of days in 2030.

Other points…

Joseph Campbell spoke of the great test of life, something everyone faces in their personal story, that when we engage some righteous struggle against evil we must not forget our oneness even with our enemy or we will lose our humanity. In our righteous struggle against evil, we maintain our humanity by remembering to love our enemy, by remembering our brotherhood even with our enemy.

Campbell quote: “There is a deep and terrible mystery here, which we perhaps cannot, or possibly simply will not, comprehend; yet which will have to be assimilated if we are to meet such a test. For love is exactly as strong as life. And when life produces what the intellect names evil, we may enter into righteous battle, contending “from loyalty of heart”: however, if the principle of love (Christ’s “Love your enemies!”) is lost thereby, our humanity too will be lost.”

Leo Tolstoy speaking to the criminal justice system: “The whole trouble is that people think there are circumstances when one may deal with human beings without love, but no such circumstances ever exist. Human beings cannot be handled without love. It cannot be otherwise because mutual love is the fundamental law of human life.”

Added notes:

This site traces the basic themes of human narratives across history, notably those of the apocalyptic complex, that have descended from Sumerian (Akkadian, Babylonian) and Egyptian mythology, down through Zoroastrianism and into the Western apocalyptic traditions of the Jewish, Christian, and Islamic religions. Apocalyptic themes were then embedded in modern “secular” versions such as Declinism (i.e. life declines toward some great catastrophe and ending). Environmental alarmism is a notable offspring of Declinist ideology/mythology. The project to trace these “bad ideas” involves the history of this pathology in human consciousness, the horrifically damaging outcomes in human societies (“Apocalyptic is the most violent and destructive idea in history”, Arthur Herman), and then offer alternative ideas to fully liberate human consciousness. See Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives just below.

The auto-bio material above relates to my view that Christ-ianity profoundly contradicts Jesus-ianity. There is a fundamental contradiction in Christianity between the core teaching/theme of Jesus, and Paul’s entirely contrary Christ myth (i.e. the contradiction between the stunning new theology of a “no conditions God” and the “supremely conditional Christ of Paul”). This comment is based, somewhat, on ‘Q Wisdom Sayings gospel’ research and more generally on ‘The Search for Historical Jesus’, a now almost three-century long project (i.e. the search among all the gospel material attributed to Jesus to find what he actually said and did).

And this relates directly to the issue of apocalyptic mythology and its continuing harmful influence on human consciousness and society. We see this, for instance, in climate alarmism with its apocalyptic-scale hysteria and endless “end of days” prophecies. Paul’s apocalyptic Christ myth is mainly responsible for re-enforcing the apocalyptic myth in Western consciousness and society, and that has resulted in contemporary “secular” or ideological versions like Declinism and its offspring- environmental alarmism. The central Jesus’ insight on no conditions deity would have liberated human consciousness from the apocalyptic pathology if it had not been buried by Paul and others in early Christianity with their retreat to a retaliatory deity and supremely conditional salvationism (i.e. demand for the ultimate payment- the sacrifice of a god/man).

A brief on Human story

Joe Campbell and others have offered priceless insights on the main features of our human stories. See the full outline below in “A framework for human story”.

I would flesh out Campbell’s points with the following: That each of us has come here from a greater Consciousness or Oneness to experience a unique human story. We gain access to our story (our experience of being human in a material body) through the limiting mechanism of the human material brain. Our brain limits our greater consciousness to the experience of this material realm. Our brain does not produce, but “mediates” our greater consciousness (yes, I lean toward Nobel laureate John Eccles-type views on the brain/mind issue- a sort of “dualistic-interactionism”). Our 5 senses and four-dimensional material reality further limit our consciousness during our life.

We have come here to fulfill a unique mission or purpose in our story that no one else can fulfill. Every person should hold a sense of the specialness of their unique story. Campbell further adds that we are all “actors on God’s stage”, fulfilling our differing roles in this realm of temporary dualisms (the point being that there is no dualism in a greater ultimate reality).

While human stories are as diverse as the multiple-billions of people living them, there is one common feature to all human adventures or quests- i.e. that we all come to learn love, to discover what love is, and how to receive and express love. Love is the highest human ideal and the defining purpose of all authentic human existence.

In our stories, each of us will face some monster, some problem(s), and we struggle to overcome and defeat our monster, whether it involves something physical, mental/emotional, social, or other. The problems/monsters of humanity are as diverse as unique individual stories across the Earth.

Further, in our struggle we will be wounded, and our consequent suffering is also part of our learning experience. From our struggle and suffering we then gain insights that can benefit others (e.g. most valuable- suffering can lead to empathy with similarly suffering others).

And we all get to contribute in some unique way to making life better for ourselves and for others in all the widely diverse ways that people engage life- whether in work, in art and entertainment, in sports, in medicine, in food production, in daily family life, and so much more (i.e. the over 50,000 human occupations today, aside from the myriad hobbies and interests of the human population).

Critical to all human story is that when we orient our lives to, not just love, but universal and unconditional love, we then “tower in stature” as maturely human. We become the conquering hero of our story. This victory involves defeating the greatest monster and enemy of us all- i.e. the inherited animal impulses that are inside each of us (from the inherited “animal” brain). The base “animal passions” include the impulses to tribal exclusion of differing others, to domination/control of weaker others, and to punishing and destroying of differing others (i.e. eye for eye or punitive justice).

Orienting our consciousness to unconditional love as our highest ideal will defeat these animal impulses with a love that includes all, treats all as equals in the one human family (respecting the freedom of others), and approaches the imperfection and failures of others with restorative, not punitive, justice. Think of Nelson Mandela as a great recent example of someone exhibiting these higher human impulses. (Note also Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s point that the real battle between good and evil runs right through the center of every human heart. It is intensely personal.)

The material on this site is an expression of my personal struggle with my monster. Backstory: I was raised in Evangelical Christianity and, overall, experienced much good in that tradition. The people were mostly good, decent human beings and they embraced and exhibited many good qualities, notably love.

But there was also a dark side to the Christian religion that I discovered during my sojourn there. Christianity, from its beginning, embraced the darker features of “Cruel God” theory (see for example, Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God). There are some ideas that, no matter how you try to gussy them up, are simply too dehumanizing and they deform human consciousness and life.

Note this dark side in Paul’s main themes of “the wrath of God” against sinful human beings (e.g. his Romans letter), the apocalyptic destruction of the world (his Thessalonian letters), and his statements on ultimate eternal destruction (i.e. a reference to the myth of Hell- see this also in John’s book ‘Revelation’). Note also in Paul’s gospel the demand for the supreme condition of a human blood sacrifice as payment for wrong, and the requirement for salvation as only possible through faith in his Christ myth (a conditional and limited love).

These harsher features in the Christian religion deform human consciousness with unnecessary fear, anxiety, shame/guilt, and despair/depression. Further, they have a history of influencing people to violence (i.e. the early Councils, later Crusades, Inquisitions, killing of heretics, and even the mass-death movements of more recent history).

(Note the research on the role that Christian “apocalyptic millennial” themes played in the mass-death movements of Marxism, Nazism, and are now playing in environmental alarmism. Remember that Paul’s apocalyptic Christ is mainly responsible for embedding the apocalyptic pathology in Western consciousness and history.)

Christianity has contributed to distorting confusion (“cognitive dissonance”) by framing the bad ideas noted above in terms of ideals like love (i.e. merging noble ideals with baser features from a primitive past). Christians argue, for instance, that because God loves us, Jesus had to be sacrificed to pay for our sin. But what kind of love would torture and kill an innocent human being before it would forgive? (i.e. The barbaric and now long-abandoned tradition of human sacrifice.) We know that authentic love just forgives, includes, and loves. It does not demand prerequisite conditions before forgiving and loving. Ordinary parents, spouses, and friends all get this unconditional love and practice it toward imperfect others. Surely, the Ultimate Goodness and Love that is God gets it also and even more so than we do. Note that Jesus had argued this in Luke 6 where he said that authentic love just gives/loves without expecting anything in return.

I take Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy’s position that there are diamonds in the Christian New Testament but they are buried in a larger context of bad religious ideas. The diamonds would include the Jesus insight to not engage eye for eye justice but to just love enemies because God does. Jesus’ remarkable insight was that we should not demand any conditions but generously forgive, include and love others just as God does. That was his point in stating that God inclusively/universally gives sun and rain to both good and bad people alike.

So yes, I long ago concluded that my personal struggle was with the Christian God and Paul’s Christ myth.

On this site I am pulling the diamonds of the Jesus insight out and polishing them off to reveal history’s single greatest insight- that, contrary to the entire history of religious God theory, there is no punitive, destroying God. There is only a stunning no conditions Love at the core of all reality and life. That transforms, liberates, and heals human consciousness as nothing ever before.

A post from my Facebook site (Wendell Krossa)

“I have encouraged people to read NDE accounts for ‘spiritual’ insights, and to help understand and overcome the primal human fear of death. Some have responded- “But they are just personal experiences”. Well yes. Just like all the major historical belief systems (i.e. world religions) are based on someone’s long ago personal experience. Moses on the mountain top, Buddha under the tree, Paul on the Damascus road, and Mohammad’s cave experiences and visions. Those personal experiences formed the very foundations of the world’s great religions. Most people across history have accepted those personal experiences, and the claims of early followers of those people, that such experiences were “special revelations from God”.

“But the issue is not who had an experience, or who makes claims of divine origins for their experiences. That is not the authoritative validating factor. Too many people across history have made suspect claims of getting words and experiences from deity. The critical issue is the content of the experience- i.e. is it authentically humane or not, according to our best human understanding of humane reality today? I would argue the authority on that comes from ordinary parents, spouses, friends, and the common human rights codes and constitutions that most of humanity agrees on. For example, most people agree that ‘no conditions love’ is the best approach to imperfect others, and to our own imperfections. No conditions love is humanity’s greatest discovery and highest ideal/ethic.

“And the NDE, whether in the brain or out of the brain (in body or out), is not the issue. Again, the real issue is the content, the central discovery or insight of any given experience. Central to most NDEs is the astonishing discovery that the “Light” or God is an inexpressibly unconditional love. Related discoveries are that we humans are all essentially good in our core self. And then there is the discovery of a stunning oneness of all things and people (much like one of the basic discoveries of Quantum relatedness or oneness). These main content themes of NDEs are self-validating and need no other outside authority, whether from some religious authority figure or holy book.

“Caution: Some try to use a minority of “bad” NDE experiences to validate their particular religion, insisting the NDEs affirm religious myths like Hell. No, the general experience is entirely non-religious, non-partisan, and non-threatening in any way. It points to an inexpressibly unconditional God- i.e. no judgment, no condemnation, no coming punishment or Hell, and no demand for some sacrifice or other payment. Quite offensively scandalous like some of those Jesus parables that rejected traditional payback justice (eye for eye reward or punishment) for unconditional mercy, inclusion, and love for all. It is no wonder that those having NDEs lose all fear of death (all fear of after-life harm). And yes, I get that this NDE discovery of an inexpressibly unconditional deity spells the end of all conditional religion.

“Note: The suggestion of “universalism” in some religious traditions is a cautious/timid step in the direction of no conditions theology. Kind of tinkering with peripheral reformism but leaving core conditional themes in place (e.g. the irrational argument of some that “God can now show unconditional love because Jesus met the great condition of dying to pay for sin”).

“So feel free to take insights from all sorts of places in response to our healthy curiosity about ultimate things, to flesh out our understanding regarding the big meaning issues and the questions that we all naturally toy with. Feel free to explore non-conventional sources of spiritual insight. Any God that is love will not be pissed with human curiosity, questioning, and innovative exploration of alternative ideas. And I view any given experience with skepticism and bring my own personal set of criteria to evaluate such experiences and the diverse features in them. For example, does the experience affirm the best of common human insight?

“Some of the sites offering thousands of these experiences and research on them include NDERF and IANDS. And if surveys are right that about 5% of the human population has had these experiences then we all know someone who has. I have met several myself. View the NDE as part of the latest historical phase of the human spiritual journey or quest.”

“This summary from the Washington Post:

“Among the thousands of people who chose to share their near-death experiences with the Near Death Experience Research Foundation (NDERF), the report is often the same: They come back with a profound understanding of God’s love.

Theologians sometimes talk about the omnibenevolence of God, the idea that God’s grace and charity is unlimited or infinite. For many who talk about encountering God, this term comes closest to the reality they describe. Here is a sampling of what some NDErs had to say about God’s love:

“No human can ever love with the love I felt in that light. It is all-consuming, all-forgiving. Nothing matches it. It is like the day you looked into the eyes of your child for the first time magnified a million times. It’s indescribable.”

“I felt the presence of pure love. This is very hard to describe. Everything made sense: God exists, God is love, we are love, and love creates all that is. … I was surrounded by pure love. First I was cold and in pain, but then I was warm and comforted.”

“I know that love is all there is and that God loves all… deeply and equally. There are no stepchildren in the family of God. We are all divine.”
“God loves us all infinitely.”

“I felt God as an all-encompassing presence — complete, total, and unconditional love in its highest form! I was surrounded by God’s unconditional love, which was so much greater than human love. I was given the knowledge that God is real and loves me unconditionally — God exists and is real, and God is love.”

“I came to realize that God is more loving and caring than I could ever imagine.”

“The entire encounter was about God, the ultimate power of God, and God’s forgiveness. The message was, ‘Love is the greatest power in the universe.’”

“Love is clearly an important part of near-death experiences. This experience of deep love often carries within it an affirmation of unity or oneness between all people or even all things.”

Further note on the NDE: All human development and growth begins with taking personal responsibility for our failures. But most of us feel threatened by confronting our imperfection and failure, especially if we are pushed to do so by others that may treat us harshly with condemnation and threat of rejection or punishment. Confronting human failure should be done in a context of reassurance of unconditional love, much like the life reviews in NDEs. People having experienced that, then claim that it was done in an atmosphere of reassuring ‘no conditions’ love. There was no threat of rejection, condemnation, or punishment. The entire experience was about the self-evaluation of one’s life (words and deeds) as a learning experience.

Another note to the post on NDEs:

The term “God” has accrued, over history, a lot of baggage that makes it at times almost a “dead word”, no longer useful for communicating meaning unless qualified with all sorts of clarifying disclaimers. I like what Joseph Campbell said, that “God is a term pointing to Mystery beyond, to the God beyond God”. The transcendently Unknowable ultimate reality. But, generally, God is still central to the human search for meaning (note that 85% of humanity today still affiliates with a major world religion- World Religion Survey).

A growing minority- the 15% “unaffiliated” category in the World Religion Survey- prefer alternative terms/theories, but their God ideas are often just as nasty as the religious God theories, with versions like retributive Universe (a great retaliatory reality), payback karma, vengeful Gaia, and angry Planet/Mother Earth.

My particular beef with the term God is that it instinctively raises too many subhuman and inhuman ideas in people’s minds upon hearing it. Whenever the term “God” is used, religious ideas automatically pop up in people’s heads and often very bad ideas. Ideas of judgment (God as ultimate judge), tribalism or dualism (true believers versus unbelievers), threat of condemnation and exclusion of unbelievers, retaliation (eye for eye justice), domination (humans created to serve some greater authority- subservience to deity or priesthoods/religious authorities), the need to embrace salvationism as demanded conditions (sacrifice, payment), and punishment/destruction (i.e. apocalypse and hell).

“God is love” is moving in the right direction but is still short of the best that we have discovered- i.e. that the highest form of love is “no conditions love”. Absolutely no conditions. None. Authority for this? The experience and insights on humane treatment of others that come from common, ordinary spouses, parents, friends, human rights codes, humane constitutions, restorative justice approaches, and so on.

Next: Beliefs shaping behavior…

“Apocalyptic has been the most violent and destructive idea in history”, Arthur Mendel in Vision and Violence.

How widely-embraced apocalyptic themes influence a population toward mass-death movements (e.g. Marxism, Nazism, and environmental alarmism).

This comment draws on the research of apocalyptic millennial scholars Richard Landes (Heaven on Earth), Arthur Mendel (Vision and Violence), Arthur Herman (The Idea of Decline), and David Redles (Hitler’s Millennial Reich). The apocalyptic millennial complex of ideas was brought into Western consciousness and society via Christianity, notably Paul’s apocalyptic Christ myth (see James Tabor’s ‘Paul and Jesus’). These ideas have dominated Western thinking for two millennia.

The main themes of the apocalyptic millennial complex of ideas include the following:

(1) The loss of a previous/original paradise (a better past).
(2) Life is viewed as declining toward disaster and ending. There will be a great final Armageddon battle before the end of the world.
(3) To save the world or one’s society, there must be a violent purging of some threat to life, the purging of some enemy or evil.
(4) Then there will be the restoration of the lost paradise, the installation of a utopia for the chosen/favored people.

These primitive mythological themes have dominated the great Western religions and were then re-stated in “secular” or ideological form in 19th Century Declinism- “the most dominant and influential theme today” (Arthur Herman). Apocalyptic millennial themes are now embraced by the environmental alarmism movement. The terms differ from movement to movement but the core themes remain the same.

Note a major case study: The stunning historical example of how these apocalyptic millennial themes worked to carry Germany into last century’s mass-death war. Germany had a long history of familiarity with Christianity and Christian themes such as apocalypse, a messiah arising to save people, and the promise of salvation into a millennial paradise. See the New Testament book of Revelation for an illustration of these themes.

Hitler was initially a fringe nutcase in 1920s Germany, not attracting any significant wider following. But during the Wiemar years of the 1920s/1930s Germany suffered multiple disasters. There was the French occupation of the Rhineland/Ruhr industrial area of Germany, and the demand for punishing reparations. There was economic chaos due to the worldwide Great Depression and the collapse of Germany’s economy. Germans suffered horrific inflation rates along with widespread unemployment and even starvation. In the mix was the imagined looming “cultural chaos of racial degeneration” attributed to “poisonous Jewish influence”. These were all varied elements in the growing sense of chaos “that fed the expectation of apocalypse- the total collapse of German civilization” (from David Redles’ book).

(Insert: One of the great questions following World War 2, was how a population of fundamentally good people, including many German Catholics and Evangelicals, became caught up the madness of Hitler’s Nazism. But then we also remember that German Christianity had a long history of anti-Semitic thought going back to Catholic priest and later influential Evangelical hero, Martin Luther, who stated regarding the Jews, “Burn their synagogues… Drive them out like mad dogs.”)

Redles and his apocalyptic millennial colleagues detail how Hitler began to use the language of apocalyptic millennialism in his speeches and writing and that started to resonate with the broader German public that had a long history of belief in Christian themes. Hitler used common ideas and imagery that were familiar to most German Christians. The broader populace in Germany, feeling desperate because of the political/economic/social situation, then began to embrace Hitler’s fringe movement.

Hitler preached that Germany was in decline toward an imminent disastrous ending and there was a great threat/enemy that had to be violently purged in order to save Germany. That would involve a great final battle of annihilation with the enemy- namely the Jewish Bolshevik or Marxism/Communism (remember that Marx was a Jew). Hitler’s belief in a great final battle of annihilation explains his obsession with the disastrous Eastern Front battle with the Russian Communists.

Hitler presented himself to the German public, first as the forerunner of a messiah/savior, but then later as the actual savior of Germany that would defeat the enemy and purge the great Jewish threat to Germany’s survival. He would be the savior figure that would lead Germany into a new millennial paradise (the German Reich/millennium). His message resonated with the largely Christian population which then became caught up in his salvation vision for Germany.

Landes is right that if you dismiss Hitler as just another madman then you have learned nothing of how apocalyptic millennial ideas can carry a society toward mass-death and you will likely repeat the same error again. Marxism is the other major example that these researchers cover.

These authors all argue that we are seeing these same apocalyptic millennial themes today influencing the environmental alarmism movement. Note, for example, Rachel Carson’s use of an apocalyptic narrative in Silent Spring and how that influenced the ban on DDT that resulted in tens of millions of deaths in subsequent decades. Note also the anti-GM foods alarmism and the consequent deaths of millions of children (see Bjorn Lomborg article https://nationalpost.com/opinion/bjorn-lomborg-trashing-rice-killing-children).

But the worst mass-death outcome could arise from the activism to “decarbonize” our societies and the collapse of economies that would result from that. As one scientist said, that could lead to multiple-millions of unnecessary deaths. Varied countries (e.g. Germany, England, US) have already experienced excess annual deaths of the most vulnerable from rising fuel prices and fuel poverty due to anti-fossil fuel activism.

Maher on Rogan’s podcast

I was listening to one of my favorite shows the other day- Joe Rogan’s Podcast (The Joe Rogan Experience). On Jan.17, 2020, he had as a guest, Bill Maher. All was fine and good till they got onto discussing someone who had cheated and then they moved on to discuss human fidelity and monogamous relationships. Both men admitted that monogamous relationships just don’t seem possible or natural for us humans. The discussion moved to explanation that, after all, look how chimps behave and we are descendants of that line of apes. Again, no argument on the common descent thing.

But here is what they missed- i.e. that we humans have developed further from our subhuman past. We now have human consciousness, human spirits, and humane sensibilities that come from such uniquely human capabilities as human consciousness. We are no longer just apes behaving badly- i.e. the group sex thing among chimps. So excusing infidelity- the choice to hump every vagina that comes along- as normal… well, Sheeesh.

Maher and Rogan were excusing bad human behavior as due to our animal past and that appears then as just excuse-making, lame validating of bad behavior, that suits the lifestyle of single guys like Maher, just as it suited his buddy Hugh Hefner. This is also my beef in general with evolutionary biology/psychology- i.e. that these disciplines tend to explain our humanity too much in terms of our animal past. That confuses things.

I would argue that monogamous relating is not some impossible ideal. It is actually an evolutionary advance. Look how it benefits children to be raised by a pair-bonded couple that can model mature human relating to them over their lifetimes (or long period of time).

And what about the benefits of pair-bonding to the couple involved? The potential lessons- i.e. such as learning love that shares, that thinks of and adjusts to the needs of a partner. Even Maher noted that real love was unselfish, thinking of the other person. Good one Bill.

We learn life’s most valuable and most humanizing lessons from the primary relationship. How to deny ourselves for a greater good- the family unit, the primary “community” of humanity. How to share in a back and forth relationship. How to forgive, how to tolerate other’s imperfections, how to stick with a failing and suffering other person (i.e. into the “sagging” years- e.g. ball sacks down to one’s knees, breasts swinging low), and so much more.

So while we do come from an animal past and we do have an animal inheritance inside our very skulls (core brain with its sometimes subhuman impulses), we humans, with human consciousness and human spirit, are moving in an entirely new direction from our animal past, into a more humane future.

See also comment such as this- Jordan Pederson on casual treatment of others… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAZ068CDUqU

And Bill Maher made another stunning statement that unhinged my jaw (it thunked to the floor). He said, “We on the Left are the science people”. Huh? What the fuck? He then made the usual reference to climate change, inferring that others (i.e. skeptics) did not believe this as the Left does. Bill, Bill, please. That distortion needs to be put aside once and for all. Nobody on either side of the debate doubts that climate is changing. That has never been the issue. And as you and Rogan both affirmed, the Left needs to get back to “facts matter”.

The real issue and debate re climate change has always been- What causes it? And how much is actually due to human input? (i.e. our input of CO2 emissions into Earth’s carbon budget and cycles) And will the outcomes be catastrophic as alarmists claim? So far, the models have been entirely wrong with their exaggerated projections.

Good science shows that other natural factors overwhelm the CO2 influence on climate (i.e. cosmic ray/sun/cloud interaction, ocean/atmosphere interaction, among many others). And natural sources (e.g. submarine volcanic and separation ridge emissions, land plant decay, etc.) overwhelm the human contribution to CO2 levels. The science has never been settled and there has never been any “consensus”. Remember the almost 32,000 scientists who signed the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine Protest Petition that was almost entirely ignored by alarmist news media.

And with only a mild 1 degree Centigrade rise over the past century (out of the bitter cold of the Little Ice Age of roughly 1645-1715) there is no “climate crisis”. We are still in an abnormal and sub-optimal cold era on Earth. See “Paleo-climate facts” below. The best evidence will include the long-term history of climate, the complete big picture of facts. All the facts… even from skeptical science.

Paleo-climate evidence shows that a more normal and optimal state for life on Earth, over the past 500 million years, has been a world with average surface temperatures in the range of 19-20 degrees Centigrade, and with CO2 in the range of 1000-1500 ppm. Not today’s sub-optimal average world temperatures of only 14.5 degrees Centigrade with only 400-plus ppm of CO2. Life flourishes with more warmth and more basic plant food, just as plant mass on Earth has increased by 14% since 1980 with more CO2. The pre-industrial levels of CO2, at below 300 ppm, were starving plant life.

The evidence to date shows that there is no sound science basis for activism to “decarbonise” our societies and cause populations to suffer the consequences of potential collapsing economies. Too many are already suffering from fuel poverty due to unnecessarily inflated fuel costs. The annual deaths from cold exceed, by ten to twenty times, the annual deaths from heat events.

Note: Bill Maher is also the guy who said that CO2 was a “poisonous gas”. Holy shit. The basic food of all life is poison? So this is what ‘Alice In Wonderland’ reality feels like, eh?

Stick a stake in it, or “Kill the Beast” (Commander Vaako’s wife in Chronicles of Riddick)

A pissed atheist erupted and spit this out a few years back, “Let’s get rid of all this metaphysical bullshit”. While we may sympathize somewhat with his fedupness with too much God-talk and God-theorizing and God-whatever else, his wish was akin to getting rid of the primal human impulse to meaning (Victor Frankl). It just ain’t gonna happen for the foreseeable future. 85% of humanity still affiliates with one of the major world religions and most of the remaining 15% are “unaffiliated”, or “spiritual but not religious”. The primal human impulse to meaning has always been inseparably tied to curiosity, speculation, and theorizing regarding “spiritual” realities.

My response? First, to calm religious nerves I would offer the defensive-reaction softener that not all religious ideas are bad. But on the other hand, some really “bad religious ideas” have always been part of the religion mix, often dominating the human meaning project and causing incalculable harm. However, recognizing that religious or spiritual beliefs are not going away anytime soon, then at the least, offer people better alternatives to inform the spiritual part of their search for meaning, at whatever stage they may be at. (See Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives below.)

Further, I affirm all endeavor at reforming religion, making religion a more moderate force in human society. Religion will continue to play a vital role as a social medium that communicates people’s shared beliefs and values.

But my beef with religious reform movements is that they often do not properly or thoroughly solve the core problem with human systems of meaning. They do not go to the core ideal and authority of humanity- deity- where some of the worst of bad ideas are still embedded. Most of the major religious traditions still hold God theories that embrace primitive features that are now widely recognized in all other areas of life as subhuman/inhuman, themes that deform human consciousness. Note “Examples” just below.

Why such cautious tinkering around the periphery of the real core problem? I would suggest that the following built-in religious defense measures still enable religious traditions to maintain a solid grip on the consciousness of most of the human population and prevent tampering with their God theories.

For instance, there is the “biblicism” fallacy- the belief that religious holy books, though the main repositories of varied bad ideas, are specially-inspired revelations straight from God. So don’t touch. Also, there is the belief that religious holy persons are specially anointed and incarnated by God and therefore speak with special divine authority. So again, don’t touch what they have taught.

Further, there is the unwarranted and excessive respect for institutions with long histories (time deifies or sacralises), hence the related fear of things designated “sacred” as representing final, untouchable, and immutable truth. Add here, the fear of losing the “truth”, fear of heresy or falling away (“backsliding”). And yes, most fundamentally the fear of a God that threatens punishment for doubt or unbelief expressed toward religious traditions and beliefs.

And here is undoubtedly the biggest religious fallacy of all- that God is a religious reality that can only be mediated to humanity through religion as the primary authority on deity. This history-long tight association of God with religion must be rejected because conditional religion has never communicated to people the unconditional reality that is God.

The single most untouchable idea in religious traditions has always been the central idea of God, notably God as the source of irrefutable conditions for humanity. Conditions like the required sacrifice/payment to appease angry deity, the right beliefs that save people’s souls for eternity, proper religious rituals that maintain the true religion, and correct religious lifestyle to illustrate the true religion.

If we are ever to make the great breakthrough into full liberation and transformation of human consciousness I would suggest that we must go directly to the core ideal and authority of humanity- i.e. deity- and clean up the mess there. That will involve fully humanizing God with our most authentically humane discovery- i.e. that love at its best is “no conditions” (unconditional, universal, unlimited are related terms). Most people intuitively get it that authentic unconditional love just forgives all, includes all, and generously loves all. Surely, God as Ultimate Good or Love will embody this highest form of love, and do so much better than the best that we have discovered or practice.

And yes, I get it that if you reform God with no conditions love, then “pfffftt…. poof”. There goes religion as it has always been- an essentially conditions-mediating social institution (again- right beliefs, correct rituals, necessary salvation plan, and required religious lifestyle). If God is authentic no conditions love then that means “absolutely no conditions. None”. And, as noted above, it means that God has never been a ‘religious’ reality. An unconditional reality cannot be communicated through, or represented by, a conditional institution. This has always been the great distortion of religious traditions- presenting an unconditional reality as highly conditional.

But really, so what if unconditional deity spells the death of conditional religion? Look at the good outcome of this death. The alternative of unconditional love is far better as a cohering central ideal for inspiring and validating our better impulses. Unconditional orients consciousness to features like inclusion, treating all equally (no domination/subservience relating), and non-punitive approaches to other’s failures (restorative justice). Unconditional offers the safest route through life, pointing us to the most humane way to respond and treat others.

Once more, the new authority for concluding that our ultimate ideal and reality is no conditions love comes from common, ordinary people that understand that unconditional is the best way to relate to imperfect others (i.e. spouses, children, friends). From this new source of authority- i.e. the “best of humanity”- we then project out to similarly define Ultimate Goodness or Love, but to transcendently better degree. We do not get this insight on unconditional love from holy books or religious teaching that has always been highly conditional in nature.

Added note: Holiness mythology

One of the most common responses from religious people to the idea of God as no conditions love is that God is also holy and just and therefore must punish wrong. God’s honor is tarnished by the wrong-doing of people so he must be just (strict eye for eye) and punish all sin. God cannot just freely forgive and love. But this is primitivism at its worst. How so? It is the very same reasoning that is behind practices like “honor killing”. People in varied cultures today still reason that, for example, a daughter embracing modern habits has dishonored her family and their traditional culture. So the dishonored males are required to punish the “evil” daughter in order to restore their tarnished honor. Holiness theology is embracing this very same primitive reasoning. I would counter that unconditional forgiveness and love is the true glory of God, the highest goodness and love.

The holiness feature in theology affirms the myth of God obsessed with perfection and punishing imperfection, hence the creation of a supporting complex of myths related to original paradise/Eden (perfect creation), Fall of humanity and ruin of paradise (loss of perfection), subsequent need for an atonement (sacrifice/payment/punishment in order to restore the lost perfection).

A bit more on the Core issue- the ‘God theory’ thing:

If I had to isolate the one thing that is the most fundamental issue to deal with in solving one of humanity’s most fundamental problems- i.e. the deformities in our greatest guiding ideal and authority (deity)- I would go right to the heart of human systems of meaning/understanding (i.e. religions) and deal with the single worst idea to ever find lodging in human consciousness and narratives. I am referring to the pathology of “threat theology”, that is, ideas of punitive, destroying gods. God theories have always embodied humanity’s highest ideals and authorities across history and have embraced some of the worst and most threatening features that people have projected onto such realities.

Its also important to note on the consequences of bad ideas. Bad ideas, especially bad God ideas, have long incited and validated the worst of human impulses, the ‘animal passions’. This is due to the behavior/belief relationship- the long-established practise of people to base their behaviors on related beliefs about divinity (the desire to replicate the divine model, or pattern, in this world, to be god-like).

Examples of subhuman features projected onto deity: These would include ideas of God as retaliatory (judgment with eye for eye justice), dominating (king, ruler), tribally exclusive (favoring a chosen people), conditional (demanding sacrifice/payment), punitive, and destructive (apocalypse, hell). Such “threat theology” ideas have been used from the beginning to define humanity’s ultimate ideal and authority, with horrific outcomes. These features in divinity have validated the basest human impulses across history to vengeance (eye for eye retaliation), domination of others (the myth of leaders appointed by God), the tribal exclusion of ‘unbelievers’ as enemies, and justice as punitive and destructive (i.e. death penalty).

Threat theology has wreaked incalculable harm deforming lives with unnecessary fear, anxiety, shame/guilt, despair/depression, and even violence (see psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God). Add here the role that these ideas have played influencing mass-death movements and wars against enemies (see research of Richard Landes in Heaven on Earth, Arthur Mendel’s Vision and Violence, and David Redles’s book Hitler’s Millennial Reich). ISIS illustrates today the role of God ideas influencing violence against “enemies”.

The evidence leads me to conclude that the single worst pathology in human consciousness across history has been that of punitive, destroying deity (i.e. most notably in apocalyptic mythology). This pathology continues to find new expression in contemporary gods and new eruptions of destructive apocalyptic hysteria (e.g. environmental alarmism with its new punitive gods- vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, retributive Universe, or payback Karma).

And if I were to go directly to the core of the issue and offer the single most potent thing to solve/correct the above pathology, I would offer humanity’s single most profound discovery ever- that ultimate reality, or God, is a stunningly inexpressible “no conditions Love”, an insight that potently transforms and liberates human consciousness and reshapes the core of human narratives entirely. Defining humanity’s ultimate ideal with unconditional will inspire and validate our better impulses to include all, to forgive all, to treat all as full equals (non-dominating, non-controlling relating), and mercifully treat failure with restorative forms of justice. And yes, to reiterate once more, no conditions deity spells the end of religion as a conditions-mediating institution.

But we are a creative species and can come up with new mediums, new non-religious narratives, for communicating our continually evolving shared values.

One more: What about science and bad ideas? Authors like Sabine Hossenfelder (Lost in Math) have noted that science has its own problems with too many scientists crossing the science/philosophy boundary. Again, that meaning impulse intrudes everywhere, leading too many scientists to make “leaps of assumption” and ‘god-of-gaps-type’ conclusions that are not supported by good evidence. Keep an eye on this as well as the ever-present distortions from confirmation bias.

Climate intro…

No one on the skeptical side of the debate denies that climate change is occurring. So “deniers” is a petty name-calling stunt to shut down discussion, to avoid dealing with real content and evidence. Climate, as a complex and dynamic (no stasis) system, is always changing. That is not the core issue of disagreement.

And be clear- there is no “climate crisis” with the roughly 1 degree Centigrade rise in average world temperatures over the past century.

The core issue is how much we humans really contribute to the rise of atmospheric CO2 and will the rise of CO2 (now 400 plus ppm) lead to catastrophic outcomes? We still do not know how much humanity in industrial civilization has contributed to the CO2 budget on Earth, what with other natural sources- i.e. submarine volcanoes, land plant decay, ocean release, etc.- that appear to overwhelm the human contribution.

And we still do not know how much CO2 itself actually influences climate change in light of the discovery of other natural factors that show stronger correlations to the climate change that we have seen over past centuries (e.g. cosmic ray/sun/cloud interaction, ocean/atmosphere interaction, etc.).

So enough already with the endless silly claims, re skeptics, that “they don’t believe in climate change”. That shows either outright deceitfulness or, more generously, profound ignorance of the basic issues of the debate over climate.

Basic Climate Facts project– a list of the most basic climate facts that overturn the alarmist apocalyptic narrative on climate and give the true state of climate history. Intent: Counter the distorting “climate crisis” hysteria of today. Affirm hope based on the best evidence available. Overall point? Earth today is in an abnormally cold, and therefore sub-optimal and unhealthy state for life.

Paleo-climate facts:

We are currently in one of the coldest ice-age eras in Earth’s history- the Quarternary ice age with repeated cyclical patterns of extended glaciation and inter-glacial periods. We are now in the coldest 1% of this ice age era.

Average global temperatures today are only 14.5 degrees Centigrade which is 5 degrees C below the normal and optimum temperatures of the past 500 million years at 19.5 degrees C (67 degrees Fahrenheit). (see https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/03/earths-ice-ages/, “The Earth’s normal or optimum global average temperature over the past 550 million years is about 19.5 degrees Centigrade… this is over 5 degrees C. warmer than today”).

For most of the past 500 million years (roughly since the Cambrian Explosion of life), over 90% of this 500 million year period, the Earth has been entirely ice free. That is a normal, optimal world- with no ice. Researchers have discovered the stumps of tropical trees in the Arctic, showing that during warmer periods animal and plant life enjoyed extended habitats that covered most of the Earth’s land area.

CO2 levels during this ice-age era have been dangerously low. Some 350,000 years ago we just missed a real potential catastrophe as CO2 levels descended below 200 ppm. Plant life dies at 150 ppm. See https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/06/climate-alarmists-winning-the-war-of-words-despite-evidence-that-nothing-unusual-is-happening/

For much of Earth’s history, CO2 levels have been in the healthy range of 1000-2000 ppm (and often higher, with no catastrophic impact on life). To the contrary, plant life has thrived under such conditions of more plentiful plant food. CO2 is the basic food of plant life. It is not a pollutant or poison. I feel an embarrassing “Duh” in stating this Grade One science fact.

Today there is no “climate crisis or emergency” with the slight warming (about 1 degree C. over the past century) and slight increase in plant food (CO2 at just over 400 ppm). These two rising features of life are also part of the more recent natural recovery from the bitter cold of the Little Ice Age of approximately 1645-1715.

Ice core samples show that rises in atmospheric CO2 levels follow climate warming. CO2, a small greenhouse gas (0.04% of the atmosphere) does not drive warming as much as varied other natural factors do (see, for example, Henrik Svensmark’s The Chilling Stars on the cosmic ray/sun/cloud interaction, or Michael Hart’s Hubris on the ocean/atmosphere interaction). Historically the CO2 influence on climate is consistently overwhelmed by other natural factors that show stronger correlations to climate changes.

The two best things happening to life today are more warmth and more CO2. The outcome of these two improving features is that plant life is now thriving a bit more and has gained roughly 14% more mass across the Earth over the past few decades. The planet is healthier today. See Matt Ridley’s “Rejoice, the Earth is greener today” at https://humanprogress.org/article.php?p=2018&fbclid=IwAR2DhS7FGEgzdR0XQp5iFNGZOUcofy8FhUrgJJ6CFfuwE8tV-rxRkb6x3jQ.

Animal life is also thriving with access to more plant food. Further, human crop production is thriving also with more critical aerial fertilizer (CO2). However, temperatures and CO2 levels are still too low and not yet normal or optimal for life to flourish even more.

Further, we do not know what actually contributes to the rise in Earth’s current CO2 budget. Alarmists have claimed that the rise over the past two centuries is due mainly to industrial society emissions (human use of fossil fuels). But research shows other natural sources that overwhelm the human contribution, such as submarine volcanic emissions (some 3 million undersea volcanoes as well as separation ridge emissions), and other natural land sources (e.g. plant decay) and ocean sources. See, for example, https://principia-scientific.org/volcanic-carbon-dioxide/?fbclid=IwAR3ScJMbDRoVmr2lSmr5jkPBR1RmV60ibhTIOYQUSxuNc5VjLqgIuIyeZSY

Point? There is no good reason to “decarbonise” our societies- i.e. stop using fossil fuels. That would devastate our economies and harm the poorest people the most. This has already happened with rising energy costs from anti-fossil fuel policies, fuel poverty, and consequent increased deaths from cold. Over ten times more people die every year from cold than die from warm events. https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/12/new-studies-cold-temperature-deaths-rising-and-10-20-times-more-common-than-heat-related-deaths/

Added notes on main claims of alarmists: Extreme weather events occur endlessly across Earth during all periods of climate change. Such events show no worsening trend today.

Ocean rise is occurring at the same slow rate that it has across this inter-glacial, the Holocene. Oceans have risen about 120 meters since the beginning of this inter-glacial.

Droughts, and related fires, are not more severe or frequent than during the long-term past. Media claims of “worst on record” are referring to the past 150 years of record-keeping, and often refer to even shorter time periods of just a few years. This distorts the true state of climate issues.

19.5 degrees Centigrade as normal and optimal? Higher temperatures will not “fry the planet” as alarmists claim. Earth has an efficient heat or energy distribution system. Great upwellings of warm air at the equator carry heat to the poles. This leads to the spread of warmth to colder regions. The result is less temperature differences between higher latitudes and tropical regions, less difference between seasons, and less difference between day and night temperatures. These “less severe gradients” mean less severe storminess. Things like tornadoes arise from the sharp differences between hot and cold air fronts. Does the slight warming of the past half century or so explain the recent decades of flat trends for hurricanes and tornadoes?

More notes:

Scientific, political, and media elites have convinced many across the world that the two best things that are happening on earth today, i.e. (1) more warmth in this cold ice-age era, and (2) more CO2, the basic food of life… alarmist scientists and alarmist news media have confused many with claims that these two improving trends are the two worst things that are happening on earth today, that they portend the “end of days” just up ahead. That is irresponsible and immoral inciting of apocalyptic hysteria, and it is entirely unhinged from reality. Frightened populations are now willing to embrace alarmist salvation schemes like “decarbonization” that will devastate economies and the lives of the most vulnerable people, the poorest.

As the paleo-climate evidence above shows, these two rising factors in nature- more warmth and more CO2- are signs of a return to a more normal and optimal state for life, and life is flourishing in response (i.e. increasing plant mass by some 14% over the past four decades). The world is greener and healthier due to these two things rising toward a more normal state for life.

And behind the promotion of public alarm over these two features of life, we see the re-emergence of last century’s great battle between Collectivism and the free individual model for organizing human society. Collectivism has reframed itself with new claims to “honor the consensus science”, which is just more of the same old Collectivist anti-freedom of speech as before. And it claims to be the crusade that will “save the world” from industrial society (i.e. capitalist society), a crusade that is fundamentally anti-human progress.

But keep these two improving trends in sharp focus as key to the public narratives of today- warming temperatures and more CO2. These improving features of life have been demonized as great threats to life. Even a usually sharp mind like Bill Maher has called CO2 a “poison gas”. Sheesh. Anti-scientific lunacy gone insane, eh.

One more: Fear of change in nature/climate

Fear of change in nature should be considered some sort of pathology, or at least, certainly profoundly anti-science. Change, especially in climate, is fundamental to such a complex, dynamic system. Climate is influenced by a still-hardly-understood myriad of natural elements. There is never the possibility of stasis in climate, especially not through the proposals of climate alarmists (e.g. the irrational claim that we can turn a CO2 knob and thereby control temperatures, holding climate change to only a 1.5-2.0 degree C. rise).

Irrational fear of change has resulted in the embarrassing claims of alarmists that every twitch in climate (especially every extreme weather event) portends the apocalypse. A notable example: During the filming of The Revenant, Leonardo DeCaprio was subject to freezing Alberta temperatures but was fortunate to experience the beautiful, and fairly common to Alberta, phenomenon of a “chinook”- a sudden warming front moving in. Startled, he told the film crews that this warming was a “terrifying sign” of dangerous, apocalyptic climate change. Huh? Warm air saving you from freezing to death and it is the harbinger of catastrophe? Sheesh. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/leonardo-dicaprio-witnesses-a-terrifying-sign-of-climate-change-in-calgary-a-chinook

The best evidence that we have shows that the change that we have seen, notably over the past few centuries, correlates most clearly with natural influences that consistently overwhelm the CO2 influence on climate. CO2 is a minor player in the climate drivers mix.

Quote from the next section just below:

“Site project: Bring down the monster that is apocalyptic mythology, with its history-distorting belief that life is declining toward some great disastrous ending. This “most violent and destructive idea in history” has endlessly fed nihilism, unnecessary fear and guilt, fatalism/resignation in populations, and worst of all- totalitarian outbursts of “coercive purification”, and related mass-death movements, that erupt from the apocalyptically-incited need to violently purge some great threat in order to “save” something.

“The latest historical outburst of apocalyptic hysteria has come to us through environmental alarmism/Green religion (the latest version of 19th Century Declinism) with its destructive policies to slow and even reverse industrial civilization (e.g. decarbonise) and to reinstate some imagined pre-industrial paradise. Huh? Regain paradise in a return to the bitterly cold “Little Ice Age” world (roughly 1645-1715) with CO2 at plant starvation levels? (i.e. below 300 ppm)

“Apocalyptic has always been essentially anti-human, viewing humanity as a “population bomb” or a “virus/cancer on the planet”. The apocalyptic mind views human industrial civilization as the vehicle through which the human virus is supposedly destroying the world (fueling the decline of life toward something worse).

“It is beyond irresponsible to advocate apocalyptic scenarios (i.e. shouting “fire” in the great theater of public life) and to publicly promote the hysteria-inciting “end of days” claims that have become so common to alarmist science and alarmist news reporting (Sociologist David Altheide was right that news media are not “truth-tellers” but are entertainers, competing with the rest of the entertainment industry that is dominated by apocalyptic- see “Creating Fear: News and the manufacture of crisis”). Its time, as someone said, that we all “grow the fuck up” and start acting more like mature adults (i.e. end the irrational and anti-science fear-mongering of apocalyptic exaggeration). See “Humanity’s best decade yet” just below.

“This site goes to the cohering center of the apocalyptic pathology- i.e. bring down the real monster that is behind apocalyptic- the single most monstrous idea ever introduced to human consciousness, the foundational error of some punitive, destroying Force or deity. This myth of punitive, destroying God has long been central to world religious traditions, and is now joined by the newer gods of environmentalism or Green religion- i.e. vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, retributive Universe, and payback karma.

“The intention here is to deal thoroughly with the main themes that have long shaped human meta-narratives, the great stories that embody our highest human ideals, give form to the human struggle for meaning and purpose, and serve to guide and validate human lifestyles and societies.

“This site offers stunning new alternative themes to shape human meta-stories. No theme is more important than that of a new cohering Center that embraces the highest form of love- i.e. no conditions love, the single greatest ideal that we have discovered. This is about how we frame our highest ideals and authorities, the ideas that we embrace to guide our meaning impulse toward a truly humane future, and the impact of ideas on life. See below a complete complex of ideas to support this central New Story theme.”

Here are some of the most prominent ideas that have shaped human worldviews/meta-narratives across history.

The “short version” list of “Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives…(the full version is below in the next section “New Story Alternatives to Declinist/apocalyptic mythology”)

1 Old story theme: The myth of God as an ultimate judging, punishing, and destroying reality. These pathologies projected onto humanity’s highest ideal and authority- i.e. deity- have long oriented human ethics and justice toward punishment and destruction.

New story alternative: The stunning new theology of God as an inexpressibly wondrous “no conditions” Love. A non-retaliatory, non-punitive reality. This foundational theme- i.e. the nature of deity- overwhelmingly shapes all other themes/ideas.

2 Old story theme: The myth of a perfect beginning (Eden) and a God obsessed with perfection and punishing imperfection (i.e. God angry at the loss of perfection).

New story alternative: The world began in imperfection but has gradually improved. A new story would argue that God included original imperfection in order to create the world as a learning arena for human development. We learn the best things in life through struggle with their opposites- the bad things. We learn important humanizing lessons (i.e. empathy) in the struggle with our own problems and suffering, as we work to make life better.

3 Old story theme: The myth that humanity began as a more perfect species but has “fallen” or degraded into something worse over history.

New story alternative: We have emerged from the brutality of an animal past to gradually become something better across history- more human/humane (see James Payne’s History of Force, Stephen Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature).

4 Old story theme: The myth that the trajectory of life declines toward something worse (i.e. toward some great collapse and ending).

New story alternative: Life has improved across history especially with creative human input and guidance. See Julian Simon’s Ultimate Resource, Greg Easterbrook’s A Moment On The Earth, Bjorn Lomborg’s Skeptical Environmentalist, Indur Goklany’s The Improving State of the World, Ronald Bailey’s The End of Doom, Desrocher and Szurmak’s Population Bombed, Matt Ridley’s Rational Optimist, and Hans Rosling’s Factfulness, among others.

For a view of the long term “improvement” in the trajectory of the entire cosmos and the overall trajectory of life see Harold Morowitz’s The Emergence of Everything and Brian Greene’s Universe Story.

5 Old story theme: The myth that natural disasters, disease, human cruelty, and death are expressions of divine punishment. This adds the unnecessary psychic burden of fear, anxiety, guilt and shame to already unbearable physical suffering. Paul tormented the Corinthians with this argument that their sicknesses and deaths were punishment from God for their sins.

New story alternative: While there are natural and social consequences all through life, there is no punitive, destroying deity behind the imperfections of life. Ultimately there is only Love at the core of reality (see number 17 on the relationship of Love to the freedom and randomness in life).

6 Old story theme: Humanity has been rejected by the Creator and has become separated from the Source, and now must be reconciled to God.

New story alternative: No one has ever been separated from the unconditional Love at the core of reality (see number 17 below- God has always been “incarnated” in all humanity, united with the human spirit).

7 Old story theme: The myth of dualism in Ultimate Reality (i.e. a Good God versus an evil Force/Satan). This ideal has incited and validated varied human dualisms and general tribalism across history (i.e. the mentality of “us versus our enemies”).

New story alternative: We all come from the same originating Oneness and we are all equals in the one human family. The apparent dualisms of this material world do not express any ultimate dualism.

8 Old story theme: The myth of looming apocalypse and the final destruction of all (i.e. God as ultimate Destroyer).

New story alternative: There are problems all through the world but no looming threat of final destruction and ending of life.

9 Old story theme: The “instantaneous transformation” of life versus gradualism in the development of life. The ‘imminent’ feature in apocalyptic (i.e. the imagined imminent threat of destruction) demands urgent action to save something and that incites the demand for “coercive purging” of some threat. The result, historically, has been the unleashing of the totalitarian impulse in mass-death movements expressed toward perceived enemies and threats (e.g. the Marxist purging of the “threat” of capitalist societies, the Nazi purging of the “threat” of Jewish Bolshevism, and the environmental alarmist purging of the “threat” of industrial society based on fossil fuels).

New story alternative: There is no end of days on the horizon and consequently no need for coercive instantaneous transformation. We improve life gradually as we solve problems democratically.

10 Old story theme: The demand for a salvation scheme, for some sacrifice or payment. This debt payment demand has always framed deity as representing requirement for punishment and the demand for atonement.

New story alternative: Unconditional means absolutely no divine demand for debt payment, no conditions. None. No demanded sacrifice or punishment. See, for example, the story of the Prodigal Son and his Father, representative of God. The Father did not demand debt payment, sacrifice, or punishment before offering forgiveness, full acceptance/inclusion, and love. This is a regular theme in the authentic teaching and stories of Jesus (Not everything attributed to Jesus in the gospels was actually taught by him). And yes, this point that God did not require debt payment is not prescriptive for human commercial and business relationships, except by the free choice of property owners/creditors.

Note also that in the Matthew 5:38-48 and Luke 6:27-36 summaries of the core teaching of Jesus, he rejects the debt payment principle in relation to God. He states that authentic love will “give… do good… expecting nothing in return…”. In this teaching- i.e. “give expecting nothing in return”- Jesus is describing authentic goodness and love. He then makes this summary point- “Do this and you will be like God because God does this” or “this is what God is like”. “Be unconditionally merciful as God is unconditionally merciful (not expecting return or payment/sacrifice)”.

11 Old story theme: Retribution or payback is true justice.

New story alternative: Unconditional affirms restorative justice that is victim-centered and holds offenders responsible, but forgives and treats all humanely, seeking rehabilitation where possible (i.e. no hurt for hurt cycles as in punitive justice approaches). And a critical qualifier- authentic love is not pacifist, but is always responsible to protect the innocent and that often means the use of force (i.e. police, military), and imprisonment, to restrain violence.

12 Old story theme: The myth of future or after-life judgment, exclusion, and punishment/destruction.

New story alternative: Unconditional includes all in the end (sun and rain given to all, to both good and bad people). There is no ultimate judgment, punishment or destruction (no such thing as Hell).

13 Old story theme: The myth of a hero messiah that uses superior force to overthrow enemies and purge the world so that he can coercively install a paradise for his “true believer” followers.

New story alternative: Authentic love does not intervene or overwhelm with force that violates the freedom of others.

(Note: This general non-coercive approach with most people does not nullify the responsibility to restrain the evil/violence of some people in this world, often forcefully.)

14 Old story theme: The myth of Biblicism- i.e. the belief that religious holy books are more special and authoritative than ordinary human insight and writing.

New story alternative: We evaluate all human writing with the same criteria of bad/good, right/wrong, or human/inhuman. There is no special religious authority above common human insights such as in human rights codes or constitutions.

15 Old story theme: The myth of God as ruler, judge, Lord, or King (expressed via priesthoods and religious authorities).

New story alternative: There is no domination/subservience in God relating to humanity, or human relating to deity. God relates horizontally to humanity. Jesus taught that true greatness was to serve and not dominate or control others. God is a “commoner” reality, not a “royalty” or elitist reality.

16 Old story theme: The myth that humanity is obligated to know, serve, or have a relationship with invisible reality. Loyalty to realities above humanity- e.g. law/rules, governing authority, deity/priesthoods- has often resulted in neglect or abuse of people.

New story alternative: Our primary loyalty is to serve real people and their needs, in here and now reality.

17 Old story theme: The absence or silence of God in the midst of natural disaster or human cruelty. The Holocaust is the iconic example of such silence.

New story alternative: There is no Sky God somewhere up above the world. God has never been absent or silent but has always incarnated in all humanity and is seen in all human raging against evil and suffering and all human effort to make life better. God is immediately present as a gently persuading influence on the human spirit and consciousness, to do the right thing. With this immediately present God- closer than our breath or atoms- it is entirely up to us to solve problems and to make life better.

Critical here is the inseparable relationship between love and freedom. Authentic divine love will not do the inhuman thing and overwhelm the freedom of others. Love understands that authentic goodness comes from authentic freedom to choose. This is the great risk that divine love takes.

18 Old Story Theme: The myth of the moral and spiritual superiority of the simple, low-consumption lifestyle (self-produced, using only local resources). Enjoyment of the good life is then misrepresented as selfishness and greed, or obsession with ‘base’ materialism.

New Story Alternative: The search for a better life is the fundamental urge of love- to responsibly improve one’s life and the state of one’s family. And it is the free choice of people to enjoy the growing abundance that modern economies provide with an ever-increasing proportion of humanity moving into middle class status.

See more detail on this new addition (number 18) in the second section below: Note the related fallacies of “limited good” or limited resources, and “noble savage” mythology that claims primitive people were uncorrupted before the fall into corrupting civilization.

Added note: Holding the belief that God is a no conditions reality (i.e. all are forgiven and included in the end) does not nullify the common-sense need for us to restrain violent people and prevent wrongdoing in this world. And likewise, our responsibility to restrain bad behavior in this life does not nullify the ultimate reality of God as unconditional love (all forgiven, included, and loved in the end).

Site project: Bring down the monster that is apocalyptic mythology, with its history-distorting belief that life is declining toward some great disastrous ending. This “most violent and destructive idea in history” has endlessly fed nihilism, unnecessary fear and guilt, fatalism/resignation in populations, and worst of all- totalitarian outbursts of “coercive purification”, and related mass-death movements, that erupt from the apocalyptically-incited need to violently purge some great threat in order to “save” something.

The latest historical outburst of apocalyptic hysteria has come to us through environmental alarmism/Green religion with its destructive policies to slow and even reverse industrial civilization (e.g. decarbonise) and to reinstate some imagined preindustrial paradise. Huh? Regain paradise in a return to the bitterly cold “Little Ice Age” world (roughly 1645-1715) with CO2 at plant starvation levels? (i.e. below 300 ppm)

Apocalyptic has always been essentially anti-human, viewing humanity as a “population bomb” or a “virus/cancer on the planet”. The apocalyptic mind views human industrial civilization as the vehicle through which the human virus is destroying the world (fueling the decline of life toward something worse).

It is beyond irresponsible to advocate apocalyptic scenarios (i.e. shouting “fire” in the great theatre of public life) and to publicly promote the hysteria-inciting “end of days” claims that have become so common to alarmist science and alarmist news reporting (Sociologist David Altheide was right that news media are not “truth-tellers” but are entertainers, competing with the rest of the entertainment industry that is dominated by apocalyptic- see “Creating Fear: News and the manufacture of crisis”). Its time, as someone said, that we all “grow the fuck up” and start acting more like mature adults (i.e. end the irrational and anti-science fear-mongering of apocalyptic exaggeration). See “Humanity’s best decade yet” just below.

This site goes to the cohering center of the apocalyptic pathology- i.e. bring down the real monster that is behind apocalyptic- the single most monstrous idea ever introduced to human consciousness, the foundational error of some punitive, destroying Force or deity. This myth of punitive, destroying God has long been central to world religious traditions, and is now joined by the newer gods of environmentalism or Green religion- i.e. vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, retributive Universe, and payback karma.

The intention here is to deal thoroughly with the main themes that have long shaped human meta-narratives, the great stories that embody our highest human ideals, give form to the human struggle for meaning and purpose, and serve to guide and validate human lifestyles and societies.

This site offers stunning new alternative themes to shape human meta-stories. No theme is more important than that of a new cohering Center that embraces the highest form of love- i.e. no conditions love, the single greatest ideal that we have discovered. See below a complete complex of ideas to support this central New Story theme.

From latest Global Warming Policy Forum newsletter– Dec. 2019, “Humanity’s best decade yet (2010s)”.

28 percent of all wealth ever created.
Extreme poverty halved.
Child mortality rate reduced by a third.
World average life expectancy increased from 69.5 to 72.6 years.
Countries criminalizing same sex unions down 40 percent to 27 percent.
Countries with laws protecting women up 53 percent to 78 percent.
Death rates from pollution down 19 percent.
Weather-related deaths decreased 95 percent since 1980s.
“Peak stuff” consumption of 66 out of 72 resources is declining.
“Not free” countries down 34 percent to 26 percent.
Sources: World Bank, Our World in Data, and other.

See also: “We’ve just had the best decade in human history. Seriously. Little of this made the news, because good news is no news” by Matt Ridley. Published Dec.21, 2019 in The Spectator.

Further… The central issue in the climate debate: “A global warming skeptic is not someone who doubts the world has warmed; it is someone who is skeptical that the warming is primarily man-made… the (skeptics) contend that natural cycles shaped by sun and sea play a far more important role than greenhouse gases in determining global temperature…”, Dr. Rael Isaac in Roosters of the Apocalypse.

Love- a stunning, inexpressibly wondrous “no conditions” love- defines the core of reality, life, and the human spirit or self. Human story is about learning what that love is, how to express it in relation to imperfect others, and how to treat oneself with that same love (i.e. not beating oneself up over personal imperfection and failure).

The great contradiction in Christianity and its holy book, the New Testament. A “stunning new theology” buried by Christianity.

(The conclusions here are based on Historical Jesus research, notably Q Wisdom Sayings gospel research- i.e. James Robinson, John Kloppenborg, among others.)

First, why go after Paul’s Christ myth, the highly revered icon of a major world religion? Because, even though the Christ represents varied highly valued ideals to the Christian community- i.e. love, forgiveness, salvation, hope- it has also embraced and reinforced some of the worst features from an ancient past- i.e. retaliatory vengeance (see the Thessalonian letters), tribal exclusion (true believers saved, unbelievers excluded), domination/subservience relating (Lord Christ and his mediating priesthood), and angry gods threatening to punish and destroy (John’s Revelation as the epitome statement of this).

You cannot merge and mix contradicting opposites. That only creates “cognitive dissonance” (see Zenon Lotufo’s “Cruel God, Kind God”). Also, the nasty elements in a merger undermine, weaken, and distort the good stuff. It’s like putting new wine in old, rotten wineskins.

Further, the Christ gospel of Paul is mainly responsible for embedding/re-enforcing the myth of apocalypse in Western consciousness and keeping that pathological myth alive. As James Tabor said, “Paul has been the most influential person in history and he has shaped practically all we think about everything” (Paul and Jesus). His Christ myth has shaped much of how we think and act- i.e. our ethics, justice.

Religious icons and beliefs still exert an outsize influence on human thought and behavior (Note the 85% of humanity still affiliated with a major world religion as per the World Religion Survey). A close examination of humanity’s highest ideal and authority- deity- reveals too much residual subhuman/inhuman stuff still in the mix. Religious reformism has to move beyond peripheral tinkering to thoroughly and properly tackle the core reality- e.g. the nature of religious deity.

Fortunately, growing human insight into the authentic nature of love as unconditional now points us toward a stunning new understanding of the true nature of Ultimate Reality- God. Parents, spouses, friends all get that love should be unconditional from daily relating to imperfect family/people all around them. So we naturally project this highest form of love out to define deity properly as Ultimate Love and Goodness. The best in humanity, as understood from common modern sensibilities, defines the transcendently better in deity. Yes, this is an “audacious” new way of doing theology. But it points to a more humane understanding of deity than what we have inherited from religious traditions and their holy books.

Moving into the issue…

The Search For Historical Jesus, over the past three centuries, has given us the basic outline of what happened in the Christian tradition. The latest phase of this search- the Jesus Seminar- offers more detail on the basic issues involved, i.e. that early Christianity was a diverse movement with major differences, for example, between Jewish Christianity (Jesus as some sort of prophet/king but not God) and Paul’s Gentile Christian movement (Jesus as God-man, cosmic Christ/Savior). Further, there were numerous other gospels that were not accepted into the Christian cannon- e.g. the gospel of Philip, gospel of Mary, Gospel of James, gospel of Thomas, and so on. The victors of the early Christian battles (i.e. Paul’s version of the gospel) got to dictate what was truth and what was heresy. Emperor Constantine also stuck his nose into the truth/heresy battles among early Christians.

(Note on the four gospels included in the New Testament: Of the many other gospels available when the New Testament canon was assembled, why were only Matthew, Mark, Luke and John included? Historians have noted some of the primitive reasoning behind the centuries-long selection process, such as Irenaeus’ affirmation that “there are four universal winds… animals have four legs…”, etc. Such was ancient ‘theological’ reasoning.)

The Search For Historical Jesus has revealed that there was a real historical person and we believe that we have gotten close to his original message. But that message is much less than what the New Testament gospels have attributed to Jesus. The NT gospel writers put a lot of things in Jesus’ mouth, claiming that he had said such things, but many of those things contradict his core theme/message.

Note, for instance, his statement in Matthew 5 to “love your enemy”. The single most profound statement of supreme no-conditions love. But then a few chapters later (Matthew 11) Jesus apparently pivots 180 degrees and threatens “unbelievers/enemies” with the single most intense statement of supreme hatred- that enemies should be cast into hell. Matthew claims that Jesus threatened the villages that refused to accept him and his miracles/message, stating that they would be “cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth”. These statements could not have come from the same person because they are statements of irreconcilable opposites.

The core teaching of Jesus has been summarized in the Q Wisdom Sayings gospel, notably the first version of Q- Q1. That teaching is basically Matthew 5-7 with some other comments and parables. Luke 6 is a similar summary but with a different setting- lakeside versus Matthew’s mountain top.
Matthew, obsessed with righteousness, tampered with the core Q Sayings Wisdom teaching in the chapter 5-7 section of his book. He added his own editorial glosses, such as his condition that people’s righteousness had to exceed that of religious teachers if they wanted to get into heaven. They had to meet the impossible condition to “be perfect just as God is perfect”. That distorted entirely the main point of Jesus that it did not matter how people responded to love, because God generously included all, both good and bad. God was unconditional Love, and universal, unlimited inclusion. Luke in his treatment of the very same message did a better job, summing Jesus’ point as “be unconditionally merciful just like your Father is unconditionally merciful” (Luke 6). That gets the spirit of the passage better than Matthew’s conditional statements.

The central statement or theme in the Q Wisdom Sayings gospel material is a behavior/belief relationship. Note this in the Matthew 5:38-48 section, “Don’t engage the old eye for eye justice toward your enemy/offender. Instead, love your enemy because God does. How so? God does not retaliate against and punish enemies/offenders, but instead generously gives the good gifts of life- sun and rain for crops- inclusively to both good people and bad people alike”. Jesus based a non-retaliatory behavior on a similar validating belief- a “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God” (James Robinson).

A critical takeaway here is that a non-retaliating God (no more eye for eye) is a non-apocalyptic God because apocalyptic is about supreme and final retaliation, ultimate eye for eye retaliation. The God of Jesus will not engage the ultimate act of retaliation that is the apocalyptic punishment and destruction of all things (include here the eternal retaliation that is the hell myth). The God of Jesus was non-punitive and non-apocalyptic.

Other common sense conclusions flow from this stunning new theology, from the core theme of a no-conditions God. For instance, the God of Jesus would not ultimately judge or condemn anyone and would not ultimately exclude anyone (again, sun and rain are given to all- to both good and bad people). There will be no Matthew 25 judgment that separates humanity into two groups and rejects unbelievers (the sheep and goats division).

The God of Jesus is best defined with the adjective “unconditional” and this clearly summarizes the core theme/teaching in Matthew 5 and Luke 6.
This also means that the God of Jesus was non-salvationist (i.e. no need to “be saved” via sacrifice or payment for sin). His God would not demand the condition of sacrifice or payment before forgiving, loving, and including even the worst offenders/enemies. He would give, expecting nothing in return. And this point scandalizes the religious/moral mind that is oriented to fairness and justice as proper retribution or punishment, justice as tit for tat, hurt for hurt, demanded payment for wrong. Note Jesus’ parable on the Vineyard workers and the Prodigal Son for illustrations of how good people were offended by the unconditional generosity, forgiveness, and love of the Father and the vineyard owner. Their disregard for the commonly understood norms of fair justice, offended the older brother and scandalized the all-day vineyard workers. Also, the unconditional inclusion of local “sinners” at meal tables offended righteous, moral Jews.

There is a “thematic coherence” to the message and behavior of the Historical Jesus and that message/behavior is intensely oriented to unconditional love.

The rest of the New Testament, including the gospels, contradicts this core non-retaliatory, unconditional love theme entirely. A proper setting forth of the correct chronology of the New Testament highlights this profound contradiction at the heart of Christianity.

The dating

Jesus taught first, around 27-36 CE. I would offer that the main point/statement in his core message, the Q Wisdom Sayings gospel, would be the behavior/belief relationship noted above: “Do not engage eye for eye retaliation, but instead love your enemy because God does. How so? Just as we are expected to do, God does not engage eye for eye justice against imperfect people. Instead, God gives the good gifts of life- sun and rain for crops- to both good and bad people”. God is a non-retaliatory reality that loves all unconditionally and universally, expecting nothing in return. God’s love is not tit for tat love that is dependent on the response of the person. Further, God does not view humanity as tribally divided (e.g. good people versus bad people) and does not treat some differently from others. All are the favorites of God, including our enemies.

Paul wrote the very next material that is in the New Testament- i.e. his Thessalonian letters written around 50 CE (I am passing over the argument re the authenticity of the second Thessalonian letter). His other letters were also written in the 50s CE. Paul contradicts Jesus entirely, notably the core Jesus theme/statement in Matthew 5:38-48. Paul also employs a behavior/belief pairing to state his theology that is the very opposite to that of Jesus. In Romans 12:17-20 he urges Christians to hold their desire for vengeance at bay because God will satisfy it eventually with ultimate eye for eye vengeance.

Here is the stunner- Paul affirms his theology that God is a supremely retaliatory reality by quoting an Old Testament statement, “Vengeance is mine says the Lord. I will repay”. In this, Paul re-affirms eye for eye retaliatory justice and response. There is no ultimate “love your enemy” in Paul’s God or Christ.

In the above section Paul is arguing with the Roman Christians- restrain your vengeance lust, not because God does that (rejecting eye for eye justice as Jesus did), but to the contrary, because God will unleash ultimate vengeance soon enough and satisfy your desire for eye for eye vengeance on your enemies.

I would suggest that Paul used this behavior/belief pairing in Romans 12 intentionally to contradict the same behavior/belief pairing in Jesus’ central message. The similarities are too obvious. Paul rejects the non-retaliatory God of Jesus to fully affirm a retaliatory, punitive God, a tribal God that favors his true believers and rejects the enemies of believers.

Paul also, in other places (again, in contradiction to Jesus), straightforwardly embraced an apocalyptic God/Christ. Once more, note his Thessalonian letters where he states, “Lord Jesus will return in blazing fire to punish/destroy all who do not believe my gospel”. Apocalypse- the supreme act of a retaliatory, destroying God that engages ultimate eye for eye justice.

Further, Paul rejected and trashed in general, the wisdom tradition that Jesus belonged to. See his first Corinthian letter for detail.
All the gospel writers that were later included in the New Testament affirmed Paul’s views and his Christ myth by adding made-up biographical material and statements that they claimed were from Jesus, material that directly contradicted his main theme and message. Mark wrote first around 70 CE. Then Matthew and Luke wrote around 80 CE, John later around 100 CE.

All affirmed Paul’s apocalyptic, destroying Christ myth and Paul’s gospel of that Christ as a great cosmic sacrifice to pay for all sin (supremely conditional love).

Paul and his apocalyptic Christ myth- the most influential person and myth in history- has since shaped Western consciousness more than anything else. His Christ myth also shaped Western justice as punitive and retaliatory- i.e. eye for eye justice (pain for pain, hurt for hurt).

Fortunately, the inclusion of the original Jesus material in the New Testament has served as a moderating force in the Christian mix, countering the harsher elements with mercy. But unfortunately, the mixing and merging of opposites has resulted in the ‘cognitive dissonance’ of a diamonds in dung situation (the conclusion of Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy). The better stuff- the core Jesus message and his stunning new unconditional theology- has been too often distorted and weakened by the nastier elements. Again, much like new wine put into old, rotten wineskins. (See Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God for a psychotherapist’s view of the cognitive dissonance of mixed God theories, and the damaging impact of including subhuman features in ideals/authorities such as deity.)

Contrary to the unconditional love that Jesus advocated, Christian love too often is a tribally-limited love, reserved more specially for fellow true believers in the Christ myth. Paul advocated such tribal love. Also, note his intolerant rage, in varied places, at his fellow apostles that did not submit to his Christ myth. He cursed them with eternal damnation. John in the early chapters of Revelation similarly curses “lukewarm” Christians with threats of exclusion and eternal destruction. And then how about those later chapters of Revelation?

After the core Q Wisdom Sayings message of Historical Jesus there is nothing of the scandalous generosity of unconditional love in the rest of the New Testament.

The unconditional God of Jesus, and the supremely conditional God/Christ of Paul that dominates the New Testament (demand for cosmic sacrifice before forgiving), are two entirely opposite realities.

Ah, such contradictions, eh.

Here is the main contradiction summarized again:

Jesus’ ethic and the theology/belief that it is based on- “Do not engage eye for eye retaliation but instead love your enemy because God does, sending the beneficial gifts of life, sun and rain for crops, to all alike, to both good and bad people”. Behave like that because God is like that.
Then, to the contrary, Paul’s ethic and the theology/belief that it is based upon. He copies the pattern Jesus used of an ethic/behavior based up a similar theology/belief. I believe Paul set this pattern up deliberately to directly contradict the central theme of Jesus and his stunning new theology. Paul’s argument and reasoning in Romans 12:17-20, “Be nice now to your offenders. Hold your vengeance lust at bay because my God- “Vengeance is mine, I will repay”- shall satisfy it soon enough”.

That is the profound contradiction in the New Testament between Jesus and Paul, between the non-retaliatory theology of Jesus and the opposite retaliatory theology of Paul. These core ideals/authorities- the very core ideals of great human narratives- influence and shape all else in belief/life systems.

Takeaway? The central theme/message of Historical Jesus: “You must not engage ‘eye for eye’ retaliatory justice. Instead, love your enemies/offenders because God does. How so? God does not retaliate and punish God’s enemies. Instead, God gives the good gifts of life- sun and rain for crops- universally and inclusively to both good and bad people”.

Christianity has never taken this central theology of Jesus seriously. It opted instead for the retaliatory and tribally excluding God of Paul. Unbelievers are excluded from Paul’s salvation scheme, and face the threat of ultimate retaliation in apocalypse and hell. Note Paul’s repeated use in his varied letters of the threatening term “destruction” in relation to people who refuse to believe his God/Christ.

And another version…

History’s single greatest contradiction? My candidate: The contradiction between the central message of Historical Jesus, and the central meaning and message of Paul’s Christ myth (his Christology theory). Or, “How history’s single most profound insight was subsequently buried in a major religious tradition”.

A side consideration: Think of the liberation that could have been promoted over the last two millennia if some movement had taken Jesus seriously (i.e. liberation from the unnecessary fear, anxiety, guilt, and shame that come from harsh and threatening God theories- Zenon Lotufo). But no one, not even his closest companions, took his scandalous and offensive insights seriously.

The contradiction at the core of Christianity has to do with the following profound opposites- i.e. non-retaliatory behavior versus retaliation, the non-punitive treatment of offenders versus a punitive approach, no conditions versus supreme condition (sacrifice, Salvationism), unlimited love versus limited tribal love, the universal embrace of humanity versus the restricted inclusion of only true believers, and non-apocalyptic versus total apocalyptic destruction. You can’t get more contrary or contradictory than these entirely opposite realities.

Psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo (Cruel God, Kind God), and others, point to the “cognitive dissonance” that arises when you try to hold opposites in some merger.

“Greatest contradiction?” How so? Because of the historical and current world-wide influence of the Christian religion, and notably the influence of Paul’s Christ myth. This myth has shaped the version of Christianity that has descended down to our contemporary world (compared, for instance, to the prominent Jewish Christianity of the first century CE).

And also “greatest” due to the very nature of the contradiction itself. It is hard to find a more stark contrast between entirely opposite realities than that between the main message of Jesus and the contrary Christ message of Paul. I use the term “the main message of Jesus” in reference to the Q Wisdom Sayings Gospel, specifically the Q1 version, and the most important statement in that gospel as now found in Matthew 5:38-48 and Luke 6:27-36.

Historical Jesus stated that, for him, the era of “eye for eye justice” was over. He rejected retaliatory justice and, instead, he promoted the restorative justice of “love your enemies” (Matthew 5). Why? Because that was what God did. It was what God was. The God of Jesus was love of a stunning new variety never before seen in the long history of God theories. His God did not retaliate with eye for eye justice but loved God’s enemies. And the evidence? Jesus illustrated his point with the main features of the natural world. God gave the good gifts of life- i.e. sun and rain for crops- to all, to both good and bad people. There was no discrimination and no exclusion of anyone.

God’s love and generosity was inclusive, universal, and unconditional. Jesus used a behavior/belief pairing to make this point. “Do this… because God does it”. He based his behavior on a similar validating belief. Do this- treat all others with unconditional love- and you will be just like God (you will be acting like the children of God) who treats all with unconditional love.

The God of Jesus was non-retaliatory, non-vengeful, non-punitive, non-excluding, non-destroying and therefore non-apocalyptic. Non-apocalyptic? Yes, because a non-retaliatory God is not an apocalyptic God. Apocalyptic is the ultimate act of eye for eye retaliation, vengeance, punishment and total destruction.

Further, such a God would not demand payment or punishment for wrong. He would not demand a sacrifice for wrong. The God of Jesus would give to all, including those who do not pay back or respond in a similar manner. His God would not just love those who loved him in return (limited tribal love). His God was authentic universal and no conditions love toward all, without exception.

No sacrifice? Yes, this is intimated clearly in statements such as “Lend, expecting nothing in return (i.e. no payback)”. Expect no payment. Just love and give anyway. Freely. Unconditionally.

Try to get the “spirit” of the overall section and the central point of the message of the man (i.e. Matthew 5:38-48 and Luke 6:27-36). Too many get sidetracked in what they believe are qualifying details that undermine the core ‘no conditions’ point that Jesus was making. Remember Matthew, obsessed with righteousness, and as the editor of this material from Jesus, added his own distorting qualifications such as “Be perfect as your Father is perfect”. Luke did a better job with this very same material, getting the spirit of Jesus in stating, “Be unconditionally merciful as your Father is unconditionally merciful” (my paraphrase of Luke’s point and spirit).

Note the same unconditional generosity and forgiveness in other Jesus material such as the Prodigal parable and the Vineyard workers story, and in statements on forgiving “seventy times seven” (unlimited). Also, in his inclusion of everyone at meal tables.

But Paul

Paul outright rejected this central theme of Jesus and retreated to the old retaliatory, punitive theology of all past mythology and religion. His used the same behavior/belief pairing that Jesus had used, but he did this to contradict the central theme of Jesus. I think Paul did this intentionally as he knew he was confronting the central statement of Jesus. So Paul also based his behavior on a validating belief.

Further, Paul more generally trashed and rejected the wisdom tradition that Jesus belonged to (see his first letter to the Corinthians).

At first glance, it appears that Paul embraced the behavioral standard of Jesus in stating that it was wrong to repay evil with evil, to retaliate (Romans 12:17-20). But then he contradicted the new non-retaliatory theology of Jesus and stated that, to the contrary, his God was retaliatory. Paul quoted an Old Testament statement to make his point, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord”. Paul re-affirmed eye for eye justice at the center of his belief system. And His God would punish and destroy all in the epitome act of retaliatory punishment and destruction- an apocalypse. “Lord Jesus (Christ) will return in blazing fire to punish and destroy all who do not obey/believe my gospel of the Christ” (Thessalonians). See his other letters for similar statements of the punishment/destruction of unbelievers.

And a closer look at Paul’s ethic in this Romans 12 section shows that his advocacy for non-retaliatory behavior was actually retaliatory in intent. You were supposed to engage such behavior in order to ensure that God would take vengeance on your offenders/enemies. Do such in order to “heap coals of fire on them”- to ensure that God punishes them harshly.

There is no greater contradiction in religious history than this one between Jesus and Paul’s Christ. It is the contradiction between non-retaliation and retaliation in deity. Between Jesus’ inclusion of all (sun and rain on all), and Paul’s exclusion and destruction of unbelievers. This is a contradiction between no conditions love and the supreme condition of all conditions ever concocted- the demand for a supreme sacrifice to pay for all sin (i.e. the sacrifice of a god-man to pay for the sins of all humanity- see Paul’s letter to the Romans).

Paul’s term “Jesus Christ” is the epitome expression of an oxymoron. You cannot mix and merge these two entire opposites. Jesus is not Christ. He was against Christology or Christ mythology (see “Rethink Paul’s Christ Myth” below). Jesus is the anti-Christ at the heart of Christianity.

Paul shaped the version of Christianity that we have today. Christianity is the religion of Paul’s Christ (“Christ-ianity”). It is not the religion of Jesus (it is not “Jesus-ianity”). Christianity does not properly represent Jesus to the world. As Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy stated so bluntly, “The diamonds/pearls of Jesus have been buried in the subhuman context of the New Testament”. I’ve paraphrased their actual statements to soften the harsh bluntness of their words.

A framework for human story (the meaning of human life- some essential features of human life and experience)

Joseph Campbell presents a basic outline for understanding human life/human story. I have added to his basic points, revising, paraphrasing, and changing things.

Where Campbell says that the embrace of “universal love” defines a mature or heroic persons, my version of heroic or mature human experience is oriented to the broader term “no conditions love” (it includes universal and more). My larger point: Unconditional, as our highest human ideal (the most humane expression of love), gives meaning to everything. It answers all the great questions about “Why existence?”; “Why this cosmos and this world?”, and “Why conscious human life?” Unconditional potently informs all areas of life- our goals, our basic mission in life, how we become the hero of our unique story, and how we mature as a human being. Unconditional is how we conquer our monster, our real enemy in life, and thereby “tower in stature” as a wise person, as a mature human person.

First, I would affirm with Campbell that we come from a greater Oneness that humanity has long called God (the Ultimate Consciousness, Mind, Intelligence, Reality, Spirit, Self, Goodness). And there is one overwhelmingly dominant feature that describes this divine reality- Love. Not just love as we commonly know it here, but Love that is inexpressibly, transcendently, and infinitely unconditional. Beyond words, terms, definitions, or categories. Inexpressible no conditions Love is the essence of the God that is infinitely beyond our theories of God (the God infinitely beyond the term God). Transcendently beyond the best that we could ever imagine. That ultimate love gives meaning to everything. It defines the core purpose of the cosmos, the world, and conscious life. It is all.

A related insight: Our true self, the core of our person, is also that same no conditions Love. That love is the very essence of our human spirit and our human consciousness, though our spirit and consciousness are often clouded by the material body and brain that we have come to inhabit. Our core nature as no conditions love is often distorted and buried by the animal brain that we have inherited, with its anti-human impulses to exhibit tribalism, domination of others, and the exclusion, punishment, and destruction of others.

Further on our origins in Oneness (i.e. that we are part of a greater Consciousness), some suggest that only part of our consciousness is expressed through our body and brain that are the physical mechanisms to limit our consciousness in order to enable us to function in this material realm. Our greater consciousness is limited by the 5 senses of our bodies/brains and the three/four-dimensional reality of this material realm so that we can experience life here. In this view, the brain is a transmitting organism, a limiting mechanism to make a life experience possible in the here and now. (Note: This view is more in line with John Eccles’ “dualist inter-actionism”.)

Our origin in the Oneness or Source that is Love, our origin from that Oneness, according to Campbell, is critical to remember as we journey through life so that we do not lose our humanity in this world where we engage some righteous battle with evil. Our origin in Oneness reminds us that the others that we battle with here- the imperfect others that we view as “enemies”- they are also from the same Oneness. They are still intimate family despite the oppositions/dualisms that we all engage here (i.e. the dualisms of religion, politics, race, nationality, or other). They are still equals with us. They are our brothers and sisters in the same one human family. If we forget this oneness with others (“our brotherhood with even our enemies”) during our righteous struggle with evil in this world, then we will lose our humanity, says Campbell. We will forget that “love your enemy” is the key to maintaining our humanity.

Others have suggested that we are co-creators with God, that we take part in creating this material reality as a learning arena, a place to come and learn how to be human, to act out a human adventure, story, or quest. We all come as fellow actors in God’s theater, says Campbell.

And others yet suggest that we may even be responsible for choosing our unique life stories and the experiences in our stories, both good and bad. We choose our bodies, our families, and our lives, in order to learn specific lessons, and to develop and grow as maturely human. If this is true in any way, then we cannot blame God for our troubles. I am not affirming these speculative things … just offering them. But they point to some stunningly alternative ways to view the harsher experiences of our lives. We may have chosen our life experiences as opportunities for learning and growth.

Add here the insight that there is no such thing as a Sky God, absent and silent. Rather, God has incarnated in all humanity, equally. God is intensely united with the human spirit and consciousness and is evident in all human rage against disaster, evil and suffering. God is manifest in all human goodness, all endeavor to make life better in some way.

Moving along… Others have suggested that we come into life to fulfill some special mission, that we are called, or sent, to make some unique contribution to improve life, to make the world a better place. And we do this through living a unique life story. No one else can accomplish the unique mission that we came to fulfill. Others express this as God incarnating in diverse lives to experience diverse human stories.

Insert: This is not some new take on religious predestination (i.e. the details of life foreordained). As freedom is inseparable from love, so freedom remains paramount to our stories. We freely choose and create our stories on the fly, in this world.

Again, affirming my main point- the core purpose of human life and story is to know and learn love. To learn what authentically humane love is about. To learn how to love, how to receive and to express love. And the expression of love is achieved through all the diversity of human lives- e.g. whether making an economic contribution, a political or social contribution, or something personal. Perhaps as an entertainer. Is there any greater contribution than that made by comedians? Putting suffering in its place, laughing at it all, and thereby lightening the dark parts of life.

Our contribution may be small and hidden, or it may be offered in the larger public realm. Again, our contributions to life are as diverse as being human in our individual life stories. There is infinite creative potential in human lives and the freedom to be different, to explore, to create and innovate.

Once again, I would offer that unconditional love is the central point of it all. And that is intensely personal. As we contribute in some area, we should never forget that successful human life is very much about how we relate to others around us in the mundane, ordinary, and private situations of daily life. Success in life is about how we treat others as fellow members of the same one family of God. They are our equals in that family despite their status (or failure) in this world.

Taking another Campbell point here: We all face some monster in life. We experience some problem, some trial, something that we struggle with and try to overcome. Our monster/problem may be a physical disability, or mental/emotional problems, or some social issue, perhaps economic or political. Our monsters, and struggles/battles, are as diverse as the problems of our complex world, whether public or personal.

Others, Campbell included, have noted that dualism is a vital part of this material realm and there is a point to the dualisms of material reality and life. Whether the male/female dualism, or the good versus evil dualism. Dualism serves the purpose, in the arena of life, of providing a backdrop of opposites against which we learn what good is. The experience of evil or bad in life provides the opposite that we struggle against, and through that “righteous struggle with evil” we gain insights, we discover humane responses, and we find solutions to problems, solutions that will benefit others. Our struggle with the bad or evil is where we also learn empathy with suffering others. (Note: Campbell and others suggest that dualism is a feature of the material world and not of greater or ultimate reality.)

So struggle and suffering are necessary and even good for us because we would not learn, we would not develop and grow as human aside from struggle and suffering. As Julian Simon said, our problems are good for us because they push us to find solutions and our discovered solutions then benefit others.

Added note on dualism in this material realm: Campbell says that we are all “actors on God’s stage” in this world, playing our varied roles in stories (good guys, bad guys). The intimation is that this dualism is all temporary and then we return to ultimate Oneness in greater surrounding reality. We learn what we came to learn and then return to our real home. Caution: This speculation does not diminish the need to take evil seriously and to engage battles against wrong in this life.

Campbell adds that we will be “wounded” in our struggle with our monster/problem. Again, this speaks to the diversity of human story and experience.
Remember once more, we may have chosen our unique problems and experiences of suffering before we came here. We may be more responsible for our lives than we realize. Let your mind toy with this suggestion (see, for example, Natalie Sudman’s The Application of Impossible Things).

I would add something further to Campbell’s good points, though in places he has intimated something similar to this. The greatest monster and the real enemy that we all face and must conquer, the greatest problem that we must all wrestle with and solve, is the inherited animal within each of us (“the animal passions”, Campbell). Here is where the role of unconditional comes into laser focus. And this is where we make our greatest contribution to making the world a better place. It starts within us, with conquering our own animal passions. “Why do you worry about and judge the speck in the other person’s eye (their imperfections) when you have a beam in your own eye (your own imperfections)?”

Revolution, reformation, renewal, change… should all begin as something intensely personal. Within each of us. As Solzhenitsyn said, “The battle-line between good and evil runs through the center of every human heart”.

We have all inherited a core animal brain. They used to frame this as the “tri-partite” brain, with the reptilian core (i.e. amygdala), the limbic system, and then the more human cortex.

The animal brain (and our past in millions of years of animal existence) bequeaths to us basic impulses or orientations to things like tribalism (small band separation and opposition to outsiders), the impulse to dominate others (Alpha male/female), and the impulse to exclude, punish, and destroy the differing other/enemy.

But a liberating qualifier: We are not our brains (Jeffrey Schwartz). Our core human spirit, our human self or person, our consciousness, is the same Love as our great Source that we have long called God. We are not our inherited material and animal brains. We are something much better in our essential nature, personhood, or being (the “real” us).

(Insert: This is the most important dualism of all to understand- the human versus the animal. The human in us- i.e. our human spirit and consciousness- is taking us in an entirely new direction from our brutal animal past. It is taking us toward a more humane future. Evolutionary biology/psychology tends to devalue the human by explaining it too much in terms of the animal, by viewing and reducing the human as just another animal.)

And here is where Campbell shines when defining human story. He says that the most critically important thing in human life is when we orient our lives to “universal love”. Then we begin to mature as humans. I would use unconditional love as a broader, more inclusive term.
Unconditional potently counters (overcomes, conquers) the animal inside us by pointing us toward the embrace of all others as equals in the same one human family (inclusive, not tribal). Unconditional inspires us to treat all others as equals and to not dominate and control the free and equal other (no alpha domination). And unconditional urges us to not destroy the other but to forgive the imperfection that we encounter in others, and to seek rehabilitation of offending others. Our core self, as unconditional love, points us toward the restorative treatment of failure in others.

Another critical point: The most important battles in life are not the great historical wars of tribe against tribe, or nation against nation. The greatest battles/wars are those that take place inside us all. And this relates to the real meaning of equality in human life. There can be no outer material equality because life is shaped by hierarchies and pyramids where only a few can reach the upper levels, whether in business, sports, politics, or entertainment. Only an elite few can achieve success in these pyramids of life. But everyone has equal opportunity to achieve the greatest success of all in the most important achievement of all- common love. Love is the most foundational thing to human existence and story. And love is the only lasting achievement in the cosmos. All else will be left behind and forgotten in the material world or realm. Only love lasts forever.

When we struggle and suffer in life, and then discover unconditional as the way to become authentically human, that is the greatest insight that we can learn, the greatest treasure that we can discover, and the greatest victory that we can achieve. When we orient our lives to unconditional love, then we can offer the greatest benefit or boon to others- to treat them unconditionally. Unconditional points us toward the greatest revolution that we can bring to life, the greatest possible transformation of life, toward the greatest liberation that we can offer to the world (i.e. liberation from the inherited animal in all of us). The unconditional treatment of all imperfect humanity (e.g. restorative justice) is one of the most potent personal ways to make the world a better place. Note the Mandelas of life as examples of this.

Another way of putting this… We will all face some struggle, some experience of suffering, something we fear, perhaps opposition from an enemy, or some abuse from an opponent. If we choose to respond to that challenge with love, we then discover our true self as a being of love, and we mature into a heroic person through that experience and choice. See, for example, The Railway Man.

In all that we do, and should do, to make this life better- i.e. in sports, in business and work, in all public or social issues, or entertainment- we should not forget that it is how we treat others in the daily mundane interactions (the ordinary and hidden things) that make us real successes and achievers, or not. Steve Jobs understood this on his death bed when he apologized to his daughter Lisa for how he had treated her sub-humanly at times. He wished that he could have done many things better, and been kinder.

Campbell also says that a “wise man”, or mentor, will give us a sword to slay our monster and help us to achieve our purpose in life. We all know such people among family and friends, people who give us advice from their own life experience. And again, most importantly, unconditional love is that sword to slay our animal monster or enemy.

From our struggle with this imperfect life and learning how to love, we are transformed into a new person, into a better version of our self. When we orient our lives to unconditional love, we then “tower in stature as mature humans”, we become the hero of our story, and we fulfill our destiny, we accomplish our mission. And that is how we help to create a better world, a new world, by first making ourselves better persons, by living the love that is our true self.

Added note: An essential part of the development toward becoming a mature human person is to take responsibility for our failures in life. Personal acknowledgement and embrace of failure is the starting point to personal improvement.

Recap: Unconditional love is the key to the cosmos, this world, and conscious human life. It is the defining essence of our great Source- God. As someone said, “The very atoms of God are made of love, unconditional love”. That love then defines the purpose of the cosmos and life- that all has been created as an arena where we come to learn and experience such love, to receive and express such love. The imperfection of life is the background against which such love shines all the more brightly.

While each of us has some unique thing to contribute to life in economics, politics, work life, social life, sports/entertainment, music, or whatever else we choose to do, the one common factor in all human story is to learn unconditional love, to discover and achieve something of this highest form of love. When we orient our lives to this central ideal, then we have conquered our real monster and enemy, the inherited animal in us. Then we have become the hero of our story.

Added note: The monster that we face in life is a two-part beast. I noted the basic features of animal reality that we all struggle with- i.e. the impulses to tribalism (small band separation and opposition), domination of others (the alpha thing), and the impulse to exclude, punish, and destroy the differing other. But across history, people have also projected these same features onto deities, onto humanity’s highest ideals and authorities- the gods. We have thereby created ultimate monsters. So conquering a monster in life is more than just overcoming the monster inside us. Our battle in life includes the monsters in our meta-narratives (i.e. religious God theories that inspire, guide, and validate our emotions, attitudes, motivations, and responses/behavior).

Again, unconditional is the sword that potently slays the monster in us and the monstrous pathologies of humanity’s God theories. An unconditional God does not engage dualistic tribalism (believers versus unbelievers), or domination of people (the myth of “humanity created to serve the gods”) and does not punish and destroy “unbelievers” (apocalypse, or hell myths).

More on a new narrative/story– short version.

We come into this world purposely created imperfect to struggle with all sorts of problems in order to create something better. As Julian Simon said, our problems push us to find solutions that benefit others. The struggle with imperfection is good for us.

We make contributions to improve life and help others, in all the diverse and creative ways that people contribute to life- in art, sports, entertainment, commerce/business, daily work, agriculture, medicine, and more. There is freedom of choice to follow personal interests and desires.
Central to all human story is the ideal of love. We come to learn love, to discover what love is, how to love. And we express love in all the diverse and creative ways that are uncountable individual human stories.

Campbell similarly argued these features in his outline of human story- that we go out on an adventure, we face some monster, and we struggle to conquer the monster, learning lessons in the struggle, gaining insights, and then we can benefit others. We conquer the monster and become heroes of our story.

He added that we will be wounded in our struggle. And a wise man will give us a weapon to conquer our monster.

He also noted the critical role of love in human story- universal love. He said that in our righteous struggle with evil we must never forget to love our enemy. If we did not love our enemy then we would lose our humanity. We must remember our brotherhood with even our enemy (our oneness with all) and thereby maintain our humanity.

I would frame human story this way- our real struggle with monsters and enemies takes place most importantly within us. The real monster and enemy that we must conquer is the animal inheritance inside each of us with its impulses to tribal exclusion, to domination of others, and to punish and destroy others. This is what Solzhenitsyn meant that the real battle between good and evil runs down the center of every human heart. The greatest battles in history are these internal, intensely personal battles.

We conquer our real monster and enemy by embracing universal, unconditional love. That makes us hero of our story. That enables us to tower in stature as maturely human.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Apocalyptic alarmism, salvation through “coercive purging”, and mass-death outcomes.

New Story Alternatives to Declinist/Apocalyptic mythology

Fighting Declinist despair and apocalyptic nihilism

“The idea of decline (that things are getting worse, that life is declining toward some great collapse and ending) is the most dominant and influential theme in (society) today”, Historian Arthur Herman in ‘The Idea of Decline in Western History’. World surveys in recent years have affirmed this widespread pessimism in varied countries that the future will get worse and there might be an end to civilization and even life itself. Declinism is a modern version of primitive apocalyptic mythology.

Stephen Hawking fell for this Chicken Little myth in the final two years of his life, offering his own prophesies of the end-of-days and setting dates just like apocalyptic prophets have done across history. He initially announced the end in a thousand or so years (caused by AI or aliens), then finally settled on the end of days in just 100 years, caused by environmental catastrophe. 100 years reserved enough time for him to vacate the planet and avoid the embarrassment that all apocalyptics eventually face. Smart man. Apocalyptic prophesying has a 100% failure rate.

Add here that many believe that humanity, as essentially corrupt and bad-to-the-bone (i.e. the anti-human myth of “inherited sinful nature”), is the cause of the imagined worsening trajectory of life. People believe that we deserve some horrible future outcome as punishment for our “sins” of corrupting nature by developing industrial civilization, and for our greed- i.e. for enjoying the good life too much. The Japanese lady (post-2011 tsunami) summarized this outlook, affirming the common belief that harmful things from nature are expressions of punitive forces/deities. She asked, “Are we being punished for enjoying life too much?”

Contrary to Declinism ideology, amassed evidence has consistently shown improvement, not degeneration or decline, on all the main features of life. Our creation of industrial civilization has enabled us to create the wealth that enables us to, not only immensely improve the human condition, but to also better care for the natural world. We have done well as Julian Simon said, proving ourselves “to be more creators than destroyers”. For detail on the improving trajectory of life see Simon’s Ultimate Resource, Greg Easterbrook’s A Moment on the Earth, Bjorn Lomborg’s Skeptical Environmentalist, Ronald Bailey’s The End of Doom, Desrocher and Szurmak’s Population Bombed, Indur Goklany’s The Improving State of the World, among others. See also the ‘Ecological Kuznets Curve’ research, or ‘Environmental Transition’ research (Google Indur Goklany on this).

The result of embracing Declinism has been widespread fear of some horrific collapse of life, often environmental collapse scenarios, and the outcome of such alarm is the incited urgency to “save the world”, to purge the world of some imagined threat to life. Today alarmists have isolated the threat as the “curse of fossil fuels” that are the main engine of industrial society, lasering in on the CO2 byproduct.

Note the profound distortion of basic reality here- that the basic food of all life is now widely viewed as a pollutant and poison that threatens life. Also note that there is no “climate emergency”. This quote from a recent GWPF newsletter, “Only last week, a declaration by more than 700 scientists and researchers was presented in the European Parliament, showing that global warming is happening, but is far more gradual and far less detrimental to the wellbeing of people and societies than activists have been claiming.” Further, few point out the many beneficial outcomes of more CO2 and warmer temperatures (i.e. increased plant growth and crop production, expanded habitats, less mortality from cold… overall, more of “life flourishing”).

Further, few point out the many beneficial outcomes of more atmospheric CO2 and warmer average temperatures (see, for example, Patrick Moore’s “Celebrating CO2” on Youtube).

Apocalyptic has always been a dangerous idea- “the most violent and destructive idea in history” (Arthur Mendel in Vision and Violence). The danger is that of populations being frightened into self-fulfilling prophesy outcomes. As Julian Simon warned, environmental alarmism creates fatalism and resignation in populations. Worse still, alarmed populations will embrace salvation schemes that involve the “coercive purging” of some threat to life that the apocalyptic prophets have advocated against (i.e. “save the world from the threat of CO2”). This has already led to outbreaks of the totalitarian impulse- i.e. projects to criminalize the skeptics of alarmist ideology (e.g. Obama’s AG, Loretta Lynch trying to criminalize skeptical science), and to silence contrary evidence (see the Climategate emails- https://principia-scientific.org/climate-science-proves-scams-dont-die-from-exposure/). These fear-driven projects have been a direct assault on freedom and democracy.

The most dangerous outcome yet of alarmism is the insane push to “decarbonise” societies and the economic collapse that this threatens.

It is an irrational ‘denial’ of good science to claim that CO2 is the dominant variable that influences climate change. CO2, making up 0.04% of the atmosphere, plays a small role but that tiny influence is repeatedly overwhelmed by other natural factors that influence climate change. See, for example, the role of the cosmic ray/sun/cloud interaction on climate in Henrik Svensmark’s ‘The Chilling Stars’. Point? You cannot coercively push public policies to “decarbonise” entire societies, and consequently threaten widespread economic collapse, based on the complex and still unsettled climate science that does not affirm your beliefs or ideology. The harmful outcomes of such policies- i.e. rising energy costs that impact the poorest people, increased death rates from fuel poverty- are already being felt in countries like Germany, England, and even the US (see Global Warming Policy Forum reports).

Declinism is just another Johnny-come-lately version of the same old, same old apocalyptic mythology, one of the earliest and most pathological of all human myths. The earliest versions were expressed in the Sumerian Flood myth, and Egyptian myths of The Destruction of Mankind and Return to Chaos. Zoroaster later embraced apocalyptic in his formal religion that shaped the subsequent Hebrew/Jewish, Christian, and Muslim versions of apocalyptic religion. Apocalyptic decline was also embraced by Hinduism (i.e. great historical cycles of rise and then decline toward disastrous ending) and Buddhism (i.e. the belief that the human life-span was decreasing over time- see Mircea Eliade’s History of Religious Ideas).

We- humanity- have had a hard time letting go of this pathology of apocalyptic, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It continues to dominate public story-telling in movies, TV, and literature.

This nihilistic idea of apocalyptic is based on the core theological pathology of God as ultimate punisher and destroyer. The latest fad versions of this retributive and apocalyptic deity myth include vengeful Gaia, angry Planet, pissed Mother Earth, retributive Universe, and payback karma. All versions of punitive, destroying Forces/deity at the core of reality and life. These later versions are part of the modern “secularization of primitive mythology” (i.e. giving ancient ideas/themes new “secular” or ideological expression) that has occurred over the past few centuries. Joseph Campbell was right that the same mythical ideas are repeated all across history and across all the cultures of the world.

I would argue that science by itself won’t correct the problem of Declinism. You also have to go to the root ideas in human meta-narratives and deal with the theological pathology at the core of our great belief systems/religious traditions if you want to thoroughly correct the problem of bad ideas that still dominate the wider public consciousness. This is necessary to fully and properly deal with the primal human impulse for meaning. And of course, science is also vital to the project of transforming public consciousness.

This site probes the root ideas behind things like apocalyptic Declinism and offers alternatives to affirm hope, alternatives that are based on our contemporary understanding of reality and life.

Added note: “Post-apocalyptic literature” (a recognized new sub-genre), claims to offer hope in a post-apocalyptic world, but it offers no credible basis for hope because it affirms the pathology of apocalyptic mythology (i.e. total destruction before trying to create a new life in the post-apocalyptic world).

Further added note: News media ignore the larger context and trajectory of improving life, almost entirely. They have embraced an obsessive compulsive orientation to alarmist reporting. Sociologist David Altheide was right in describing news media as “not truth-tellers but entertainers competing with the rest of the entertainment industry” (“Creating Fear: News and the manufacture of crisis”). And what dominates the entertainment industry? Apocalyptic.

Defining Alarmism:

The exaggeration of problems, and even natural change (i.e. weather/climate), to apocalyptic scale thereby distorting the true state of things. Then inciting populations to embrace fear-based policy responses/solutions that have repeatedly harmed people and nature. The bio-fuels fiasco is an example. It resulted in rising food prices for the poorest people and led to further deforestation for palm oil plantations. Another example is decarbonisation, a policy that is based on the lunacy of demonizing the basic food of all life- CO2. Decarbonisation is the anti-science crusade to end the use of cheap fossil fuels that have benefited life immensely, lifting billions out of the misery of poverty and enabling humanity, with increased wealth, to better care for the environment.

Discussion group post (response to fellow discussant’s question- “Why be concerned about alarmists?”):

“Mainly because I am concerned about here and now life, about practical daily reality…and the established fact that when you alarm populations with scenarios of disaster/death as alarmists do daily, then you incite the natural self-preservation instinct, the survival instinct, and the felt need to take drastic action to “save” something- i.e. save one’s self, one’s family, or the world. That salvationist activism has had horrifically destructive outcomes over recent history for many others because it has often involved the “coercive purging” of some imagined threat to life.

“I am referring to exaggerated threats, not to real problems in life. Alarmists have a track record of exaggerating problems in our world to apocalyptic-scale thereby distorting the true state of things.

“This is why I so persistently refer to the stunning research of Landes, Herman, Mendel, Redles and like historians that exposed how fear-inciting apocalyptic millennial themes played a role in the Marxist mass-death movement (100 million deaths), in Nazi mass-death (50-60 million deaths), and those themes are today inciting an ongoing mass-death movement in environmental alarmism with its insane battle against the food of all life (i.e. CO2). Alarmists today have demonized fossil fuels that have saved so much human life, enabling humanity to create this industrial civilization (enabling the creation of wealth) that has helped us to also better take care of nature.

“The death totals from environmental alarmism may have already exceeded those of the other two mass-death movements of the past century, though the Marxist one has re-birthed itself in environmental alarmism (a new collectivism movement- the push for centralized control of economies via agencies like the UN), so that last-century movement actually continues.

“Past death totals exceeded in environmental alarmism? Some attribute up to 50 million deaths from Rachel Carson’s anti-DDT alarmism alone. And anti-GM alarmism- Bjorn Lomborg attributed 8 million child deaths to that alarmism, over a recent 12 year period alone. Do the math yourself. As Lomborg said, such alarmism is not only irresponsible. It is immoral.”

Richard Lindzen: “What historians will definitely wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that CO2 from human industry was a dangerous, planet-destroying toxin. It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world – that CO2, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.”

The full extent of the change involved, or “Truth and consequences”…

An unconditional God spells the end of all religion as conditional institution. Across history our great religious traditions have been all about the conditions of correct beliefs, the demand for some form of conditional salvation (i.e. atonement as required sacrifice, payment, punishment, retribution), and the conditions of proper rituals and uniquely religious lifestyle. No religion has ever presented an “unconditional Ultimate Reality or deity” to humanity. To the contrary, all religion has clouded and buried such reality under myriad religious conditions and the core ideal of a supremely conditional God (i.e. deity demanding sacrifice, payment, excluding unbelievers, and judging, punishing and destroying the bad guys).

The overturning and revolutionizing of a worldview can be frightening to many people. But the truth of unconditional will set people free in ways that are fully humanizing. The fundamental transformation of our worldviews with this “unconditional” ideal liberates us to be more authentically humane in our treatment of other imperfect people. Add to this- there is no greater liberation than freedom from “the primal human fear of after-life harm”, along with freedom from the myth of great punitive Forces/Spirits behind the harmful elements of life- e.g. natural disasters, disease, and the cruelty of others.

There is only a stunningly inexpressible no conditions Love behind all reality and life. And that has always been true. Marinate in that for a while. Detail below in “Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives”.

The primary human “psychological-spiritual need” (J. Harold Ellens’ term) is for love. But not just love. It has to be love of an inexpressibly wondrous ‘no conditions’ quality. Nothing less will satiate this primary desire/need of conscious beings.

The project of this site is to point toward the features of a new meta-story that will affirm such love.

Definition of unconditional: “Absolutely no conditions. None.” Embrace the scandal and offensiveness of this reality (offensive to traditional justice as some form of deserved payback- i.e. conditions of reward or punishment). But move beyond the sense of offense to see that a no conditions Ultimate Reality, and a life oriented to such love, is profoundly liberating and transforming, as nothing else can possibly be.

Preface to “Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives”

The alternative new story themes include a “spiritual” element. This simply affirms what most of humanity across history, and most people today, understand and embrace (the 85% of humanity affiliated with a world religion, with most of the remaining 15% claiming to be “unaffiliated” or “spiritual but not religious”). Humanity in general has always understood that greater or Ultimate Reality (Ultimate meaning) is about more than just energy, natural law, quantum fields, multiple-dimensions, or Self-Organizing Principle (as the creating Force of philosophical materialism).

Most human beings across history have intuitively understood that greater Reality has to do with Mind, Consciousness, Self/Personhood, Spirit, or Intelligence. Note that you do not have Consciousness or Mind without personality. Further, the early quantum theorists recognized this Consciousness/Mind element also in their conclusion that their new science pointed to the universe as more “a great Thought than a machine”.

The problem with mythical and religious explanations of greater or Ultimate reality has been the projection of subhuman/inhuman features to define such reality, features like divine justice as punitive retaliation, ultimate exclusion of some (i.e. unbelievers rejected), domination/subservience (i.e. humanity created to serve the gods via subservience to priesthoods/religious authority), and ultimate destruction (i.e. apocalypse, hell). Those features have long been entrenched in our great religious traditions, and their God theories, and there has been little serious effort to challenge or dislodge that core pathology. Ongoing reform in religion must go to such core ideas/myths as they still influence so much else in life and society. Note, for example, the ongoing destructive influence of the nihilistic apocalyptic pathology (God as violent destroyer of all), now expressed often through environmental alarmist scenarios and their consistently harmful salvation schemes.

There will always be profound mystery to theology, as there is about all reality, and that cautions us against dogmatism in our theological speculations. In addition, any theological speculation must include the framework of the latest discoveries from science.

The long-term and widely embraced conclusion of humanity that there is a spiritual reality is a fully coherent and rational conclusion about reality and life. I do not accept the materialist argument that humanity needs to grow out of, or move past, the spiritual (i.e. the argument of a frustrated atheist, “Let’s get rid of all this metaphysical bullshit”). Our project should be to reframe it all as something more humane as well as affirm the science/philosophy and state/religion boundaries.

(Insert note: While acknowledging that the spiritual plays a crucial role in human meaning/purpose issues, a healthy orientation ought to be to full here and now involvement- i.e. to improving life in this world. The practical, real-world outcome of ideas is the true test of the goodness or usefulness of an idea.)

The human meaning impulse as expressed in spirituality, and spiritual beliefs, has always been something inherent to conscious human awareness. Even the Neanderthals exhibited such awareness as seen in burial site evidence (i.e. items included for an after-life journey).

It has long been the argument of this site that thorough long-term problem solving should also deal with the human meaning impulse and the meta-narrative themes that express/affirm such meaning. Pathology still dominates at this basic level in public consciousness. And while scientific evidence is always crucial in the problem-solving mix, such evidence does not sway many people toward more rational views due to their deeply held spiritual beliefs. This applies to both sides as secularist/materialist types often hold dogmatic philosophical beliefs just as religious people hold their religious beliefs.

(Note: The above is not to discourage our atheist friends who have contributed so much good input to the project of challenging religion. But their alternative, notably the more dogmatic forms of atheism, will never resonate with most of the human population. A better alternative is the more moderate “atheism”, as some call it, that has been more about the exchange of old unworkable/discredited gods for new ones- i.e. new god theories or ultimate meaning theories- that are more attuned to modern sensibilities regarding humane reality.)

Preface

The belief/behavior relationship, or theology/ethics relationship, is as old as conscious humanity. People, driven/inspired by their primary impulse for meaning, have always tried to model their lives and societies according to some greater ideal or authority, mainly deity. Plato did this with his argument that the ideal life and society should be shaped according to the invisible Forms or perfect Ideals. The Hebrews followed this pattern in the Old Testament, shaping all aspects of their lives and society according to what they believed was the law, word, and will of their God. Anthropologist Clifford Geertz noted this practice among the Balinese of Indonesia who built their villages and homes according to what they believed was the divine model.

The critical role of belief in shaping human behavior and society (inspiring, validating human behavior) makes it vitally important that our guiding ideals/authorities are fully humane, in line with common humanity’s ever-advancing understanding of the authentically humane in all areas of life.

The 16 “Old story themes” below have been the most dominant and influential ideas in history. They have shaped human consciousness across history via mythical and religious traditions. They continue to shape the worldviews of most moderns in “secular” or ideological versions. The consequences from these subhuman ideas have been, and still are, significantly damaging, both personally and across wider societies. Evidence? On the personal level see psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God. See also the Millennial Studies historians noted in sections below- i.e. Richard Landes, Arthur Mendel, David Redles. They have detailed how the ‘apocalyptic millennial’ complex of ideas contributed to the mass-death movements of the past century (i.e. Marxism, Nazism, environmental alarmism). Mendel (Vision and Violence) was right to conclude that “apocalyptic has been the most violent and destructive idea in history”. Also, Bob Brinsmead has often reminded us that “Men never do greater evil than when they do it in the name of God”.

The project to embrace better alternatives is about the full transformation and liberation of consciousness, and more humane outcomes in human life. The old ideas are no longer credible for defining or explaining reality and life.

Old story themes, new story alternatives (16 fundamental ideas to re-evaluate)

1. Old story theme (threat theology- the core idea): The myth of deity as a judging, punishing, and destroying reality that metes out final justice- i.e. rewarding the good, punishing the bad. This myth continues at the foundation of the world religions and is now also given expression in ‘secular’ versions such as vengeful Gaia, angry planet/Mother Earth, retributive Universe, and payback karma, the new gods of movements like environmental alarmism, history’s latest apocalyptic movement.

This myth of God as a retaliating, punishing reality has long under-girded human justice as similarly retaliatory and punitive. From the beginning, belief in a punitive deity has incited the demand for punitive response to human imperfection and failure.

This primitive view of deity as punitive and the Ultimate Destroyer (i.e. apocalypse, hell) is the single most important “bad idea” to engage and correct. All other bad religious ideas are anchored to this foundational pathology in human thought.

New story alternative: The “stunning new theology” that God is an inexpressible “no conditions love”, a non-retaliatory Reality. The adjective “unconditional” points to our highest understanding of love and is therefore most critical for defining deity as transcendent “Goodness”. Takeaway? There is no ultimate judgment, no ultimate exclusion of anyone, no demand for payment or sacrifice, no need for redemption or salvation, and no ultimate punishment or destruction of anyone (no such thing as “hell”).

This new theology of God as unconditional Love overturns the most psychically damaging myth that has burdened and enslaved humanity from the beginning- the myth of retributive, punitive deity. While there are natural and social consequences to our choices and behaviors, there is no punitive Force or Spirit behind natural world events and suffering (i.e. natural disasters, disease, or the cruelty of others). This myth of punitive deity behind such things (e.g. angry God, vengeful Gaia, angry Planet, retributive Universe, or karma) has long burdened people with unnecessary guilt, shame, fear, and anxiety. Like the distressed Japanese woman who asked after the 2011 tsunami, “Are we being punished for enjoying life too much?”

Paul used this primitive threat theology on the Corinthians, claiming that their sicknesses and deaths were punishment from God for their sins.

(Note the qualifiers below on holding people accountable for their behavior, the need to restrain bad behavior, responsible human maturing and growth, and restorative justice approaches. All necessary for healthy human development, in this world.)

2. Old story theme (notable element- perfection/imperfection, and the belief that the past was better): The myth of a “perfect beginning” and that God is obsessed with perfection in the world and life, that God creates perfection (Eden), is enraged at the subsequent loss of perfection, and now wants to punish imperfection. (This idea of deity obsessed with perfection originated with the misunderstanding that any good and all-powerful God would only create perfection, and if things are not perfect then blame bad humanity for mucking things up that were once perfect. It can’t be God’s fault.)

We- humanity- have always had a terrible time understanding and embracing imperfection in life and in ourselves. Imperfection, and fear of divine rage at imperfection, has long deformed human consciousness with fear, anxiety, shame, guilt, and depression. Yes, we ought to engage the struggle to improve ourselves and others, and to improve life in general, in all ways. But we ought to do so without the added psychic burden of fear of angry deity or divine threat.

New story alternative: The world began in “chaotic imperfection” but has gradually evolved toward something more complex and organized. Life on this planet is never perfect, but it gradually improves. And over history, humanity has created something better out of the original imperfect, wilderness world.

In this new story theme, God has no problem with imperfection but includes it in the original creation. Imperfection (in a new story) serves the important purpose of providing an arena where humanity struggles with a messy wilderness situation in order to learn to create something better. And, most critical, we learn how to love in the process of engaging that struggle with imperfection in others (i.e. We learn more humane values in our “righteous struggle against evil”, Joseph Campbell. We experience and learn human values in the context of the subhuman or inhuman.).

Perfection, aside from being boring, does not bring forth the best of the human spirit. To the contrary, struggle with imperfection in life, and in others, brings forth the best in humanity. See Julian Simon’s comment that our struggle with problems in the world leads to creative solutions that benefit others (i.e. Ultimate Resource). See also the comment below on Joseph Campbell’s outline of human story and our struggle with a monster/enemy (i.e. some life problem that may be physical, mental/emotional, interpersonal, financial, social, etc.). That struggle is where we gain insights and learn lessons that can help others (e.g. Personal suffering can lead to empathy with others that similarly suffer).

(Note: The use of the term “imperfection” is not to diminish the horror and trauma that people suffer from natural disaster, disease, and the cruelty of others. But ‘old story’ explanations of the imperfection of the world as a fall from original perfection due to human corruption/sin, and subsequent imperfection introduced as punishment for that original sin… such myths tend to affirm deity as cruel, punitive, and destructive- i.e. God as the great obsessive compulsive Punisher of imperfection. That only adds psychic suffering to general human suffering- i.e. the added burden of unnecessary mental, emotional suffering. We can do better and understand original imperfection in alternative ways. And this is the impulse to theodicy, as roughly the defense of Ultimate Good/Love behind all, and to view the world in a new story as an experience/learning arena.)

3. Old story theme (related to previous): The myth that humanity began as a more perfect species but then became corrupted/sinful (i.e. the “fall of man” myth). The idea of original human perfection, and subsequent human degeneration toward something worse today, is still common in the “noble savage” mythology that dominates throughout academia (the myth that original hunter/gatherer people were more pure and noble but humanity has degenerated in civilization). See, for instance, Steven LeBlanc’s ‘Constant Battles’. Contemporary versions of “fallen humanity” mythology include Green religion’s belief that humanity is a “virus” or “cancer” on the Earth. These are pathologically anti-human views.

New story alternative: Humanity has emerged from the brutality of animal reality (original imperfection) but has gradually become more humane, less violent, and more civilized. See James Payne’s History of Force, and Stephen Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature. Also, amassed evidence on humanity improving all areas of life across long-term history shows that “we are more creators than destroyers” (Julian Simon in Ultimate Resource).

A new alternative to “fallen humanity” myths will recognize that humanity, with human spirit and human consciousness, is intimately and intensely united with the greater Consciousness at the core of reality that is Love. This “union with deity” is more than relationship. It is more about essential nature. This means that the same Love that is God, is also the essential nature of our human spirit or human self. We are most essentially “beings of Love”. We are fundamentally good. We are not evil (i.e. core “sinful nature”), as we have long been told by mythology and religious traditions.

The real issue is not how far humanity has fallen (the mythical perspective) but the real wonder is how far we have risen (the evidence-based perspective) from our brutal animal and primitive human past. Our improvement over history is evidence of the essential goodness of humanity naturally emerging over time.

(Note: How to explain bad human behavior? That inherited animal brain with its base impulses to tribalism and exclusion of differing others, to domination of others, and to retaliatory and destructive response to others/”enemies”. Our human consciousness/spirit, along with our inherited animal side, explains the great “battle between good and evil that takes place in every human heart”, (Alexander Solzhenitsyn). The bad side in humanity is not “inherited sin”, but is better understood in terms of the inherited animal in us. See Lyall Watson’s “Dark Nature”.)

4. Old story theme : The myth that the world began as an original paradise and that “golden age” has been lost and the trajectory of life is now “declining”, or degenerating, toward something worse (“Each present moment is a degeneration from previous moments”, Mircea Eliade).

The trajectory of life as a decline toward something worse is a core feature of apocalyptic mythology.

New story alternative: Life does not decline overall but the long-term trajectory of life shows that it actually “improves/rises” toward something ever better. Humanity, as essentially good and creative, is now responsible for the ongoing improvement of life and the world. (Note Julian Simon’s conclusion that we- humanity- are “more creators than destroyers”.)

Evidence of life improving over past millennia and recent centuries: Julian Simon’s Ultimate Resource, Greg Easterbrook’s A Moment on the Earth, Bjorn Lomborg’s Skeptical Environmentalist, Indur Goklany’s The Improving State of the World, Matt Ridley’s Rational Optimist, Ronald Bailey’s The End of Doom, Desrocher and Szurmak’s Population Bombed, James Payne’s History of Force, Stephen Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature, and others.

On the longer “improving” trend of the overall cosmos and the long-term emergence of life (i.e. toward more complexity, organization, and suitability for carbon-based life to mediate human consciousness), see Brian Green’s ‘The Universe Story’ and Harold Morowitz’s ‘The Emergence of Everything’. Further, even Darwin affirmed that evolution trended toward something more “perfect”.

This theme of long-term improvement, or fundamental direction toward something better, is critical to countering apocalyptic nihilism and affirming hopefulness.

5. Old story theme: The myth that natural disasters, disease, human cruelty, and death are expressions of divine punishment. This adds the unnecessary psychic burden of fear, anxiety, guilt and shame to already unbearable physical suffering. Paul tormented the Corinthians with this argument that their sicknesses and deaths were punishment from God for their sins.

New story alternative: While there are natural and social consequences all through life, there is no punitive, destroying deity behind the imperfections of life. Ultimately there is only Love at the core of reality (see number 16 on the relationship of Love to the freedom and randomness in life).

6. Old story theme: The myth that humanity has been rejected by the Creator, that we are separated from our Source and we need to be reconciled, we need to restore the broken relationship with God, via a violent blood sacrifice.

New story alternative: No one has ever been separated from the unconditional Love at the core of reality. That Love has incarnated in all humanity in the human spirit and consciousness. That love is the essence of the human self or person though it’s expression is often hindered and buried by the free choice of people to act inhumanely.

But be assured that no one has ever been separated from the indwelling love that is God, no matter their failure to live as human. God as love is always closer than our breath or atoms. God as love is inseparable from our common human spirit and consciousness.

Note: God incarnated in all humanity demands a radical rethink of theology or God theory. There has never been any such thing as a separate Sky God up in some distant heaven. God has always been intensely and immediately present in all humanity and this is evident in the best of humanity, in all human goodness. God is present in all human raging against evil and suffering. God is present in all human effort to make life better. There has never been any such thing as an absent or silent God. Just listen to and watch people all around you.

Again, as stated similarly in number 3 above, this new alternative overturns entirely the historically persistent myths of “fallen”, “essentially sinful”, bad-to-the-bone humanity.

Further, the idea of God incarnated equally in every person presents a new element for affirming equality among all people (and equal respect for all). God incarnated in humanity offers a stunning new element to defining the essential core of being human- i.e. what we really are as human persons. The Near Death Experiences repeatedly note this feature of the astounding human unity with deity- of inseparable oneness.

7. Old story theme: The myth of a cosmic dualism, a Good spirit in opposition to a bad spirit (i.e. a demonic entity, Satan). Deity is thereby portrayed as an essentially tribal reality- i.e. a God that favors believers and hates/punishes unbelievers. This idea of a fundamental cosmic dualism is played out through varied human dualisms- i.e. the tribal mindset of “us versus our enemies”, true believers versus unbelievers, or other racial, national, religious, or ideological divisions (include gender). Dualism thinking deforms human identity and buries the fact of our essential oneness in the human family. Dualism thinking affirms the inherited animal impulse that orients people to small-band thinking and behavior (i.e. the tribal exclusion of differing others). Embracing dualism as a divine reality and ideal, orients people toward opposing, dominating, and fighting/destroying others as ‘enemies’.

New story alternative: We all come from the same Oneness and we are all free equals in the one human family. We are not essentially defined by the tribal categories and divisions that we create to set ourselves apart from one another. We are most essentially defined by our common human spirit and human consciousness. And the essential nature of our human spirit is universal or unconditional love. That love is the expression of our authentic core humanity.

Added note: Most modern story-telling (e.g. movies) continues to re-enforce the primitive themes of dualism and tribalism. Note the all-too-common movie theme of good guy versus bad guy, and ‘justice’ as good guy beating and destroying bad guy in some way. Nothing in this about the oneness of the human family. Instead, only further affirmation of infantile tribalism and retaliation between people. The only dualism that we ought to be concerned about is that of “the battle-line between good and evil that runs through the heart of every person”, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. This is the dualism between our true human spirit/self and our inherited animal impulses.

(Caution: Offering the following speculative comment is not intended to diminish the urgency to fight evil and affirm good in this world. But some have suggested that dualism, and the apparent separation related to dualism- i.e. between good and bad- is only a temporal feature of this material realm. This world with its dualism provides an arena for us to live out our stories and engage our varied “righteous struggles against evil”. Others have said that we can only experience and learn to embrace/exhibit the good ideals of human story in our struggle with their opposites- the bad features of others, and life. Joseph Campbell suggests that this dualistic realm is where “we act out our differing roles on God’s stage”. But this dualism between good and bad exists only here in this world. It is temporal and not part of any greater timeless reality. See also Natalie Sudman’s The Application of Impossible Things.)

Further note on oneness conclusions: The oneness of all, along with the core unconditional nature of deity, counters the myth of some people as especially chosen of God and favored by God more than others. There are no “elect people”, or special “children of God”. People who see themselves as “true believers”, more so than others, are not closer to God than any other people. Oneness means that all humanity, that is every person, has God within them, equally. All people have equal access to the immediacy of God that is everywhere present as the sustaining Core or Source of all reality. Further, there are no special “holy places”- i.e. temples, churches- where limited religious members gain more access to God than the ordinary lives and daily mundane spaces of all people.

8. Old story theme: The myth of looming apocalypse as the final judgment, punishment, and destruction of all things. The myth of an apocalyptic ending embraces the core theme of God as the destroyer of all things. This ideal has incited endless destructive violence among the followers of such an ideal. That is why Arthur Mendel called apocalyptic “the most violent and destructive idea in history” (Vision and Violence).

To embrace and advocate apocalyptic is to embrace and advocate the epitome expression of nihilism- i.e. the complete and final destruction of life and the world.

Apocalyptic mythology still dominates much of modern story-telling, whether movies, TV, literature (note the genre of “post-apocalyptic”), and environmental alarmism or Green religion.

New story alternative: There are problems all through this imperfect world but there is no looming threat of final destruction and ending (the religious understanding of apocalypse since Zoroaster). The apocalyptic alarmist exaggerates problems in nature and life to “end of days” scenarios, distorting the true state of things, and thereby promotes fear and even destructive violence in populations. This has been evident in the felt need to “coercively purge” what is believed to be some great threat- see notes in following sections on the Marxist, Nazi, and Green apocalyptic movements (and the mass-death outcomes).

In the new story alternative theme there is no core destroying Force or Spirit behind the violent elements of this world. Ultimately, there is only creating and sustaining Love. And again, the imperfection of this world serves the purpose of providing a learning arena for humanity to struggle with, in order to create something ever better.

Further, the destructive element in the cosmos and world exists as part of the ongoing creative process (i.e. death as entirely natural and serving the purpose of making room for new life), just as Second Law dissipation of energy is “virtuous waste” that serves the creation of more order (Huber and Mills in Bottomless Well). But again, that element of destruction is not evidence of some punitive deity threatening a final punishment and ending of all things. (See notes on “natural consequences” below)

Further helpful here, some have made the argument that there are also positive aspects to the destructive elements of nature (In response to the theodicy question: Is this the “best possible world?”). For example, the plate tectonic movement that generates destructive earthquakes also generates mountain-building, which creates differences in climate and that contributes to the development of diversity in emerging life (i.e. different environmental pressures on populations and the change that brings forth). Our project is to adapt to such things and we have done better over time. This is evident in the decreasing loss of life from such natural disasters.

9. Old story theme (key element- instantaneous transformation of life versus “gradualism” in the trajectory of history and life): The “always imminent” element in apocalyptic (i.e. the “end is nigh”) demands urgent action to “save” something, to save the world or life. The exaggerated threat of apocalyptic ending pushes people (the urge for salvation) to take immediate violent action to purge what is presented to them as the threatening thing. Threatened populations are more easily manipulated to embrace policies that will abandon the democratic process to engage “coercive purification” schemes (Richard Landes) directed at perceived opponents/enemies. End-of-life threats incite populations to embrace policies that will coercively and instantaneously install their version of protection and security in some safe paradise.

Alarmism, that exaggerates and distorts the true state of things, has too often unleashed the totalitarian impulse across history.

We saw the violence of instantaneous transformation policies in the 100 million deaths that stemmed from Marxist urgency to coercively purge the world of the threat from “destructive capitalism” and immediately install its vision of utopia. We also saw it in the 50-60 million deaths from Nazi alarmism and consequent action to violently purge Germany of the imagined threat of “destructive Jewish Bolshevism”, and then coercively initiate the millennial paradise of the Third Reich. And we are seeing “coercive purification” again today in the environmental alarmist push to save the world from “destructive humanity in industrial civilization” and restore the lost paradise of a wilderness world (Mendel in Vision and Violence, and Herman in The Idea of Decline).

New story alternative: There is no “end of days” just over the horizon. Rather, life is improving gradually as creative humanity solves problems. The escapist desire for an instantly-installed utopia misses the point of the human story as the struggle with imperfection throughout the world, a struggle that is gradually succeeding. Such struggle is essential to human development, learning, and growth. Mendel is good on this issue of “gradualism” versus the violence of “instantaneous transformation” movements. Humanity is learning to patiently improve life more democratically without coercively overwhelming the freedom of differing others.

The search for instantaneous salvation also stems from the escapist mindset of apocalyptic types who cannot endure the struggle to gradually and democratically improve an imperfect world. They irresponsibly seek to escape to some instantly installed utopia, often coercively installed.

10. Old story theme: The demand for a salvation plan- i.e. a required sacrifice or payment (atonement, debt payment, punishment) as necessary to appease/satisfy some great threat or threatening reality, whether a religious God or vengeful Gaia, angry planet, upset Mother Earth, punitive Universe, or payback karma.

(Note: Key point to observe here- Jesus rejected debt payment as necessary to divine love. He advocated giving to all without expecting any payment in return. And his argument in Matt.5:38-48, also Luke 6:27-36, was about a new standard of human love- i.e. not requiring debt payment, or appropriate response from others to the goodness that was shown to them. The new ‘no conditions love’ would enable people to express the divine love that was the very same no conditions reality- i.e. do this because God is like this, or God does this.)

New story alternative: The fundamental nature of God as unconditional love means “absolutely no conditions. None.” That means there is no demand for ultimate payment, sacrifice, or conditions to fulfil. With ultimate safety secured, the only “salvation” that we need to engage is the ongoing and gradual struggle to make life better in this world.

The reality of God as “no conditions Love” requires that we make all the logical conclusions that arise from such a stunning new theology. Again, a critically important one is that such a divine reality- an authentically unconditional God- will not demand any conditions of payment or sacrifice or balancing response to goodness shown. Jesus himself had argued this in his Matthew 5 and Luke 6 statements where he taught that an authentic universal love will not just love those who love in return (i.e. family, friends, or fellow tribe members). But unconditional love will also love those who do not love in return. Unconditional love will freely give to all and not demand any return payment.

Unconditional love does good to everyone without expecting a similar response, without expecting any payback (i.e. include sacrifice here). This is how Jesus further defined a God that “loved enemies”.

Jesus rejected the principle of debt payment as a fundamental requirement of divine love. This is clearly expressed in his statement to “give/love expecting nothing in return”. Keep in mind that in these passages (Matt.5 and Luke 6) he urged people to love in a new unconditional manner because that was how God loved. He was arguing for a new standard of love that would show what God was like, that would do what God did (i.e. “Love your enemy because God does”).

Debt payment, or more generally the righting of wrongs as the required basis for offering forgiveness, had been the basis of atonement thinking from the beginning. That was based on the archaic belief that God, as holy, must punish all wrongs properly and fully, and must rectify all wrongs by demanding payment or retribution of some sort. God could not just forgive, accept, and love without first making all wrongs right. That was necessary to restore divine honor. The God of the old atonement/sacrifice mythology could not just freely forgive and love.

That old theology made no sense because it stated that the atonement love of the religious God, based on a prerequisite payment/punishment, was something lesser than the best of human love. We are expected to just forgive in an unlimited manner (“seventy times seven”), to accept all universally, and to love without demanding prerequisite conditions or similar response (again- “give without expecting payment in return, love without expecting love in return”). Parents, spouses, and friends have all learned that this no conditions love is the best and highest form of love for daily relationships. Surely God as Ultimate Goodness and Love would, at least, love as well as we are expected to love.

Jesus further corrected the old belief that divine love was conditional in his parables. Those short stories further illustrated the point that divine love did not require the payment of debt, or more generally the righting of wrongs, before forgiving, accepting, and loving (i.e. the ‘no conditions’ love that defined his new theology). No conditions love meant “no conditions” at all. Note this element in his Prodigal story where the father does not demand a sacrifice, restitution, or repayment before forgiving and fully accepting/loving the wayward son. All such conditions are brushed aside by the father.

I reject, as Jesus appears to have done, the old theology that God as ultimate Goodness and Love is held to a lesser standard of love than we are held to. I reject the idea that God remembers all wrongs and can demand conditions before forgiving, while we are told that authentic love, for us, means “keeping no record of wrongs” for some future making-of-things-right. Our love is to be without condition because that is actually how God loves. And it is the unconditional nature of forgiveness and love that constitute the greatness and glory of these features, not the conditions of religious holiness/honor mythology with its prerequisite demands.

Unfortunately, Paul refused the new theology of Jesus and retreated back to traditional conditional theology- i.e. a punitive God that demanded full payment for sin before forgiving anyone. We inherited Paul’s version of Christianity with its orientation toward punitive and conditional treatment of others. Note the clear New Testament statements on this essential feature of requisite payment in the Christian gospel. The book of Hebrews (chapter 9) states that “without the shedding of blood (sacrifice) there is no forgiveness”. The book of Romans (e.g. chapter 5) states that there is only salvation (“saved from wrath”) after the condition of a blood payment/sacrifice has been fulfilled.

And of course, in this life people should learn to be responsible for their behavior, to make amends for wrongs done, and to pay their debts. That is all part of normal human development and growth. This is never in question, but it is not the basis of theology and authentic love. Our love, just like God’s love, is not to be conditional on anything done, or not done, by others.

(Note: The theology of Jesus is not a prescriptive model for economic/commercial relationships in this world. Jesus was speaking to ultimate realities and the atonement mythology of his era. Further, my reference to “Historical Jesus” is not an appeal to him as some special religious authority on these issues. I refer to him simply because he continues to be viewed as a notable religious icon. And I would repeatedly emphasize the larger background context to these themes- i.e. the profound contradiction between the core message of Historical Jesus- i.e. the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel and Paul’s Christ myth- i.e. the Christian “Jesus Christ”. It is the profound contradiction between the themes of unconditional and conditional, non-retaliation and retaliation, non-punitive/non-destructive and punitive/destructive, among other contrasting features.)

11. Old story theme: The belief that retribution or payback is true justice (i.e. eye for eye), based on the myth that God is a retributive reality that demands the reward of the good and the punishment of the bad. That retributive God demands full punishment of sin. This hurt for hurt theology, or pain returned for pain caused, still under-girds much thinking on justice today, though its often framed as the practical need to present the punishment of offenders as a warning to others, to serve as a deterrence example for the general public. Psychology now recognizes that such punitive approaches do not work with criminal offenders or children. Punitive response to human imperfection and failure “does not teach alternative humane behavior”.

New story alternative: Again, unconditional love keeps no record of wrongs, it does not obsess over imperfection, and it forgives all freely and without limit (“seventy times seven”). But yes, there are natural and social consequences to bad behavior in this world. All of us are to be accountable and responsible for our choices and actions. This is essential to human development in this life. But all justice in response to human failure must be restorative.

As Leo Tolstoy wrote about the criminal justice system, “The whole trouble is that people think there are circumstances when one may deal with human beings without love, but no such circumstances ever exist. Human beings cannot be handled without love. It cannot be otherwise, because mutual love is the fundamental law of human life.”

Added note: Yes, there is value in remembering past bad behavior and the outcomes as a warning to others. The Holocaust is a signature example of this value. But we remember the bad behavior of others in a larger context of consciously forgiving, with an orientation to restorative justice that is victim-centered (i.e. fully deals with restitution issues). Simon Wiesenthal’s “Justice, Not Vengeance” illustrates the struggle for balance on these concerns.

12. Old story theme: the myth of future or “after-life” judgment, exclusion, punishment, and destruction (i.e. Hell). The fear of after-life harm is the “primal human fear” (Michael Grosso). Myths of after-life harm have added a magnitude of order increase in fear to the already burdensome fear of death that many people carry.

(Insert: Why bother with speculation about such unknowable realities as after-life reality? Why not just dismiss or ignore such? Well, because the speculation has been done by major belief systems/religions across history and across all the cultures of the world. Pathology- i.e. bad mythology like the horrific myth of hell- already exists in human consciousness and ignoring it does nothing to solve the problems that the pathology causes- i.e. unnecessary fear, anxiety, guilt, shame. While all after-life theorizing may be considered speculative, we can at least offer more humane alternatives with healthier parameters- i.e. eliminate unnecessary worry regarding death while also focusing human orientation to full involvement with here and now reality.)

New story alternative: Again, authentic love is unconditional and does not demand the fulfilment of conditions. It does not threaten ultimate exclusion or punishment. It embraces all with the same scandalous mercy and unlimited generosity. It gives sun and rain to all, to both good and bad. All- both good and evil- are ultimately safe and included in the love of God. Such love scandalizes the mind that is oriented to ultimate (or after-life) conditional payback justice or “deserved” punishment.

Note again the stories that Jesus told of good, moral people who were offended by the unconditional generosity and love that was shown by, for example, the vineyard owner and the father of the prodigal son. The all-day vineyard workers and the older brother of the prodigal were upset because such mercy and generosity was not fair, moral, or just in their eyes. Other “righteous” people were also offended and scandalized by Jesus when he invited local outcasts and scoundrels to meals with them.

All such material points to the safe conclusion that there will be no after-life harm. We die into a stunning no conditions Love that is our origin and final home. We are all safe in that Love (i.e. sun and rain are generously given to all alike, to both good and bad people). We are never separated from that Love.

Insert: Make the important distinction here between Ultimate Reality and life in this imperfect world. We can recognize God as absolutely no conditions Love but not deny the reality of natural and social consequences in this world. The need for personal responsibility for behavior is critical to human development. Love here and now is responsible to restrain violence and to protect the innocent, even with force. But our embrace of the ideal of ultimate unconditional love will orient our treatment of human failure and offense away from punitive approaches and toward restorative approaches. An unconditional attitude will recognize that, despite the offense and scandal to conventional payback justice, all of us return safely to the same no conditions Love that birthed us and is our final home. We are all one family, despite our diverse failures to live as fully human in this world.

Add here that self-judgment and self-punishment are the most devastating experiences that human persons can embrace and endure. Most people do not need further threat of judgment and punishment from some greater reality.

13. Old story theme: The myth of a hero messiah that will use superior force (“coercive purification”) to overthrow enemies, to purge the world of evil, and to bring in a promised utopia. This myth argues for the abandonment of historical processes of gradual improvement via creative human freedom and endeavor, and opts instead for overwhelming revolutionary violence that seeks to instantly purge some “corrupt” entity that is viewed as the threat, and then re-install one’s view of some lost paradise.

We saw this resort to “violent force against the imagined enemy” recently with ISIS in Syria (a struggle to bring on the final annihilation/Armageddon battle and then spread the caliphate across the world). Just as we have seen it in Jewish history (Old Testament) and Christian history (Crusades, Inquisitions, persecution of heretics). The embrace of revolutionary violence has to do with the divine model/human behavior relationship (i.e. our behavior validated by our divine ideas/ideals). As Harold Ellens says, if your God uses force, then so may you, to get your way against your “enemies”.

Again, the great ideals that we embrace will shape our thinking, our feeling, and our responses/behavior. We become just like the God that we believe in. Bad myths like coercive, destroying deity have repeatedly incited people to violent, destructive action, to act as the agents of their violent, destructive God to destroy some enemy and save something that was believed to be under dire and imminent threat from the enemy. Too often this belief in divine violent force has been misappropriated to validate unnecessary harshness and cruelty toward fellow human beings.

New story alternative (see also “16th bad idea” below): A God of authentic love does not intervene with overwhelming force that overrides human freedom and choice. Further, a non-intervening deity helps to explain the gradualism of improving life. It is entirely up to humanity to make the world a better place, in all ways, and to do so while respecting the freedom of others to differ from us.

This is to say that there is no hero messiah, and a tribal deity at that, that will intervene with superior force to conquer some enemy of ours, and grant us our vision of our longed-for paradise with our enemies excluded (i.e. the unbelievers of our ‘truth’), as per the book of Revelation.

Note: This point recognizes the valid need at times (police, military) to use legal force to restrain irrational violence. This legitimate use of force is to be distinguished from the harsh mythology that drives ISIS and drove historical Christian violence against fellow Christians that disagreed over theological issues, often very minor disagreements (e.g. note the incident of Calvin putting his fellow Christian theologian, Servetus, to death over the placement of an adjective in a sentence).

We are seeing this advocacy for coercive force today against fellow citizens, over similarly minor issues of disagreement, such as in the climate debate. The hysterical exaggeration of change in nature to apocalyptic-scale scenarios has clouded the minds of many and has incited the felt need for coercive force (i.e. criminalize skeptical science), and even violence against opponents.

14. Old story theme: The fallacy of Biblicism, the myth that religious holy books are more special and authoritative than ordinary human literature, and that people are obligated to live according to the holy book as the will, law, or word of God. This myth argues that people must submit to divine conditions, to some heavenly model as outlined by their holy book.

New story alternative: We evaluate all human thought and writing according to basic criteria of right and wrong, good and bad, or humane and inhumane, as agreed upon in common human rights codes or constitutions. Holy books are not exempted from this process of discernment between good and bad.

Further, our highest authority is our own personal consciousness of right and wrong as tuned by common understanding of such things in widely adopted human rights codes and constitutions that are embraced by the entire human family.

15. Old story theme: The myth of God as King, Ruler, Lord, or Judge. The idea that God relates to humanity in domination/submission forms of relating.

New story alternative: There is no domination/subservience relationship of humanity to God. Jesus said, “Whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant”. True greatness is to serve the other and not to dominate or control others. The greatness of God is exhibited in serving, not existing above to rule or dominate. God is not “above” humanity but has incarnated in all people as equals. God relates horizontally to humanity.

Yes, this is another stunning correction to traditional God theories.

We see the presence of this street-level God in all daily, mundane human goodness and love expressed toward others, especially toward enemies, which is the highest expression of authentic love or goodness. When we love unconditionally, we tower in stature as maturely human. We become the hero of our story and conquer our real monster and enemy, the animal inheritance that is within each of us. See story outline in sections below.

16. Old story theme: The idea that humanity is obligated to know, serve, and have some relationship with an invisible reality (deity), to give primary loyalty to something above people (i.e. a law, will, or word of God). This has often led to neglect and abuse of real people.

New story alternative: Our primary loyalty is to love and serve real people around us. Their needs, here and now, take priority in life.

And a new addition…

The 17th bad idea (related to the earlier theme, in the list above, of a hero-messiah that will intervene to save)

One of humanity’s greatest frustrations has been the apparent “the silence of God” across history. The Holocaust is the iconic example of this traumatizing silence of God.

Where was God when natural disasters took hundreds of thousands of lives? Where was God when human cruelty went unhindered in mass-death movements? Such apparent absence should put to rest the common religious myth of a miraculously intervening God. The evidence has long been final that there never was any such thing as a supernaturally intervening deity that would, for example, violate natural law to rescue people.

What then should we conclude? God is good but powerless to help humanity? Or the atheists are right that there is no God? No. I would offer that the evidence simply urges us to rethink the great question of how God relates to this world. Theologies like Panentheism (not Pantheism) are wrestling with this issue.

And some versions of the Deist’s alternative are not much better than atheism. God is not the absent Creator who starts the whole thing running and then disappears off to some far away heaven to wait and watch as natural law works throughout life.

A new theory or theology is emerging that argues that God has incarnated in all humanity. God did not incarnate only in special ‘holy’ persons like the Christian Jesus. Rather, God has incarnated in all humanity in union with the common human spirit or human consciousness. That human spirit has gradually emerged and developed as more humane across history. This is evident in the trends to decreasing violence, more democratic societies, and generally improved human well-being (the improvement of all areas of life).

And as Bob Brinsmead notes, the improvement in life has been a long, slow process of gradually developing understanding and practise. It has, for instance, taken millennia for us to understand disease and come up with medical cures. See the gradualism arguments in Arthur Mendel’s Vision and Violence.

We see this common human spirit, or God spirit, emerging and developing in all human goodness, whether expressed in commerce, art, sports, medicine, agriculture, and all areas where people contribute to making life better and just having fun while doing so.

As some have stated, we are the voice, hands, and feet of God in this world.

God has never been silent or absent. There has never been a Sky God up above the world in some heaven, above and outside of humanity, doing things to the world and to people from the outside (the “yoyo God”, coming down and going back up, across history). To the contrary, God has always been within all things (the creating Sustainer of all reality), especially within the human family, and evident in all human crying and raging against suffering and evil. God has always been present in all human action to prevent evil and to solve problems and to improve life. God has always been in all humanity and all good and useful human endeavor. That means it has always been our responsibility to prevent wrong and to promote good/right in our world. Yes, it is all up to us. We must stop looking to the heavens for what is right here and now, in us.

Add this feature to your theology- God is at our very core, as the human impulse to love, to be better. God is inseparably united with the love that defines us at our best. God is at the core of the real or authentic human self and is evident in the human impulse to be more humane as expressed in all human goodness.

This means that God has always been closer than our own breath or atoms. God has never been absent or silent when people have suffered from natural disaster or human cruelty. Religious mythology has never framed this immanent feature properly. The immanence of deity speaks to the fundamental “oneness” behind all things. Even quantum mechanics points to this foundational reality.

The confusion here over silent deity also has to do with the element of freedom or the inseparable relationship of love and freedom. God as love does not coercively overwhelm the independence, self-determination, and freedom of others. Better, God respects human freedom profoundly and influences with gentle, quiet impulses to do the right thing, what we feel is right (i.e. God persuades and does not coerce).

Part of the human confusion over how God relates to this world has to do with our inability to grasp that divine Love prizes freedom highly and will not overwhelm or violate it. Authentic moral goodness emerges only from authentic freedom of choice. Such love entails great risk as authentically free people may choose wrongly. The upside is that nothing in life is pre-planned or predestined. We are free to create our own unique story, to become the heroes of our own life adventure. And there is nothing more heroic than choosing no conditions love, for even the enemy, as the supreme height of human achievement. Then we tower in stature like a Mandela.

Note: The above comments relate to one of the options offered in Jewish “Protest Theology” that emerged after the Holocaust (i.e. the idea of God willing/choosing to not intervene in human freedom). Others have suggested that, as spirit, God cannot intervene in material reality, aside from gentle suasion on the human spirit and consciousness.

And of course, aside from all these points in number 16, there are still the myriad unexplainable and fascinating “coincidences” scattered through personal human stories that we may view as just random, or the work of Providence. Interesting that people tend to explain good coincidences as Providence, but not so much the bad ones.

Added discussion group post from Bob Brinsmead: “____, many thanks for sending the link to this great Wikipedia article on Process Theology. I would have to say that I agree with the main thrust of the thesis.

“To say that God could have stopped the Holocaust but refrained from stopping it is very unsatisfactory to me. I agree with the argument of the PROCESS theologians here. If God is committed to love, then God is committed to human freedom. God can use persuasion but not coercion of the human will. Love would not allow God to do something that was inhuman (interfere, coerce, etc.). If you look at history and daily experience, there is no other conclusion that seems to be either logically or ethically possible. It is also hard to see God acting contrary to the laws of nature or the laws of physics.”

Another Old Story Theme, New Story Alternative to add to the list below…

While human selfishness and greed are present in any approach to life, these features do not most essentially define industrial civilization and its outcomes. Collectivists have argued that the free individual model that developed over past centuries in England (i.e. the “classic Liberalism” that protected the individual rights and freedom of all citizens, equally) orients populations to destructive selfishness, greed, disconnect from nature, and violence, among other pathology. But that is not generally true. More importantly, with the fundamental protection of private property rights, the free individual model has unleashed human creativity as never before, along with environmental concerns, to achieve unimaginable new heights in the improvement of all aspects of our lives, and the world in general.

Old story theme: The myth of the moral and spiritual superiority of the simple lifestyle with low consumption (i.e. self-produced, using only local resources). This is related to “noble savage” mythology, the belief that primitive hunter/gatherers were more pure and environmentally conservative before humanity “fell” in developing civilization (“falling” even further in the last few centuries of industrial civilization). This myth fosters endless guilt and shame over consumption and the enjoyment of the good life. Small is Beautiful by Schumacher was an affirmation of this mythology. Note that it is most often wealthy Western elites that advocate this “morally superior primitivism” lifestyle for poorer people in developing areas.

New story alternative: The search for a better life is the fundamental urge of love- to responsibly improve one’s life and the state of one’s family. And it is the free choice of people to enjoy what they wish to use and enjoy. The abundance that most people enjoy today, with an ever-increasing proportion of humanity moving into middle class status, is part of the larger trajectory of developing technological, industrial civilization that is also lessening environmental impacts. For example, the trend of continuing world urbanization is concentrating more people in smaller and more efficient spaces- e.g. economies of scale- that lessen pressure on natural areas (see population expert Julian Simon’s Ultimate Resource). Industrial society further decreases per capita consumption of varied resources with ongoing technological development. The general creation of wealth has also enabled more developed areas to better care for and improve their environments. This overturns the environmental alarmist argument that industrial society is “destroying the world”. See “Environmental transition” research, for example, by Indur Goklany. Also, Desrocher and Szurmak’s Population Bombed.

Note: There is no finalized consensus on how much of the natural world humans can engage, use, and change. We are a legitimate species and not an intruding “virus or cancer” in the view of those who want a more untouched wilderness world. And from today’s progressing industrial civilization note the emerging trends like ‘peak agriculture’ and the return of agricultural lands to nature as, with safe GM inputs, we produce more crops on the same or less land. Note also the improving status of world forests over the past seven decades (FAO reports on increasing world forest cover), and the strengthening of conservation and restoration trends in world fisheries (Ray Hilborn research, University of Washington). Further, there is no species holocaust occurring. It appears the “responsible stewardship” approach of the early 20th Century conservationists is working (see Alston Chase’s In A Dark Wood).

As Julian Simon said, “Evidence on the big picture and long term trends of life shows that we are more creators than destroyers”.

Added notes: There is a long history of belief in the moral/spiritual superiority of the ascetic lifestyle and engendering guilt over enjoying the good life too much (the good life viewed in terms of selfishness, greed, the “base” obsession with materialism). Note past history’s cloistered mystics, wandering holy men, and sages, begging for their daily needs. These “holiness exhibited in simple living” cults are found in Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, and elsewhere.

Varied other beliefs play into the fear of consumption such as the fallacy of “limited good” that anthropology notes in hunter/gatherer societies where people believe that if some people in the group get more, then others must be getting less, as there are limited resources to go around. The evidence, while at first seeming counter-intuitive, comes down on the side of ever-expanding human resources across history (“cornucopians” like Julian Simon were right).

Simon (Ultimate Resource) has outlined the steps in the process that results in the expansion or increase in resources: Within traditional production there is an apparent scarcity of some resource. This leads to increasing prices for that resource. That prompts the search for more reserves of the resource, the discovery of technology that leads to more efficient production and use of the resource, or a search for alternatives to the resource (i.e. the shift from whale oil to fossil fuels). And ultimately there is a return to the trajectory of lowering the price of the resource. We saw the process above operating with the discovery of fracking technology and the opening of vast new sources of fossil fuels in the US.

J. Harold Ellens quote on the pathology of retaliation from his book “Honest Faith for Our Time”:

After noting the message of vindictiveness, settling scores, and meeting force with force, a message so common to the Old Testament, Ellens says, “These archetypes of fighting fire with fire are products of unconscious metaphors that contend that the world is wired this way, the cosmos is wired this way, God is wired this way. Everything is wired for a cosmic conflict. Have you got a major problem, resort to ultimate force. God does. Why should not we? It’s how things are designed. (Retaliatory archetypes argue that) God was so ticked off that he could not possibly get his head screwed back on straight until he had killed somebody, us or his son Jesus… That’s the familiar way things are set up. But it is not the way of the divine Spirit…

“We will not achieve human wellbeing until we create a world culture of wellbeing. We shall not achieve that until God gets well in our theological constructs. A culture of wellbeing implies a world of psycho-spiritual metaphors that produce healthful unconscious archetypes. To achieve that we must destroy the sick monster God that reigns unconsciously in all our hearts.”

Defining Alarmism:
The exaggeration of problems, and even natural change (i.e. weather/climate), to apocalyptic scale thereby distorting the true state of things. Then inciting populations to embrace fear-based policy responses/solutions that have repeatedly harmed people and nature. The bio-fuels fiasco is an example. It resulted in rising food prices for the poorest people and led to further deforestation for palm oil plantations. Another example is decarbonisation, a policy that is based on the lunacy of demonizing the basic food of all life- CO2. Decarbonisation is the anti-science crusade to end the use of cheap fossil fuels that have benefited life immensely, lifting billions out of the misery of poverty and enabling humanity, with increased wealth, to better care for the environment.

Preface note on the “pathology” of apocalyptic:

Apocalyptic is based on the central fallacy of retaliatory, destroying deity that punishes human imperfection with violent and complete destruction. Note the Sumerian Flood myth for the original template- i.e. angry Enlil proposing to destroy all humanity for the sin of “being too noisy”. This punitive theology/God theory was embraced by Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism- i.e. “Lord Shiva the Destroyer”. Punitive, destroying God theory has also been embraced by “secular” moderns in the theologies of “vengeful Gaia”, “angry Planet/Mother Earth”, “retributive Universe”, and payback karma.

The historical outcome of apocalyptic- “the most violent and destructive idea in history”- has been endless unnecessary human mental/emotional suffering and the incitement to further violence. See Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God for a psychotherapist’s notes on the “personality-deforming” fear, anxiety, shame, and guilt that arise from cruel God theories, as well as the incitement to violence. As the millennial scholars show (Richard Landes, Arthur Herman, Arthur Mendel, David Redles), alarming populations with apocalyptic scenarios pushes people to embrace destructive “coercive purification” solutions/policies- i.e. the coercive purging of imagined threats such as capitalist society in Marxist apocalyptic (100 million deaths), Jewish Bolshevism in Nazi apocalyptic (50-60 million deaths), and industrial/fossil fuel society in environmental alarmist apocalyptic (death tolls still mounting).

A brief history of the root ideas that have long undermined hope, freedom, and love.

How did the lunacy of apocalyptic mythology get from ancient Sumeria (i.e. Sumerian Flood apocalypse) to us today in extremist movements like environmental alarmism? How did the primitive and pathological belief of apocalyptic get into our modern world where public consciousness is constantly battered by prophecies of the end of the world, now mainly from climate alarmism? (Example: James Hansen, the father of global warming alarmism, stating in 2008, “It’s all over in five years”.)

Start with Joseph Campbell’s statement: “The same mythical themes repeat all across history and across all the cultures of the world”. The same themes descend down through history in both the Western and Eastern traditions.

One writer (Douglas Murray- The Madness of Crowds) says that we have abandoned the great narratives of our past, narratives given to us by the great religions that provided meaning and purpose to life. Now in the “post-modern” era we are floundering without those meaning-giving and purpose-providing guides.

No, the great narrative themes have not been abandoned but are still held by the majority of humanity that affiliate with some notable religious tradition (85% of humanity). Close to 4 billion people claim affiliation with the two great apocalyptic religions of Christianity and Islam, with another billion or so affiliated with Hinduism and Buddhism, religions that also embrace the feature of declinism, a central theme of apocalyptic mythology (i.e. great cycles of emergence and then decline toward catastrophic ending in Hinduism, decreasing life spans in Buddhism). And, most critical, those themes are also given new “secular” expression in the ideologies and philosophies of today.

Point? The dominant themes of the past continue to dominate today across all world religions and ideologies. The core themes are always the same old, same old no matter their diverse expression in religious or secular versions. And they cause the same old damage as ever before. What are these core themes that have dominated all past history and all the cultures of the world?

Here is a summary of the most dominant themes in human meta-narratives:

There was an original paradise (e.g. Eden). Bad people (the fallen, sinful humanity myth) ruined the paradise and life is now declining toward some catastrophic collapse and ending (apocalypse). We must embrace some salvation plan, make some demanded sacrifice, and do something radical to purge the evil from the world in order to save ourselves and the world. If we do so- i.e. coercively purge the corrupting force- then we can restore the lost paradise. Include here the tribal dualism of true believers versus unbelievers, true religion/ideology versus false religion/ideology.

Now trace these ideas from the very beginning of human writing some 5000 years ago, in Sumeria. Those first human attempts at writing- the cuneiform tablets of around 3000 BCE- were broken and scattered but complete versions of the same Sumerian myths/stories are found in later Akkadian and Babylonian epics like The Epic of Gilgamesh (dated to around 1650 BCE).

The themes are not yet expressed as a coherent belief system in Sumerian mythology but are all present- i.e. the original paradise city of Dilmun without sickness or death. Then Enki eats the 8 forbidden plants and paradise is lost/ruined and Enki becomes ill. Add here the Sumerian Flood myth as the great original apocalypse- the destruction of all humanity and life. The Egyptians around the same time had their own apocalyptic myths- The Destruction of Mankind and the Return to Chaos myths. Further, the Sumerians also embraced the themes of sacrifice/salvation/immortality.

Roughly a millennium later Zoroaster formulates these earlier themes into his dualist religion where the good God Ahura Mazda created an original good world that was later corrupted by evil. Ahura Mazda then brought a great apocalypse of molten metal to purge and end the world and restore the lost original paradise. Zoroaster’s Persian religion then shaped Jewish/Hebrew beliefs, whether via an exile in Persia or through the usual exchange of ideas via trade relations (or Semitic origins in the Persia/Sumer region).

Judaism subsequently shaped Christianity through people like Paul. And there is an interesting side note here in that this time in history could have experienced the embrace of a major break with ancient apocalyptic mythology and its related themes. The Historical Jesus rejected apocalyptic with “his stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God” (James Robinson). Jesus stated that there should be “no more eye for eye retaliation but instead love your enemy because God does. God does not retaliate against enemies but inclusively loves all the same, giving the good gifts of life- sun and rain- to both good and bad people”.

A God that does not retaliate will not engage the ultimate act of retaliation that is an apocalypse. But Paul rejected this non-retaliatory, non-apocalyptic theology of Jesus and instead retreated to embrace a retaliatory God. Note his quote of an Old Testament statement in Romans 12 that expresses his view of God, “Vengeance is mine says the Lord. I will repay”. Paul also re-affirmed apocalyptic in his Christ myth- “Lord Jesus will return in blazing fire to punish/destroy all that do not believe my gospel” (Thessalonians letter).

Paul’s retaliatory, apocalyptic theology became the version of Christianity that has dominated Western, and world, consciousness. His Christianity has been mainly responsible for bringing the pathology of apocalyptic into subsequent history.

The Jewish branch of early Christianity (notably Ebionism) later also shaped Islam as an apocalyptic religion (see Joseph Izza’s The Priest and the Prophet, and David Cook on Islamic apocalyptic).

Christianity then shaped the 19th Century ideology of Declinism (i.e. the belief that life declines toward catastrophic ending), the most dominant and influential theme in modern society (Arthur Herman in The Idea of Decline in Western History. See also the research of apocalyptic millennial scholars Richard Landes, Arthur Mendel, and David Redles).

Declinism subsequently shaped Marxism- i.e. the belief that the original communal paradise has been lost in capitalist/industrial society that declines toward destruction. Salvation is to be found in the violent purging of the corrupting force so the lost communal paradise can be restored.

Declinism also shaped Nazism with its belief that the original pure German spirit and culture was being corrupted by Jewish Bolshevism and was declining and in danger of annihilation/apocalypse. There had to be a violent purging of the corrupting force (a great final battle of annihilation between the good and evil) so that the lost paradise could be restored in the Third Reich.

The main offspring of Declinism today is environmental alarmism with its belief that the original paradise of a wilderness world has been ruined by humanity in civilization, especially in industrial society, and the world is now declining toward some great collapse and ending. Salvation is to be found in the coercive purging of the corrupting force so that the lost wilderness paradise can be restored.

Here we are today with majorities of our populations still embracing such primitive mythological themes of some original paradise ruined by bad humanity and declining toward catastrophic ending. The best evidence powerfully contradicts this old narrative because life has improved on all fronts and the overall long-term trajectory of life is one of rise and progress, not decline.

But apocalyptic myth continues to dominate public media- in movies, TV, literature, even science (i.e. climate science), and news media. This pathology creates unnecessary public trauma- fear, anxiety, shame and guilt (i.e. we ‘corrupt’ people have ruined paradise). Apocalyptic also feeds the totalitarian violence of “coercive purification” responses- i.e. the felt need to purge some corrupting force/entity (the enemy in dualist thinking) that threatens life.

We have alternative themes for an entirely new narrative. And they are soundly evidence-based. Themes that orient human consciousness to hope and love.

Preface to comment on “The great Christian contradiction” material below (Historical Jesus or Q Wisdom Sayings research… a bit of explanation for religiously-inclined visitors):

My argument below for unconditional as central to any theology (God theory or Ultimate Reality theory) is not dependent on first establishing the actual message of the original Jesus. I do not view him as an authority and I do not need his actual words (original message) as the critical element to affirm my point re unconditional theology. Nonetheless, I refer to the good comments in the Jesus material (i.e. “love your enemy”) just to illustrate something that stands on its own as authoritative.

Unconditional is the best of being human and holds authority in itself as ultimate goodness without the need for validation by some religious authority. It is “self-validating” as good or true. It does not need any Jesus validation but I do not mind touching base with widely respected icons/symbols for illustrative purposes.

Unconditional love is not a religious insight or discovery. To the contrary, religions across history have been essentially conditional traditions- promoting the religious demand for right belief, correct ritual and religious lifestyle to please religious deities, and necessary conditions for religious salvation (sacrifice, payment). Religion as a conditional institution has never communicated the stunning unconditional nature of deity to humanity.

I would establish the authority of unconditional as supreme goodness by appealing to its discovery and practice by ordinary people all through our societies- i.e. parents, spouses, friends. It is the best behavior that we can engage and hence it should be the basis of any authentic theology of Ultimate Good or Ultimate Love. This is to say- do theology from humanity and then out to deity, not the other way around as religious traditions have long done (i.e. they begin with some holy text as authoritative revealed truth for defining deity and human ethics). First establish the best of being human, and then project that out to define deity, but as transcendently better (Ultimate Good or Love). As Alexander Pope said, “The proper study of mankind is man”.

This is all to say- I am not a Biblicist (i.e. dependent on the texts of religious holy books for authoritative validation of ideas or ethics). My location of ultimate authority is common humanity and the best of common human goodness, whether exhibited by non-religious/atheist or religious persons. I view all such common love as the expression of the God spirit, or god-likeness (that is to say- humaneness) in ordinary people. ( And yes, I am suggesting that all people- both good and bad- are equally incarnated with the God spirit- what we call the human spirit. There has been no special incarnation only in religious heroes like Christian Jesus. The equal incarnation of God in all alike- how’s that for a new metaphysical basis for human equality? Unfortunately, too many deny and bury that core human spirit and choose to exhibit the inherited animal more.)

Continuing the previous point… I do not start my appeal to ultimate meaning and authority with religious gods or religious holy books, as traditionally claimed “revealed truth” or “supreme authorities”. Those traditional sources of validation should be subject to the same evaluating criteria as all other areas of life- i.e. is the content good or bad, humane or inhumane?

And yes, I get it that an unconditional theology will spell the end of all religion. If God is freely accessible to all alike- not a dominating authority, not demanding salvation conditions (sacrifice/payment), not requiring a religious lifestyle or ritual, not making tribal distinctions between believer/unbeliever, not threatening future judgment/punishment/destruction… well, who then needs religion?

A “stunning new theology” buried by Christianity

The great contradiction in Christianity and its holy book, the New Testament.

(The conclusions here are based on Historical Jesus research, notably Q Wisdom Sayings gospel research- i.e. James Robinson, John Kloppenborg, among others.)

First, why go after Paul’s Christ myth, the highly revered icon of a major world religion? Because, even though the Christ represents varied highly valued ideals to the Christian community- i.e. love, forgiveness, salvation, hope- it has also embraced and reinforced some of the worst features from an ancient past- i.e. retaliatory vengeance (see the Thessalonian letters), tribal exclusion (true believers saved, unbelievers excluded), domination/subservience relating (Lord Christ and his mediating priesthood), and angry gods threatening to punish and destroy (John’s Revelation as the epitome statement of this).

You cannot merge and mix contradicting opposites. That only creates “cognitive dissonance” (see Zenon Lotufo’s “Cruel God, Kind God”). Also, the nasty elements in a merger undermine, weaken, and distort the good stuff. It’s like putting new wine in old, rotten wineskins.

Further, the Christ gospel of Paul is mainly responsible for embedding/re-enforcing the myth of apocalypse in Western consciousness and keeping that pathological myth alive. As James Tabor said, “Paul has been the most influential person in history and he has shaped practically all we think about everything”. His Christ myth has shaped much of how we think and act- i.e. our ethics, justice.

Religious icons and beliefs still exert an outsize influence on human thought and behavior (Note the 85% of humanity still affiliated with a major world religion as per the World Religion Survey). A close examination of humanity’s highest ideal and authority- deity- reveals too much residual subhuman/inhuman stuff still in the mix. Religious reformism has to move beyond peripheral tinkering to thoroughly and properly tackle the core reality- e.g. the nature of religious deity.

Fortunately, growing human insight into the true nature of love as unconditional now points us toward a stunning new understanding of the true nature of Ultimate Reality- God. Parents, spouses, friends all get that love should be unconditional from daily relating to imperfect family/people all around them. Now project this highest form of love out to define deity properly as Ultimate Love and Goodness. The best in humanity, as understood from common modern sensibilities, defines the transcendently better in deity. Yes, this is an “audacious” new way of doing theology. But it points to a more humane understanding of deity than what we have inherited from religious traditions and their holy books.

Moving into the issue…

The Search For Historical Jesus, over the past three centuries, has given us the basic outline of what happened in the Christian tradition. The latest phase of this search- the Jesus Seminar- offers more detail on the basic issues involved, i.e. that early Christianity was a diverse movement with major differences, for example, between Jewish Christianity (Jesus as some sort of prophet/king but not God) and Paul’s Gentile Christian movement (Jesus as God-man, cosmic Christ/Savior). Further, there were numerous other gospels that were not accepted into the Christian cannon- e.g. the gospel of Philip, gospel of Mary, Gospel of James, gospel of Thomas, and so on. The victors of the early Christian battles (i.e. Paul’s version of the gospel) got to dictate what was truth and what was heresy. Emperor Constantine also stuck his nose into the truth/heresy fighting among early Christians.

(Note on the four gospels included in the New Testament: Of the many other gospels available when the New Testament canon was assembled, why were only Matthew, Mark, Luke and John included? Historians have noted some of the primitive reasoning behind the centuries-long selection process, such as Irenaeus’ affirmation that “there are four universal winds… animals have four legs…”, etc. Such was ancient ‘theological’ reasoning.)

The Search For Historical Jesus has revealed that there was a real historical person and we believe that we have gotten close to his original message. But that message is much less than what the New Testament gospels have attributed to Jesus. The NT gospel writers put a lot of things in Jesus’ mouth, claiming that he had said such things but many of those things contradict his core theme/message.

Note, for instance, his statement in Matthew 5 to “love your enemy”. The single most profound statement of supreme no-conditions love. But then a few chapters later (Matthew 11) Jesus apparently pivots 180 degrees and threatens “unbelievers/enemies” with the single most intense statement of supreme hatred- enemies should be cast into hell. Matthew claims that Jesus threatened the villages that refused to accept him and his miracles/message, stating that they would be “cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth”. These statements could not have come from the same person because they are statements of irreconcilable opposites.

The core teaching of Jesus has been summarized in the Q Wisdom Sayings gospel, notably the first version of Q (Q1). That teaching is basically Matthew 5-7 with some other comments and parables. Luke 6 is a similar summary but with a different setting- lakeside versus Matthew’s mountain top.

Matthew, obsessed with righteousness, tampers with the core Q Sayings Wisdom teaching in the chapter 5-7 section of his book. He adds his own editorial glosses, such as his condition that people’s righteousness had to exceed that of religious teachers if they wanted to get into heaven. They had to meet the impossible condition to “be perfect just as God is perfect”. That distorts entirely the main point of Jesus that it did not matter how people responded to love, because God generously included all, both good and bad. God was unconditional Love, and universal, unlimited inclusion. Luke in his treatment of the very same message does a better job, summing Jesus’ point as “be unconditionally merciful just like your Father is unconditionally merciful” (Luke 6). That gets the spirit of the passage better than Matthew’s conditional statements.

The central statement or theme in the Q Wisdom Sayings gospel material is a behavior/belief relationship. Note this in the Matthew 5:38-48 section, “Don’t engage the old eye for eye justice toward your enemy/offender. Instead, love your enemy because God does. How so? God does not retaliate against and punish enemies/offenders, but instead generously gives the good gifts of life- sun and rain for crops- inclusively to both good people and bad people alike”. Jesus based a non-retaliatory behavior on a similar validating belief- a “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God” (James Robinson).

A critical takeaway here is that a non-retaliating God (no more eye for eye) is a non-apocalyptic God because apocalyptic is about supreme and final retaliation, ultimate eye for eye retaliation. The God of Jesus will not engage the ultimate act of retaliation that is the apocalyptic punishment and destruction of all things (include here the eternal retaliation that is the hell myth). The God of Jesus was non-punitive and non-apocalyptic.

Other common sense conclusions flow from this stunning new theology, from the core theme of a no-conditions God. For instance, the God of Jesus would not ultimately judge or condemn anyone and would not ultimately exclude anyone (again, sun and rain are given to all- to both good and bad people). The God of Jesus is best defined with the adjective “unconditional” and this clearly summarizes the core theme/teaching in Matthew 5 and Luke 6.

This also means that the God of Jesus was non-salvationist (i.e. no need to “be saved” via sacrifice or payment for sin). His God would not demand sacrifice or payment before forgiving, loving, and including even the worst offenders/enemies. He would give, expecting nothing in return. And this point scandalizes the religious/moral mind that is oriented to fairness and justice as proper retribution or punishment, justice as tit for tat, hurt for hurt, demanded payment for wrong. Note Jesus’ parable on the Vineyard workers and the Prodigal Son for illustrations of how good people were offended by the unconditional generosity, forgiveness, and love of the Father and the vineyard owner. Their disregard for the commonly understood norms of fair justice offended the older brother and scandalized the all-day vineyard workers. Also, the unconditional inclusion of local “sinners” at meal tables offended righteous, moral Jews.

There is a “thematic coherence” to the message and behavior of the Historical Jesus and that message/behavior is intensely oriented to unconditional love.

The rest of the New Testament, including the gospels, contradicts this core non-retaliatory, unconditional love theme entirely. A proper setting forth of the correct chronology of the New Testament highlights this profound contradiction at the heart of Christianity.

The dating

Jesus taught first, around 27-36 CE. I would offer that the main point/statement in his core message, the Q Wisdom Sayings gospel, would be the behavior/belief relationship noted above: “Do not engage eye for eye retaliation, but instead love your enemy because God does. How so? Just as we are expected to do, God does not engage eye for eye justice against imperfect people. Instead, God gives the good gifts of life- sun and rain for crops- to both good and bad people”. God is a non-retaliatory reality that loves all unconditionally and universally, expecting nothing in return. God’s love is not tit for tat love that is dependent on the response of the person. Further, God does not view humanity as tribally divided (e.g. good people versus bad people) and does not treat some differently from others. All are the favorites of God, including our enemies.

Paul wrote the next material that is in the New Testament- i.e. his Thessalonian letters written around 50 CE (I am passing over the argument re the authenticity of the second Thessalonian letter). His other letters were also written in the 50s CE. Paul contradicts Jesus entirely, notably the core Jesus theme/statement in Matthew 5:38-48. Paul also employs a behavior/belief pairing to state his theology that is the very opposite to that of Jesus. In Romans 12:17-20 he urges Christians to hold their desire for vengeance at bay because God will satisfy it eventually with ultimate eye for eye vengeance.

Here is the stunner- Paul affirms his theology that God is a supremely retaliatory reality by quoting an Old Testament statement, “Vengeance is mine says the Lord. I will repay”. In this, Paul re-affirms eye for eye retaliatory justice and response. There is no ultimate “love your enemy” in Paul’s God or Christ.

In the above section Paul is arguing with the Roman Christians- restrain your vengeance lust, not because God does that (rejecting eye for eye justice as Jesus did), but to the contrary, because God will unleash ultimate vengeance soon enough and satisfy your desire for eye for eye vengeance on your enemies.

I would suggest that Paul used this behavior/belief pairing in Romans 12 intentionally to contradict the same behavior/belief pairing in Jesus’ central message. The similarities are too obvious. Paul rejects the non-retaliatory God of Jesus to fully affirm a retaliatory, punitive God, a tribal God that favors his true believers and rejects the enemies of believers.

Paul also, in other places (again, in contradiction to Jesus), straightforwardly embraced an apocalyptic God/Christ. Once more, note his Thessalonian letters where he states, “Lord Jesus will return in blazing fire to punish/destroy all who do not believe my gospel”. Apocalypse- the supreme act of a retaliatory, destroying God that engages ultimate eye for eye justice.

Further, Paul rejected and trashed in general, the wisdom tradition that Jesus belonged to. See his first Corinthian letter for detail.

All the gospel writers that were later included in the New Testament affirmed Paul’s views and his Christ myth by adding made-up biographical material and statements that they claimed were from Jesus, material that directly contradicted his main theme and message. Mark wrote first around 70 CE. Then Matthew and Luke wrote around 80 CE, John later around 100 CE.

All affirmed Paul’s apocalyptic, destroying Christ myth and Paul’s gospel of that Christ as a great cosmic sacrifice to pay for all sin (supremely conditional love).

Paul and his apocalyptic Christ myth- the most influential person and myth in history- has since shaped Western consciousness more than anything else. His Christ myth also shaped Western justice as punitive and retaliatory- i.e. eye for eye justice (pain for pain, hurt for hurt).

Fortunately, the inclusion of the original Jesus material in the New Testament has served as a moderating force in the Christian mix, countering the harsher elements with mercy. But unfortunately, the mixing and merging of opposites has resulted in the ‘cognitive dissonance’ of a diamonds in dung situation (the conclusion of Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy). The better stuff- the core Jesus message and his stunning new unconditional theology- has been too often distorted and weakened by the nastier elements. Again, much like new wine put into old, rotten wineskins. (See Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God for a psychotherapist’s view of the cognitive dissonance of mixed God theories, and the damaging impact of including subhuman features in ideals/authorities such as deity.)

Contrary to the unconditional love that Jesus advocated, Christian love too often is a tribally-limited love, reserved more specially for fellow true believers in the Christ myth. Paul advocated such tribal love. Also, note his intolerant rage, in varied places, at his fellow apostles that did not submit to his Christ myth. He cursed them with eternal damnation. John in the early chapters of Revelation similarly curses “lukewarm” Christians with threats of exclusion and eternal destruction. And then how about those later chapters of Revelation?

After the core Q Wisdom Sayings message of Historical Jesus there is nothing of the scandalous generosity of unconditional love in the rest of the New Testament.

The unconditional God of Jesus, and the supremely conditional God/Christ of Paul that dominates the New Testament (demand for cosmic sacrifice before forgiving), are two entirely opposite realities.

Ah, such contradictions, eh.

Here is the main contradiction summarized again:

Jesus’ ethic and the theology/belief that it is based on- “Do not engage eye for eye retaliation but instead love your enemy because God does, sending the beneficial gifts of life, sun and rain for crops, to all alike, to both good and bad people”. Behave like that because God is like that.

Paul’s ethic and the theology/belief that it is based upon. He copies the pattern Jesus used of an ethic/behavior based up a similar theology/belief. I believe Paul set this pattern up deliberately to directly contradict the central theme of Jesus and his stunning new theology. Paul’s argument and reasoning in Romans 12:17-20, “Be nice now to your offenders. Hold your vengeance lust at bay because my God- “Vengeance is mine, I will repay”- shall satisfy it soon enough”.

That is the profound contradiction in the New Testament between Jesus and Paul, between the non-retaliatory theology of Jesus and the opposite retaliatory theology of Paul. These core ideals/authorities- the very core ideals of great human narratives- influence and shape all else in belief/life systems.

Takeaway? The central theme/message of Historical Jesus: “You must not engage ‘eye for eye’ retaliatory justice. Instead, love your enemies/offenders because God does. How so? God does not retaliate and punish God’s enemies. Instead, God gives the good gifts of life- sun and rain for crops- universally and inclusively to both good and bad people”.

Christianity has never taken this central theology of Jesus seriously. It opted instead for the retaliatory and tribally excluding God of Paul. Unbelievers are excluded from Paul’s salvation scheme, and face the threat of ultimate retaliation in apocalypse and hell. Note Paul’s repeated use in his varied letters of the threatening term “destruction” in relation to people who refuse to believe his God/Christ.

Defining Alarmism: The exaggeration of real problems to apocalyptic scale thereby distorting the true state of something and inciting fear-based policy responses. Such responses have been immensely more harmful than helpful in solving some problem. Decarbonisation is one example. It is a policy that is based on the lunacy of demonizing the basic food of all life- CO2- and trying to end the use of cheap fossil fuels that have benefited life immensely, lifting billions out of the misery of poverty and enabling humanity, with increased wealth, to better care for the environment.

The distortions of alarmist argument/ideology

Climate alarmists (e.g. Bill Nye the “anti-science” guy) argue that we must return to the pre-industrial levels of CO2 and average surface temperatures. They see the roughly 1 degree Centigrade of warming over the past 150 years as portending the end of days- a heat apocalypse. This is an unscientific read of climate history.

Pre-industrial levels of CO2- i.e. the basic food of all life, not a pollutant or poison- were around 285 ppm. That is a dangerously low level and plant life was stressed/starving. Paleo-climate history shows that past levels of atmospheric CO2 were often in the multiple-thousands of ppm and plant life flourished during such times (e.g. the Cambrian Explosion). And there was no ‘heat apocalypse’ with those higher levels. Plants prefer optimal levels of around 1000-1500 ppm, which is what horticulturalists/farmers maintain in greenhouses. With just the slight rise to today’s levels of 400 plus ppm, plant life is once again flourishing across the Earth.

And return to the pre-industrial levels of cold temperature? That is madness. The pre-industrial world was the era of the Little Ice Age, with abnormally cold temperatures across the world. Again, paleo-climate evidence (e.g. Ian Plimer’s Heaven and Earth) shows that for over 80 percent of world history the planet has been entirely ice free and life has flourished during such times with vastly expanded habitable areas and massively increased biomass. Animal life then benefits immensely with more food. A much warmer world is a more optimal world for all life.

Note: Current world average temperatures (14.5 degrees C.) are barely above ice age averages (12 degrees C.). This is not optimal, normal, or healthy for life. Life does much better with averages heading more toward 20 degrees C. Will this mean a “fried planet”? No, because Earth has an efficient heat distribution system, notably the great upwellings of warm air at the tropics that take that heat energy to the northern and southern latitudes resulting in less severe gradients between latitudes which lessens the potential for storminess in climate. It also means warmer winters (less severe gradients between seasons), and warmer nights. Overall, this should result in less storminess (hurricanes, tornadoes that depend on severe gradients of temperatures- i.e. cold air fronts meeting warm air.).

Aside: The end of tribalism

All humans alive on Earth today belong to the same one family, the common human family that embraces every person across our planet. We have all descended from the same one ‘great, great, great, … grandmother’. See https://www.northernnews.ca/news/new-genetic-study-pinpoints-the-african-homeland-that-nurtured-humanity-for-70000-years/wcm/9b9c0be1-c419-41cb-aedf-21291a2e7c0e

Note on Problem solving…

Problem solving that is thorough and for the long-term future should include all contributing factors/causes related to any given problem that is under consideration. Consider, for instance, the problem of bad human behavior- i.e. the pathologies of tribal exclusion, domination of others, and the impulse to vengeance/destruction of some “enemy” other. What ideas incite, guide, and validate such behaviors? What narrative themes influence such pathologies?

Bad ideas that have contributed to bad human behavior have descended down through history- from ancient mythology, to world religions, and are now given expression in modern “secular” ideologies.

“The same mythical themes have repeated all across history and across all the cultures of the world”, Joseph Campbell. See Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives below.

Added note:

Serious problems across the planet need our attention. But these problems are not helped by exaggerating and distorting their true state. Alarmist distortion of problems (the end of days is nigh) has driven the public adoption of policy responses that are more often harmful than helpful (i.e. the bio-fuels mess). The contemporary endeavor to shut down the use of cheap fossil fuels- the very engine of human industrial/technological civilization and all that we value- will be devastating to humanity.

Quote (a thought-provoking point made by Bob Brinsmead)

“A God that demands full punishment/payment of all sin (i.e. sacrifice) before he will forgive is a God that knows nothing of true unconditional forgiveness or love”. If the debt is fully paid, the wrong fully punished, then forgiveness is not required as there is nothing to forgive, no more debt to be paid. We imperfect humans are held to a higher standard of forgiveness and love (i.e. “authentic love keeps no record of wrongs”). We are expected to just forgive and love without expectation of some equivalent response/return, without demand for payment or sacrifice (Luke 6: 27-36, “Love, do good, and give without expecting anything in return”).

Authentic love is unconditional and not based on the similar response of the other. It is not tit for tat. And it takes a special courage and maturity to break a retaliatory cycle with someone (hurt for hurt, harm for harm) and take the lead to engage such no-conditions love.

The ideas/myths behind alarmist movements across history… new alternatives.

The myth of apocalypse has been one of the most distorting and destructive ideas conceived by primitive minds. Its central theme of decline toward catastrophic ending distorts the overall rising trajectory of life. Further, historians (see notes below on research of Richard Landes, Arthur Herman, Arthur Mendel, David Redles, and others) have traced its role in religious apocalyptic movements and in “secular” apocalyptic mass-death movements such as Marxism, Nazism, and now in environmental alarmism.

Apocalyptic-scale alarmism unleashes the totalitarian impulse… How so?

(And someone said regarding the Extinction Rebellion, that it was a “middle-class death cult that should be laughed out of existence”, hence some of my wording below- i.e. “lunacy gone insane”, a reference to a lot of the environmental alarmism of today.)

Watch the ever-lurking totalitarian impulse in the apocalyptic fear-mongering over environmental problems. When you tell populations that every twitch in nature portends the end of days as imminently nigh, that the situation is at “crisis” levels, or that catastrophe is just up ahead, then alarmist logic reasons that there is no more time for indecisive debate or the critically vital feature of good science- skepticism. We must act now before it is too late (tipping points are being approached and passed) and we must act ‘drastically’ to save ourselves, the world, all life.

This crisis logic unleashes the totalitarian impulse to shut down opponents, to take full control, because the crisis demands decisive action now, and damn the consequences or outcomes. Alarmists appear unaware, or to not care, that this crisis narrative and logic is a direct attack on democracy and freedom. Examples: Pres. Obama’s AG, Loretta Lynch, tried to criminalize skeptical science, and David Suzuki called for oil company CEOs to be imprisoned. Get that: Lock up the executives of the companies that provide the fuel for our transportation, to heat our homes, and to sustain agriculture and all else that we value in life.

Central to this apocalyptic logic is the demand for ‘coercive purging’ of the thing that the alarmist believes threatens the world. In the case of climate alarmists the great threat is industrial civilization that is sustained by fossil fuels. The coercive purging of the threat is part of the larger alarmist call for instantaneous transformation of society. We saw this “instantaneous transmutation” element (Arthur Mendel in Vision and Violence) with “coercive purification” in Marxism (purge the threat of capitalism), in Nazism (purge the threat of Jewish Bolshevism), and we are now watching it in environmentalism (again, purge the threat of technological/industrial civilization). Today the demand for instant transformation is expressed in the call for rapid “decarbonisation” of our societies (the lunacy of claiming that CO2 is a great threat to life).

Contemporary apocalyptic logic is the very same reasoning that was behind the irrational actions of many people across history, caught up in the hysteria of the apocalyptic movements of their era, who then abandoned their crops and normal patterns of life to go wait in caves for the end to come. No wonder Julian Simon (Ultimate Resource) warned that alarmism creates fatalism and resignation in people. Those people often starved as their crops rotted in the fields.

Likewise, today’s environmental alarmists, with their crusades for coercive purging and instant transformation, will devastate populations as we are already seeing in rising energy costs and fuel poverty, and the excess death rates from cold in places like the US (estimated 11,000 additional annual deaths) and Britain (32,000 annual excess deaths from cold).

Do we really want to return to the climate conditions of the pre-industrial era as some kind of optimum? That was the time of the Little Ice Age, a bitterly cold period across the planet, notably in the Northern hemisphere (roughly 1645-1715). Dangerously low pre-industrial levels of CO2 at roughly 285 ppm stressed plant life, and animal life suffered as a consequence. Today, life across Earth is once again flourishing with more basic plant food and a bit more warmth. All life would appreciate even more of both food and warmth, just as life flourished during the last interglacial- the Eemian- with 4 degrees Centigrade higher temperatures than temperature averages of our interglacial today.

The continuing apocalyptic alarmism over changes in nature fueled by hysterical media oriented to Creating Fear is lunacy gone insane (David Altheide nailed media in his book Creating Fear: News and the manufacture of crisis). And environmental alarmism misses the true state of the world by miles.

Julian Simon taught us how to properly view life and how to get to the “true state of the world” (i.e. How to correctly view the varied elements and problems in our world). He argued that we have to look at the complete big picture. That means including all the evidence from all sides of any issue, especially contrary evidence. This will help us to counter our own personal confirmation bias tendencies to shut out contrary evidence that does not affirm our beliefs.

And we have to look at the long-term trends related to the issue we are looking at. This will show, for instance, that climate change today is mild, and mainly beneficial to life, compared to the more severe changes of the longer term past. Look past the repeated claims that some feature in weather is the “worst on record”. The “record” being referred to is only the past century and a half of more formal weather recording.

Up from the section just below…

Site project

This site advocates themes for a new meta-narrative that includes the discoveries of the past few centuries of science along with the best of human “spiritual” understanding- i.e. the “ultimate meaning” element. This is about embracing thoroughly a primal human concern as evident in the 85% of humanity still affiliated with a major world religion with many of the remaining “unaffiliated” 15% still “spiritual, but not religious”.

(Note: The ‘spiritual’ being understood in terms of the best in humanity. I do theology by taking the best in humanity as central to meaning and projecting that out to define greater reality/deity- i.e. what is most humane is most true, and most real. See note on unconditional below as the best of human discovery. I make it my baseline criterion for ultimate ideals and authorities like deity. Further, I do not embrace the Biblicism that grants special authority to religious holy books as revelations of ultimate truth from deity, with self-claimed or internal validation.)

An authentically humane narrative will embrace as its cohering center “the stunning theology of a no conditions God”. No religious tradition has ever communicated this ultimate reality to humanity. All religion, to the contrary, is highly conditional- e.g. conditions of right belief, a required salvation scheme (some sacrifice, payment), correct ritual, and detailed religious prescriptions for life, with punishments for wrongs.

A humane narrative will also embrace restorative justice, not punitive. And no, this does not undermine or weaken the need to hold all responsible for their behavior (the natural and social consequences of behavior in this world, with a focus on restitution/healing for victims). Full personal responsibility for our behavior is essential for healthy human development in this life.

Unconditional deity at the center of a system of meaning overturns entirely the Zoroastrian dualist theology that has dominated Western thought for millennia. It overturns the dominant features of Western theology- i.e. themes of deity as Judge (justice as punitive), God as tribally exclusive (true believers in the right religion versus unbelievers), deity as dominating with humanity subservient (i.e. God as King/Lord that mediates authority through priesthoods), and God as violently destructive (apocalypse, hell).

Unconditional theology is liberating in that it states that, whatever we experience in this life, there is nothing to ultimately fear. There is only Love at the core of reality and life, a stunning no conditions Love. That reverberates out to change everything, notably the central punitive orientation of human justice systems.

This unconditional ideal transforms and liberates consciousness as nothing else can. For example, it frees consciousness from humanity’s “primal fear”- the fear of after-life harm (i.e. ultimate judgment, punishment).

Unconditional to define deity? Why? Unconditional is the highest and most humane form of love that we have discovered. Friends, spouses, and parents all get this as the best response to imperfect others. Therefore, unconditional would best define the Ultimate Goodness that humanity has long hoped for in deity- our Ultimate Ideal or Reality. “What is most humane is most true and most real”. This is pretty much my theodicy (i.e. defense of ultimate Good).

See the potential outline of a meta-narrative in “Old Story Themes, New Story Alternatives” (16 dominant ideas) in next section below.

The central climate issue

(Climate alarmism is the latest phase in the long history of excessive human alarm over the natural world. Environmental alarmism is an offspring movement of more general apocalyptic alarm (i.e. end of life, end of world fears). This site probes the mythical roots of such movements.)

Both sides in the climate debate- alarmists and “deniers”/skeptics- agree that climate change is occurring. As it always has. Climate is a complex and dynamic system, not a static system. Pardon the “duh” here.

(Note: Skeptics do not “deny climate change”. They simply disagree with the alarmist claim that human contribution to CO2 is the main cause of climate change and that the scale of climate change will be catastrophic in nature.)

Both sides agree that CO2 has a warming effect or influence. If a warming period is occurring then CO2 is contributing to that warming (but not to cooling).

However, the central disagreement is over the actual role of CO2- how prominent is it? Alarmists argue that CO2 is the dominant or main cause of warming, and some even claim that it is almost entirely the cause of warming periods. They also claim that warming will be catastrophic in outcome.

But other natural factors have consistently overwhelmed the CO2 influence which skeptics point out is small. Note for example, that while CO2 levels continue to rise (now 400 ppm plus), the warming of 1975-95 has turned into the almost flat trend since. Where is the claimed causal relationship here?

Factors like the cosmic ray/sun/cloud interaction and the ocean/atmosphere interaction have shown stronger correlation to the climate change that we have observed over the past few decades and centuries.

Point? You cannot argue for policies to decarbonise societies when the science does not affirm your claim that CO2 is mainly responsible for warming, and that the warming will be catastrophic in nature. The outcome of decarbonisation would be devastating to billions of people depending on cheap fossil fuels to lift them out of poverty.

Further, given the current knowledge of climate science, as one scientist said, it is absurd to think that we can control climate by turning a CO2 knob. You cannot “stop climate change”. But we can adapt to it just as our line of humanity has done across past history with constantly and naturally changing climate, through an ice age and two inter-glacials.

Further, the hard evidence has shown that the climate change we have experienced has been mild compared to past periods of change. The warming since 1975 has been only 0.3 degree Centigrade. Contrary to the inaccurate and discredited climate models, actual evidence shows that there is no “climate emergency”.

Another critical fact in the mix- the lunacy of demonizing CO2 as a pollutant or poison. CO2 is the main food of all life. It has been at starvation levels during the past millions of years of this ice age era. With some small recovery now, life is once again “flourishing” with a 14% increase in plant productivity since 1982. Plant food levels are still low at 400 ppm plus. Plants prefer CO2 in the 1000-1500 ppm range. With those levels in the past there was no climate crisis or catastrophic outcome for life. Instead, life flourished (see Ian Plimer’s Heaven and Earth).

(Note that the previous inter-glacial- the Eemian of 127,000 to 106,000 years ago- was much warmer than our current inter-glacial. Also climate change over the last glacial Maximum- the Wisconsin in North America- was much more severe than the changes over this subsequent inter-glacial and all life on Earth today has survived those natural changes. Glaciations, and cold periods in general, are the most destructive factors to life. Alarmists ignore the beneficial outcomes of warming on life.)

This site…

This site advocates themes for a new meta-narrative that includes the discoveries of the past few centuries of science along with the best of human “spiritual” understanding- i.e. the “ultimate meaning” element. This is about embracing thoroughly the primal human concern for meaning as evident in the 85% of humanity still affiliated with a major world religion, with many of the remaining “unaffiliated” 15% still “spiritual, but just not religious” (World Religion survey).

The irrepressible nature of the meaning impulse: Add here the history of philosophy, and that even in the scientific arena many scientists frequently cross the science/philosophy boundary, including in the most basic science of all- physics (Sabine Hossenfelder in ‘Lost In Math’). You cannot suppress or deny this fundamental impulse for meaning. Greg Easterbrook noted long ago in a Wired article that materialist scientists constantly do just what religious people have done across history- i.e. appeal to invisible, unknowable realities to explain what exists (note multi-verse theory, or multiple hidden dimensions, as examples).

It’s understood that some people can find final satisfaction in orienting their meaning impulse to material reality alone but that does not work for most people. It never has and never will. Most people across history have oriented their impulse for meaning to some greater creating, sustaining reality (Ultimate Reality or core Reality) that is of the nature of Mind, Consciousness, Self or Spirit/God, and of course, if we think of Mind/Consciousness/Self then that obviously points to Person or personhood. To conclude that Natural law, or quantum energy/force fields, alone will provide the final explanations about reality, well, that does not suffice for most people.

Add here that scientific rationality has done us a great service in exposing the irrationality of much inherited religious belief. But I am not convinced of the correlation of rationality with scientific discovery alone or material reality alone. Others argue it is entirely rational to conclude there is some greater Mind, Consciousness, or Self behind reality and in fact that may be the most logical conclusion to make regarding many things in this profoundly mysterious Cosmos and life.

The issue is what people project out to explain/define greater reality… i.e. Is it fully humane or not? The 16 new themes below deal with things now understood by most people as more humane realities.

Note also the article in the second section below re the frustrated scientist who argues that scientific evidence alone will not settle the climate debate. There are deeper issues of meaning behind the disagreements over the evidence. This site probes those deeper issues that are often “meaning” issues.

Quotes from sections below

“The 100% failure rate of apocalyptic to predict the future will continue. It will continue to make fools of otherwise bright and well-intentioned people, Paul Ehrlich being a notable example (i.e. global cooling, mass starvation, exhaustion of mineral resources, United Kingdom will not exist by 2000, species holocaust, and other end-of-days scenarios). Unfortunately, the “world’s most intelligent man”, Stephen Hawking, also threw in his lot with apocalyptic in the final years of his life.”

“There is no ‘climate crisis'”.

(Note on climate change: “Climate is changing just as it has changed endlessly across the history of our planet. The changes of the recent past have been mild. From 1975 till today we had only 0.3 degree Centigrade of warming. The previous interglacial- the Eemian- had temperatures that were 4 degrees Centigrade higher than today, in the Northern latitudes, with much smaller ice sheets and higher ocean levels. All life on Earth today has survived such climate change and done well. The climate changes during the last Glacial Maximum were much more severe than the changes during our current interglacial. Our interglacial has also experienced the Roman and Medieval Warming periods that were as warm as today and life flourished with that increased warmth.”)

See: https://www.cfact.org/2019/10/13/common-sense-musings-on-the-climate-debate/

“There will be no apocalypse (i.e. end of the world)- environmental or other- because there is no God of apocalyptic (nor vengeful Gaia, angry Planet, retaliatory Universe, or karma). There is no punitive, destroying Force or Spirit behind life”.

“Good research affirms that the overall trajectory of life rises/improves toward something better and does not decline toward something worse”.

Quote from post to discussion group: “People offer the truism to ‘follow the money in science’. I would add- follow the philosophy/belief behind the science. This is especially true of climate science, so corrupted today by both. Read that good statement by Richard Lindzen- that future historians will look back at this time as having experienced perhaps the greatest mass delusion ever- that people across the world believed the food of all life (i.e. CO2) was a poison/pollutant. I keep pushing people to go to those root ideas behind all this- the religious thing.” (see “Old Story Themes” just below)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on New Story Alternatives to Declinist/Apocalyptic mythology

The 16 fundamental themes of our human story… and the alternatives.

“The same mythical themes repeat across all history and across all the cultures of the world”, Joseph Campbell. They repeat in ancient mythologies, in world religions, and in the “secular/ideological” versions of the modern world.

The mythical or meaning element in alarm over nature.

Waves of alarm repeatedly surge through world media, often related to environmental issues. Over recent decades these surges of alarm have been mainly related to climate change. What drives this endless hysteria that natural world events/changes portend the end of the world? Here (the link just below) is one scientist’s comment on the political element in the mix. But as this author notes, there is something deeper going on, something religious- i.e. the “meaning” thing. He does not elaborate on the real nature of this meaning element. That is the project of this site.

See…

Understanding the climate movement: the impotence of science.

This site probes the mythical or meaning roots of human fear, anxiety, and despair, notably in relation to nature and the harsher outcomes of the natural world (e.g. natural disaster, disease, violence- the “imperfections” of our world). Alarm over nature is much more than just an ideological or scientific issue and that is why scientific fact alone, as vital as that is to all areas of life, will not correct the madness of environmental alarmism thoroughly and for the long term future.

Many people continue to embrace the pathology of some ultimate threat behind the natural world- i.e. the belief that harmful natural events are the work of destroying deity and are punishment for human sin. And yes, this myth of punitive, destroying deity is now given “secular” or ideological expression in versions like “vengeful Gaia… angry Planet/pissed Mother Earth… retributive Universe… and karma”.

But the natural world only presents us with ‘natural consequences’. For example, if you do not wash your hands before eating you will likely ingest some virus from something you touched earlier in the day. Consequence? A cold or worse. Or live in an earthquake zone and you may experience the damage from that natural world feature. But such things are not punishment from deity for being bad.

See the 16 fundamental ideas below that embody and express our primal human fears and concerns.

Quote: “Are we being punished for enjoying life too much?”, Japanese lady in the aftermath of the 2011 tsunami.

Site project: Liberate people from unnecessary fear and anxiety over the harmful elements of our world. How? Eliminate the sense of threat behind life- i.e. the great pathology of apocalyptic.

Note: There will be no apocalypse- environmental or other- because there is no God of apocalypse. How so? Here is one line of argument from a major world belief system. Historical Jesus in his most basic message of the Q Wisdom Sayings gospel (Matthew 5:38-48, Luke 6: 27-36) urged that there should be no more eye for eye retaliation but instead love for enemies. He argued that we should do so because God does that. God does not retaliate against the bad but generously forgives and includes all, giving the beneficial and fundamental gifts of life- i.e. sun and rain- to both good and bad people. In that statement Jesus offered the stunning new theology of an unconditionally loving God, inclusive of all, non-punitive, and non-destructive.

The point here? A God that does not retaliate is a non-apocalyptic God because apocalyptic is a great final act of eye for eye retaliation against enemies/evil. Apocalypse is an act of ultimate punishment and destruction. See the New Testament book of Revelation for detail.

Paul, contradicting Jesus, embraced a God of retaliation and apocalypse. He accepted the God of Zoroastrian and Jewish apocalyptic. Note that he quoted the Old Testament to affirm his retaliatory theology, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord” (Romans 12:17-20). And in his first letters (i.e. Thessalonians) he affirmed apocalypse: “Lord Jesus will return in blazing fire to punish/destroy all who do not believe my gospel”. Paul’s retaliatory/apocalyptic God became the Christian God in direct contradiction to the main non-retaliatory theme/theology of Historical Jesus.

This is the foundational contradiction of Christianity- i.e. the entirely opposite theologies of Jesus and Paul. This is about the fundamental and irreconcilable themes of non-retaliation vs retaliation, non-violent versus violent deity or non-destructive vs destructive deity, tribal exclusion vs universal inclusion, punitive justice vs restorative justice, and stunningly unconditional love vs highly conditional love.

And yes, Christian apocalyptic is mainly responsible for embedding the apocalyptic myth in Western consciousness. That then shaped 19th Century Declinism (“The Idea of Decline in Western History”, Arthur Herman) and birthed its offspring- contemporary environmental alarmism.

Main site topics:

16 themes for a new meta-narrative centered on the stunning new theology of unconditional deity.

Environmental alarmism as contemporary apocalyptic mythology (the offspring of Declinism). The endlessly destructive pathology of alarmism.

Campbell’s outline of the main features of human story and the meaning of life (i.e. universal love as mature humanity- see sections below).

The profound contradiction between Historical Jesus and Paul’s Christ myth. Jesus rejected Christ/messiah mythology. (also further below). Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on The 16 fundamental themes of our human story… and the alternatives.

Climate alarmism and apocalyptic hysteria over change (change in nature alarmism).

We are not facing a “climate emergency”.

Section topics: Stasis versus change in nature (fear of change); The core climate issue (i.e. the prominence, or not, of CO2); Irresponsible and destructive apocalyptic alarmism; The origin and pathology of alarmism (original fear of nature; destructive nature as the expression of punitive, destroying deity; the continuing pathology of nature alarmism today); Climate facts; Countering the alarmist narrative (go to the root ideas behind the mythology).

Post from discussion group (this relates to the apocalyptic mythology that is regularly tackled on this site)

“Note, in today’s environmental alarmism, the promotion of endless fear over any “change” in nature. Climate physicist/meteorologist Richard Lindzen said regarding change, “we are scanning for small changes… we are talking about tenths of a degree… and viewing them as ominous signs of something…” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJwayalLpYY). Change itself has become the feared thing. This relates to what Alston Chase noted in his book ‘In A Dark Wood’, that many people believe there should be stasis in nature, at some optimal state. But there is no such stasis anywhere in nature and our past millions of years in this ‘ice-age era’ affirm the constancy of change. We exist in a world where there are massive swings between cold and hot periods on our planet, and many minor swings are constantly occurring between the big ones (see Ian Plimer’s graph of climate changes over the past 55,000 years in ‘Heaven And Earth’).

“But fear of change itself, even minor perturbations, is now reason for alarmists to argue that the apocalypse is coming. This is insanity gone insane. Every hiccup in weather or shift in an animal population is used as justification to bleat, or cluck with Chicken Little, that the apocalypse is coming. I would counter that while the constant change in nature means that we cannot maintain life at some optimal state, some states are more optimal for life- notably, warmer temperatures and with higher levels of CO2. Paleo-climate studies affirm that such states enable life to “flourish” (Ian Plimer).

“Plimer has a graph on page 33 of his book showing the changes in surface temperatures over the past 50,000 years. From 50,000 years ago to around 30,000 years ago there were major swings in averages from minus 10 degrees Centigrade to plus 15 degrees Centigrade. Then those wild swings levelled off when we entered our current inter-glacial with temperature changes of only a few degrees over the last 20,000 years. (Note at bottom of graph: “The amount of temperature and rate of temperature change over the last 50,000 years, showing wild swings in temperature during glaciations and far more stable temperatures during the current interglacial.”)”

Point: The climate change during our current interglacial has been mild compared to the last 30,000 years of the previous glaciation. There has been no climate crisis, and will be no climate crisis, according to the evidence of the past 20,000 years, the “historical record” of most importance.

The core climate issue

While media and politicians continue to get the vapors over every hiccup in nature (any change), keep your eye on the core issue in the climate debate- how prominent is the role of CO2 in the climate change that we are experiencing over these decades?

(Note: We are not experiencing any rise toward “catastrophic climate change” as predicted in the now falsified climate models. The actual change that we have experienced has been only in the tenths of a degree (see Youtube videos on Richard Lindzen- climate physicist). The warming over the roughly 1975-95 period was about 0.3 degree Centigrade. The temperature trend since has been flat, not rising toward some 3-6 degrees warming as per the models. So we are not facing a “climate emergency” as the politicians hysterically exaggerate (all apocalyptic claims are are irresponsible and distorting anti-science exaggeration). And as Lindzen says, we experience temperature differences every day that are 30-40 times the minor change that was experienced over the 1975-95 warming.) Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Climate alarmism and apocalyptic hysteria over change (change in nature alarmism).

The pathology of apocalyptic (i.e. punitive, destroying God mythology)

Section topics

See “Religion represents God to humanity???” (highly conditional institutions cannot present unconditional reality), “Rethinking 16 Fundamental Ideas” (Old story themes, new story alternatives), “History’s single greatest contradiction (the central non-apocalyptic message of Jesus versus the contrary apocalyptic message of Paul)”, “Eye for eye cycles”, “Qualifier: unconditional is not warm and fuzzy pacifism”, and “Rethink Paul’s Christ myth” (Historical Jesus is not Christ; he was anti-Christology)- all just below. Also below- “Framework for human story”, “The persistence of the spiritual (the primary impulse to meaning) in secular society”, and “Love- not the Higgs- defines reality” (Brian Cox on Joe Rogan podcast). Also, “Decline or Rise: The long-term trajectory of life (forestry facts, fish facts…)”.

Contact: wkrossa@shaw.ca (site is copyrighted material)

This site traces the line of historical descent of apocalyptic across history… from its earliest expression in myths like the Sumerian Flood myth, or the Egyptian Destruction of Mankind and Return to Chaos myths, down to Zoroaster’s apocalyptic theology that shaped Jewish religion, Christianity, and Islam as apocalyptic religions. Primitive apocalyptic mythology (via Paul’s apocalyptic Christ myth) was then given “secular” expression in 19th Century Declinism which became one of the dominant ideologies of our modern world, the ideology of today’s environmental alarmism. At the core of all this mythology is the belief in a great punitive, destroying Force or Spirit/God (or vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, retributive Universe, karma).

This site counters this primal fear of humanity (some ultimate punitive, destroying reality) with the most potent discovery ever- that deity is unconditional Love and does not ultimately punish or destroy anyone (sun and rain are given to all alike, to both good and bad). This is about transformation of worldviews/belief systems and liberation of consciousness at the deepest levels. It is all about conquering humanity’s greatest monster and enemy.

Critical point: The foundational pathology in human thought…

Apocalyptic mythology embraces the original and foundational error of our ancestors- i.e. that there were spirits behind all the elements of nature, and if nature was destructive (storm/flood, sun/drought, earthquake/tsunami) then the gods must be angry and were punishing people for their sins. That error then defined deity as punitive and destructive and that theological error became the foundational theme in human worldviews. It was embedded in the theologies (God theories) of subsequent world religions, and has now descended into the ideologies of the modern world (i.e. Declinism- a “secular” or ideological version of apocalyptic).

The supreme expression of divine anger and punitive destruction would be a life-ending, world-ending apocalypse.

Punitive deity theories (threat theology) have long been associated with demands for sacrifice/payment/appeasement, hence the salvation industry across history. The dark side of this apocalyptic mythology has been alarmed populations embracing salvation schemes that demand the coercive purging of some imagined threat, in order to save something believed to be under threat. The outcomes of apocalyptic salvationism have been devastating for many people and for nature- e.g. the bio-fuels fiasco and consequent deforestation, or Rachel Carson’s apocalyptic narrative in Silent Spring that contributed to the ban on DDT and subsequent deaths of tens of millions of people. Arthur Mendel was right that apocalyptic has been the most violent and destructive idea in history.

We have the potent corrective to this foundational error of punitive, threatening deity- the insight that deity is an inexpressible no conditions Love. This insight overturns the original error of the ancients and puts a stake through the heart of the apocalyptic fraud and the terrorizing God at the center of that fraud- humanity’s greatest monster and enemy.

Note: Any advocacy for non-punitive deity will have to explain the imperfection of this world (i.e. natural disaster, accident, disease) and the consequent suffering that humanity has long viewed as divine punishment. This requires the reframing of human meta-narratives with new insights on the purpose of conscious human existence in this imperfect world- e.g. imperfection in life is essential to the world as a learning arena for human development. But suffering is not punishment for sin as the world religions have long claimed (see ‘Framework for human story’, below).

Quotes from below...

“The same mythical themes have been repeated endlessly across history and across all the cultures of the world” (Joseph Campbell). Today, these primitive “old story themes” continue to shape the worldviews of the majority of humanity (85%) that is affiliated with one of the main world religions. These mythical themes also shape the thinking of many moderns that consider themselves secular and even materialist/atheist. Over the past few centuries these old themes have been given new expression in our ideologies and even in science.

(Note: This site affirms the varied good ideals in the mythological/religious mix but notes that the better ideals in religious traditions are often distorted by contexts containing “bad religious ideas”. For example, love in religious holy books is often a ‘tribal’ love that is limited to fellow true believers but ultimately excludes unbelievers. That is not authentic love.)

But the old story themes represent a worldview that does not present the true state of life on Earth or the truly humane nature of ultimate reality. Further, the “old story themes” have caused immense damage across history, inciting and validating the worst impulses of people to harm others. (Note: Historians, e.g. Arthur Herman, Richard Landes, Arthur Mendel, David Redles, among others, have traced the role of these ideas behind the history of religious violence- notably the ideas of apocalyptic millennialism- and also their role in the mass-death movements of Marxism, Nazism, and now environmental alarmism.)

The “new story alternatives” are derived from contemporary science and the best of contemporary spiritual insight. They point more correctly to the true state of life and to a more humane view of Ultimate Reality or deity.

Also, the new alternatives potently overturn the ‘apocalyptic millennial’ complex of myths, the complex of themes that support the foundational mental pathology of belief in a retaliatory, punitive Force or God. A central project of this site is to bring down this greatest monster and enemy of humanity (i.e. Ultimate Reality/deity as retaliatory, punitive, exclusionary, dominating, and destructive).

These new alternative themes are also my response to the apocalyptic element in today’s climate change alarmism. I would urge people to probe the deeply embedded themes that continue to dominate contemporary public consciousness and worldviews. This will help to understand the confirmation bias of alarmists that, despite evidence to the contrary, endlessly claim that the “end of days” is looming just up ahead (i.e. the endless setting of end-time dates).

“Love your enemy… because God does”

This statement is from the Matthew 5 and Luke 6 summaries of the central message of Historical Jesus (the Q Wisdom Sayings Gospel). It is my paraphrase of that material: “Love your enemy… because God does”. It is the single most profound statement on love anywhere in human literature. It takes us to the height of humane ethics and humane theology. It is simply the finest statement anywhere on the meaning of authentic love- i.e. as universal (includes all, sun and rain on both good and bad), unlimited, and unconditional. It tells us what it means to be truly human. It is the best example of the behavior/belief relationship that is central to the human quest for meaning- i.e. to base our behavior/lives on a validating (inspiring, guiding) ideal.

The above statement is the single most important statement anywhere on the essential nature of deity. It tells us what God is like- a transcendently unconditional Reality. No religion has ever communicated this to humanity. As Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy concluded- this diamond of Jesus has been buried in highly conditional Christianity.

Note: The Christ myth of Paul is primarily responsible for affirming and embedding the destructive theme of apocalyptic in Western consciousness (see James Tabor quotes in next section below). Arthur Herman (The Idea of Decline) also notes several features from the Christian tradition that formed the ideology of Declinism, a “secular” version of apocalyptic mythology- i.e. the Christian belief in the loss of an original paradise and the need for violent purging (an apocalypse) in order to cleanse the world and restore the lost paradise. Herman states that “Declinism is the most influential and dominant theme in modern society”. Declinism is the ideology of environmental alarmism or Green religion (Note: This site differentiates between the environmental concern that we all share and the alarmism that exaggerates environmental problems to apocalyptic scale, thereby distorting the true state of things- the endless prophesying of the end of days).

The project of this site is to go to root ideas/themes in human meta-narratives/worldviews and make fundamental corrections there (see “Old Narrative Themes, New Story Alternatives” below).

History’s single greatest contradiction? My candidate: The contradiction between the central message of Historical Jesus, and the central meaning and message of Paul’s Christ myth (his Christology theory). Or, “How history’s single most profound insight was subsequently buried in a major religious tradition”.

A side consideration: Think of the liberation that could have been promoted over the last two millennia if some movement had taken Jesus seriously (i.e. liberation from the unnecessary fear, anxiety, guilt, and shame that come from harsh and threatening God theories- Zenon Lotufo). But no one, not even his closest companions, took his scandalous and offensive insights seriously.

The contradiction at the core of Christianity has to do with the following profound opposites- i.e. non-retaliatory behavior versus retaliation, the non-punitive treatment of offenders versus a punitive approach, no conditions versus supreme condition (sacrifice, Salvationism), unlimited love versus limited tribal love, the universal embrace of humanity versus the restricted inclusion of only true believers, and non-apocalyptic versus total apocalyptic destruction. You can’t get more contrary or contradictory than these entirely opposite realities.

Psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo (Cruel God, Kind God), and others, point to the “cognitive dissonance” that arises when you try to hold opposites in some merger.

“Greatest contradiction?” How so? Because of the historical and current world-wide influence of the Christian religion, and notably the influence of Paul’s Christ myth. This myth has shaped the version of Christianity that has descended down to our contemporary world (compared, for instance, to the prominent Jewish Christianity of the first century CE).

And also “greatest” due to the very nature of the contradiction itself. It is hard to find a more stark contrast between entirely opposite realities than that between the main message of Jesus and the contrary Christ message of Paul. I use the term “the main message of Jesus” in reference to the Q Wisdom Sayings Gospel, specifically the Q1 version, and the most important statement in that gospel as now found in Matthew 5:38-48 and Luke 6:27-36.

Historical Jesus stated that, for him, the era of “eye for eye justice” was over. He rejected retaliatory justice and, instead, he promoted the restorative justice of “love your enemies” (Matthew 5). Why? Because that was what God did. It was what God was. The God of Jesus was love of a stunning new variety never before seen in the long history of God theories. His God did not retaliate with eye for eye justice but loved God’s enemies. And the evidence? Jesus illustrated his point with the main features of the natural world. God gave the good gifts of life- i.e. sun and rain for crops- to all, to both good and bad people. There was no discrimination and no exclusion of anyone.

God’s love and generosity was inclusive, universal, and unconditional. Jesus used a behavior/belief pairing to make this point. “Do this… because God does it”. He based his behavior on a similar validating belief. Do this- treat all others with unconditional love- and you will be just like God (you will be acting like the children of God) who treats all with unconditional love.

The God of Jesus was non-retaliatory, non-vengeful, non-punitive, non-excluding, non-destroying and therefore non-apocalyptic. Non-apocalyptic? Yes, because a non-retaliatory God is not an apocalyptic God. Apocalyptic is the ultimate act of eye for eye retaliation, vengeance, punishment and total destruction. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on The pathology of apocalyptic (i.e. punitive, destroying God mythology)

Religion as condition. And the most fundamental human need- love. That is… no conditions love.

Site project: Conquer/Slay the Monster

Joseph Campbell outlines human story as going out into life, confronting and struggling/fighting with some monster or problem, learning lessons/gaining insights from that struggle, getting wounded in the struggle, receiving a sword from a wise man to slay the monster, becoming a hero of one’s story in the process of conquering the monster or problem, and then returning to bless others with the lessons that we have learned.

I’ve identified my monster and I have spent a lifetime struggling, fighting with that monster, trying to slay it. And yes, I have been wounded by my monster (Zenon Lotufo- Cruel God theory deforms human personality with fear, anxiety, depression, and despair). I have also received sharp weapons from wise men to help me slay my monster.

My monster is one that is common to all humanity- and it is a two-headed beast. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Religion as condition. And the most fundamental human need- love. That is… no conditions love.

Unconditional versus conditional reality. Rethink the nature of religion and deity (Ultimate Reality). 15 ideas for a new narrative that affirms the better angels of our nature (i.e. hope and love).

Contact: wkrossa@shaw.ca

Site Project: This site counters the endless alarmist exaggeration and hysteria over the state of the world and life (i.e. the ‘end of days’ always just over the horizon). This project involves a thorough re-evaluation of the primitive themes, notably the apocalyptic complex, that still dominate modern thinking and contribute to unnecessary pessimism and anxiety over life. This involves problem solving at the deepest levels of thought/perception, emotion, and motivation/response.

And yes, there are problems all through life that give cause enough to fret about. But, critical to human mental and emotional health- there is no great Force/Principle/Spirit behind the imperfections of life, that threatens to punish or destroy, and bring life to some catastrophic ending.

Most important, this site confronts the bad theology of a monster deity (i.e. angry, punitive, destroying God, or Retributive Universe, angry Nature or vengeful Gaia, and karma). That bad theology is at the root of too much mental/emotional pathology in humanity… A correlation, perhaps, with depression as the number one illness on the planet?… I’m just sayin.

This site goes to this critical taproot idea of Ultimate Threat, cuts that infected root, and offers alternative themes that affirm authentic hope, notably the foundational theme of a core “no conditions Love” that overturns humanity’s primal fears- i.e. the fears of harm from greater Forces/Spirits behind life, and after-life harm.

Elements of bad theology still dominate the world religions and are now embraced in “secular” versions such as 19th Century Declinism, environmental alarmism or Green religion, and street-level theologies of angry Mother Earth or karma. As psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo has concluded, “Cruel God theology deforms human personality” with unnecessary fear, guilt, shame, and anxiety. (see “Cruel God, Kind God”).

The project on this site is oriented to removing the added, unnecessary psychic burden (i.e. divine threat) that has deformed human consciousness for millennia. It is about liberating/healing consciousness with authentic ‘no conditions’ love.

Insert note (quote from below): “Revenge, payback, karma, eye for eye, getting even- retaliation in all its expressions- is us at our worst. Retaliation is more animal-like than human. It renders us potentially magnificent beings, petty and infantile. The base impulse to retaliate, often masquerading as ‘justice’ or a fight against ‘evil’, is behind too much unnecessary harm and suffering in life. We can be so much better. Remember towering human spirits like Mandela. I would shout this message into the midst of today’s public ‘hurt for hurt’ cycles (hurt repaid for original hurt caused)- ‘Let’s all grow up, eh, and start acting like the great human spirits that we are'”.

Opening section topics: Rethinking 15 fundamental ideas (Old story themes, New story alternatives, rethinking the conditional nature of religion). See further below… Two Stories of Life- Decline or Rise?; Problem solving; “And the lights turned on…” (understanding the behavior/belief relationship as central to history’s single greatest insight); “Framework for human story” (the basic features of human life- Joseph Campbell’s outline); “Re-evaluate history’s most dominant myth- Paul’s Christ myth” (Historical Jesus is not Christ, he was anti-Christology); “Hurt for hurt cycles”, or retaliatory/punitive justice (getting even, payback, and the tribal politics of today…”Let’s all grow up, eh”); and “The basic science of CO2” (climate change update). Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Unconditional versus conditional reality. Rethink the nature of religion and deity (Ultimate Reality). 15 ideas for a new narrative that affirms the better angels of our nature (i.e. hope and love).

An ancient wisdom sage gave us the single most liberating and transforming insight ever- that the core of reality is a stunning “no conditions Love”.

The entirety of material on this site is trying to say just one thing: “In the end it’s going to be all right. For everyone. You are all safe. Safe in Love. Love that does not exclude anyone, despite their failure to live as human. It does not threaten to hurt back for hurt caused. It is not tribal- favoring ‘true believers’ over ‘unbelievers’. It does not demand some payment or sacrifice or the required embrace of some salvation scheme before it forgives or loves. It will not punish or destroy anyone. It knows that the worst forms of punishment are self-punishment, the self-judgment for failure to live as human. The Ultimate Love that many have long called God is all about an infinite, inexpressibly wondrous, and even scandalous generosity toward all (sun and rain given to all alike, both to good and bad). There is simply no more liberating and humanizing ideal anywhere in human thought or literature. The absolutely no conditions Love that is Ultimate Reality will transform consciousness and revolutionize life for the better. And it is an entirely non-religious reality. So yes, in the end it’s going to be all right. For everyone.”

A bit more…

With most of humanity across history I have never questioned the intuitive understanding that there is some greater creating Mind, Consciousness, Self, or Spirit behind all reality and life. Even the Neanderthals got this as expressed in their burial of items for some ongoing existence. The ancients believed that we belonged to some greater Reality that was more than just energy or natural law.

Where things went wrong was when the ancients started to project all sorts of subhuman and inhuman features out to explain the Greater or Ultimate Reality. We then got the history of religion and “bad religious ideas” (see “Top Ten Bad Religious Ideas” in sections below)

But as with most of life, we are learning to humanize all things- to make all things more humane- with our growing understanding of this over history. Our greatest ideal- i.e. love- enables us to do this. And we get it today that the highest form of love is unconditional. Most parents and spouses get this from their daily experience of one another’s imperfections. Forgiving unconditionally. Accepting unconditionally. Loving unconditionally. Surely, any Ultimate Reality would get this even more (“If you being imperfect can understand and do good, then how much more is God good”).

I urge people to do this- to fully humanize all things- especially with God theory and their personal speculations on God. Make it fully humane. This is critically important because of the influence of humanity’s highest ideal and authority on human thought, feeling, motivation/response, behavior and society across history.

But religious traditions balk at this endeavor to make God fully humane, along with the rest of life, and fall back to defending the old inherited systems of ideas. Many of those are subhuman ideas/ideals. Religious defenders, despite many good reformist endeavors, continue to maintain mergers of humane ideals with old inhumane ideas. Example: “God is love but will send unbelievers to Hell”. Hell being the most extreme expression of hatred ever conceived. The result of merging such opposites is cognitive dissonance to extreme. Oxymoronic. See psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo’s Cruel God, Kind God.

This site probes these issues in detail.

See “Punishing Nature: The most fundamental human myth” further below in this section. Unconditional deity overturns the entire complex of “bad religious ideas” and changes everything for the better.

For fly-by visitors in a hurry….

An unconditional deity at the core of reality overturns humanity’s primal fear of after-life harm- i.e. the judging, punishing, and destroying God of most historical religion. That original pathology of punishing, destroying deity has long incited fear and pushed people to engage wasteful salvation movements.

With an unconditional core Reality there is no need to embrace some salvation plan, to make some sacrifice or payment. Related: no one has ever been separated from God, or “lost”, and no one needs to be “saved”. We have all been safe in Love, from the beginning.

Threat theology in all its diverse expressions- i.e. angry God, “vengeful Gaia”, “angry Planet”, retributive Universe, or karma- has always been a great fraud. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on An ancient wisdom sage gave us the single most liberating and transforming insight ever- that the core of reality is a stunning “no conditions Love”.

19th Century Declinism (i.e. life is declining toward collapse and ending) continues to deform Western consciousness. Liberation from primal fears- redefine the core of reality with unconditional.

New material just below: Some stunning insights; “Reflecting” with Noel- how I arrived at unconditional as defining the core of reality (the “stunning new theology” of Historical Jesus, entirely contrary to Paul’s Christ myth); Decline to despair.

Section topics further below: Some opening qualifiers; The transformation and liberation of consciousness: The pathology of punitive, destroying God has long dominated mythology, religion, and is now given expression in “secular ideology” (i.e. vengeful Gaia, angry planet, retributive Universe, karma); The overdue replacement- unconditional deity; Climate insert- natural trumps human; The never-ending ending- Stephen Hawking joins the Chicken Little parade; The human struggle with imperfection; Degenerating public discourse?; The story of improving life- hope overcoming fear; There is no monster; Bad ideas and their outcomes; A qualifier to calm religious nerves- affirming the good from religious traditions; The unconditional treatment of all and justice issues; Environmental alarmism; Bob Brinsmead’s posts and my responses.

Stunning stuff for the New Year

(Apocalyptic alarmism: Engage some ‘reverse engineering’. Trace ideas back to their historical roots. What incites and affirms harmful alarmism in Western consciousness?)

Environmental alarmism continues as a dominant note in contemporary world consciousness. And like all irresponsible alarmism it exaggerates and distorts the true state of things in life. The outcomes of alarmism have been devastatingly harmful to both humanity and life in general.

Alarmism incites people to embrace “salvation” schemes (i.e. save the world, save something) that too often unleash the old totalitarian impulse that is then expressed in “coercive purification” approaches. We saw this outcome with Marxism, Nazism, and we are now seeing it in environmentalism. And yes, also in Islamic extremism and terrorism. These apocalyptic purging movements are driven by the same core themes. (see Campbell below on common themes repeated across history and cultures)

Why does environmental alarmism continue to dominate human consciousness? Because it is based on the ideology of 19th Century Declinism that has become “the most dominant and influential theme in the twentieth century” (see full Herman quote below). Declinism promotes the view that life is degenerating/declining toward some disastrous collapse and ending. (“Each present historical moment is a degradation from previous historical moments”, Mircea Eliade)

And what shaped Declinism? Here we get to some more stunning and disorienting information. Declinism is a “secular” version of primitive apocalyptic themes (see Arthur Herman’s ‘The Idea of Decline in Western History’). How did those apocalyptic features get into the mix? Here is the disorienting stuff. They were borrowed from basic Christian ideas/themes. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on 19th Century Declinism (i.e. life is declining toward collapse and ending) continues to deform Western consciousness. Liberation from primal fears- redefine the core of reality with unconditional.

The point of reality and life- love. No conditions love.

(See Topic lists just below.)

Site Project: This site probes the core ideas that shape human thought, emotion, motivation, and response/behavior. I present the complex of bad ideas that have dominated human thought across history (see Top Ten Bad Ideas below). This site then explores the alternative of unconditional Ultimate Reality or deity. Unconditional God overturns entirely the foundational bad idea of “divine threat of punishment” and thereby calms primal human fears. This is about winning the “battle of ideas” that drive human behavior- see sections below on religious violence, environmental alarmism.

Recent additions: A sample of the most destructive ideas. The outcomes of bad ideas. Short-circuit the central validation for bad behavior with unconditional. Human identity and tribal mentality. My complaint against religion- it has never communicated unconditional reality to humanity. Stunning research on the apocalyptic millennial ideas behind Twentieth Century mass-death movements.

Topics further below in this section: The hardest saying ever- “Love your enemy” (It’s not about pacifism). De-fang the death monster. Transform and liberate the core of human consciousness with the unconditional ideal. A brief summary of the history of bad religious ideas. Blurb on environmental alarmism (Celebrate CO2- the food of all life). Post on stirring the dreaming impulse in young people (their essential goodness). Apocalyptic incites destructive salvationist responses (the relationship between fear and “defensive” aggression). An Independent taking a poke at Progressive intolerance. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on The point of reality and life- love. No conditions love.

Campbell’s outline on human story. Embrace unconditional and “tower in stature” as maturely human, like Mandela. Unconditional respect for all makes us the hero of our own story.

Topics below: Jesus versus Christ, or “the message of Ultimate Non-Retaliation” versus “the icon of Ultimate Retaliation” (two foundational and contrasting influences on Western consciousness and society). Defining justice- retaliatory or restorative (related issue- maintaining our own humanity in the face of inhumanity). Then: What defines the authentically humane? Also, Gradualistic versus Cataclysmic- the democratic approach to life versus the coercive apocalyptic approach to life (“coercive purification”, Richard Landes) ; Top Ten Bad Religious Ideas; and “The end of the world is always 10 years away”- Saltzman essay.

Intro notes on human story- the animal/sacred relationship

I embrace a basic dualism in humanity. We have an inherited animal brain with its base drives. But we are not our brain, and our human consciousness is something uniquely different from the animal, with humane impulses that take us in a new direction from animal existence. Our human consciousness constitutes the true human self or person and its core impulse is not just to love, but to love unconditionally. Unconditional love is, then, the defining feature of the human self or person. Unconditional love is our true core nature, the authentic “us”. We discover this truth over our life-time and learn to express it- that we are most essentially beings of love.

Here is my basic argument:

The fundamental animal impulses from our inherited animal brain would include small band or “tribal” thinking and behavior- us versus some “other”, alpha domination of others, and the exclusion and destruction of the competing other.

Affirming the animal inheritance, the foundational themes and behaviors of religion have long included features such as the tribal dualism of “us versus them”- the division of humanity between true believers and unbelievers, domination/submission forms of relating with humanity subservient to an Alpha God or alpha priesthoods (gurus, religious authorities- see Alex Garcia’s “Alpha God”), and the exclusion and destruction of the unbelievers.

These features are central to the animal/sacred relationship, the belief/behavior relationship. From the beginning people have created beliefs, notably religious beliefs, to validate their behavior, even bad behavior. We want to model our lives according to greater realities. As meaning-seeking beings we like to know that we are fulfilling some greater purpose for our existence. So we project features out onto our gods and then, in turn, we take meaning and purpose from those ultimate ideals and authorities, from the “spiritual” realities that we have created.

(Note: I accept that God exists but not a deity that is defined by religious features. Features, as noted above, that have more often been projections of animal existence, and not human.)

Bob Brinsmead: “You become just like the God that you believe in”.

“There are no bad people, just bad ideas that incite bad behavior”.

Heroic human story- conquering the inherited animal Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Campbell’s outline on human story. Embrace unconditional and “tower in stature” as maturely human, like Mandela. Unconditional respect for all makes us the hero of our own story.

So you think you are “secular”, and scientific.

This site explores the history of “bad religious ideas” and the stunning contrary theology of unconditional. It traces the descent of apocalyptic in the Western tradition- from the apocalyptic Christ of Paul to environmental alarmism. Paul’s Christ myth (“the most influential myth in history”) has shaped all of us, profoundly.

Most of us feel that we exist as conscious persons somewhere just behind our eyeballs. And we feel that we are reacting to stimuli around us in daily life. We are often unaware of the themes, ideas- and associated impulses/emotions- that influence us from the back of our skulls (i.e. the subconscious). There are deeply embedded things in the background of our belief systems, our worldviews, primitive things that powerfully shape our lives (i.e. our perception, our feelings, and our responses/actions).

This site traces the line of descent of primitive apocalyptic myth down from Sumerian/Egyptian religion, to Paul’s apocalyptic Christ, to 19th Century Declinism, and then to the environmental alarmism of today. Ancient myth has become “secular” ideology.

Watch how this deeply embedded stuff works. For example, we heard “secular scientist” James Hansen, state in 2008- “It’s all over in five years”. Now ask yourself: How was that really different from the primitive Sumerian priest that alarmed his ancient population with the claim of a looming great Flood that would destroy humanity and life?

And what about Stephen Hawking today prophesying that the end is nigh? He has switched from prophesying in 2016 that the end of days would be in 1000-plus years to now prophesying in 2017 that the end of days will happen in just 100 years. How is Hawking any different from Pastor Harold Camping who prophesied the end in 2013? The same primitive themes continue to find new expression in both religious and secular versions.

Hence, the interesting spectacle today of many self-proclaimed secularists, even atheists, mouthing the same old, same old themes of primitive apocalyptic. The terms used to express apocalyptic change over time but the core themes remain the same.

Environmental alarmism, as the latest apocalyptic movement, exaggerates the many problems in life to apocalyptic scale thereby distorting the true state of things and frightening populations to embrace devastatingly harmful salvation schemes. Remember Rachel Carson’s apocalyptic narrative (Silent Spring) and endeavor to save the world that resulted in the unnecessary deaths of tens of millions of vulnerable people, many children, due to the consequent ban on DDT.

Apocalyptic alarmism is not just irresponsible (e.g. like shouting “Fire” in a crowded theater). It is highly immoral. We are all responsible for the themes, and their outcomes, that we put out into public consciousness.

A qualifier: My challenge to the fraud of apocalyptic is not a denial of the potential for catastrophe in life, whether natural or human-caused (i.e. war). Going after apocalyptic is about rejecting the added and unnecessary psychic burden of the fraudulent belief that people are being punished by deity through natural disaster or human cruelty. Rejecting apocalyptic is also about countering the inciting role that apocalyptic has played in pushing alarmed people into wasteful salvation schemes (e.g. the anti-fossil fuel, anti-industrial society lunacy of today). And it is about ending the inciting role that apocalyptic millennialism has played in promoting mass-death movements (see Landes and Mendel research below).

Topics below: The contradiction between the message of Historical Jesus and the Christ of Paul- the stunning new non-retaliatory God of Jesus versus Paul’s retaliating deity, the core theme of all past mythology/religion. The retaliating God of Paul is at the heart of his Christ myth. The core features of Paul’s Christ have shaped Western consciousness more than any other set of ideas.

Then: Exploring unconditional as the ultimate expression of the human ideal of love. Unconditional takes love to the supreme height of the authentically humane.

Further: Apocalyptic- the most violent and destructive force in history. And: Why probe theology? Bad theological ideas have a long historical record of inciting bad behavior. Psychotherapists Zenon Lotufo and Harold Ellens detail the damaging influence of punitive God theology on human consciousness and behavior.

Also, Joseph Campbell on human story, conquering monsters, and maturing into universal love. Further, “The origin of bad ideas”, and “Humanity created to serve the gods?” Then: Rethinking theology as authentic no conditions love.

At the bottom- Child’s play: Trump and media locked in eye for eye cycles- adult “counter-punching” or infantile “getting even”?

One more: New comment from discussion group on Arthur Mendel’s book “Vision and Violence”- how apocalyptic became “the most violent force in history”. Detail on how bad religious ideas have been given “secular” expression in the alarmist ideologies of the modern era (e.g. environmental alarmism). Read the rest of the opening comment here

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on So you think you are “secular”, and scientific.