“It’s coming on Christmas…. singing songs of joy and peace… Oh, I wish I had a river to skate away on…”

See new material just below– i.e. summary of site topics for new visitors

A bit of auto-biography, Wendell Krossa

It’s a Philippine tradition to start celebrating Christmas early in the Fall, around Septemberish.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-in-the-Philippines-start-celebrating-Christmas-in-September-It-is-beyond-all-reason-and-the-exact-opposite-of-tradition-in-the-rest-of-the-world-What-is-wrong-with-Filipinos-Almost-everything-there-is

I picked that up from my 11 years of living and working on the island of Mindanao (Bukidnon, Davao del Norte, Agusan del Sur) with the upland Manobo tribal groups (i.e. Langilan, Ata, Tigwa, Matig Salug, Dibabawan, etc.). So fortunate to have befriended some of the best (and funnest) people on Earth who taught me much about being human.

That venture with the Manobo was about initially venting my “do-gooder” impulse among some of the poorest people (tribal groups) and getting firsthand experience of the degrading, dehumanizing nature of poverty. There is nothing more distressing than the stunning death rates among poor people, especially the deaths of children, from the otherwise easily treatable maladies in well-off areas (i.e. infections, diarrhea, malaria, pneumonia/TB, etc.). Manobo were in desperate need of better wealth-generating occupations and incomes to handle the costs of basic medical care for survival.

In response, I immediately got involved in varied programs- literacy, medical, economic/livelihood, and eventually erosion control as in agroforestry projects (originating out of East Africa), etc. Manobo are upland farmers and hunter-gatherers. Farming the very steep volcanic slopes of the Pantaron Ridge of mountains (a tribal name), the central spine of Mindanao. Protecting soil on those steep slopes is vital to their livelihood.

The experience working with erosion control fueled my initial desire to return home and do a Soil Science degree (fascination with slope processes, erosion). But Calculus 101 popped that balloon real quick. I had been out of school too long. I retreated to a “generalist” approach to education that was more fitting with personal interests (geography, anthropology, etc.).

A subsequent 4 years of undergrad at Simon Fraser University, and 2 years of post-grad education at University of BC, added nothing to understanding the causes of poverty, due to the domination by Socialist/Marxist profs in the departments of those schools that I took courses in. This relates to Jordan Peterson’s point that much of Western university education is beyond salvaging now as it has gone so far left into Woke Progressivism.

Imagine, after taking the prerequisite courses to get to a third-year course on “Development/Underdevelopment Theory”, and hoping that course would finally explain poverty, to discover the proposed Marxist solution was to blame the CIA for assisting US business domination in other countries (not excusing the elements of corruption in such ventures).

More generally, the Marxist explanation is that global poverty was due to capitalist urban centers that drained resources from surrounding smaller urban nodes, that in turn drained the resources of peasants from the further outreaches of rural life.

That’s it? Sheesh.

Back to my Manobo friends… They helped me to temper my do-goodism with their patience and wisdom born of long experience of suffering in tribal life. And a resounding yes, there is still a place for aid and development endeavors across the globe- i.e. sharing information, skills training, infrastructure projects, etc.

But critical in such endeavor is respecting the priority of local people’s freedom and self-determination, avoiding Western “savior” complex (“Manifest destiny-type complex”). Absolutely basic to work with and serve others, is to learn to live and treat one another as fully equal members of the one human family. Not pushing your perceived solutions but working with local people to discover what they feel is needed, how to approach any issue, and ensuring local control from start to finish.

As an old “aid and development” text cautions- (pardon the colonial-like terms “First world… Third world”)- “The ‘Third world’ is littered with the rusting projects of well-intentioned ‘First world’ intervention programs”.

An Asian friend at university once checked me, after I had used the term “Third world” in reference to his country. He remonstrated me with, “No. My country is not ‘Third world’”. I thanked him for the correction. People in aid and development now use terms like “developing, developed”.

And oh, I finally found better explanations to understanding poverty, its causes, and proper resolutions, in the good research on Classic Liberalism. See, for example, William Bernstein’s “The Birth of Plenty”, and Daniel Hannan’s “Inventing Freedom”, among others.

Why did I initially go to the Philippines? Since childhood I have day-dreamed of Asia, reading uncountable books and articles on the region and cultures. Best explanation? I am Asian in spirit but born in the wrong part of the world. Kind of a trans-like issue, eh.

Oh well, I married my Asian love and have the blessing of partially Asian children. One could not hope for a better outcome. God is good, as the religious folk say.

And no, there are no “rivers to skate away on” in the Philippines.

A further note on my “higher education” experience:

The point is wasted years in education that was no serious education at all. A trade skill would have been far more useful to contributing something good to society.

Fellow students also expressed the same concerns in grad school- how little of the coursework was of any use for real life. So with most of my undergrad courses.

I have expressed before that the core apocalyptic nature of much of the environmental alarmism in the grad school that I attended reminded me of my wasted years in apocalyptic Evangelicalism, doing Sunday school-level education in religious fanaticism.

The grad school at that major Canadian university was pumping out a narrative of “lost paradise, corrupt humans ruining paradise, life declining toward collapse and ending/apocalypse, demand for sacrifice/payment (de-development, de-growth, give up the good life in industrial civilization), suffering as redemptive, demand for purging of some evil threat to life (the food of all life- CO2- now lasered in on as the great evil threat), engaging the Hero’s Quest as a battle against evil enemies that must be exterminated, and the promise of restored paradise, future communal utopia.

All framed in contemporary “ecological/environmental science” terms, of course. But the core themes behind the differing terms were indistinguishable from the same primitive Sumerian versions of 5,000 years ago, and all subsequent iterations down through history.

As the director of the grad school admitted in a later personal email, responding to my comment that his environmental alarmism message was purely apocalyptic, “Well, apocalyptic is true, isn’t it”. Yikes. And he has a PhD in Ecology.

Well, Julian Simon noted insightfully that many of the environmental alarmists, like Paul Ehrlich, have biological-type educations and tend to view humanity as just another species of animal, mindlessly subject to the vagaries of nature. Greg Easterbrook had some good responses to that over the last 40 pages of his “A Moment On The Earth”. Humanity, with infinitely unlimited creative human minds and compassionate hearts, is the best thing that ever happened to mindless and cruel nature.

Christmas is coming, time for some consideration of the metaphysical that stirs emotions and longings for peace and love.

And this comment, as with all comment here, is very much about fighting fear, unnecessary fears incited by bad ideas as in the “threat theology” that has dominated religious traditions across history and now infected “secular/ideological” traditions of our modern era.

My Christmas and New Years message to all visitors- We are all safe in love, ultimately. Let that truth dominate your personal narrative and the background story of your life, no matter any confusion about anything else in life.

So here is some speculation about things that matter to many people. And yes, consideration of these things requires speculation on the metaphysical as in noting the insights of varied “spiritual/religious” sages and traditions across history. No apologies for that. And again, my defense for using some NDE accounts is that, generally, they have done the best in affirming the central insight of Historical Jesus that God was unconditional love to transcendent degree. Nothing in religious history approaches the consistency of that theme in many of those NDE experiences. Unfortunate for Historical Jesus, Paul rejected and buried that main theme of his.

Note: What is true and real has some element of the “self-evident” to most people, affirming their speculations. Just sayin.

Another note: Everyone engages metaphysical speculation, even those denying it most, because science, as valuable as it is, does not give us final insight into ultimate truths and reality or ultimate meaning. It does not answer what really matters to most people- i.e. the meaning and purpose of reality and human life. So we accept science for what it reveals and as far as it goes, and then we figure the rest out for ourselves, making our own conclusions about the meaning and purpose of it all. Everyone does this, as shown by physicists like Sabine Hossenfelder (“Lost In Math”- i.e. scientists regularly crossing the science/philosophy boundary) and James Baggot (“Farewell To Reality”).

My point on engaging speculation on the metaphysical, we have still today the prominence of bad metaphysical ideas in human narratives, so at the least, offer better speculations, more humane speculations, than what we have inherited from the past.

Hating that “some people are better than others”, Wendell Krossa

“Jordan Peterson was in pain for three years, Lex Fridman podcast clips,” on YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjEcM11Fg-M

Lex Fridman says that he “has always hated the idea that some people are better than others”. He adds that he is afraid of dismissing people because of his perception of them. That launched some interesting discussion with Jordan Peterson on Lex’s podcast.

The idea that some people are better than others, that some are more important- by what arguments do we counter that perception and affirm the equality of all? Something most of us recognize as a natural reality or “God-given” right.

I have posted before that in early human tribal existence some tribe members began to elevate themselves over others with claims to know the secrets to the invisible realm of spirits, and how to placate the upset spirits that were manifesting their anger in natural disasters like storms, and in accidents and disease. The earliest elites emerged as shaman/priests. Those early “better than others” associated themselves with deity as validation of their being better than others.

Helmut Koester (“History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age”) adds details on how the belief that some are better than others was developed in Greek biography over the BCE era. Divinity was associated the powerful deeds, great acts, and extraordinary human gifts of some people. Notably in Greek biography, divinity was manifest in kings/emperors and their military and political achievements, and in the special abilities of great poets, philosophers, and artists. Their special skills were believed to be divine manifestations that made them better than others. Special abilities and accomplishments were believed to be “miraculous”.

“Hellenistic biographies incorporate miracle stories in a strikingly uncritical manner”.

Koester says the early Christians later adopted this Hellenistic approach in creating the biographical account of their founding hero (Jesus), hence the many miracle stories in the gospels. Further, “It is not surprising that subsequent literature, especially the legends of Christian saints is entirely dominated by miracle stories”, p.131-132.

In those ancient practices we see the developing pattern of associating dominant figures and their great public deeds as special, as making those people “better than others.” Note especially how those “better than others” appealed to deity for validation of their specialness. Those ancient ideas and practices of divinizing special people have, with the passing of time, become lodged in public consciousness as somehow “truthful” due to longevity over subsequent history.

With Lex, I hate and reject that fallacy that some are better than others. This is not about the obvious unfairness among the human population in distribution of talents, gifts, or abilities in varied areas. Peterson, his psychological mind kicking in, speaks well to this element.

This is about the inherent value of all human persons, the intrinsic equality that is based on the God-given thing.

We could start in establishing fundamental human equality, as Peterson suggests, by accepting the metaphysical speculation that every human person is created “in the image of God”, whatever “image of God” means.

I would emphasize, derived from the varied “spiritual” insights noted below, that deity does not value humans according to the standards that we judge one another by. Consider that God does not value people according to the out-of-the-ordinary, spectacular, and great achievements of some people that we often celebrate in our societies. There is nothing wrong with celebrating such things as long as it does not undermine the inherent and equal valuation of all human beings.

Based on varied “spiritual/metaphysical” insights, I would argue that deity does not prize special personal talents, or special success in business, sports, politics, education, etc., above the vast majority of human lives that are lived in the ordinary and mundane arenas of common life. Those “majority of humanity” common stories are just as valued by deity as every other human story. None are more valued than any other.

On what basis do I assume this? Why do I agree with Fridman in hating the idea that some people are better than others, more valued than others? And why do I challenge the perception that some people, who appear to have failed at life, are therefore less valued than others?

For one, because I see love is the single most important criterion for evaluating success in human life, the one thing that survives forever, the one feature that everyone in their ordinary life can achieve to heights of true greatness.

An insert to stress something before moving along with this point- That the fundamental basis of the equality of all is the metaphysical recognition that God loves all the same.

Continuing…

Like the ancient Greeks, we tend to evaluate and value one another according to great accomplishments in athletics, beauty, commerce/business, political power, etc. And with our tradition of these comparative valuations, we diminish the value of the many who live lives that appear ordinary, mundane, lacking notable public achievements. Our valuations miss the primacy of love as the great leveler and the thing that deity values above all else.

An example (again, appealing to metaphysical speculations): Ken Ring in “Lessons From The Light” notes the Near-Death Experience of one person who said that on meeting God, they discovered that God focused on one primary concern while helping that person to evaluate their life story (i.e. the “life review”)- Did you learn anything about love? Do you know how to love? Did you love?

So also, in another NDE account, a successful businessman said that he was shocked to find that God ignored his business successes and was only interested in one thing- Did he love people? Did he learn something about love? All the rest that he had accomplished in his life, and considered of great importance, was ignored.

These insights challenge human evaluation criteria. Add that the greatest achievements in love often take place unheralded in the secret areas of life. They are often anonymous acts, expressed in the ordinary and mundane, not celebrated publicly. Such “love is everywhere” is common among commoners.

Marinate a bit further on this: Our valuation schemes miss the primacy of love, and especially the hidden accomplishments of love in the ordinary and mundane. I have always appreciated the comments of Jesus in the Matthew 6:1-4 summary (posted just below) where he frames what impresses God most- i.e. divine rejection of the great public displays for the hidden, secret acts of goodness, the anonymous displays of good. This also gets to human motivations. It’s comparatively easy to exhibit goodness when the cameras are on, but our true self manifests in the hidden arena of life, especially in the mundane and ordinary interactions with difficult others.

“Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.”

And to laser in more on what feature of love takes us to the absolute heights of human achievement and greatness

If the hero’s quest is fulfilled/accomplished when we conquer our inner monster by orienting our life to universal or unconditional love, then every person has the equal opportunity to succeed at that supreme success or achievement, to achieve greatness in those terms. I am referring to Joseph Campbell’s point that we attain human maturity when we orient our lives to universal love. I would use unconditional love as the more encompassing term.

“Love your enemy” points us to the absolute height of human greatness and achievement. There is nothing higher to reach for or to achieve, and by which to measure real success in life. We are all equal in terms of the opportunity for greatness in regard to such love.

I put forth “love your enemy” as the single greatest possible achievement in life for any human person to accomplish. There is no higher reach of love, love as the defining feature of being human and a successful human life. As Ken Ring noted- God’s primary concern was- Did you learn how to love? Do you know what love really is? As Bob Brinsmead says, if love is not unconditional then it is not really love.

Historical Jesus answered that question- “Do you know what love is?”- by defining authentic love as unconditional, as “love your enemy”. And that profound insight was then deformed entirely by Paul with his retreat to conditional love defining his theology, as in his Christ myth. Paul re-established primitive tribal limits to love, where enemies would be ultimately retaliated against and destroyed- see Rom 12:17-20 for illustration.

“Do not take revenge… but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord.”

My point here is the radical reframing of human concepts of deity that Historical Jesus introduced, but that Paul subsequently rejected and tried to bury with his Christ myth. Paul was offended by the overturning of long-standing views of divine justice as retaliatory with the divine demand for conditions to be fulfilled before love, acceptance, and restoration could be manifested by deity. Paul wanted to restore tribal, limited love in deity. Paul re-established the basic narrative of retaliatory justice that has come down through a long history of human spirituality and religious belief.

Yes, in Paul’s New Testament there are scattered fragments of history but even that element has been deformed by the Christology that interprets it. Paul’s New Testament is mostly metaphysical speculation on the imagined ultimate reality of a cosmic savior sent to redeem fallen humanity and restore a ruined world to its supposed original perfection.

Paul’s Christ engages the great mythology of Zoroaster’s cosmic battle of good against evil, with the Christ sent to conquer the evil and punish the followers of that evil. It’s a very tribal worldview with additional features of eternal domination and punitive destruction.

Most egregious in Paul’s rejection of the message of Jesus was his retreat to primitive notions of deity such as his deforming of the unconditional love that Jesus had taught. Paul reframed the love of deity as a highly conditional love with the demand for an ultimate sacrifice/payment before anyone could be forgiven and granted salvation. That was entirely contrary, for example, to the Prodigal Father parable. Paul’s Christ-ianity gave us a highly conditional religion that buried the unconditional message of Jesus entirely.

This site recognizes the great value in the original message of Historical Jesus but that message has to be pulled out of its context just as Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy argued.

Moving along…

The point I take from the Fridman/Peterson interview, as I do from other sources- there is no higher human attainment than love. You can possess great abilities and make notable achievements in sports, business, entertainment, politics, and intelligence/education and still be an overall failure at life if you don’t learn how to love, especially to unconditionally “love your enemy”, the ultimate reach of love.

As Peterson says to Fridman, great talents given unfairly don’t privilege people regarding moral conduct. He says there is no evidence for any correlation between intelligence and morality. You are not better because you are smart. And in the context of his comments on this, he argues for the value of holding the belief that all are made in the image of God despite immense differences in ability.

His point– We can assume radical equality of worth despite differences of ability.

I would add that, rather than reference to the common religious phrase “in the image of God”, I would frame the “God-given” assertion in terms of the truth that we are all embodiments of God. God indwells every human person equally, much like Jesus stated in telling people- “the kingdom of God is among or in you”.

The reality that we term “God” is not separate from our human spirit and mind. Others frame it as “God has incarnated in all humanity, equally”. Meaning that no one is more special than any other human person. No one is closer to God than any other. None are more privileged than others, more favored by God than others. As Bob Brinsmead says, God has never incarnated only in special holy persons or only been manifest in the great public achievements of special people.

This “God incarnate in all equally” is my metaphysical basis for the equality of all humans, for everyone as good as anyone else, and for fundamental human goodness.

Further to this, the God present in all humanity is not present as a dominating, overwhelming reality but a gently persuading influence. God is the “still small voice”, not the thunderous and frightening storm, as per Elijah’s account.

Point? Adding to the Jesus transformation of fundamental theology- God is not manifest in the overpowering, overwhelming and frightening thing, the thunderous fearful storm, but to the contrary, manifests in the still, quiet thing, the gentle voice. So perhaps this clarifies things for the many who complain that they don’t feel that presence of the creator. Because, as with many others across history, they are looking for deity in the spectacular, extraordinary, great thing- in storm and fire and fury. Consider the alternative- that God is not in the storm but manifests in gentle suggestions for good. The “feeling” to do what is right in the ordinary, mundane events of daily life.

Here is the interesting account of Elijah’s experience in1 Kings 19: 11-13…

“The LORD said, “Go out and stand on the mountain in the presence of the LORD, for the LORD is about to pass by. Then a great and powerful wind tore the mountains apart and shattered the rocks before the LORD, but the LORD was not in the wind. After the wind there was an earthquake, but the LORD was not in the earthquake. After the earthquake came a fire, but the LORD was not in the fire. And after the fire came a gentle whisper. When Elijah heard it, he pulled his cloak over his face and went out and stood at the mouth of the cave.”

That is a similar reframing of theology, much like Jesus’ comment that true greatness was not to lord over others like kings and rulers do, but to serve. Add his Matthew 6 statement that God prefers the humble, the hidden and self-effacing, the anonymous acts of goodness.

The “stunning new theology of Jesus” framed for us an entirely different view of God, nothing like the human-created deities of history who favored the great public deeds of notable public actors. That is rank elitism appealing to a deformed view of deity to validate the elite/commoner divide in human societies.

In the “stunning new theology of Jesus” you get a non-dominating reality, an entirely non-threatening deity, something that incarnates and interpenetrates throughout the physical realm and humanity as a gentle all-pervading presence, that serves with gentle persuasion, the soft, quiet voice inside reminding us of good. The God of Jesus doesn’t intervene, interfere with, and overwhelm human freedom. This is a radical new framing of the reality of deity that began with historical Jesus. His theology had nothing to do with the “king/lord” deities of old, the tribal judges that struck fear into unbelievers and other free spirits.

Again, the central Jesus message sums it all:

“Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you. If you love only those who love you, what credit is that to you? Everyone finds it easy to love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Everyone can do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Most will lend to others, expecting to be repaid in full.

“But do something more heroic, more humane. (Live on a higher plane of human experience). Do not retaliate against your offenders/enemies with ‘eye for eye’ justice. Instead, love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then you will be just like God because God does not retaliate against God’s enemies. God does not mete out eye for eye justice. Instead, God is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. God causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. Be unconditionally loving, just as your God is unconditionally loving”. (My paraphrase of Luke 6:32-36 or Matthew 5:38-48.)

Other points:

Further on affirming the basis of true human equality, I would suggest that critical for understanding true equality among people is the insight that we are one human family sharing this venture on earth. The oneness of the human family manifests a greater underlying oneness that affirms the truth that we are inseparable from the creating and sustaining reality that is God that is the ultimate Oneness.

Varied insights/truths that affirm this- i.e. quantum entanglement (reflects a deeper oneness), Mitochondrial Eve (all humans on Earth today are descendants of the same African mother), and the NDE insight that we are one with God and with all others, meaning that we have an inseparable union with a greater Consciousness. This was sort of touched on by Paul in his comment that nothing will ever separate us from the love of God.

On this site I am not entirely badmouthing Paul but just acknowledging, with Jefferson and Tolstoy, that we need to get him out of the way, so the actual message of Jesus can be made clear. To honor the man for what he actually said. There is nothing of Paul’s Greek “Lord Jesus” in the original message of Historical Jesus. With Jesus there is no “Lord coming in flaming fire to punish and destroy”, nothing of John’s fierce warrior Christ as the destroyer of worlds (see Revelation). That is all from the influence of deforming Hellenistic mythology as noted by Helmut Koester in “History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age”.

Moving along…

Climate Crisis

Patrick Moore said something that I have never heard any politician state so clearly. He told Jordan Peterson that there is no evidence of CO2 influence on climate. I winced on first hearing him state that. Patrick, that sounds a bit extreme. But then he followed that up with- Yes, theoretically there is an influence, but it’s not evident in the historical record.

Because other natural factors overwhelm any CO2 influence, consistently. OK, good one Patrick.

Meaning there is no “climate crisis”. There is no scientific justification to tax carbon or to decarbonize our societies.

This latest from Shellenberger

“EU Threat To Seize Elon Musk’s Assets Is Part Of Larger Totalitarian Plan: European Union and United Nations are working with Organization of Islamic Cooperation to impose mass censorship and “global blasphemy laws” in the West”, Michael Shellenberger, Oct. 17, 2024

https://www.public.news/p/eu-threat-to-seize-elon-musks-assets

Shellenberger says that “First Brazil and now the EU say they will seize the assets of Elon Musk’s companies if he doesn’t censor in the ways they want him to… They know it’s illegal. They know it looks bad. They don’t care. They know they can’t rule the world without mass censorship and total information control.”

He says that the totalitarians controlled Google and Meta for years and Mark Zuckerberg admitted that in a recent letter. Shellenberger says that now the totalitarians are desperate to control X.

He adds, “The Twitter Files revealed mass censorship operations by the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and “former” CIA people to control its censorship (“content moderation”) from inside the company. DHS used think tanks tied to the Intelligence Community for mass censorship. Its Cyber Threat Intelligence League created a handbook for censorship based on US military operations abroad.”

Shellenberger warns that we should remember the warnings from books like “1984” as “They help us to understand the real-world and present-day totalitarianism happening before our very eyes.”

He then moves on to note a researcher Paul Coleman, “An attorney with the Alliance Defending Freedom, explains how the censorship efforts we see unfolding today in the EU are just the tip of the iceberg.”

Coleman states, “Most disturbing is that the UN and EU have formed an alliance with 57 Muslim states that are members of the “Organization of Islamic Cooperation” to demand mass global censorship.”

“Coleman sees a pattern. “I think we see these steps in every part of the world. Step one, the perceived threat is announced. Whatever that may be. Could be Russia is affecting our democracy here in or in Europe or whatever. The threat is always on the rise. They’ll cite a study from an NGO with dubious funding sources or Soros Networks. And then vague plans are announced to counter the threat.”

(End of Shellenberger article)

A few from the comments section:

“Hate speech is pretty much anything not following the established party-line or that with which an individual disagrees.”

“I wish I saw enough wisdom in the masses to agree with you. Not that I hope for that moment, but should it be necessary, I hope that someone has the strength to overcome these coming dark ages. Unfortunately, watching the world fold under the Covid madness, to me it looks pretty hopeless.”

Not to upset, but to stimulate thought and liberate from fear, especially primal fears, Wendell Krossa (intentions matter)

You will be confronted with the most revolutionary of ideas on this site, none more radical than the overturning and replacement of the single most critical idea of all, i.e. that the nature of the core of reality- my TOE- is a stunning “no conditions love”. That transformation of the core of human narratives replaces millennia of threat theology.

“Most critical idea”? Yes, because the nature of ultimate reality, as ultimate human ideal and authority, determines the nature of all else. How we define all else.

Let your mind roam over the conclusions that are drawn from this stunning new theology of an unconditional loving deity. Right off the top- it means there is no ultimate reality as in deity as tribal, dominating, and punitively, violently destructive (as in the psychopathology of apocalypse). This overturns dominant themes in religious traditions, themes that have penetrated all areas of human thought, including contemporary “secular/ideological” narratives.

No religion from across history has ever communicated the truth of deity as unconditional love. After Historical Jesus first announced that breakthrough insight, Paul’s developing Christianity then began to bury it some two decades later in his earliest letters to the Thessalonians, following with a more direct rejection of the stunning new theology of Jesus in his Romans letter. Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy both spoke to this distorting and burying issue in terms of the Jesus “diamonds/pearls buried in….” (Canadian nicety prevents me from quoting their terms, eh).

Deity, as the cohering center of human narratives, then shapes a complex of supporting myths- ideas of original paradise, corrupt humanity ruining paradise, the decline of life to a worsening state, the threat of looming apocalypse as punishment for human sin (retaliatory justice), the divine demand for sacrifice, payment, and purging of evil through a hero’s quest to join a battle of opposing tribes (good versus evil) to conquer and exterminate evil enemies, and then the promise of salvation in a utopian communalism.

These psychopathologies have deformed human personality and then even driven societies to mass-death outcomes (psychologist Harold Ellens, psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo in “Cruel God, Kind God”).

Historian Arthur Herman, for example, notes the presence of the myths of “lost paradise” and “violent purging of evil” in Declinism ideology, the “most dominant and influential” ideology in the world today- the belief that the world is becoming worse (“The Idea of Decline in Western History”). Historians Richard Landes, Arthur Mendel, and David Redles note the presence of the themes of “apocalyptic threat and promise of salvation into millennial utopia” in Marxism, Nazism, and environmental alarmism.

Unconditional God at the core of human narratives and thought is the transformation of worldview that amounts to a death and rebirth in human story, known as disintegration and then re-integration around a new reality. It is the transformation of mind that liberates human consciousness to stunning new perceptions of love, never before imagined.

Its about the background sense of ultimate safety that is critical to dampening our primal fears that incite our worst impulses to tribalism and punitive destruction of differing others. its about a more humane reality that affirms our better angels/impulses to hope and love.

It’s the sense that all of us are safe while on this journey through life. Safe in ultimate no conditions love.

This truth orients human minds to entirely new views of why this cosmos/reality was created, what the purpose is for biological life here, and more. An ultimate unconditional reality fundamentally changes the meaning of everything.

Review of main site topics, among many other topics scattered throughout this site: Wendell Krossa (Ideas to transform consciousness and change the world, summary for new visitors)

(1) There is no “climate crisis” because the best of atmospheric physicists tell us that the warming influence of CO2 is now “saturated” (a physics term)- see research reports at “co2coalition.org”, “wattsupwiththat.com”, etc. Even if CO2 were to double to 800 ppm, it would add no more to any possible future warming.

The mild “1 degree C” warming over the past century has been highly beneficial in a still far-too-cold world where 10 times more people die every year from cold than die from warming (Lancet study). Cold, not warming, is still the great threat to life.

The climate crisis crusade is a “profoundly religious movement”, just as the Marxism and Nazism crusades were driven by the same basic themes of “lost paradise, apocalypse, redemption/millennial utopia”.(Sources: Arthur Herman’s “The Idea of Decline in Western History”, Richard Landes’ “Heaven On Earth”, Arthur Mendel’s “Vision and Violence”, David Redles’ “Hitler’s Millennial Reich”, etc.)

(2) The re-instatement of the “elite/commoner” divide in our liberal democracies is the great threat to democracy and individual freedom. Varied articles posted here try to probe and understand the totalitarian impulse of elites, the psychopathology of elites seeking to meddle in, coerce, manipulate, and control commoners. This is a rejection of Classic Liberal principles, systems of law, and institutions that protect all of us from elite domination by dispersing power back to populations of equal citizens. Classic Liberalism is the best that we have created to protect all of us from our own impulse to dominate, the best approach to promote the freedom, rights, and equality of every person. (Sources: Daniel Hannan’s “Inventing Freedom”, David Boaz’s “Libertarianism: A Primer”, etc.)

(3) The same set of primitive mythical themes has dominated human narratives across history, in both religious and “secular/ideological” versions, even scientific versions. (Sources: Books of Joseph Campbell, Mircea Eliade, and other historians of mythology/religion.)

(4) There was no original better world, no original paradise in the past. This is the baseline fallacy in human narratives and mental pathology.

(5) Humanity is not a fundamentally corrupt and inherently “sinful” species but is the best thing to have ever happened to life, with creative mind and compassionate hearts. As Julian Simon concluded after detailing the historical evidence, “We are more creators than destroyers”. Bob Brinsmead says that the real story of humanity is not the religious pathology of how far we have “fallen” but the amazing story of how high we have risen from our primitive past. This counters the domination of anti-humanism in human narratives today.

(6) Our contemporary narratives, both religious and “secular/ideological”, are still dominated by the inherited themes of primitive mythologies- i.e. the mind-deforming fallacies of a paradise past, corrupt humanity ruining paradise, life declining toward apocalypse, demand for sacrifice/payment, demand for suffering as redemptive, demand for violent purging of evil threat, demand to engage a tribal battle of true believers exterminating unbelievers, and the promise of restored paradise in utopian communalism.

(7) The meta-story of humanity is the story of exodus from our animal past to become maturely human in civilization.

(8) Life is not declining toward worse but is rising toward a better future. Julian Simon and many others have presented volumes of evidence on the main indicators of life that shows, while problems still exist all over, life over the long-term continues to improve.

(Sources: Julian Simon’s “Ultimate Resource”, Greg Easterbrook’s “A Moment On The Earth”, Bjorn Lomborg’s “Skeptical Environmentalist”, Ronald Bailey’s “The End of Doom”, Indur Goklany’s “The Improving State of the World”, Tupy and Bailey’s “Ten Global Trends”, Desrocher and Szurmak’s “Population Bombed”, Matt Ridley’s “Rational Optimist”, and more.)

(9) The Christ myth of Paul has buried the message of Historical Jesus that God is stunningly inexpressible no conditions love. Paul buried that stunning new message in his highly conditional religion.

Paul’s Christ myth is entirely opposite to the message of Historical Jesus. Paul gave us the “Christ-ianity” that buried the actual “Q Wisdom Sayings” message of Jesus- i.e. what would have been “Jesus-ianity”.

Paul’s Christ myth has been the single most dominant influence on Western narratives, consciousness, and society (James Tabor, “Paul and Jesus”).

(Sources: Search for Historical Jesus research, Jesus Seminar books, and “Q Wisdom Sayings” research, notably the work of James Robinson, John Kloppenborg, and others. See also the essays by Bob Brinsmead- https://bobbrinsmead.com/ )

(10) Paul re-established the primitive theology of retaliatory, highly conditional deity (i.e. a God who demands sacrifice/payment) in his Christ myth and thereby buried the message of Jesus (an unconditional God) that could have liberated humanity as nothing ever before.

The stunning new theology of Jesus stated that there is no judging, condemning God who demands sacrifice/payment (see, for example, the Prodigal Father parable).

(11) There is no such reality as a tribal deity who favors true believers and damns unbelievers. There is no cosmic Zoroastrian dualism as the divine model for human tribal dualisms. The human family is one family- i.e. based on varied insights such as that all humans on Earth today are descendants of Mitochondrial Eve, quantum entanglement as fundamental oneness, and the NDE discovery of the oneness of all.

(12) There is no God threatening punishment of human failures through natural world disasters, disease, and death, whether the angry deity of past mythologies/religions or the similarly pissed deity of contemporary narratives- “vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, punitive Universe, payback Karma”.

This has been the single most psyche-traumatizing myth ever constructed. There is no retaliatory God threatening retaliatory apocalyptic destruction of life. Again, there is only inexpressible no conditions love behind reality and life.

What is my authority for stating these “truths”? The self-validating nature of unconditional love as ultimate truth and reality.

(13) There is no dominating “Lord/King” God who interferes, intervenes, or meddles in human freedom and self-determination. This is critical to understand and get right as elites try to re-establish elite domination in our liberal democracies, based on the archetypal belief that domination by elites is a non-negotiable divine reality and pattern. So just accept your fate, commoners. Dominating deity has long been the ultimate ideal and authority to validate human elitism, elites dominating commoners. See comment on this in sections below.

Historical Jesus would have rejected outright Paul’s “Lord Jesus” myth because he taught his followers- “The rulers of the gentiles lord it over them… exercise authority over them. It must not be like that among you. Whoever wants to be great must be your servant. Whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave”.

Historical Jesus, not Paul’s Christ, was the original Classic Liberal advocating the equal freedom and rights of every person. God, according to Jesus, was a servant reality, a commoner reality. Historical Jesus rejected the pathology of “Lord”.

(14) There is no threat of future after-life harm- i.e. threat of eternal exclusion, punishment, and destruction (i.e. hell). There is only an inexpressible unconditional love and that is our true home.

(15) In his “no eye for eye retaliation” and “love your enemy” maxims, Historical Jesus was advocating for restorative justice as in the robust holding all responsible for the consequences of their behavior- i.e. the necessary incarceration of violent people to protect others, but then treat all humanely as the Allies did post-WW2 defeat of enemies. So with criminal justice, like Tolstoy said, there is no circumstance where people are not to be treated with love. But also, no pacifist “turn the other cheek” in the face of violence. (Sources: “The Crime of Punishment” by Karl Menninger)

(16) We are not our animal brain with its inherited impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others. Our true human self and human spirit is love.

(17) The “hero’s quest” is not a battle against other people but an inner quest to conquer our inherited animal drives to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others. That is our real enemy, the real monster that we face in life and must learn to conquer and vanquish as we learn to affirm our better human impulses.

(18) The God of Jesus is not a sky-god up above in the heavens but is immediately present everywhere in life as love, inseparable from the common human spirit in every person- “The kingdom of God is within you”. The true nature of every human being consists of the same love that is God. “There are no really bad people, just people misled by bad ideas”.

(19) The “hero’s quest” is about learning and manifesting love in this world through a unique life story that is as equally valuable as any other human story. People manifest love through the infinite diversity of their unique life stories, whether in the mundane and ordinary of common work, in home life and raising children, in recreation, or in sports, entertainment, business, politics, science, and all other human occupations.

True religion is to focus on this life and making a unique contribution to improving life in this world, not living for some after-life reality, or trying to “have a relationship with God” as in focusing on some invisible, metaphysical reality (so “heavenly minded as to be of no earthly use”).

(20) Authentic human achievement, real success in the Hero’s Quest, is about love in the details of daily life, in the mundane and ordinary, when not publicly praised or even publicly known, where the true self is living authentically with no cameras to acknowledge good done.

The primacy of the ordinary and daily mundane is validated by the new theology of God as a street-level God, incarnated in every person equally, and not impressed with the great deeds of public people but more interested in the secret, hidden actions of common people in daily life.

(21) The God who opposes tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction.

(22) And many postings on the battle for free speech today, the new totalitarianism emerging from within Western so-called liberal democracies, mainly from the left side of our societies- i.e. the Woke Progressivism that threatens freedom and democracy.

The neo-totalitarian, neo-Marxism (neo-collectivism) coming at us from Progressives in our democracies that are promoting censorship of speech as reported by courageous journalists like Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi, Douglas Murray, Glen Greenwald, and others. This is, once again, about the primitive impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others.

(23) The resurgence of tribal dualism in the neo-collectivism of Woke Progressivism. DEI categorization of populations by skin color as good or bad (victim/victimizer) is the latest addition to traditional Marxist categorization by the tribal dualism of oppressor/oppressed (capitalist property owners/workers).

And many more topics…

Added note: Insights to help with human concerns re the metaphysical or “spiritual”.

Another metaphysical fallacy claims that there is an eternal cosmic dualism of good versus evil, heaven versus hell. That has long functioned as a divine model, a validating archetype for human dualisms. Joseph Campbell made some interesting comments on this- i.e. that dualism only exists in this material realm, and we all come here as “actors on God’s stage”, playing our differing roles during a brief life story. But there is no ultimate dualism.

Historical Jesus also spoke to the issue of ultimate monism in stating that God was only unconditional love. NDE accounts similarly affirm there is no angry God, no judgment and consequence of hell, just a realm of inexpressible unconditional love. Also meaning no tribal deity (believers versus unbelievers separated forever). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

This does not mean that we do not take seriously the struggle against evil/wrong in this life. That is fundamental to development as human. But it helps to recognize this may all just be a temporary realm for human learning, experience, and development. As others suggest, we don’t know good except in contrast with its opposite- evil. There is no authentic moral good except as a truly free response to the possibility of choosing for evil.

But this is all “temporary” in contrast with ultimate reality.

Sorting through the varied insights on such issues does have something to do with framing narratives and the consequent impact on human consciousness, emotion, motivations, and responses.

This on constitutional freedom

“An Originalist Perspective Of Freedom”, Barry Poulson, Oct. 14, 2024

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/10/14/an-originalist-perspective-of-freedom/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_

Poulson says both parties- Republicans and Democrats- have enacted laws that conflict with personal freedom, laws censoring free speech, controlling social media, etc. as well as laws constricting commerce.

Poulson then points to the Bill of Rights that protects the “rights of citizens to personal and economic liberty”. He states that “these rights were not granted by government, but rather were natural rights of citizens”. He adds that the “Constitution limits the power of government to impose taxes and regulate economic activity” because an expanded role for government will infringe on individual property rights.

Barry Poulson is a policy adviser with The Heartland Institute.

Other pertinent commentary

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/j-d-tuccille-obamas-scolding-wont-change-the-populist-elite-divide-thats-replaced-racial-politics

“Obama’s scolding won’t change the populist-elite divide that’s replaced racial politics”, J. D. Tuccille, Oct. 19, 2024

“Last week, former president Barack Obama dressed down Black men for failing to support Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris with the numbers he thinks she deserves.”

Tuccille says, “the former president’s message was laden with the usual condescension and sparked an immediate backlash, earning him the title “scolder in chief.” But Obama was on to something. While Black and other minority-group Americans continue their traditional support for Democratic candidates, they’re doing so in declining numbers as voting patterns shift, breaking along lines of class rather than skin colour. The erosion of racial politics, and their replacement by a populist-elite divide, could be seen as relatively healthy”.

He points to a statistician and political analyst, Nate Silver, who has noted “a realignment where educational attainment and social class begin to predominate over race as the major dividing line in American politics.” This is apparently a significant shift in voting patterns.

“The ongoing development of the Democratic Party as a party not of labour but of socioeconomic elites, and the ongoing development of the Republican Party as a party not of business but of working class social conservatives represents a major, perhaps the major, American political development of the 21st-century.”

But Tuccille sees danger in that both parties are rejecting freedom of speech that is violating the original American vision of “personal liberty and a limited state that minds its manners.”

National Post

This on DEI ruining medical education

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/bruce-pardy-at-tmu-medical-school-some-students-are-more-equal-than-others

“At TMU medical school, some students are more equal than others: Remember that the next time you’re waiting to see your newly minted doctor”, Bruce Pardy, Oct. 19, 2024

“Canada’s newest medical school will select students not for their ability, but their identity… The school, which opens next fall at Toronto Metropolitan University, will reserve 75 per cent of its seats for Indigenous, Black, and other “equity-deserving” groups including 2SLGBTQ+… Canada now has full-blown racial and gender discrimination. How did we get here? The Supreme Court of Canada is largely to blame.”

Pardy notes that last year the US Supreme Court ended race-based admissions at American universities because some were preferring black and brown students to Asian and white students which violated the “equal treatment under law” clauses of the US Constitution.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms also claims to protect equal treatment without discrimination but “the Supreme Court of Canada has long insisted that the clause does not mean equal treatment but equity.

“Equity, also known as “substantive equality” or “equality of outcome,” means treating different groups differently. It means applying standards and granting rights to compensate for perceived advantages, disadvantages, strengths, and weaknesses. Equity is a right granted not to individuals as individuals, but to members of groups.”

Pardy says that equal treatment and equity are opposites. He argues that laws cannot apply standards to every individual and then adjust them to groups. He quotes Friedrich Hayek’s argument that if people are treated equally then the results will be inequality of actual positions, and you cannot achieve both equal treatment of individuals and equal outcomes at the same time.

Hence, by giving preference to equity, the Canadian Charter allows for programs of affirmative action that “discriminate against members of some groups to promote the fortunes of others.” This equity of outcomes has been made the general rule by the Supreme Court.

“Thanks to the Supreme Court, equality rights have become weapons wielded by preferred groups to demand more lenient standards and advantageous outcomes. In Canada, some people are more equal than others.”

National Post

“Bruce Pardy is executive director of Rights Probe, professor of law at Queen’s University, senior fellow with the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy, and author of the new report “A Right to Unequal Treatment”.”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.