See new material below on tussling with Shellenberger on the revival of undifferentiated religion.
Note new material below on Haviv Gur’s interview at Free Press explaining the theology that drives the Iranian theocrats to violence. A theology common to all three great Western religions that holds the dangerous potential to incite some to extremist fanaticism.
See also below the “holy shitoli” (a variant on “WTF”) as the IPCC admits that “a set of key assumptions promoting a climate ‘crisis’ since 2011 are ‘implausible’” and these “assumptions have produced outlandish claims of future climate catastrophe”. This means that “almost every fearmongering mainstream media climate headline and story that has been written over the last 15 years is junk”. Once again, everyone now say with me- “Holy shitoli”.
Also, a defense of the NDE movement as the latest stage in the history of human “spirituality”. But, as some argue… “It’s just personal, subjective experience”. Yes, just like the “personal, subjective” experiences of all the founders of our great religious traditions, that they subsequently built those religions on (i.e. Moses’ mountaintop experiences, Buddha’s enlightenment under the tree, Paul getting his Christology on Damascus Road and other heavenly visions, Muhammad’s cave revelations and visits from Gabriel, etc.).
Those have been the most dominant meta-narratives in human history as the products of humanity’s response to the primary impulse for meaning and purpose. The ideas/beliefs/themes of these traditions have long shaped the archetypes of the collective human subconscious and those, in turn, have repeatedly shaped and driven all the following offspring human systems of meaning/belief down through history, both religious and “secular/ideological”.
See historical research on Marxism, Nazism, and environmental alarmism for evidence.
The best of news is that we were long ago given the liberating and non-religious alternative to the bad ideas in these dominant meta-narratives- i.e. the “stunning new theology” presented by Historical Jesus of an unconditionally loving deity. Entirely contrary to Paul’s highly conditional Christology. Now the project is to recover the “buried diamond” of that Jewish wisdom sage.
More on rethinking the “spiritual/metaphysical“, Wendell Krossa. Yes, its “speculation”. Nonetheless, some speculation offers better alternatives than what we have inherited from religious traditions. Historical Jesus felt the same.
This site exists to communicate one critical insight/discovery, i.e. the stunning new alternative theology that was given to us two millennia ago that there is a profoundly unconditional Love behind all reality and all life. That Love is closer than our own breath or atoms, it is in us all as inseparable from our human spirit and self. It defines the nature of our core self or spirit, the real us. And that is a liberating boost to human self-image after we have been beaten down with “fallen, sinful humanity” mythology from our beginnings.
The new theology of God as unconditional love defines the nature of the core of all reality- i.e. the Creator- and hence, the basis from which I can affirm that “Its going to be alright, ultimately, for everyone”. This truth exists as ultimate reality despite the sometimes hellish experiences that we endure on this planet.
Among all that is commented on here, this is the background theme of all themes, the basic insight that I want to repeatedly affirm to all who read any material here.
I give the nod to Joseph Campbell’s “Hero’s Quest” as a useful framework for our life stories. That we go out into life on a journey, an adventure. And during our adventure we encounter monsters that we have to fight and conquer, monsters that may be physical disabilities and challenges, or mental/emotional problems, or social issues that we struggle with, etc.
And through our struggle with our monsters, we learn lessons and gain insights that we can then offer to benefit others in their battles. Further, we are wounded from our struggles with our monsters, wounded in ways that leave us scarred for the rest of our lives, walking with limps like Jacob after he had wrestled with “God” (I refer to that incident loosely as metaphorical).
Insert- AI Overview: “In Genesis 32:22-32, Jacob wrestles with a mysterious ‘man’ (identified as God or an angel) at the Jabbok River before meeting his brother Esau. Jacob refuses to release the figure until he receives a blessing, resulting in his renaming to ‘Israel’ (“one who struggles with God”) and receiving a permanent, symbolic limp.”
My monster was presented to me, initially at 3 years of age, by my Evangelical Dad who told me that God was going to get me, that he was angry with me and would punish me in hell if I was bad and did not “get right with God” by joining his Evangelical religion. He repeated that “Threat theology” over subsequent years as he pressed his beliefs on my sisters and me.
It took me several decades to discover that Carl Jung was right- i.e. that there was no such wrathful deity frowning down on us, threatening apocalypse and hellfire. Jung stated bluntly that religions had God all wrong. But Jung was not clear on the alternative nature of God as no conditions love.
It took me more years to discover the core theme of the entirely non-religious Historical Jesus whose profound discovery of an unconditionally loving God was buried in the “Christ-ianity” of Paul. Not entirely buried as the “Search for Historical Jesus” and “Q Wisdom Sayings” research opened up the way to glimpse the buried “diamonds” of Jesus (Thomas Jefferson, Leo Tolstoy).
Unfortunately, even the Q scholars were not clear on exactly what they were uncovering, with James Robinson getting closest with his statement that the “single greatest contribution of Jesus to the history of human ideas” was his insight on the “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God”. That was stating the new theology negatively.
That negative element was taken from Jesus’ statements that there should be “no more eye for eye retaliation against offenders/enemies but instead we should ‘Love our enemies’.” Robinson stopped there though he was right that the God of Jesus did not vengefully and punitively retaliate against human failure.
Historical Jesus then continued to state the positive side of his stunning new theology. How were we to “love our enemies”? He referenced the natural world to illustrate the unconditional love that was the central element in his theological discovery/insight. He said, “God gives sun and rain- the two critical elements to survival in agrarian society- to both good and bad people alike.”
He used the “behavior based on similar belief” coupling to conclude- “We should then be unconditionally merciful just as God is unconditionally merciful”.
His point? God included all without discrimination, both good and bad people. None were excluded from that generous and merciful love of deity.
Jesus went on to add further insights to his stunning new theology that should profoundly transform human narratives, human thought, feeling, motivation, and consequent action or behavior.
He added that God was a non-dominating reality, a serving reality. True greatness, he said, was to not lord over others but to serve all. To treat all others as equals. And “God is great”.
After re-affirming the “no eye for eye” basis of his stunning new theology, the alternative was obviously then “restorative justice”, but not the extremist response of pacifism in the face of evil. Any common-sense love will restrain the violent in order to protect the innocent. Authentic love will hold offenders accountable. Because responsibility for behavior and its consequences is fundamental to all healthy human development and growth.
Our primary impulse for meaning and purpose has stirred humanity across history to understand the nature of Ultimate Reality because that shapes our ultimate Ideal, that which informs us why we exist and how we should live. The stunning new theology of Jesus overturned that central reality entirely, a reality that had from the beginning been defined by features of Zoroastrian cosmic tribalism, deity as dominating “Lord/King”, and deity as vengefully punitive, as ultimate Destroyer through apocalypse and hell.
And though it may upset many- Jesus’ new theology is profoundly non-religious, even anti-religion, in that all religious traditions have been highly conditional and none of them have ever communicated the unconditional nature of God to humanity.
One more thought: We (humanity) have arrived at liberal democracy/Classic Liberalism as the best system for expressing the basic themes of the Jesus discovery- i.e. the universal inclusion of all as equals with equal rights and freedoms, laws and institutions that restrain elite domination and orient state leaders and bureaucrats to serve citizens not lord over them, and justice systems oriented to restorative not punitive justice.
Anyway, just this reminder that among all the comment here on this and that going on in our world, we have been given this profoundly liberating discovery from a wisdom sage of two millennia ago, an insight on theology that transforms everything, that is liberating at the most basic levels of the human psyche- i.e. how we think and feel, and how we are then motivated and behave, how we treat others.
The discovery of Historical Jesus that deity is unconditional responds to our primal impulse for meaning and purpose like nothing else in human history. It is “his greatest contribution to the history of human ideas.” And unfortunately, it has too long been buried by the Christology of Paul that dominates the New Testament and highly conditional Christian religion.
So, once again– Yes, “It is going to be alright ultimately for everyone”. Just to vent again the Daddy thing in me.
Non-domination in ultimate Reality, Wendell Krossa
Something I read recently sparked this thought on the non-dominating God of Jesus. Where did Jesus teach that? When he told some disciples that true greatness was not lording over others but serving others (Matthew 20).
(Note- I do not affirm all that AI says)
AI Overview
“Jesus redefined greatness as humble service rather than exercising authority over others, highlighting that true leadership involves sacrificial service rather than self-promotion. As a “Facebook” post notes, true greatness is not in power, but in serving. He modeled this by stating he came to serve, not to be served…
Key Aspects of Jesus’ Teaching on Greatness:
• Servant Leadership: Jesus directly contrasted kingdom leadership with worldly leadership, where rulers “lord it over” others. True leaders are to be servants of all.
• The Ultimate Example: Jesus demonstrated this by washing his disciples’ feet, a task for the lowest servants.
• Actionable Service: True greatness is defined by humble service and sacrifice, not power or position.
• Not a Path to Self-Promotion: It is a call to serve others regardless of how they treat us.
(End of AI Overview)
And in relation to the non-dominating feature/element in deity, Jung offered this insight (and I may be reading him differently from what he intended). Jung spoke of “synchronicity” as similar to mysterious “coincidences” that could be viewed as some sort of divine intervention in our lives.
But these surprising “chance” occurrences cannot then be taken as affirmation of traditional religious views of deity as controlling all elements of this world and constantly intervening in human lives and affairs (e.g. Puritan “sovereignty of God” beliefs). The religious view of God as constantly intervening to control all of life was illustrated in Charles Spurgeon’s sermon on divine sovereignty where he stated that every grain of dust spinning off the turning wheels of a passing stagecoach was “following its divinely pre-ordained path.”
Any “divine intervention” does not override free human choice to, for example, choose badly and make stupid mistakes, including some real bad mistakes that harm others. We can’t blame deity but must maturely take full personal responsibility for the outcomes and consequences of our free choices.
As Bob Brinsmead argues- If God is love then authentic love by its very nature is inseparable from respect for the freedom of all others, so God cannot overrule the freedom of people or God would not be love. Love and freedom are two sides of one coin. This goes some way to explaining the presence of evil in life, in this realm of dualism (good and evil). As Bob also says, “Where there is no authentic freedom, there is no authentic love.”
It helps to think of any divine influence as “gentle persuasion”- i.e. the still small voice or inner urge to do the right thing, and to caution against bad choices. What some call “conscience”.
The gentle persuasion can be illustrated, for example, in the Elijah in the cave incident where God was not in the storm and thunder (i.e. not in fierce threat and overwhelming power) but manifested in a still, quiet voice. The gentle persuasion whisper we all feel at times.
(Note again: I do not affirm all AI Overview says below)
AI Overview
“Elijah, fleeing from Queen Jezebel, hid in a cave on Mount Horeb, where God revealed himself not through powerful wind, an earthquake, or fire, but in a “still small voice” or “gentle whisper”. This profound moment of comfort and instruction, found in 1 Kings 19:11-13, taught Elijah that God often works through subtle, quiet power rather than dramatic spectacle, restoring the discouraged prophet.
“Key Aspects of the Narrative
• The Context (1 Kings 19): After a great spiritual victory on Mount Carmel, Elijah became fearful and despondent due to threats from Jezebel, leading him to flee to Horeb, the mount of God.
• The Display of Power: God told Elijah to stand on the mountain. A massive wind, an earthquake, and a fire occurred, yet Scripture notes that the Lord was not in these.
• The Still Small Voice: After the fire, a gentle, quiet sound (described as a “low whisper” or “sheer silence”) appeared.
• Elijah’s Reaction: Upon hearing this, Elijah wrapped his face in his cloak and stood at the entrance of the cave to hear God’s message, indicating his recognition of the divine presence.
• The Message: God asked, “What are you doing here, Elijah?” to which the prophet replied that he felt alone in his zeal. God then revealed there were still 7,000 in Israel who had not bowed to Baal, reinforcing that his work was not done.
“Significance of the Event
• Gentle Restoration: Instead of rebuking Elijah, highlights that God provided comfort and a new mission for the exhausted prophet.
• God’s Method: The event contrasts with previous dramatic miracles, teaching that God is often present in quiet moments and that spiritual power often works in silence.
• The Voice in Different Translations: The Hebrew phrase (qol demamah daqqah) is translated differently across versions, including a “gentle whisper” (NIV), “sound of sheer silence” (NRSV), and “still small voice” (KJV).
“For further study, offers a perspective on the, “What does it mean that God speaks in a still small voice?” query, while provides an in-depth analysis from The Spurgeon Library on this profound moment.”
(End of AI Overview)
Also, none of us quite understands this, but we see the sometimes amazing coincidences that Jung spoke of as we look back on our lives. Joseph Campbell said that our lives unfold like a novel being written. We all live unique life adventures with all the parts fitting as they should, even though things often appear to occur randomly or accidentally. And yes, even our bad choices can sometimes be turned to useful learning occurrences (though this is not to excuse the outright evil done by some).
Again, if we choose stupid then that is stupid and its all on us for the outcomes or consequences. We can’t blame anyone else. As the wise sage Forest Gump said, “Stupid is as stupid does”. Couldn’t have said it better.
Anyway, something more from our AI friends…
AI Overview
“Carl Jung described coincidences as “meaningful coincidences” (synchronicity), defining them as acausal, non-random, and significant events that link internal mental states to external reality. He viewed these experiences not as mere chance, but as revelations of a deeper cosmic order and connected, symbolic patterns.
“Key Aspects of Jung’s View on Coincidence
• Definition of Synchronicity: Jung defined it as an “acausal connecting principle”— a “falling together in time” (from Greek syn together, chronos time) of internal thoughts and external events that lack a direct cause-and-effect relationship.
• Symbolic Meaning: These coincidences often carry profound personal significance, functioning like dreams to provide guidance or insight into life challenges, as discussed on ‘This Jungian Life’.
• The “Scarab” Example: A key example of a synchronistic event was when a patient, during a therapy session, was describing a dream about a golden scarab. At that exact moment, a beetle (a scarab-like insect) tapped on the window. The coincidence broke the patient’s rational, rigid mindset, allowing for therapeutic progress.
• Not Random Chance: Unlike, for example, simple “meaningless” coincidences that can be explained by probability, a synchronistic event is characterized by its high improbability, emotional intensity, and connection to archetypal situations, such as birth, death, or major relationships, according to ‘Psychology Today’.
• Universal Connectedness: Jung believed these events suggest that the human psyche and the external world are interconnected, points that he further explores in his writings, and which are also explained on Reddit.
“Purpose of Synchronicity
“According to Arts of Thought and Wikipedia, for Jung, these events act as:
• Affirming mechanisms: They serve to validate or highlight a particular, often challenging, psychological state.
• Guidance tools: They often occur at moments of profound personal change or during significant psychological crises.
• Catalysts for Growth: They can break a person out of a rigid, purely rational mindset.
“These “meaningful coincidences” are often linked with archetypal or unconscious energy, providing moments of insight or a feeling of connection to a larger whole, according to ‘This Jungian Life’.”
(End of AI Overview)
Note: I find the NDE movement, as the latest phase in the history of human “spirituality”, offers some interesting insight into all that happens during our “Hero’s quest” adventures here on Earth. That we may even have some “pre-incarnation in a human body” involvement in what happens to us during our lives. That we choose the varied things, both good and bad, that happen to us during our life stories. Sure, this is “speculative” and based on the testimonies of the NDE people who claim to have entered the surrounding realms during their “out of body” death experiences. But it is another interesting insight to toy with in our search for meaning and purpose. Especially the insight that we may be more responsible for all that happens in our lives, more responsible than we imagine.
The NDE movement? Those are subjective, personal experiences.
Yes. Just like all the founders of the major world religions had subjective, personal experiences that their religions are built upon. Moses’ mountaintop experiences and burning bush. Buddha’s under-the-tree enlightenment. Paul’s Damascus Road and other heavenly visions that gave him his Christ myth. Muhammad’s cave revelations and visits from Gabriel. All subjective, personal experiences.
Subjective, personal experience is the only real thing that each of us knows to be real. It may be the only real thing in the universe. And of course, we all bring our criteria to evaluate subjective, personal experiences of others.
The NDEs hold credibility with me because of the common discovery of God as inexpressible unconditional love. That is the central discovery of Historical Jesus that formed the basis of his message. NDE’s are the only spiritual experiences in history that affirm that “diamond” discovery of Jesus. No major religion has ever presented that truth to people or confirmed the central insight of Jesus. Christianity buried it under Paul’s highly conditional Christ myth.
I also view the NDE accounts as our Creator re-assuring us that its going to be alright ultimately, for everyone. That we all return safely to the Love from where we came.
A qualifying note to my comments below on varied recent articles by Michael Shellenberger on TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) and the “savior complex” that he claims as driving the recent assassination attempt on Donald Trump.
I view Shellenberger with the highest regard as one of the best journalists of our era. His work on the Twitter Files, and his probing of the psychology behind left-wing extremism, are among the best of reporting being done today. That said, I have some quibbles, as noted further below, with his repeated advocacy for the revival of an undifferentiated Christianity (i.e. “undifferentiated” in not acknowledging the profound difference between the messages of Historical Jesus on unconditional deity and Paul’s entirely contrary and highly conditional Christ myth).
First… Some site project comment, Wendell Krossa
This site probes the origins of the main themes that shape our narratives and lives, that inspire how we think, feel, are motivated and act. I probe these main themes, trying to understand more of- Where did they come from? And- What produced them? And- Why are they are still here dominating the meta-narratives of our present era, shaping the contemporary narratives around which societies unify, whether around religious narratives or secular ideologies?
I want to know more of which themes are good and produce humane outcomes, as in liberal democracy, and which are bad and incite/validate the worst impulses from our common animal inheritance (i.e. inciting/validating tribalism, domination/control of others, and retaliatory destruction of enemies).
Which ones should we be rejecting, overcoming, and which ones should we embrace and promote that energize us to become more human? This is about the age-old goal of our existence here, the age-old battle that involves discerning between good against evil, that involves rejecting the evil and living the good. This is the grand story of our becoming truly liberated to be human as we make our exodus from our animal past.
Our impulse to know good from bad is our fundamental project (see, for example, the Adam/Eve story that opens the Bible). We get that the main features of our animal past are bad- i.e. notably the impulses to tribal opposition toward differing others, the elite domination/control of commoners, and the vengeful, punitive treatment of human differences that we tend to view in terms of demonized “enemies”.
A high point in our exodus from our animal past has been the modern-era discovery of liberal democracy as the best that we have come up for organizing human societies in ways that provide the most benefit to the most citizens. Liberal democracy principles, systems of law, and representative institutions do best to assist our struggle to become more human.
Liberal democracy systems define good as (1) the protection and promotion of equal rights and freedoms for all citizens in true inclusiveness (i.e. not “equity outcomes” as socialism advocates and thereby deforms liberal democracy). (2) Liberal democracy also promotes good by combatting the elite/commoner divide that ruins human freedom with elite domination, control, and subjugation of commoners.
Liberal democracy promotes laws and institutions that orient government officials/elites and bureaucrats to use state agencies and institutions to serve citizens. Such laws and institutions restrain the elite impulse to dominate, intervene, and control citizens (i.e. notably through excessive taxation and regulation).
In liberal democracy we have a system and approach that functions well to bring out the best in people. Today, it is threatened by two main totalitarian systems that want to reestablish the elite domination of commoners- i.e. one is theocracy (Islamic, Christian, or other) and the other is Marxist/socialist collectivism.
Further…
In the links posted below, Michael Shellenberger is not clear on the theocratic danger from Christianity. He repeatedly recommends that we need to recover our abandoned religious traditions, a loss that he bemoans as responsible for the current embrace of Marxism by many as a replacement “religion”. He is not clear, as historian Richard Landes has shown, that Christian “apocalyptic millennialism” has been a major driving factor behind Marxist revolutions. Modern-era Marxism, along with environmental alarmism, is a secular version of “salvation through destruction” (i.e. the requirement to violently purge Western civilization that has been the great “evil force” in life that has ruined an original communal paradise).
Shellenberger and Malice attempt to explain the modern shift to the far-left as influenced by Jean-Jacques Rosseau’s ideas of an original paradise of “noble savage communalism” that has been ruined in modern civilization and the lost communalism paradise has to be restored through the purging, especially, of “corrupt” Western civilization.
Insert on Rosseau’s ideas:
“Nature vs. Civilization: He believed humanity was corrupted by civilization, (and people) preferred a “state of nature” where humans are naturally good (“noble savage”).
Note that this is a version of the “Adam/Eve in Eden” myth, before humanity fell into sinfulness.
Another Rosseau idea:
“General Will: A concept that the collective body of citizens acts in the common interest rather than for private, selfish gain.”
This is another element of Marxist collectivism- i.e. the belief that the elites who run the collective do so “on behalf of the people/workers”, for the “greater or common good”. I have repeatedly posted Kristian Niemietz’s good summary of this mental fallacy that collectivist elites run collectives “for the people”.
Shellenberger/Malice do not reference what fundamentally drives people like Rosseau- i.e. that he embraced the central themes of world religions that have changed little over the millennia, affirming Joseph Campbell’s point that all people across history and across all the cultures of the world have believed the same primitive myths.
This site repeatedly posts the lists of “bad religious ideas” that have dominated human narratives and minds across history, the beliefs that have endlessly incited and validated our commonly shared inheritance of base animal impulses known as the “evil triad” of tribalism, domination, and retaliatory destruction of differing others.
(See- “Humanity’s worst ideas, better alternatives” or “Old story themes, new story alternatives” http://www.wendellkrossa.com/?p=9533 and “The complex of “bad religious ideas” that have darkened and enslaved human minds from the beginning” http://www.wendellkrossa.com/?p=13571#more-13571)
It is critical to human progress that we engage the battle against these base impulses in an intensely personal manner and also understand the religious themes in our own narratives that incite and validate these impulses. This is what Solzhenitsyn referred to when he stated that the real battle of good against evil is not waged between differing social classes but runs down the center of every human heart.
Each of us then makes our most important contribution to the overall exodus of humanity from our animal past and into a human future by conquering the real enemy in life that is the residual animal still inside each of us. That is how we each contribute to furthering the grand liberation of humanity- i.e. by winning our personal battle against the residual animal.
Central to winning this battle is to understand what most potently incites the animal in us, what generates the energy that stirs these base impulses to act inhumanely toward others. My bad ideas lists summarize the complex of beliefs/myths that were created by our ancestors, mythical themes that then shaped the archetypes of the “collective human subconscious” (Jung), from where these archetypes, exerting subtle subconscious influences, then motivate people to repeatedly and endlessly embrace new narratives that embody the same core themes, both religious and secular/ideological. The embedded archetypes have influenced many to embrace the apocalyptic millennial crusades of Marxism, Nazism, and now environmental alarmism.
Another important contributing factor to note-
Our base animal impulses are incited and validated most significantly by the Ultimate Ideal of a deity possessing similar characteristics. This dominant “Ideal” validates the worst of evil in us, while cloaking the evil triad of tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction as good, as true righteousness and justice.
Hence, my repeated appeal to Historical Jesus for successfully going after the evil triad, and for rejecting the archetypes that validate the evil triad, by straightforwardly rejecting the old God that validates these base animal impulses. He presented the stunning new alternative image of deity- i.e. a non-tribal, non-dominating, non-exterminator God. His stunning new theology presented the opportunity to radically transform our inherited archetypes.
Such foundational narrative transformation will then give people “emotional satisfaction” in choosing new narrative themes that affirm our better human impulses (i.e. archetypal themes that validate the universal inclusion of all as equals, that promote mutual service, and restorative justice). Through the foundational transformation that Historical Jesus advocated we can then transform life for the better, motivating humanity toward an ever-more humane civilization as in liberal democracy.
I find that Shellenberger, who advocates for a generalized restoration of a religion like Christianity, does not make clear what is bad in the religious mix that affirms the animal in us.
The archetypal features of the Christ of Paul-
(1) The tribalism of true believers that are separated from differing others and “saved”, while unbelievers are excluded and damned. (2) The advocacy for domination that is validated by the archetype of “Lord/King Christ” who rules with a totalitarian rod of iron and demands that every thought be brought into subjugation to his Lordship. (3) The violent retaliatory destruction of unbelievers via apocalypse and eternal hellfire.
(2) Shellenberger, as with many others, does not present the clear contrast between what is good in the merger of profound opposites at the heart of Christianity, i.e. what Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy termed the “diamonds” of Jesus as contrasted with the “dung” of Paul’s Christology.
Advocating for the revival of one of history’s most violent religious traditions does not solve the problem that he tackles in “the opposition of far-left collectivism to modern Western civilization”. Shellenberger believes that the rejection of the generalized “Judeo-Christian” religion is central to the problem of modern leftism. He does not distinguish the evidence that reveals the profoundly contradictory ideas in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Judeo-Christianity, along with embracing varied good insights, also embraces the prominent archetypes that validate tribalism, domination, and retaliatory destruction, the worst of features cloaked as good, as divine, even as deity.
Added note:
Paul’s advocacy for ultimate domination by a Lord/King then validates his affirmation of the divine approval for human relationships of domination- i.e. the divine right of kings/state leaders, slaves submitting to masters, wives submitting to husbands, etc. All relationships of domination that are advocated in his letters.
The main elements of Jesus’ message, not the dominant Christ themes, properly affirm liberal democracy principles and institutions.
Jesus’ message of a stunning new unconditional theology affirms the core ideal of liberal democracy inclusion and equality. However, we can dismiss other elements in his message. For example, his statements such as “give to all who ask”… Well, you can’t run a successful business or large economy on such principles. But his central ideals of unconditional inclusion of all as equals, his teaching on unlimited forgiveness, etc., these counter the inherited impulses to tribalism, domination, and violent destruction of differing others.
I would urge people like Michael to look at some of the more fundamental contributing factors than just the surface psychological elements that incite the violence that he references coming from today’s far left. Look at the archetypes that were shaped by early mythology and subsequently embraced by religions like Christianity and also by the “secularized” variants of Marxism and environmentalism.
The archetypes noted above are the “idea” that General Nagata said that we have to defeat if we are to properly “prevent” the violent “savior activism” that Michael argues against in another article further below. Richard Landes argued for the same as Nagata- i.e. recognize that the themes of Paul’s apocalyptic millennialism have structured religions like Christianity and its secular offspring of Marxism and these themes continue to energize the minds and spirits of these young people with savior complexes. They identify as heroic warriors for some greater good, driven by more than the surface psychology elements that Shellenberger identifies, though those elements are also helpful to be aware of.
Proper and thorough “prevention” (urged by Shellenberger) has to go deeper if we are to defeat the “idea” behind all this violence. And that will involve going after Paul’s Christ, the ultimate archetype at the heart of Michael’s Christian religion.
Another added note:
Carl Jung said that religions like Christianity have “gotten God all wrong”. Thomas Jefferson said Christianity has gotten Jesus all wrong. Historical Jesus was one of history’s singularly unique voices that advocated for unconditional deity. Unfortunately, his stunning new theology was embedded in the larger context of a myth that promotes the very opposite theology of a God who demands the supreme conditions of salvation through a cosmic sacrifice and the violence of apocalyptic destruction and eternal hell.
Another note– I am not picking on Shellenberger, but I reference him for representing something common to many Christians.
You cannot claim to properly understand Christianity without some basic familiarity with the “Jesus Seminar” on the “Search for Historical Jesus” and the “Q Wisdom Sayings” research. These endeavors/projects are among the best providing information/evidence on how Christianity formed in the first Century AD. That research details the battles between the Jewish Jesus movement and Paul’s Gentile Christ religion. These researchers detail how early Christian leaders battled over the belief in sacrifice as a divine condition and the related sacrifice industry.
The early Christian battles over whether God wanted sacrifices was a continuation of the Old Testament conflict in Judaism between the prophetical tradition and the priests who pushed the sacrifice industry in that BCE era, an industry that many pre-AD Jews viewed as “heretical” to Judaism. So also, Jewish leaders in the first Century AD, notably James and Peter, also viewed Paul’s sacrifice gospel as heresy. Paul in response damned them both to hell for refusing his Christ gospel (see, for example, Gal. 1:8-9, etc.).
Shellenberger, as with many other Christians, seems quite unfamiliar with this profound contradiction in Christianity- i.e. between the message of Jesus and Paul’s entirely opposite Christ myth.
Added notes (Again, I am referencing Shellenberger as an illustrative set-up guy to make a larger point. My respect for him as an excellent journalist remains strong.):
This “Preface” to the link below was sent to a discussion group.
In this discussion with Michael Mallice, Michael Shellenberger states that modern meaninglessness can be explained in part as due to the loss of traditional religion (notably Christianity) hence many are viewing Marxism as a replacement religion. But Marxism is more closely aligned in its core themes with Paul’s Christ-ianity than Shellenberger seems aware of and is in fact a “secularized” continuation of core Christian themes.
Malice inserts a comment on a book that shows how socialism is derived from Jesus’ message and there is some evidence of that.
More critical however is that the basic themes of Jesus on equality, non-domination, and restorative justice affirm liberal democracy principles and laws that protect the rights and freedoms of all people and affirm the representative institutions that protect commoners from elite domination (i.e. “true greatness is not lording over others but serving others”).
And the new unconditional theology of Jesus puts the unconditional treatment of all others at the center of ethics and justice.
But as for Jesus’ statements to give to all who ask and to turn the other cheek, well, don’t base your business principles and practises on such advice, nor economic policies, as you will be bankrupted quickly. And also, do not take what Jesus said on “turn the other cheek” to structure justice systems that are responsible most primarily to protect the innocent from violent offenders. Though certainly, offenders also must be treated humanely after restraint and incarceration.
“Michael Shellenberger Breaks Down the Epstein Insanity | ‘YOUR WELCOME’ #413”, Michael Malice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poi-vW3Nge4
As noted above, Malice and Shellenberger discuss the Rosseau belief that in the ancient past we were happy and noble natives in communal societies of equals sharing all things in common like the Christians of Acts 2-4, but we have now degenerated in civilization. Hence, the leftist demonization and hatred of Western civilization that leftists argue has become hierarchical and thereby ruined past egalitarian communal societies. These distortions of humanity’s past affirm their belief that we must destroy this present evil civilization and return to the utopian past (i.e. salvation through destruction).
This view infects much of contemporary academia- i.e. the myth of noble savages more connected to nature with low consumption existence.
Malice and Shellenberger offer other interesting points- i.e. that young people today just want to be on the barricades of some social cause even if they don’t know exactly what they are protesting as interviews sometimes reveal.
Here is another on Shellenberger as illustrating critical mistakes on religion (I recently sent this also to a discussion group), Wendell Krossa
“This is good on varied elements of the psychology of radicalism and violence but Michael continues to miss other important elements… Could it be his generalized Christianity that he often urges to have restored in society as a primary source of meaning, blaming the modern-era loss of meaning/purpose on the abandonment of a tradition religion like Christianity? He does not appear to understand what Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy got clear and expressed so bluntly- i.e. that there are the “diamonds” of Jesus in the New Testament that are quite opposite to the larger New Testament context that they term the “dung” of Paul’s Christ myth.
Shellenberger says below that “the savior complex emerged in opposition to, not as an extension of, Christianity.” Huh? Christianity is the ultimate embodiment of the “savior complex”. Christians believe the Old Testament foretells the coming of a savior and the New Testament then reveals the Savior. How can he miss this central savior theme?
And as for beliefs modelling human behavior- note Revelation 19 where Paul’s Christ tramples out “the fury of the wrath of God” and in the ultimate display of Zoroastrian tribal cosmic dualism, destroys all the unbelievers as the necessary purging of evil in preparation for salvation. That- i.e. “salvation through violent destruction”- is a key theme structuring religions like Christianity. Psychologist Harold Ellens, along with others, warns that such images of deity using violence to solve problems then energize people to also use violence against their enemies.
Michael notes the sin of “a desire for recognition”. He misses the point that the entire Bible is about a deity who demands ultimate recognition, worship, praise and for all eternity and from all people. Charles Templeton, Billy Graham’s early ministry colleague, said that the God of the Bible is an Idi Amin-like character demanding constant praise and worship on pain of death for not doing so. Jesus opposed this praise (e.g. “Why do you call me good?”), but Paul’s Christ demanded it, or else.
Shellenberger adds, “many progressives are in the grip of a savior complex”. Yes, they are in the grip of Christianity’s central narrative theme of “salvation through violent destruction”. Michael, look at the history of Christianity and what Christian historians like James Tabor have shown regarding Paul’s Christ, a message that is entirely opposite to the message of Jesus, how the Christ myth has dominated Western civilization and history and the historical trail of violence that has produced. Tabor’s book “Paul and Jesus” is helpful on understanding the influence of Paul and his Christ on our civilization.
If you really want to do proper “prevention” (as Shellenberger advocates) then go to root contributing factors such as what psychologist Harold Ellens explained in Zenon Lotufo’s “Cruel God, Kind God”- i.e. how bad Christian theology energizes violence, among other pathologies. Note that Ellens and Lotufo are Christian (i.e. not casting stones from without).
There are two fundamentally different narratives in the New Testament, one a profound “savior complex” mythology and the other expressing no such complex at all- i.e. the original Jesus message as recorded in the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel, the closest that we get to what Jesus actually taught. “Q Wisdom Sayings” research comes out of “Jesus Seminar” and overall “Search for Historical Jesus” research.
“Ego-Driven ‘Savior Complex’ Behind Trump’s Would-Be Assassin And Radicalized Activists: While violence and assassinations are rare, progressive theology taps into the need for purpose in a secular age”, Michael Shellenberger May 4, 2026
He begins:
“Cole Allen, the man who sought to murder high-ranking Trump administration officials, as well as the president… had a savior complex. He felt a moral duty to sacrifice his life to save people he considered victims.
Shellenberger then quotes psychological experts who say that Allen wanted to “be some kind of hero, and that would make him feel better about himself, and it would be worth it to lose his life doing this.”
Shellenberger adds other comments on the varied psychological factors that influence people with savior complexes. This is now manifesting in increasing levels of left-wing violence against political opponents.
He notes a Secret Service study of potential assassins over past decades and says “most had struggled with acute reversals and disappointment in their lives. Political violence offered a vehicle to convert that disappointment and angry resentment into spiritual significance.”
Then Shellenberger exposes his unfamiliarity with the good research on how the archetypal narrative of saviorhood- i.e. the New Testament Christ message of Paul (notably the apocalyptic millennialism of his Christ), has driven the savior complexes of Marxist revolution, Nazism (Hitler identified as savior based on his own Christian views), and environmental alarmism. Again, see the historical research of Richard Landes, Arthur Mendel, David Redles, among others.
Shellenberger says, “Cole identified as Christian, but his assassination attempt was plainly an act of pride, which is a sin. Pointing this out is not to make the case for Christianity but to understand how the savior complex emerged in opposition to, not as an extension of, Christianity.”
I politely but firmly beg to differ, Michael. Christianity is the ultimate embodiment of a savior complex.
Where Shellenberger says that Cole Allen was, “A young man with high cognitive capacity inherited Christian language but rejected its meaning.” I would argue that Allen got the central Christian meaning quite entirely right. That the gospel of the Christ is the epitome statement of “salvation through violent destruction”. Saviorhood that advocates ultimate divine violence to solve problems.
Nonetheless, Shellenberger is quite right in concluding “that many progressives are in the grip of a savior complex.”
And another interesting one from Shellenberger on the psychological factors driving “Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS)”:
https://www.public.news/p/stoic-influencer-violates-core-precepts
“Stoic Influencer Violates Core Precepts Of Stoicism In TDS-Fueled Condemnation Of Ivanka Trump: Ryan Holiday displays a lack of humility, emotional control, and concern for family loyalty”, Michael Shellenberger, May 3, 2026
Some quotes pulled from this article:
“But what is TDS actually? Where does it come from? And why does it capture so many otherwise intelligent and emotionally balanced people?…”
He quotes “Charles Krauthammer, the Washington Post columnist and trained psychiatrist. He coined the original ‘Bush Derangement Syndrome’ in a 2003 column, defining it as ‘the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency, the very existence of George W. Bush”
Shellenberger add re the new Trump variant, “the inability to distinguish between legitimate policy differences on the one hand and signs of psychic pathology on the other.”
The Trump version of TDS, “projects increasingly catastrophic interpretations onto ordinary events….
“It is triggered by surface features of Trump’s persona, his insults, his hair, his speech patterns, his rallies, his children, rather than by analysis of policy outcomes. It is impervious to disconfirming evidence; the deranged critic does not update his beliefs when the predicted disasters fail to occur, and he treats the absence of disaster as further evidence of Trump’s diabolical cleverness.”
TDS, says Shellenberger, “resembles religious demonology more than political analysis. In medieval Christian thought, the devil was the principle behind every sin; the modern deranged critic constructs Trump as the principle behind every contemporary social ill.
This totalizing reaction runs against the grain of every serious wisdom tradition that has ever taught humans how to think about evil.”
He then notes varied religious traditions that conclude, “the person who moralizes most loudly against another, stands in the greatest spiritual danger himself, because the act of moralization breeds the very arrogance it claims to oppose.”
Another:
“The professional-managerial class does not simply think it is smarter than the working class; it thinks it is morally better. It treats its political preferences as expressions of justice rather than as ordinary interests.
“The educated American left of the mid-twentieth century, whose ranks included observant Jews, Catholic social activists, mainline Protestant clergy, and secular humanists who took moral philosophy seriously, would have recognized the danger of treating any politician as an absolute evil.”
(End of Shellenberger article)
More AI interactions…
I asked Grok these questions below and received responses to the first two and then saw Grok heading in the direction of philosophical materialist explanations. So, I was going to push it for something different but was shut down. First time I have been limited in this manner…. Hmmm. Is “shut down” just my “conspiracy theory” tin hat??
My first query…
Grok: What possible natural events and inherited impulses inspired early humans to create myths of (1) an original paradise, myths of (2) an early human sin that resulted in the ruin of paradise, myths of (3) deity angry at people for ruining paradise, myths of (4) deity punishing people by cursing life with death and horrific suffering through nature (i.e. natural disasters, disease, accidents, cruelty from others, etc.), myths of (5) life declining toward something worse, toward disastrous ending in an apocalypse, myths of (6) salvation through divinely demanded blood sacrifice, myths of (7) the divine demand for people to purge the world of some form of evil as preparation for the restoration of the lost paradise, and myths of (8) eternal tribal dualism (elect people “saved”, unbelievers punished eternally), and so on.
And why do these themes still dominate major human narratives today, both religious and secular/ideological (i.e. Marxism, environmental alarmism, etc.)?
Grok replied:
These themes arise from a mix of universal human psychology (evolutionary adaptations) and recurring environmental pressures that early humans encountered. They are not arbitrary inventions but patterned responses that helped groups explain chaos, endure hardship, maintain cohesion, and motivate action. Cognitive and cultural evolution favored stories that “fit” our mental architecture: hyperactive agency detection (seeing intention in events), pattern-seeking, loss aversion, coalitional instincts, and terror management around mortality.
Natural events and impulses behind the core motifs
1. Original paradise / Golden Age: Post-Ice Age memory and seasonal abundance. Many cultures recall a time of easier foraging/hunting before agriculture’s spread (Neolithic transition ~10-12kya). Warmer Holocene climates, megafauna, river valleys with wild grains created pockets of relative plenty. Hunter-gatherer life had lower population pressure and less drudgery than early farming. Psychology: nostalgia bias + “decline from purity” as a way to frame present scarcity.
2. Human sin / ruin of paradise: Observation of overexploitation and consequences. Overhunting megafauna, soil depletion, deforestation, population growth leading to conflict. The “fall” encodes awareness that human choices (greed, hubris, taboo violation) disrupt balance. Evolutionary impulse: guilt/shame mechanisms for norm enforcement; reciprocity and cheater-detection.
3-4. Angry deity + punishment via death/suffering: Direct experience of nature’s indifference and violence. Floods (Mesopotamian epics, possible Black Sea inundation ~5600 BCE), volcanoes (e.g., Thera, supervolcanoes), plagues, famines, predation, infant mortality, injury. Life was cursed with toil, thorns, pain in childbirth, and entropy. Agency detection turns random disasters into “punishment” — a hyperactive agency detection device (HADD) that errs toward intentionality for survival (better to flee a rustle that might be a predator). Death is the ultimate observable loss; myths externalize it as curse rather than biology.
5. Decline toward apocalypse: Real climatic shifts and collapse cycles. Younger Dryas cooling, Bronze Age collapse, Roman decline, Little Ice Age, repeated empire falls amid drought/war/plague. Entropy is visible: ruins, oral histories of lost cities. Psychology: future discounting + dread of resource overshoot. Narratives of worsening prepare for hardship and rally effort.
6. Salvation via blood sacrifice: Meat, hunting, and costly signaling. Blood = life force in hunter societies. Ritual killing (animals, occasionally humans) releases tension, signals commitment, or “appeases” unseen forces. Evolutionary: costly signaling builds trust in groups; scapegoat mechanisms (Girard) redirect intra-group violence. War and hunting provided literal blood economies.
7. Purging evil for restoration: Coalitional psychology and hygiene/purity instincts. Pathogen avoidance + in-group moralizing. “Evil” often maps to parasites, defectors, rivals, or environmental degraders. Purgation restores order. Prepares collective action against real threats (raiders, disease vectors).
8. Eternal tribal dualism (elect vs. damned): Kin selection + coalitional instincts scaled up. Humans evolved in bands with strong in-group favoritism, out-group hostility. Moralized versions (“saved” vs. damned) extend this to afterlife for ultimate justice, countering observable unfairness. Terror management theory: belief in cosmic reward/punishment buffers death anxiety. Maintains group boundaries and loyalty under stress.
Cross-cultural recurrence (Eden parallels in Sumer, Hesiod’s ages, Hopi, etc.) suggests convergent cultural evolution on shared psychology and ecology, not single diffusion. Writing and priesthood formalized them into durable canons.
Why they dominate today — religious and secular
These templates are supremely sticky memes because they hijack adaptive psychology:
• Explanation + meaning: They turn random suffering (disease, accident, betrayal) into a coherent plot with agency, causality, and hope. Pure materialism feels cold; narrative arcs satisfy.
• Moral motivation and social control: “Purging evil” and dualism mobilize groups. They justify sacrifice now for utopia later.
• Loss aversion and hope: Paradise-lost + restoration arc exploits our bias toward recovering what was “ours.” Apocalypse warnings focus attention on threats.
• Scalability: Works for tribes, nations, or global ideologies.
Secular versions repackage the structure without supernatural elements:
• Marxism: Original harmony (primitive communism) → sin (class society/private property) → worsening contradictions and suffering → purging evil (revolution, liquidation of bourgeoisie) → restored paradise (classless society). Blood sacrifice via vanguard party and purges. Dualism: proletariat vs. exploiters, with historical inevitability as “deity.”
• Environmental alarmism (certain strands): Pristine nature/Eden → human hubris/sin (industrialization, capitalism) → angry “Gaia”/nature’s revenge (disasters, extinction) → decline to collapse → purge (degrowth, sacrifice consumption, remove polluters) → sustainable restoration. Dualism: enlightened activists vs. deniers. Blood sacrifice reframed as economic pain or population control rhetoric.
• Other moderns: Progressive narratives of original innocence corrupted by colonialism/patriarchy → awakening and purging → utopia. Nationalist myths of lost golden age betrayed by outsiders. Tech utopianism sometimes flips to dystopian singularity/apocalypse.
They persist because human nature hasn’t changed: we still face scarcity, mortality, group conflict, environmental shocks, and status competition. Evolution wired us for stories that bind groups, attribute blame, promise justice, and channel anxiety into action. Cognitive biases (confirmation, motivated reasoning) + modern media amplify dramatic arcs. Institutions and movements that adopt them gain commitment and fervor; blander alternatives lose.
Counterexamples exist (Stoicism, Buddhism’s non-dual emphases, liberal incrementalism) but often get overwritten by the stronger emotional template during crises. These myths endure because they work — for cohesion, endurance, and reproduction of the culture — even when their literal claims conflict with evidence. Understanding the roots allows critiquing specific versions without discarding the underlying human needs for meaning and agency.
I then asked…
Grok:
Further, early people created the mythology of deity as embodying tribalism, defeat and domination of others, and vengeful destruction of enemies, to validate the above 8 “bad religious ideas”.
Then over subsequent millennia, some created alternative beliefs to counter the above “bad religious ideas.” How and why did the emerging and maturing human consciousness, notable in historical figures like Jesus, begin to imagine an entirely alternative view of deity as unconditional love?
This appears to counter entirely what you term “universal human psychology (evolutionary adaptations)… adaptive psychology”.
For example, Historical Jesus advocated no more “eye for eye” justice but instead “love your enemy” because his new deity loved enemies as evident in generously giving sun and rain to both good and bad people universally, without discrimination or vengeful punishment. Further, if his new deity did not retaliate, then that deity would not demand blood sacrifice for payment of “sins”, nor would a non-retaliatory deity (as per teaching in Luke 6: 27-36, etc.) enact the ultimate retaliatory punishment of apocalyptic destruction of the world.
Grok replied: (Note in it’s reply below, Grok’s defense of “evolutionary psychology” explanations, that being a more “philosophical materialist” view that dominates many public narratives and diminishes/dismisses more “spiritual” explanations).
Grok said:
This shift represents cultural and cognitive evolution building on, rather than contradicting, our underlying psychology. It expands and redirects evolved capacities like empathy, reciprocity, coalitional instincts, and agency detection toward broader, more reflective applications. Human consciousness didn’t “overcome” evolution; it leveraged increasing social complexity, literacy, trade, empire-scale interactions, and introspection to reframe old templates.
Historical and cultural context: The Axial Age and precursors
The move toward more universal, less vengeful conceptions of the divine intensified during the Axial Age (roughly 800–200 BCE), a period of parallel breakthroughs across disconnected civilizations (China, India, Persia, Israel/Greece). Thinkers responded to upheaval: larger states, warfare, urbanization, trade, and literacy eroded purely tribal worldviews.
• Key shifts: From localized, transactional gods (propitiated for victory, rain, fertility) to transcendent principles emphasizing ethics, inner transformation, compassion, and universal order. Examples include Confucian ren (benevolence), Buddhist compassion/karuna, Upanishadic unity, Zoroastrian ethical dualism with cosmic stakes, and Hebrew prophets highlighting justice, mercy, and critique of power.
• In the Jewish tradition (Jesus’ context), prophets increasingly stressed God’s mercy, care for the vulnerable, and covenant ethics beyond strict tribal retaliation. “Eye for eye” was originally a limit on vengeance (proportional justice, not endless feud), not a mandate for maximum revenge. Jesus radicalized existing threads: extending neighbor-love, emphasizing intent of the heart, and modeling imitation of a Father who sends sun and rain on just and unjust alike (Matthew 5:43–48; Luke 6:27–36).
This wasn’t sudden invention but maturation: larger-scale societies favored norms enabling cooperation beyond kin or immediate band. Blood sacrifice and apocalyptic purging suited small, zero-sum tribal survival; universal love and forgiveness scaled better for diverse empires and ethical reflection.
Why “unconditional love”? Psychological and evolutionary continuity
This doesn’t counter evolutionary psychology— it exploits it at higher levels:
• Empathy and caregiving circuits: Evolved for kin and offspring (parental investment, attachment). Culture and reflection extend this “expanding circle” (Peter Singer’s term) to strangers, out-groups, and even enemies. Mirror neurons, oxytocin, and affiliative systems underpin compassion; these can be trained upward.
• Reciprocity and indirect benefits: Direct tit-for-tat works in small groups. In complex societies, reputation, indirect reciprocity (help others → gain allies indirectly), and costly signaling (forgiveness as strength/moral prestige) reward broader benevolence. “Love your enemies” can disarm cycles of revenge, build unexpected alliances, or signal superior virtue—adaptive in volatile environments.
• Terror management and meaning: Vengeful gods explain suffering via punishment. A loving, non-retaliatory deity reframes suffering as test, mystery, or path to growth, reducing anxiety while motivating prosocial behavior. It counters observable unfairness with ultimate justice or grace.
• Cognitive reflection and second-order thinking: Literacy, philosophy, and leisure allowed questioning: “If the deity is ultimate good, why model endless tribal vengeance?” Prophets and Jesus critiqued ritualism and legalism for heart-level ethics. This is cultural evolution selecting for memes that promote long-term group flourishing amid diversity.
Jesus’ teachings fit a pattern of “moralizing high gods” that emerge with societal scale— encouraging pro-sociality even without constant monitoring. Non-retaliation doesn’t eliminate all justice or consequence (New Testament retains judgment themes) but prioritizes mercy as primary imitation of the divine. Early Christianity’s appeal partly stemmed from radical care networks in a brutal ancient world.
Limits and persistence of “old” psychology
This alternative view didn’t erase the old impulses— it coexists in tension. Christianity and other traditions retain dualism (saved/lost, good/evil), apocalyptic elements, and calls to confront evil. Institutions often reverted to tribalism, conquest, or punitive enforcement. “Unconditional love” ideals inspire reformers but compete with evolved coalitional instincts (in-group bias remains strong). Secular parallels (human rights, universal dignity, effective altruism) show the same expansion without deity.
Maturing consciousness arises from gene-culture coevolution: biology provides raw materials (empathy, status-seeking, pattern-seeking); culture, environment, and individual insight (rare figures like Jesus, Buddha) refine them. Crises and connectivity select for ideas enabling larger-scale cooperation. The vengeful-tribal deity validated small-group survival; the loving-universal one better fits (and helps create) interconnected worlds.
These themes endure today because they address perennial needs— meaning, belonging, justice— while adapting to evidence and ethics. The “alternative” doesn’t abolish evolutionary substrates; it harnesses and transcends their narrower expressions through reason, empathy training, and narrative power.
I sensed Grok leaning a bit too much on “philosophical materialist” explanations in its responses above.
This was my next query to Grok…. (Keep in mind Elon Musk’s statement on Joe Rogan that AI learns off “all the bullshit on the Internet”)
Note that I tried to get Grok to respond to this query below, but it shut me down, setting a limit on queries, even though promising more if I applied through a new “security code” that never arrived. Hmmm.
I asked Grok:
It appears that you are trying to maintain the more “philosophical materialist” view that explains human love as just an evolutionary progression and development of “species altruism”, based on explanations from evolutionary biology/psychology. Others, notably Nobel laureate John Eccles, argue for human mind and love as a unique emergence in life, and the human self as “a special divine creation”.
Grok, it appears that you too are “learning off all the bullshit on the Internet” as your boss cautioned in his Joe Rogan discussion of how things like the woke virus are deforming AI.
There is more to understanding life than just the “philosophical materialist” take on things (i.e. the evolutionary psychology tendency to explain all in materialist terms).
So far, still shut out…
End of Grok interactions…
Qualifier before starting:
Much deserved words of praise should be given to the many, even majorities, in these great western religious traditions who do not take the bad ideas in their belief systems seriously, or who find other ways to defuse the power of bad ideas to generate bad motivations and bad behaviors. Some are abled to moderate by only loosely affiliating with these traditions. Others affiliate as full membership believers in order to enjoy the sense of group belonging and acceptance and the opportunities to virtue signal as good people because they associate being “religious” with “goodness”. But they can “tone down” their true believer status in ways that don’t threaten others.
Others simply ignore or deny the nasty parts of their systems.
But then the issue of “culpability” arises with the people who affiliate with major world religions. What about the violence over the past histories of all these traditions- i.e. in Judaism (Old Testament accounts), in Christianity (Crusades, Inquisitions, persecution and torture of heretics and witches, etc.), and in Islam (any need to list anything particular here?).
Members of the great Three of Western civilization should recognize that the violence produced by their religions has been attributed to the core themes in the religions, ideas that generate and validate tribalism, domination, and vengeful destruction. Do I need to repeat the research of Richard Landes, Arthur Mendel, Harold Ellens and Zenon Lotufo, David Redles, and many others on the vengeful, violent deity of Paul’s “Christ-ianity”? Notably, violence spawned by “apocalyptic millennialism”.
As stated here before- “It’s the God, stupid”. Its about the deity at the very core of all these religions, the God image that has been shaped across millennia with some of the worst features of human existence and subsequently functions as the ultimate ideal to model human life after.
The God of the western religions is a tribal deity (favoring true believer followers, excluding and punishing unbelievers), a dominating “Lord/King/Judge” who models domination/subservience in human relationships, and a punitive Destroyer who enacts the violent destruction of unbelievers through apocalypse and hell (i.e. If our God solves problems with violence, then so may we- Harold Ellens).
And generating “cognitive dissonance”, the nastier features attributed to deity have been cloaked as good, covered with themes of love, grace, righteousness, truth, and justice.
Why do the many moderates in these traditions do nothing to purge these now proven dangerous ideas/beliefs and then embrace the better alternatives that we have been given by wise sages like Historical Jesus? Is the transformation that Jesus advocated just too radical?
Knowing the destructive power of bad ideas, as evidenced from the histories of horrific violence toward unbelievers, there is no excuse to irresponsibly continue to permit the bad ideas to deform these great traditions.
Thomas Jefferson illustrated how to deal with this- i.e. he cut out the worst parts of his New Testament, the “products of lesser minds” (his words), and preserved only the “diamonds” of Jesus in his new “New Testament”.
Nonetheless, lets sincerely honor the many religious moderates who find ways to use their religious traditions to treat others humanely, to promote their personal growth as good people, and to affirm liberal democracy principles and institutions. I know and associate with many of these good people. They are best friends.
“The Battle Over Hormuz, Settler Violence, and Turmoil in the Gulf”, The Free Press
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbX79qd0WeE
In this link Haviv Rettig Gur begins by explaining the religious beliefs that drive the Iranian theocrats. He says that people who believe this fanatical regime can be felled by bombs are misunderstanding what drives these people. Their belief system, he says, is built on a martyrdom ethos called in Arabic “the Resistance”. But, he says, not many understand the real meaning of this term. It is more a belief in the capacity to suffer as the way to salvation. He references Ali Shariati as a noted writer on this topic.
He points in the right direction of religious belief as the major driving factor behind Iranian theocratic fanaticism but at times he falls back to describing the religious factor as “ideology”. He adds that their beliefs are built on the principle that you may lose battles and die in war, but your death is the victory because you achieve divine salvation.
I would add to his points that Iranian theology is informed and shaped by the larger mythical framework of Zoroastrian cosmic dualism that proclaims a great war of Good against Evil. Zoroaster’s theology presents the divine requirement for people to join the true religion of the Good God and to fight and exterminate the unbelievers in the evil Force who do not believe the true religion.
Zoroaster’s mythical framework of themes has shaped Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
AI Overview on the Ali Shariati influence in Islam (noted above by Gur):
The ideology of the Islamic Republic of Iran is heavily influenced by a unique, modernized interpretation of Shi’a theology that emphasizes martyrdom (shahadat) as an active, revolutionary strategy rather than a passive tragedy. This, often called the “Culture of Resistance” (Farhang-e Moqavemat), relies heavily on the work of sociologist and revolutionary thinker Ali Shariati (1933–1977).
Here is a breakdown of that belief system:
1. The Core Philosophy: “Red Shi’ism” vs. “Black Shi’ism”
Shariati reinterpreted Shi’ism to fit modern revolutionary goals, drawing a sharp distinction:
• Red Shi’ism (Alid Shi’ism): The “true” faith of action, martyrdom, and social justice, symbolized by Imam Ali and Imam Husayn.
• Black Shi’ism (Safavid Shi’ism): The passive, ceremonial, and institutionalized religion of the clergy, which Shariati argued kept the people docile and accepted oppression.
2. Martyrdom as “Active Resistance”
For Shariati, martyrdom was not about dying in vain, but a conscious choice to “arise and bear witness” (shahadat: arise and bear witness).
• The Goal is Action, Not Death: Shariati argued that when a righteous person can no longer fight oppression with the pen or sword, they must fight with their blood.
• Capacity to Suffer: This belief system promotes the idea that suffering is a form of “positive attack” that humbles the oppressor and awakens the masses.
• Ashoura Everywhere: Shariati popularized the slogan, “Every day is Ashoura, every place is Karbala,” meaning that the battle between good (Husayn) and evil (Yazid) is continuous.
3. Salvation Through Struggle
This ethos turns suffering into a tool for achieving both immediate political justice and ultimate spiritual salvation.
• “Return to Ourselves”: Shariati’s catchphrase urging Iranians to abandon Western, capitalist, and communist models and find liberation in their own Islamic culture, interpreted through a revolutionary lens.
• “Religion vs. Religion”: Shariati taught that true religion struggles against “the powerful, the wealthy and the deceivers”.
4. Influence on the Iranian Theocracy
Although Shariati died before the 1979 Revolution and had a rocky relationship with traditional clerics, his ideas were essential to the revolution’s success.
• Khomeini’s Adaptation: Ayatollah Khomeini later adapted Shariati’s populist, martyrdom-focused rhetoric to mobilize the masses against the Shah.
• The Revolutionary Guard: This ethos heavily influences the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which portrays its regional activities as part of this “Resistance” against “imperialism” and for “justice.”
(End of AI Overview)
Moving back on topic:
The theology that is driving the Iranian theocrats is in a sense indestructible and hence the regime cannot be defeated with military force alone, though military force is necessary for defense against their endless instigating of terrorism.
The theology of the Iranian theocrats embraces the belief that victory and salvation comes through martyrdom and violent destruction. They view martyrdom as the ultimate virtue of the heroic true believer. Therefore, “death-cult” is a correct description of how they will enact their crusade to establish a worldwide totalitarian theocracy- i.e. salvation through violent destruction.
Gur is right that you have no choice but military force to protect yourselves against the theology that possesses these theocrats, what psychologist Harold Ellens termed the “Cruel God” image that deforms human personality and energizes/motivates people to violence.
Further, after militarily defeating this fanaticism, there is still also the need for ultimate long-term solutions to defeat the “idea” (General Nagata) that is driving them and that involves fundamental narrative transformation. And there is no more critical idea in narratives to transform than the ultimate Ideal and reality of deity that centers complexes of “bad idea” myths.
This site repeatedly offers that Historical Jesus presented the ultimate solution to bad idea narratives when he tackled the most fundamental of human beliefs- i.e. deity- and rejected the traditional religious God of Judaism (i.e. “the day of vengeance of our God”) and replaced that with his stunning new alternative of an unconditional God. His new image of Ultimate Reality and Ideal as unconditional Love would eventually work its way out from the center of narratives to transform all else in human thought, emotion, motivation, and behavior. However, that radical transformation of theology is the long-term project for solving violence and war.
Insert: The Jewish sage Jesus accomplished more than anyone ever before in countering the problem of bad theology. However, his new theology enraged his first Jewish audience (see Luke 4 incident) and Jewish leaders eventually had him killed him for rejecting their most fundamental belief in a vengeful God who would destroy their enemies/oppressors. The Jewish scholar, Paul, later also publicly rejected the Jesus discovery but absorbed the man into his contrary Christ myth that, once again, re-affirmed the very theology that Jesus had rejected. Paul created his Christ myth to affirm his own longing for a retaliatory God who would destroy all enemies/unbelievers. His restoration of “retaliatory theology” resonated with Gentile audiences who held the same archetypal beliefs.
(End of insert)
Haviv Gur says that the Iranian leaders sincerely believe that they are actually winning. He is right that many in western media and the western commentariat are missing this point entirely of the theology that drives Iranian violence and incitement to war. Western media mindlessly believe the lies of the Iranian leaders that they are winning and seem ignorant of the theological factor driving the theocrats. Could their ignorance be due to the fact that they embrace religious systems with the same theology?
Gur says the Israelis understand that their Iranian enemy will never stop with its death-cult commitment to martyrdom. The recognize the Iranians have embraced an undeterrable commitment to exterminate them violently. That is the real nature of what Isreal is facing and it comes down to, unfortunately, “exterminate as a defensive response or be exterminated”.
The Iranian theocrats have placed their entire identity in their beliefs and theology. Hence, rather than rationally bow before superior military force, they double down because their very survival and existence as people on the right side of the true God fulfilling the grand purpose of their God, is at stake (i.e. assisting the true God to win the Zoroastrian battle of cosmic Good against cosmic Evil). They are involved in the ultimate war of exterminate or be exterminated. Ultimate divine salvation is at stake.
The element of Zoroastrian apocalyptic is also in the mix of their beliefs. Hence their commitment to murder unbelievers is framed in ultimate Armageddon war and end-of-world terms, scaled up to ultimate existential level. Apocalyptic always exaggerates things to ultimate world-ending status. Add also the demonic or satanic element. That those you frame as “enemies” are not just normally bad people for being unbelievers, but in your view they are extra frightful and threatening- i.e. demonic.
The Iranian theocrats hold an undefeatable idea and the only defense against their undeterrable commitment to Zoroastrian cosmic war, unfortunately, is counter-extermination. Western militaries could hope that the most violent of the death-cult soldiers could be arrested and imprisoned as temporary solutions. Or they can try to weaken the theocratic armies by military defeat to the point that such defeat will grant a reprieve of decades before they could rearm and emerge once again as they have repeatedly done over the past.
Where it is not possible or safe to disarm the death-cult threat, because you are dealing with martyrdom mentality (people who glory in death), then whatever means necessary must be employed to eliminate that threat.
The long-term plan must be to defeat the idea or theology that is driving that theocracy crusade. That will involve foundational transformation at the archetypal level and that tends to be generational.
Gur notes another element in this battle– i.e. that of western useful idiots who, for whatever reasons, believe the Iranian lies that they are winning and then publish that in Western media which the Iranian regime reads. That then buttresses their own stubborn refusal to surrender unconditionally and to obstinately continue their violent aggression. In their view, they are winning the divine battle.
Gur adds later that the Islamic belief is that the destruction/extermination of enemies is necessary for the redemption of Islam, for Islamic salvation. This is another element affirming their undying commitment to exterminate unbelievers.
Add other carrot and stick features attached to their general salvation through destruction belief, such as the divine demand for true believers to instigate the final destruction of life in an apocalyptic purging of impurity from the world (i.e. unbelievers and their liberal democracy culture) in order for the Madhi and Isa to descend to earth. The carrot element here is that there is no alternative way to achieve salvation in a worldwide caliphate of totalitarian theocracy.
The “stick” element in this mix is the divine threat of hellfire for any who do not join the slaughter of unbelievers.
Preface note to AI Overview’s response below on the “stick” element of divine threat: AI Overview tends to pussyfoot around difficult elements in a religion like Islam, tending to explain things protectively so as not to offend believers of the tradition, hence, it offers summaries at times that do not explain clearly what the verses noted below are actually stating. Removing the sting of how straightforwardly these holy books advocate actual physical violence/destruction toward differing others with threats of divine retaliation toward those who are not complying.
Note carefully, these Quranic verses speak to actual physical warfare, not to some form of “spiritual jihad”. This needs to be said because just as in Christianity, so in Islam, theologians are trying to soften the harsher elements in their holy books by redefining them as “metaphorical” not literal. Thereby explaining away any charges that their traditions advocate actual violence and religious war.
All these religions contain elements/statements that speak to actual physical punishment and destruction of enemies.
AI Overview
“The Quran includes several verses that threaten severe divine punishment, including hellfire, for Muslims who refuse to participate in fighting (jihad) when called upon, especially when fleeing from battle against unbelievers. These verses often highlight that avoiding duty is considered a serious sin and an act of hypocrisy, which can lead to abandonment by Allah.
Key Quranic verses that address the threat of hell for avoiding jihad include:
• Surah Al-Anfal (8:15-16): This verse warns against turning away from battle, stating that those who turn their backs (unless in a tactical maneuver or to join another company) incur the wrath of Allah and that “his refuge is Hell – and wretched is the destination”.
• Surah At-Tawbah (9:38-39): This passage asks believers why they feel heavy (reluctant) when asked to go forth in the cause of Allah. It states that if they do not go forth, Allah will “punish you with a painful punishment”.
• Surah At-Tawbah (9:73): This verse commands the Prophet to be harsh against the disbelievers and hypocrites, stating that “their abode is Hell, and miserable is the Destiny”.
• Surah An-Nisa (4:75-76): These verses challenge those who do not fight for the oppressed, framing fighting in the way of Allah as a requirement to fight against the “friends of Satan”.
• Surah At-Tawbah (9:68): Allah promises the hypocrites (both men and women) and the disbelievers that they will abide in the Fire of Hell.
(End of AI Overview)
The core theology of their religion is why Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian theocrats cannot cease their attacks on unbelievers, believing that leaving unbelievers alive will continue to defile the world and such impurity will prevent the Mahdi from descending to bring salvation in a worldwide totalitarian caliphate. Hence, the never-ending murderous attacks on unbelievers and ongoing efforts to exterminate “satanic” opponents like Jews.
You can’t make permanent peace deals with this theology because the proponents of it have a track record of using peace deals to recoup losses, rearm, and then plan for new assaults on enemy unbelievers. You have to remain vigilant to defend liberal democracies and willing to use force, even engage counter-extermination defense. This is the great tragedy of these horrific religious ideas, as Arthur Mendel noted in regard to apocalyptic mythology in general- i.e. that it was “the most violent and destructive idea in history” and it still dominates our religious traditions and secular variants like environmental alarmism and contemporary Marxism. And we wonder why these secular variants keep resurging across our societies. They are all driven by the same fundamental theology.
Throughout the interview, Gur repeats his explanations of what drives Iranian theocracy:
As he says, the Iranian fanatics believe that the destruction they are suffering now from the Israeli and US military assaults is confirming evidence of their righteous cause. They view their heroic martyrdom as working for their salvation and that they will eventually be assured of ultimate divine victory, if not here, then in an Islamic heaven.
True believer theocrats believe that they will be rewarded because they are on the right and true side of the cosmic dualism war. They are on the side of good God who demands extermination of his enemies- the unbelievers. Hence, the destruction the theocrats suffer from others is viewed as victory in their eyes. It is salvation, not just through the destruction of enemies (as commonly viewed when they commit terrorist acts) but also through their self-destruction (the glory of martyrdom in achieving salvation and pleasing one’s God).
Gur also, as others do, occasionally slips back into framing the Iranian theocrat’s beliefs as “ideology”, unfortunately after he has done such a good job explaining that it is “theology”.
I would stress that the theology he references throughout his interview is basic to Islam, just as it is fundamental to Judaism and Christianity. The theology that extremists embrace and appeal to for validation is not a radical or extremist “distortion” of basic Islamic theology. It is the fundamental Islamic belief in a specific God, but in their case taken seriously, literally. Hence, their abandonment/rejection of religious moderation.
Again, the God at the core of Western religious traditions is a violent God who demands violent war against unbelievers as the divinely required way to salvation for true believers. Salvation through violent destruction. Note once more the graphic display of this salvation in the New Testament book of Revelation. This concerns not just Islam but the Christ myth of Paul- i.e. his theology of a wrathful God who ultimately wreaks vengeance on unbelievers through world-ending apocalypse and then eternal hellfire (i.e. Paul’s Christ with the fire of divine rage in his eyes and a bloodied robe tramples out “the fury of the wrath of God”). Literal or “metaphorical”, that is the central message or theology.
I would add that this theology descends from the earliest human mythologies of angry gods behind all the elements of the natural world, gods who punish bad people through natural disasters, disease, accident and predatory cruelty. Terrified people must then submit to the salvation schemes of shaman/priests that demand violent bloody sacrifice and the destructive purging of evil enemies/unbelievers.
This theology is as old as the earliest emerging/developing human consciousness that from the beginning has been trying to explain human existence and suffering in an imperfect world. People from the earliest times have been responding to their primary impulse for meaning and purpose, and religious beliefs, including some really bad ones, are the result of their efforts to understand and explain.
The inherited original deformities in their conclusions have to be tackled, rejected where necessary, and religious traditions transformed, if we are ever to properly solve this problem of violence and war. It is fundamental human responsibility to face the fact that some really bad ideas still dominate our religions and the “secular” variants.
One of the blocks to solving the problem that Haviv Gur outlines is that our main religious traditions frame the ideas that incite and validate the extremists as good. The worst of features in the theologies of these traditions are cloaked as “divine”, as basic to the deity. One person stands out uniquely in history for rejecting the deformed theology of major religious traditions, Judaism in his case. He presented a stunning new alternative- i.e. Historical Jesus.
His “diamond” theology stated that there was was no such God as long presented by Judaism- i.e. a “day of vengeance of our God”. There was only unconditional love at the core of reality and life. Carl Jung was right to state that a religion like Christianity has “got God all wrong”. Jesus stands out historically for clearly explaining what this “all wrong” meant and for presenting a clear alternative theology.
Unfortunate for Western civilization, his insight has been ignored, dismissed, redefined, and buried by the more dominant Christ themes in Christianity (James Tabor in “Paul and Jesus”), and none have been worse on this than Paul.
Another note:
It is also right for us to celebrate and honor our military forces who defend liberal democracy from assaults by theocracy crusades and Marxist revolutionaries. They pay a horrific price to protect our freedom, and their use of force is not contrary to the reality of an unconditional God as taught by Historical Jesus.
People abandoning the “madness of crowds” that is the “climate apocalypse crusade” and coming to their senses again.
James Hansen played a significant role instigating the modern-era climate madness in 1988 with a Congressional testimony and made the irrational prophecy in 2008 that there were only 5 years left till we passed the tipping point to no return from climate catastrophe. Al Gore stirred the madness further with claims that we were living through the apocalypse of Revelation. Others made endless predictions of the imminent end of days.
However, some came to their senses. As “Madness of Crowds” author, Charles Mackay, said, they go mad in herds but only come to their senses slowly one by one.
Notably, James Lovelock, the father of the GAIA hypothesis eventually admitted that he and Al Gore were wrong to exaggerate and promote climate alarmism as climate was doing what it always does. As he neared 90 years of age, he had the integrity to admit that he had been wrong in pushing climate alarmism. (Note: Lovelock did not entirely abandon the “climate change” madness movement.)
This from AI Overview:
“Criticism of ‘Green Religion’: He (Lovelock) criticized the environmental movement for behaving too much like a religion and stated that he believed people like himself and Al Gore had been too extreme in their warnings.”
(End of AI Overview comment)
Fellow alarmists were enraged at his honesty and smeared him as having “gone senile”.
Also from AI Overview:
James Lovelock, the respected creator of the Gaia hypothesis, faced significant backlash from environmentalists and fellow scientists after walking back his earlier, more extreme climate change predictions.
• Admission of Overstating Risk: In 2012, at age 92, Lovelock told and that he had been ‘alarmist’ and that the planet had not warmed as fast as he originally expected.
• Backlash and Criticism: His admission was seen as a betrayal of the environmental movement, of which he had been a hero, leading to criticism that he was an unreliable ‘outlier’ and not a true climatologist, as noted in reports from Time Magazine.
• “Senile” Smears: While some critics focused on his shift in views, others did cast aspersions on his mental clarity, with some accusing him of becoming ‘cranky,’ having ‘gone senile,’ or suggesting he was a ‘discredited’ voice.
• “Green Religion” Commentary: Lovelock exacerbated this tension by describing environmentalism as a ‘religious movement’ and… calling on environmentalists to stop being ‘very silly’ about thinking they could ‘save the planet’”.
Despite the criticism, Investor’s Business Daily noted that his honesty in admitting he was wrong was lauded by others as a refreshing display of scientific integrity, particularly given his willingness to challenge the consensus.
(End of AI Overview comment)
My insert: Observed evidence on climate exposes the unscientific and profoundly religious nature of the climate alarmism crusade. It is indeed a contemporary apocalyptic millennial movement.
Then, I posted the following to a discussion group (Wendell Krossa):
“The death of climate apocalypse lunacy and hysteria?
Well, as my Asian wife politely says, “Holy shitoli”.
The climate apocalypse narrative that incited the waste of $20 trillion over past decades is now apparently dying, killed by the facts from observation of real weather/climate.
Ah, apocalyptic has always made fools of otherwise bright minds. Even Stephen Hawking, “the most intelligent man on earth”(?), fell for this apocalyptic fallacy in the last two years of his life.
“IPCC Admits Apocalyptic Climate Scenarios Are “Implausible” – Meaning Most Media Scare Stories Over Last 15 Years Are Officially Junk”, Chris Morrison, The Daily Sceptic
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2026/05/05/ipcc-admits-apocalyptic-climate-scenarios-are-implausible-meaning-most-media-scare-stories-over-last-15-years-are-officially-junk/
Quotes from article:
Morrison begins: “Activist climate scientists, journalists and Net Zero-obsessed politicians are in shock following an official admission from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that a set of key assumptions promoting a climate ‘crisis’ since 2011 are ‘implausible’. The notorious set of always-improbable RCP8.5 ‘pathway’ assumptions which fed into computer models trying to measure an unmeasurable climate are no more. Since around 2011, these ‘business as usual’ assumptions have produced outlandish claims of future climate catastrophe which have been lapped up by lap dog journalists and politicians. The influential writer Roger Pielke Jr. called RCP8.5’s demise, ‘the most significant development in climate research in decades’.”
He continues, noting that climate expert Roger Pielke explains what this means when he says, “the group with official responsibility for developing climate scenarios for the IPCC and broader research community has now admitted that the scenarios that have dominated climate research, assessment and policy during the past two cycles of the IPCC assessment process are implausible. They describe impossible futures.”
He adds that tens of thousands of research papers have been published based on the exaggerated and alarmist climate scenarios of the IPCC and media have propagandized even more exaggerated conclusions, followed by governments and international organizations turning these apocalyptic scenarios into policy and regulations. Hence, the $20 trillion wasted and immense harm done to entire economies and to the hundreds of millions of citizens in those societies (increased energy costs due to unnecessary and irrational blockage of fossil fuel development and use).
Morrison says, “It cannot be over-emphasised how important this finding of implausibility is. It means that almost every fearmongering mainstream media climate headline and story that has been written over the last 15 years is junk. Of course, it also explains why a growing band of sceptical commentators have refused to accept the political concept of ‘settled’ science and have engaged in widespread debunking. Shooting fish in a barrel is one way of describing this work. At times, with just a modicum of investigative scepticism, the stories can be seen as little more than an insult to average human intelligence.”
This site, among many other skeptical voices, has long argued that the climate alarmism crusade has been just another profoundly religious “apocalyptic millennial crusade”. Another “madness of crowds” eruption and these eruptions of mass irrationality cause immense damage to populations due to alarmist prophets callously and irresponsibly using apocalyptic end-of-world lunacy to arouse the survival impulse in people. Scared people are then susceptible to embracing irrational and self-destructive “salvation schemes” (i.e. to “save the world”), even if such schemes result in destroying their own societies, as is happening in German, Britain, and other places.
Morrison notes that the alarmist climate scenarios overestimated the warming effect of a few trace gases. He adds that CO2 levels were much higher over the past 600 million years of life (Phanerozoic-era levels were in the multiple-thousands of ppm versus only 400-plus ppm of today’s “CO2 starvation era”). And during that time there was no “climate crisis” but, to the contrary, life flourished and progressed to ever better states with more of the basic food of plants.
He says, “(Climate involves) a complex, chaotic, non-linear and ultimately unmeasurable atmosphere.”
Morrison concludes that we have been given “the politicised agitprop of a ‘climate emergency’” by “village idiots”.