Topics from material below:
Gutfeld panel on Millennial’s fear of growing up in a world they have been told is ending.
Understanding the true nature of the ideas that incite/validate our impulses to good or bad behavior. What contemporary criteria help us to discern good and bad in the mix of complexes of beliefs, especially when we are confronted with the common practise from across history of religious traditions to “cloak bad as good, even as divine”.
Christian psychologist Harold Ellens, Billy Graham colleague Charles Templeton, and clinical psychologist Hector Garcia all bluntly expose “evil cloaked as divine”.
Grok summaries of “A profound shift in theology (God image) is the ultimate human liberation”, and “Explore Julian Simon’s resource optimism”, also “Investigate Chase Hughes behavioral expertise”.
Also below: Steve Forbes and Michael Shellenberger take needed pokes at socialists in the US. It appears the “Democratic Socialists of America” have served well, functioning as the latest batch of “western useful idiots” (Lenin’s term) assisting their Chinese and Russian overlords on their long march to subvert US educational institutions and turn them into indoctrination organizations for collectivism. Surveys of young people coming out in favor of socialism show the success of the long march.
Added note: I would not condemn entirely the impulse of young people to favor socialism. Aside from exhibiting personal envy in the longing to have free stuff handed to you, taken coercively from successful people, there is also the element of authentic concern for the less fortunate members of societies. Though the choice for socialism to respond to these concerns is a shift toward “suicidal empathy” that reveals ignorance of and/or denial of inevitably destructive outcomes. Socialism is undeniably (historical evidence is conclusive) another “salvation through destruction” approach.
The blame lays more at the feet of adults for not instructing new generations re the inevitable dangers and destructive outcomes of centralizing power and control in state elites and bureaucrats, the consequences of coercively taking private property (i.e. through excessive taxation) and removing individual rights (i.e. through excessive regulatory control of citizens), the outcomes of subjecting individuals to collectives, etc.
Responsible adults need to tell young people that choosing for socialism inevitably takes all toward loss of personal freedoms and rights, immiserating entire countries as we observed, for example, with Venezuela over past decades, and similarly in many other places over the past century or so (i.e. notably the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, etc.).
Who said, “If you are young and not socialist you have no heart. But if you are older and still socialist, you have no brains”. Kind of sums up the issues, eh. Individual freedoms and rights in liberal democracies (imperfect but the best that we have come up with), or the denial and loss of such freedoms and rights.
Some good historical evidence on the devastating outcomes of socialism/collectivism:
See “Mao: The Unknown Story” by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday.
The Amazon blurb on this book:
“The most authoritative life of the Chinese leader every written, Mao: The Unknown Story is based on a decade of research, and on interviews with many of Mao’s close circle in China who have never talked before — and with virtually everyone outside China who had significant dealings with him. It is full of startling revelations, exploding the myth of the Long March, and showing a completely unknown Mao: he was not driven by idealism or ideology; his intimate and intricate relationship with Stalin went back to the 1920s, ultimately bringing him to power; he welcomed Japanese occupation of much of China; and he schemed, poisoned, and blackmailed to get his way.
“After Mao conquered China in 1949, his secret goal was to dominate the world. In chasing this dream he caused the deaths of 38 million people in the greatest famine in history. In all, well over 70 million Chinese perished under Mao’s rule — in peacetime.”
And more…
Now moving along to the content below in this section, here is a sample quote regarding healthy cognitive therapy as in “change in perspective”…
(From Grok’s summary) Two Key Shifts Highlighted
1. Empirical/Material Shift (Julian Simon and successors):
Julian Simon overcame his own clinical depression from environmental alarmism by examining evidence showing that, overall, human life and conditions have improved over the long term thanks to intelligence, creativity, and problem-solving. Krossa cites Simon alongside later researchers (e.g., Bjorn Lomborg, Greg Easterbrook, Indur Goklany) as evidence against doomerism. He links modern “eco-anxiety” (especially in children) to alarmist narratives and presents optimistic, evidence-based views as effective cognitive therapy for a healthier personal worldview. wendellkrossa.com
2. Theological/Metaphysical Shift (Historical Jesus’ “stunning new theology”):
This is the post’s central and most emphasized element. Krossa portrays Historical Jesus as offering the most radical transformation in human thought by replacing “threat theology” (a wrathful, retaliatory, punishing, destroying God that had dominated for millennia) with unconditional love, acceptance, inclusion, and forgiveness.
Here is more for your ‘perusal’…
Site-splainin with some “reiterations”:
“AI Overview- reiterations
“Reiterations are the act of saying or doing something again, usually to make a point clearer or to add emphasis. People use it to ensure important messages are understood.”
(End of AI Overview)
A reiteration: I am not engaged here in some sort of follow-up to Jesus Seminar-type research and their debates over what might be authentic to Historical Jesus or not. While important for sorting through what the man actually taught, some of that strikes me as too much like those medieval theologians arguing over how many angels can balance on the head of a pin or how many teeth are in a horse’s mouth, etc. I pick and choose selectively from the Jesus material because he is a well-known historical person to reference and some elements of his message present useful illustrative material.
I don’t “believe in Jesus” and feel no need to defend any particular position regarding him (i.e. for example, “apocalyptic or non-apocalyptic” is another point of contention). I appreciate that he made some very important insights on theology, notably his insight on the unconditional nature of deity.
My position is that unconditional love is self-validating and needs no affirmation from him as some ultimate and required religious authority (i.e. required “appeal to authority”). He is simply useful to illustrate and use as backup for that point.
Contemporary NDEs are actually more clear on the unconditional nature of God and function better for presenting up-to-date insights that affirm unconditional theology.
The ideal of unconditional is self-validating as the best of love, as the ultimate and highest reach of love, and therefore as ultimately good, true, and most real (Hint- Why have the materialists never completed TOE? Well, what is the creating Source of all really like? The nature of the ultimate Reality, Consciousness, Mind?).
This interesting clip from the Greg Gutfeld show of 26/06/30
Gutfeld discusses a study of Millennials that noted they, more than previous generations, are fearful of growing up, of letting go and getting into life. No wonder. For past decades they have been battered with irresponsible and hysterical terrorizing over mild, natural climate changes. Where most of us welcomed hot summer days for tanning purposes, Millennials have been propagandized that such climate change is evidence of the looming end of the world.
They have also been lied to that liberal democracy is evil, oppressive colonization, and is destroying the world. It must be overthrown and replaced with the historically proven destroyer of societies that is Marxist collectivism (24 failed tries as recounted by Kristian Niemietz in “Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies”).
Add now to the growing list of Millennial terrors, the alarmism over a new technology- i.e. AI- that alarmists claim will bring on the end humanity. Most everything newish and still not fully understood is exaggerated to apocalyptic-scale threat, buttressed with claims that it is further evidence that the end is nigh. With such endless panic-mongering and incitement to hysteria, who would not fear life and the world as a dangerous place?
This site exists to tell everyone that amassed evidence and insights show that “Its going to be alright”. Don’t fear going out into life to face whatever “monsters” you will face, to fight your monsters, to discover that you can conquer them (and your fears), and learn what you are meant to learn from your struggles, to gain the insights that you will grasp, and to recognize that you are here to bring some benefit to others from what you experience, suffer, and learn.
Note, particularly, Grok’s summary below of the work of Julian Simon, research that shows that life is not declining toward something worse but over the long-term, life and civilization are ever rising, improving toward something better due to human creativity and hard work.
As Simon concludes, we have done well, and “we are more creators than destroyers”. We learn from our past mistakes and we continue to do ever better at improving the human condition and protecting all life.
“Greg Gutfeld: No one told you life was gonna be this way…”, Fox News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPdugwGIwOE
Ideas/beliefs as behavior “drivers”- Differing ideas incentivize and drive differing behaviors, Wendell Krossa
Each one of us has core inherited impulses inside us that will lead us to choose either bad or good responses and behaviors. The ideas or beliefs that we embrace to shape our personal narratives or belief systems, act to motivate our choices and behaviors often with subconscious-like influences.
(Insert: The human understanding of the true nature of “bad and good” has developed and matured across history. Its an ongoing thing.).
What incites and validates our differing impulses in either direction- i.e. toward good or bad behavior? This site identifies and lists complexes of ideas/beliefs/themes that give people “emotional satisfaction” for their choices in the beliefs that validate differing impulses. Too often the emotional satisfaction from a set of beliefs that people choose causes immense harm to others. Does the “test of facts or outcomes” then spark any self-reflection over the beliefs that we have chosen?
It appears this has happened with Christianity in general over the past few centuries as the previous history of Christian violence and destruction (i.e. Crusades, Inquisitions, torture and murder of heretics/witches, etc.) led to spreading revulsion among Christians who then moved to a general moderation in the modern era (see Stephen Pinker’s comments on this in “Better Angels of Our Nature”).
Understanding how our ideas/beliefs motivate our behavior, to produce either bad or good outcomes, starts with the overall meta-impulse of humanity for meaning and purpose. This stirs in most of us the wish to present ourselves as good persons, even heroic, and hence, we like to virtue-signal for status as morally good or superior in our tribe. As Jordan Peterson says, this is a natural human desire, the wish to present ourselves as good and thereby attain status or good standing in our family, our tribe, or our larger group or community.
Now some on the deeper embedded influences motivating us…
(1) Add to this, that we have inherited complexes of ideas/beliefs, constructed over previous millennia to frame our meta-narratives, commonly the religious ideas/beliefs of major religious traditions, that present us with this-world threats of punishment and harm from angry, retaliatory deity (i.e. punishment through natural disaster suffering, disease, accident), and then add the threats of after-life punishment and destruction in hell. Such threats incite the deepest of human survival impulses.
The complexes of beliefs that we have inherited then offer us salvation and escape from punishment and destruction if we meet the conditions that are attached to the dangling-carrot salvation schemes. There are, for example, divine demands to make sacrifices/payments (or to believe myths of “substitutionary” sacrifice).
Further to salvation complexes (notably the Zoroastrian version that has shaped all the great western religions), there is the divine demand to fight, defeat, and even eliminate demonized enemies (differing others) who are viewed (in terms of our narratives) as exaggerated “existential” threats to us, to life, and to all good in the world. This has to do with the understanding of complete “salvation” as the necessary purification of what is portrayed as a corrupted, fallen, and evil world.
The big stick of threat of punishment follows upon any failure or refusal to embrace the sacrifice/payment element, or to refuse to join the righteous battle of true believers against evil enemies.
These ideas/beliefs (along with other elements in the full complexes of bad religious ideas) incite and validate our primal “evil triad” impulses to (1) tribalism (us versus the differing others), (2) to defeat and dominate the differing others, and (3) to destroy the threat that is the differing other.
Our “evil triad” impulses have long been described by religious traditions as “original sin, inherited sinfulness, fallen human nature, etc.”. They are more accurately understood as inherited animal impulses.
(2) And on the other side of our human dualism, what alternative ideas/beliefs/themes dampen or counter the above “evil triad” impulses and, to the contrary, inspire the better impulses of our human spirit and consciousness?
The impulses of our human spirit naturally orient us to (1) the universal inclusion of all as equals in the one human family, to (2) non-dominating relationships with others (i.e. respecting the freedom, rights, self-determination of others as in liberal democracy “live and let live”), and then to (3) generous mercy and forgiveness of human failures while also holding all responsible for their behavior, i.e. for example, the necessary restraint and incarceration of violent offenders, with the obligation to treat them humanely as we seek to rehabilitate them where such restoration is possible.
This stuff has to be stated due to the pendulum swings in our societies from too severe approaches to justice (i.e. excessively harsh punishment and high incarceration rates) to the opposite of too lenient approaches that let violent offenders free to harm repeatedly (i.e. “suicidal empathy” expressed in irresponsibly pacifist “catch and release” policies).
And where does ultimate responsibility and guilt lie?
And here is where I point a “recognize and take responsibility” finger at religious traditions for contributing to the problem of presenting/harboring/protecting the incentives for bad behavior. Most religious traditions hold beliefs of deity, the ultimate embodiment of human ideals, as (1) tribal (favor/include true believers, reject/exclude unbelievers), (2) as a dominating “lord/king” who models similar relationships among people (i.e. Paul’s precepts for women to submit to husbands, for slaves submit to masters, citizens to submit to governments, etc., encouraging relationships of domination/submission modelled by his Lord Christ), and most religious traditions (3) affirm justice as some form of punitive retaliation or even destruction.
The God of our great religions epitomizes these features/elements, though religions across past millennia have added the features of “love, grace, mercy, etc.” to their theologies.
The “bad” ideas in the complexes of religious beliefs would have to do with themes that incite and validate tribalism, domination, and punitive retaliation toward human differences and failures.
These bad religious ideas/beliefs constitute the framework of “salvation through destruction” that is noted in the above divine demands for salvation that is based on (1) the sacrifice of innocent human life and (2) through defeating and destroying evil enemies in great “cosmic dualism” battles of righteous true believers against evil unbelievers.
Protecting and promoting the above beliefs of deity as tribal, dominating, and advocating retaliatory punishment and destruction (i.e. “eye for eye” justice) is how religious traditions “cloak bad as good, as divine”. As noted, the above evil triad elements are presented in terms of “love, grace”, etc. And that has resulted in horrific mental deformity in regard to what is being protected “under the canopy of the sacred”. It clouds human perception and awareness of the true nature of what is being taught, i.e. that evil is being cloaked as good.
Christian psychologist Harold Ellens exposed just what is going on when he stated bluntly,
“There is in Western culture a psychological archetype, a metaphor that has to do with the image of a violent and wrathful God (see Romans, Revelation). Crystallized in Anselm’s juridical atonement theory, this image represents God sufficiently disturbed by the sinfulness of humanity that God had only two options: destroy us or substitute a sacrifice to pay for our sins. He did the latter. He killed Christ.
“Ellens goes on by stating that the crucifixion, a hugely violent act of infanticide or child sacrifice, has been disguised by Christian conservative theologians as a ‘remarkable act of grace’. Such a metaphor of an angry God, who cannot forgive unless appeased by a bloody sacrifice, has been ‘right at the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2,000 years. And the unavoidable consequence for the human mind is a strong tendency to use violence’.
“’With that kind of metaphor at our center, and associated with the essential behavior of God, how could we possibly hold, in the deep structure of our unconscious motivations, any other notion of ultimate solutions to ultimate questions or crises than violence- human solutions that are equivalent to God’s kind of violence’…” (End of Ellens quotes)
So also, Charles Templeton exposed the true nature of what is worshipped and praised in religious traditions when he stated that the God of the Bible, who demands constant praise of his greatness on threat of horrific punishment and destruction for any refusal to bend the knee and do so, is no different from an Idi Amin tyrant (see his “Farewell To God”).
Insert: However, I am not with Templeton in his conclusions that led him to shift to dogmatic atheism. We can do better than that, just as Historical Jesus presented the liberating alternative of an entirely different image of God.
Note below (“Added note:”) how AI Overview cautiously and defensively responds to a query on biblical verses where God threatens punishment and destruction for people not praising him. That is so typically a woke progressive-like response- i.e. trying not to express anything that might upset/offend someone, a response that tries to avoid the blunt and direct point that people like Templeton made clearly and straightforwardly. Yet Overview then ends affirming the very same thing that Templeton said- i.e. that refusal to worship and praise leads to punishment and destruction. AI Overview muddles around and does not seem aware of the contradiction in what it is saying.
Moving along…
The demand to be the center of attention and be praised is an Idi Amin-like threat and self-centered tyranny. It is not what “God is love” would be and act like. Authentic love denies itself to focus on serving others.
And did I almost forget Hector Garcia’s “Alpha God: The Psychology of Religious Violence and Oppression”. He makes the interesting comment that the bowing of heads and bodies of religious people in the “presence of the religious deity” is, in evolutionary biology/psychology” terms, mimicking the bowing of submissive animals in the presence of the threatening dominant male. Hmmm? Hence his title- “Alpha God”.
The Amazon blurb on Garcia’s book reads:
“This book uses evolutionary psychology as a lens to explain religious violence and oppression. The author, a clinical psychologist, examines religious scriptures, rituals, and canon law, highlighting the many ways in which our evolutionary legacy has shaped the development of religion and continues to profoundly influence its expression.
“The book focuses on the image of God as the dominant male in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. This traditional God concept is seen as a reflection of the “dominant ape” paradigm so evident in the hierarchical social structures of primates, with whom we have a strong genetic connection.
“The author describes the main features of male-dominated primate social hierarchies- specifically, the role of the alpha male as the protector of the group; his sexual dominance and use of violence and oppression to attain food, females, and territory; in-group altruism vs. out-group hostility (us vs. them); and displays of dominance and submission to establish roles within the social hierarchy.
“The parallels between these features of primate society and human religious rituals and concepts make it clear that religion, especially its oppressive and violent tendencies, is rooted in the deep evolutionary past. This incisive analysis goes a long way toward explaining the historic and ongoing violence committed in the name of religion.”
(End of ad blurb)
The outcome of merging the worst of inherited beliefs with ideals like love and grace, as Ellens noted above? Cognitive dissonance has been widespread under such oxymoronic mixtures/mergers (i.e. the religious practise of cloaking bad as good, even as divine). And none have been more egregious in regard to this than Paul’s tribal Christ that has had worldwide impact in validating “salvation through destruction” complexes of beliefs. That is the very framework of his Lord Christ to whom every knee must bow as he demands to rule with a rod of iron, threatening destruction through apocalypse and then eternal hell for any free spirits refusing to give the knee to Paul’s “Christ-ianity”, a highly conditional religion constructed to oppose and bury “Jesus-ianity” (i.e. the opposite unconditional theology and message of Jesus).
(Insert: “Tribal Christ”? Yes, the eternal separation of humanity in opposing classes of true believers saved versus evil unbelievers cast into the lake of fire to be tortured in burning forever. The eternal “Zoroastrian cosmic dualism” where humanity is divided into two entirely opposite groups, a myth that violates all understanding of ultimate oneness as fundamental to metaphysical reality, as well as fundamental to humanity.)
Just as humanity has learned to discern good and bad across past millennia, so we are individually responsible to do the same individually, in our beliefs and behavior, throughout our life journey.
The principles, laws, and institutions of liberal democracy provide critical help in discerning the true good from the bad in the mix of human beliefs and the related impulses and consequent behaviors that they validate- i.e. the principles of (1) nontribal inclusion of all as equals (not “equity” outcomes), (2) non-dominating relating that respects the rights and freedoms of all equally, treats all as equals, and (3) non-punitive, non-destructive approaches to justice. The liberal democracy approach counters our worst impulses and affirms our better human impulses.
Add to bad/good discernment criteria, the Jesus themes that tackle the archetypes behind human ideas/beliefs. And most critical for discernment of good from bad, note the Jesus project to go to the theology at the core of complexes of ideas/beliefs, the most critical of all elements to transform, theology as the foundation of all subsidiary ideas/beliefs that incite and validate impulses to good and bad.
His new archetypal themes? Similar to later liberal democracy principles- (1) The universal inclusion of all as family of God, all loved equally with same unconditional love- i.e. “sun and rain given to all inclusively and equally”. (2) Non-dominating relating as in true greatness does not lord over others but serves others (and “God is great”, right?). And (3) non-punitive justice (i.e. “no eye for eye retaliation, harm for harm, but instead love enemies”), justice that mercifully forgives while at same time holding all responsible for their individual lives and behavior- i.e. the Jesus advocacy to “Go and sin no more”. My paraphrase of what he stated- “Take full responsibility for your life and behavior and the consequences/outcomes”. Or in contemporary English, “Grow the fuck up, eh”.
The core themes of Historical Jesus, along with basic principles of liberal democracy, take us a long way to discerning correctly the difference between good and bad in our modern era.
To conclude this: The incentivising beliefs that we embrace do produce differing outcomes by inciting and validating very different impulses in us, either those inherited from our animal past (cloaked as good in religious traditions) or those of our very different human spirit and consciousness (the internal dualism that is the real battle of good against evil in life against the real enemy in life- to paraphrase Solzhenitsyn). We are without excuse in knowing the difference as we have had the insights and themes of Historical Jesus for two millennia and the principles and institutions of liberal democracy for several centuries.
Now, here below is the AI Overview “woke progressive” response to the query- “Biblical verses where God threatens punishment for not praising/worshipping him”. Note how this AI shifts blame away from the bad religious theology of a God threatening eternal punishment and destruction of those refusing his demand to be the center of attention and praise. This AI then shifts the blame to people. AI Overview tries to frame the evil of self-centered demand for attention as more the issue of bad people guilty of stubborn refusal to honor a “loving parent”. Sheesh. And we wonder why cognitive dissonance dominates so many religious minds.
Well, if that parent is authentic love, then why the threat of such severe punishment for not worshipping what in all areas of human life is considered a pathology, the psychopathic demand of tyrants? The Idi Amin sickness of demanding to be the center of attention and praise, on pain of death.
Did not Paul quote the love hymn in 1 Corinthians 13- i.e. “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs”, etc.
And what about Jesus’ statement that true greatness does not demand to lord over subjugated and kowtowing others, but denies itself to serve others?
And the blaming of people below (common throughout the bible) smacks of the same old anti-humanism that begins at the very opening of the book of Genesis, now expressed in modern variants as the “noble savage” mythology that dominates western academia. Original humans were mythically imagined as pure, undefiled communalists but became corrupted (i.e. “fallen/sinful”) as humanity progressed across history, especially corrupted in modern liberal democracy civilization. The earliest version of this “noble savage” theme is the Sumerian myth of Enki in Dilmun.
Added note:
AI Overview
The Bible does not explicitly use the phrase “praise me or be punished.” Instead, verses describe God judging people for pride and ignoring Him. The text outlines consequences for turning away from God to worship other things, or for knowing God but refusing to honor Him.
These key verses detail those warnings and consequences:
• Romans 1:21-23: The Bible states that humans knew God but refused to honor or thank Him. As a consequence, their thinking became dark and foolish, leading them to worship idols.
• Daniel 5:23: The prophet Daniel condemns King Belshazzar for praising false idols of gold and silver while failing to glorify the one true God who holds his life in His hands. This lack of honor immediately resulted in the loss of his kingdom.
• Deuteronomy 30:17-18: God warns the Israelites that if their hearts turn away and they choose to worship other gods, they will “surely perish” and lose their home.
• Exodus 20:5: God describes Himself as a “jealous God”. He warns that failing to worship Him exclusively— by turning to idols— will result in punishment that affects families for generations.
• 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9: The New Testament warns of “retribution” for those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel. The punishment for this rejection is described as “eternal destruction”.
These consequences function like a broken relationship. Think of it like a child refusing to speak to a loving parent. When the child cuts off the relationship, they miss out on the parent’s protection, wisdom, and love. Similarly, failing to acknowledge God separates a person from the ultimate source of life.
(End of AI Overview)
Bob Brinsmead had the true story of humanity right when he said, “Our true story is not how far we have fallen but how high humanity has risen” (i.e. from its earliest emergence in barbaric animal reality).
“One more poke at this, Grok”, Wendell Krossa
My concern is that to “defeat the idea” (Gen. Nagata) that is driving too much violence and war, we have to first understand clearly what “the idea” actually is. It is a complex of themes constructed around a core ultimate belief or idea, a theology or “Ultimate Reality” that validates all the rest.
It is critical to point out the nature of “the idea” directly and clearly, in order to properly counter it, to defeat it. Only then can we clearly and distinctly define the alternative (i.e. the Jesus alternative) as the potent counter to the complex of “bad religious ideas” that we have isolated and named.
I urge this clarity and directness in response to the varied commentators who claim that they will name the ideas driving, for example, the Iranian theocratic violence and war. But then, after dancing cautiously around the subject, even getting somewhat close (i.e. perhaps stating the drivers are “religious”), they then often undermine and blow their argument by describing the driving ideas as “ideology”, missing quite entirely the profoundly religious nature of the complex of themes and the theology that drive, for example, Iranian violence.
It helps to get a grip on the mythical/religious nature of the core themes by remembering that they were developed initially as primitive myths, then embraced in subsequent religious traditions. Over succeeding millennia, the basic themes were deeply embedded in human subconscious as archetypes from where they have repeatedly influenced following generations of people to repeatedly construct narratives that are based on the same basic complexes of ideas/beliefs created for the earliest mythologies. The same basic complex of ideas/beliefs has endlessly been used to frame narratives for successive religious traditions and eventually for structuring modern-era secular ideologies. They are all variants on the general framework of “salvation through destruction”.
I get the hesitancy of commentators to be direct and clear, to name the bad religious ideas (i.e. the theology) driving so much violence/war, due to fear of charges of “Islamophobia”, etc. Hence, I repeatedly couch my directness (too blunt?) with the spread of blame, noting the Islamic variant on the idea, i.e. their theology or God, descends directly from Zoroastrianism down through Judaism and Christianity to Islam. All western religious traditions share the guilt for maintaining and protecting the same theological “idea” at the center of their belief systems, and for structuring their religions around “salvation through destruction” themes (i.e. demand for sacrifice of innocents, and violent purging of evil threats/enemies from life).
A summary of the core archetypes/themes/beliefs in the complex of “salvation through destruction” narratives, the fuller complex of bad religious ideas:
(1) The past was better. Then (2) corrupted humans ruined the original paradise. Fallen humanity now justly deserves punishment in a world where (3) life is declining toward something worse, (4) toward apocalyptic destruction and the end of life. (5) Salvation (“save the world”) demands that humanity must offer a sacrifice. People must also (6) purge the evil threat to life often defined in terms of demonized enemies (and their society) who oppose the apocalyptic millennial true believers. The righteous heroes in the true religion/movement must purge the unbelievers and their system or society to purify life and the world. Then (7) the way is cleared to restore the lost/ruined paradise or to install a new utopia.
This framework of themes has been traced by historians as driving Marxism, environmental alarmism, and Iranian theocracy, just as it drove Nazism. (“Driving” as in “inciting, validating”.)
The cohering center of the above complex of themes is a God that is (1) tribal, (2) dominating, and who (3) metes out “justice” as punitive destruction.
These are “profoundly mythical/religious themes”. Grok, if as you claim, that “empiricism” is your guiding criterion, then this is “empirical” history and fact. Mythology/religion shaped the original beliefs and ideas that became the main archetypes of human subconscious that shape subsequent historical human narratives both religious and secular/ideological. Rendering both versions profoundly religious in nature. Why keep dancing around this fact, trying to temper the actual nature of such narratives and related movements?
While I hear Grok’s repeated insistence that some of the ideas/issues driving modern ideological variants are also “secular” in nature, my insistence is that the overall framework and content of the ideas of the “secular” versions differ not at all in thematic content from the historically preceding religious versions.
The modern-era “secular” counterparts adhere closely to the same archetypes that were much earlier embedded in human subconscious as mythical/religious ideas/beliefs, making the secular variants just as profoundly religious in nature as the religious precedents. It is more helpful to name them in accordance with the core themes that they express, thereby helping people to understand the actual nature of what is expressed, i.e. that they are profoundly religious in nature. And I am referencing the dominant themes in these “secular” traditions. Other subsidiary ideas and social elements are in the mix of what drives these secular ideological movements but do not lose sight of the overall dominant structuring that is profoundly religious in nature, i.e. the framework of salvation through destruction.
Richard Landes faced opposition from western academics when he clearly exposed the actual nature of Marxist collectivism that had presented itself as “scientific” (i.e. “scientific history, modernity of the French Revolution, etc.”), just as environmental alarmism is deceptively presented as “science”.
As Landes said,
“Any attempt to put this totalitarian system (Marxism) in the category of a closed and barbarian theocracy is very often vehemently refused. In this case, very emotionally seated aspirations and hopes of young or older intellectuals are at stake. Everybody who dares to take the Bolshevik world as a religious community is considered a traitor betraying the humanitarian ideals of the modernity of the French Revolution…
“’If you see it in this sense’, say the proponents of the project of modernity, ‘the distance between the old and new modern world would shrink too much and the debts to the Christian tradition would become too heavy’. Thus, when you treat the Bolsheviks as a millennial sect, you are going to betray the project of modernity and treat the Bolsheviks, despite their very modern efforts to industrialize backward Russia, as a medieval sect of obscure believers.
He adds, “Among the historical issues of the twentieth century nothing poses greater problems to scholars than the similarities and differences between the Soviet and Nazi totalitarian systems, both of which (by the definitions of this study) were active cataclysmic, apocalyptic millennial movements”.
And then my query to AI regarding the two most potent shifts in perspective for cognitive therapy that produces the ultimate human liberation:
Grok your analysis and summary of the section at http://www.wendellkrossa.com/ titled-
“A profound shift in theology (God image) is the ultimate human liberation”
Posted on June 23, 2026 by Wendell Krossa
http://www.wendellkrossa.com/?p=16055#more-16055
Grok replied:
Summary of the top section of the post “Shift in perspective and the ultimate human liberation” (posted June 23, 2026, by Wendell Krossa on his site The Unconditional Human Spirit):The post builds on a recent Joe Rogan Experience podcast (#2515 with behavioral expert Chase Hughes) discussing “shift in perspective” as a key mechanism in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for issues like anxiety, depression, and PTSD. Krossa extends this idea far beyond individual therapy to propose the ultimate human liberation through two profound perspective shifts: one empirical/material and one theological/metaphysical. wendellkrossa.com
Core Thesis
Krossa argues that transforming one’s fundamental worldview— especially core beliefs about reality, human progress, and the nature of ultimate reality (God/deity)— is the most powerful form of cognitive therapy. This liberates people from fear, anxiety, depression, and deformed narratives that have dominated human history. wendellkrossa.com
Two Key Shifts Highlighted
1. Empirical/Material Shift (Julian Simon and successors):
Julian Simon overcame his own clinical depression from environmental alarmism by examining evidence showing that, overall, human life and conditions have improved over the long term thanks to intelligence, creativity, and problem-solving. Krossa cites Simon alongside later researchers (e.g., Bjorn Lomborg, Greg Easterbrook, Indur Goklany) as evidence against doomerism. He links modern “eco-anxiety” (especially in children) to alarmist narratives and presents optimistic, evidence-based views as effective cognitive therapy for a healthier personal worldview. wendellkrossa.com
2. Theological/Metaphysical Shift (Historical Jesus’ “stunning new theology”):
This is the post’s central and most emphasized element. Krossa portrays Historical Jesus as offering the most radical transformation in human thought by replacing “threat theology” (a wrathful, retaliatory, punishing, destroying God that had dominated for millennia) with unconditional love, acceptance, inclusion, and forgiveness.
• Examples: Rejecting “eye for eye” retaliation; “Love your enemies”; God sending sun/rain on both good and evil; omitting “day of vengeance” from Isaiah 61.
This shift targets the “mother of all archetypes”— deity as the core reality shaping ethics, justice, meaning, purpose, societies, and personal psychology.
• It liberates humanity from fear-driven psychic torment, “monster God” myths (where suffering = divine punishment), and related pathologies (e.g., demon possession interpreted as psychosomatic).
• Jesus’ mission is framed as proclaiming freedom for captives and release from darkness— the ultimate cognitive reframing at the archetypal/subconscious/meta-narrative level. wendellkrossa.com
Krossa combines both shifts for “the most potent cognitive therapy ever imagined”: optimistic evidence on material progress + unconditional divine love at the spiritual core.
Supporting Elements in the Top Section
• CBT explanation (via AI overview): Notice negative thoughts, accept feelings, inquire into evidence/alternatives, and intentionally shift to constructive narratives. wendellkrossa.com
• Qualifier on “unconditional”: It does not mean “suicidal empathy” or abandoning justice/rule of law; personal responsibility and restraining harm remain essential.
wendellkrossa.com
• Links to related posts on the site exploring Jesus’ ideas as the most profound thought in history, psychological/theological revolutions, etc.
• Brief nods to contemporary issues like tribal dualism (oppressors/oppressed), virtue-signaling, and deformed “Hero’s Quest” narratives. wendellkrossa.com
Analysis
Krossa’s writing is optimistic, integrative, and iconoclastic. He draws from psychology (CBT, archetypes), history of ideas, environmental economics (Simon et al.), and a highly selective, non-traditional reading of Jesus that prioritizes the “Historical Jesus” over later Christian theology (especially Pauline).
He treats theology not as dogma but as the deepest psychological operating system— changing the image of God changes everything downstream in human narratives and behavior.
Strengths (from the text’s perspective): It offers a coherent, hopeful framework that addresses both evidence-based optimism and existential/spiritual needs. The emphasis on liberation from fear-based religion resonates with critiques of authoritarian or punitive belief systems.
Potential critiques: The interpretation of Jesus is unconventional and focuses heavily on unconditional love while downplaying or reinterpreting elements of judgment in the Gospels.
The environmental optimism section relies on a specific set of “cornucopian” thinkers and may underweight ongoing challenges. The post blends personal essay, quotation, AI summaries, and links in a somewhat stream-of-consciousness style typical of blogs.
Overall, the piece presents “shift in perspective” as humanity’s path to freedom— not through politics or material fixes alone, but through transformed core beliefs about reality and the divine. It positions this as the ultimate therapy: replacing threat and scarcity mindsets with love, creativity, and evidence-based hope. The post invites readers to engage with linked Rogan content and other articles on the site for deeper exploration.
Next Grok suggestions:
“Explore Julian Simon’s resource optimism” and “Investigate Chase Hughes behavioral expertise”.
Grok’s reply:
Julian Simon’s Resource Optimism (Cornucopian Economics)
Julian Lincoln Simon (1932–1998) was an American economist, professor (University of Illinois and University of Maryland), and a leading proponent of optimistic views on population, resources, and human progress. He is best known for his book The Ultimate Resource (1981, with later editions) and for challenging neo-Malthusian environmental alarmism. en.wikipedia.org
Core Ideas
• Human ingenuity as the “ultimate resource”: Simon argued that people are not just consumers but creators. More people mean more minds to innovate, solve problems, and create wealth. Population growth, in the long run, drives progress rather than causing collapse. en.wikipedia.org
• Resources are economically infinite (or effectively so): While physical resources are finite in a strict sense, human creativity makes them effectively unlimited. Scarcity raises prices, which incentivizes exploration, substitution, recycling, efficiency improvements, and technological breakthroughs. Over time, real (inflation-adjusted) prices of resources tend to fall, signaling increasing abundance. independent.org
• Evidence-based optimism: Simon pointed to long-term trends— declining resource prices, increasing known reserves, rising living standards, and falling environmental impacts per unit of output in many areas. He emphasized looking at decades or centuries, not short-term spikes. adamsmith.org
• Critique of doomerism: He directly opposed Paul Ehrlich (The Population Bomb) and The Limits to Growth reports, arguing that pessimistic predictions repeatedly failed because they underestimated human adaptability and market mechanisms. en.wikipedia.org
Famous Simon–Ehrlich Wager
In 1980, Simon bet Ehrlich and colleagues that the real prices of five metals (copper, chromium, nickel, tin, tungsten) would decline over the next decade. Simon won decisively; Ehrlich paid him after prices fell. This became a symbol of the broader debate between resource pessimists and optimists. en.wikipedia.org
Influence and Legacy
Simon’s ideas align with “cornucopian” thought (abundance via technology and markets) and influenced later optimists like Bjørn Lomborg, Matt Ridley, and Hans Rosling. The Simon Abundance Index (tracking time-price of resources relative to population) continues his framework, showing resources becoming more abundant. cato.org
Critiques: Critics argue his long-run optimism may underplay near-term environmental costs, biodiversity loss, or specific constraints (e.g., climate, water, soil). Some say it works better for metals than for complex ecosystems. sciencedirect.com
Simon’s personal story is notable: He overcame depression partly by shifting from alarmist views to evidence-based optimism, as referenced in the Wendell Krossa post.
en.wikipedia.org
Chase Hughes’ Behavioral Expertise
Chase Hughes is a former U.S. Navy Chief (20-year career, retired ~2019) who positions himself as a leading expert in behavioral profiling, influence, persuasion, interrogation, and human intelligence (HUMINT) operations. He founded Applied Behavior Research / NCI University, runs the “Station One” YouTube channel, and has appeared on Joe Rogan (#2515 and prior). missourimilitaryacademy.org
Background and Claims
• Military service: Served in the Navy, with roles involving curriculum development for tactical operations, interrogation/interview training, and related areas. He holds degrees/certificates from institutions like the U.S. Naval War College and has training in psychology and behavioral sciences. He developed systems like the Behavior Pilot System and claims to have trained military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel. missourimilitaryacademy.org
• Key contributions claimed: Creator of the Neuro-Cognitive Intelligence (NCI) system, the “Behavioral Table of Elements,” and tools for rapid profiling, deception detection, enhanced persuasion, and influence. Books include The Ellipsis Manual, The Behavior Operations Manual: Neuro-Cognitive Intelligence, and Tongue: A Cognitive Hazard. chasehughes.com
• Focus areas: Psyops recognition, hypnosis, memory editing, body language, non-verbal cues, and practical influence techniques. On Rogan, he discussed perspective shifts, CBT-like reframing, hypnosis, and behavioral change. youtube.com
Reception
Hughes has a large following for accessible, high-stakes applications of behavior science (sales, leadership, personal development, security). Supporters value his military-derived frameworks and pragmatic tools. easyprey.com
Critiques and Controversies: Some former colleagues, behavior analysts, and podcasters accuse him of exaggerating his military roles/expertise, overclaiming capabilities (e.g., extreme hypnosis or mind control), and repackaging Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) or pop psychology with a “military/intelligence” veneer. Credibility debates exist around grandiose claims versus verifiable background. youtube.com
In the context of the Joe Rogan podcast and Wendell Krossa’s post, Hughes is highlighted for practical insights into cognitive reframing and perspective shifts as powerful tools for personal change— aligning with CBT principles and broader worldview transformations. His work emphasizes that understanding and influencing behavior (one’s own and others’) is a high-leverage skill.
Connection to the Original Post
Both figures support Krossa’s theme of “shift in perspective” as liberation: Simon via empirical optimism on human progress against scarcity fears; Hughes via behavioral tools for reframing thoughts, overcoming anxiety, and mastering influence. Together, they illustrate material/evidence-based and psychological angles for reducing fear and enhancing agency.
And then…
A few quotes from “The Heroes of 1776”, Neil Gorsuch, Free Press
https://www.thefp.com/p/neil-gorsuch-the-heroes-of-1776
His intro states: “A Supreme Court justice remembers the signers, soldiers, farmers, fifers, spies, and messengers who made the American Revolution—and reflects on our enduring task of forming ‘a more perfect Union.’”
Insert: The ideals noted below, while framed in the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence, are also universal human values.
Gorsuch writes,
“This year marks the 250th anniversary of our nation’s independence. We are celebrating with fireworks, barbecues, and parades. But we might also pause to reflect on the courage and sacrifice of the founding generation and ask: What moved so many ordinary people to do so many extraordinary things?
“Much of the answer lies in the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution establishes our framework of government. But it is the Declaration that gives voice to our nation’s highest ideals: that all are created equal; that each of us enjoys unalienable rights endowed by “their Creator,” not government; and that “We the People” have the authority to govern ourselves. Americans fought and died in the revolution for these principles. Two and a half centuries later, they remain the nation’s creed, enduring aspirations that—whatever our imperfections and disagreements—bind us together as one people….
“Recent surveys suggest that just one-third of Americans can identify the Declaration as the source of the phrase “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” Three in 10 Americans are unable to name the three branches of government, let alone explain why their separation promotes the Declaration’s ideals…
“What unites us is our shared commitment to the Declaration’s ideals of equality, liberty, and self-rule.”
(End of Gorsuch article)
And this from Steve Forbes...
Forbes comments on how socialist central state planning destroys societies and the poorest suffer the most. Its always the same old “promised salvation but through destruction” (“dressed as compassion” or what Gad Saad terms “suicidal empathy”). More “evil cloaked as good”.
“Mamdani’s socialist rent-control puts New York on the road to housing ruin: Mamdani-backed candidates scored primary wins, signaling more rent control is coming”, Steve Forbes, Fox News
He opens:
“New York City has just taken another giant step backward.
“The Rent Guidelines Board voted 7-1 to freeze rents on roughly 1 million rent-stabilized apartments, handing Democrat Mayor Zohran Mamdani a major political trophy. Mamdani called it a “historic victory.” It is nothing of the sort. It is an act of economic vandalism dressed up as compassion.
“This is not housing policy. It is price control. And price controls have failed everywhere they have been tried.”
Rent control, says Forbes, “is an act of economic vandalism dressed up as compassion.
Under rent control, Forbes notes, benefits are socialized, ownership is demonized, investment is punished, and shortages and decay results. Rent freeze is collectivist expropriation of private property, “confiscation by regulation”.
The reason for New York’s shortage of housing, says Forbes, is due to bad government making it too slow (excessive regulation) and too expensive (excessive taxation) to build.
The collectivist approach of using rent controls/freeze is an attack on the people who provide housing, according to Forbes.
The outcome of this approach?
“The inevitable result will be less maintenance, fewer upgrades, more distressed buildings and less new rental housing. The owner who was thinking about renovating will delay. The investor who was considering a new project will look elsewhere. The small landlord who has been barely holding on will sell, defer repairs or walk away. Tenants may enjoy a temporary political sugar high, but they will eventually pay in deteriorating buildings and fewer choices.
“This is the oldest lesson in economics: when you cap the price of something below its real cost, you get less of it. Freeze rents and you reduce the incentive to supply rental housing. Punish ownership and you get less ownership. Demonize profit and capital flees.”
These failed socialist approaches (some 24 tries over the past century of so) have been documented by varied historians. They are always the same old formula of more centralized government planning and control (i.e. more regulation), demonization and hostility toward private property and enterprise (i.e. contempt for the people who create businesses, jobs, and wealth), and more taxation and redistribution (coercive state confiscation of private property).
Forbes concludes:
“If this ideology spreads, New York’s decline will accelerate. The city will become more expensive, not less. The tax base will erode. Construction will slow. Small businesses will suffer. Public services will weaken. More middle-class families will leave. The people hurt most will be the very tenants and working families the left claims to champion.”
He says, “The answer to New York’s housing crisis is not socialism. It is supply. Build more. Cut red tape. Reform zoning. Speed permits. Reduce taxes on housing. Encourage private capital. Make it profitable to create the homes New Yorkers desperately need…
“New York needs growth, not grievance. It needs ownership, not class warfare. It needs housing, not socialist slogans.”
(End of Forbes article)
Why and how “useful idiots” in the west are deceived by collectivist tyrants…
“Seizing the means of production” is the Marxist phrase for taking all private property from citizens and putting it under the centralized control of the elites running the collectives. Look at what that did to China under Mao- i.e. estimates of up to 70 million deaths (“Mao” by Chang and Halliday). 20 million died under Stalin. Up to 3 million were murdered under Pol Pot. Entire societies ruined and populations reduced to the impoverishment of equity outcomes and eventual mass-starvation, along with mass imprisonment and murder of free-spirited dissenters.
“Public’s Repudiation Of Woke Radicalism Drives Democrats’ Socialist Turn: Deliberate deception, excess of college grads, and the collapse of the Left’s core agenda are driving the turn toward socialism in the US and UK”, Michael Shellenberger, July 1
https://www.public.news/p/publics-repudiation-of-woke-radicalism
He begins: “The socialists who swept recent New York elections and will soon run the United Kingdom are really not very radical, say many in the media… But all of those socialists support a much more radical agenda than the one they ran on. The program of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), of which Mamdani and AOC are members, calls for: total defunding and abolition of the police, jails, and prisons; ending the independence of the Supreme Court and the entire Executive Branch, making them subordinate to congress; “expropriating property from capitalists and delivering it to the working class”; socializing energy production; allowing surgeons to sterilize children and adolescents in an effort to change their sex; a return to Joe Biden’s open borders policy; and the decriminalization of illegal camping and open air drug use.”
He continues, stating survey results that show all the above policies are wildly unpopular with majorities of the US population. The socialists realize this and, hence, “did not highlight their more radical agenda items during their campaigns.”
Shellenberger then goes into the deception that is being used by socialists to deceive citizens and gain their votes. They emphasize popular issues like affordability and offer free things and focus attention on more popular issues while successfully hiding their radicalism.
As Mayor Mamdani told the Democratic Socialists of America years ago, “’But then there are also other issues that we firmly believe in, whether it’s BDS [boycott, divest, and sanction Israel], or whether it is the end goal of seizing the means of production, where we do not have the same level of support at this very moment.’ The task, he said, was to ‘meet people where they’re at’ and ‘over time bring people to that issue’.”
Part of the deception problem Shellenberger is outlining is that many view “Democratic Socialism” in terms of the Scandinavian models “rather than the Democratic Socialists of America program of abolition and expropriation”. Mainstream media have assisted this deception by not making the actual connection of collectivism/socialism with Communist China, Soviet Russia, North Korea, and Cuba.
He says, “There is a long history on the Left of concealing radicalism.” The end result will inevitably be the same as in all 24 previous failed tries- “You will own nothing, and you will be miserable, not happy”. It is always the same old “promised salvation through destruction” that impoverishes, immiserates, and ruins life on vast scales, with entire societies ruined.
(End of Shellenberger article)
Added note:
This sentence from the above article by Shellenberger- “Expropriating property from capitalists and delivering it to the working class”.
This is the promise of the elites running the collectives via centralized planning and control of all elements of societies and all details of the lives of citizens. The elites claim that they do such on behalf of the citizens, for the greater or common good. A major impetus for their centralization of power, and control of the details of the lives of citizens, is their embrace of Plato’s “Philosopher Kings” view of themselves as especially enlightened elites (Marxist enlightened vanguards) who believe that they alone know better what is best for all others and, hence, for the greater or common good, must coerce others to submit their freedom and rights to the controlling elites.
Kristian Niemietz responded to this arrogance of collectivist elites:
From “Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies”
“Socialism in the sense which self-identified democratic socialists define it… a democratized economic planned collectively by ‘the people’, has never been achieved anywhere and could not be achieved. Economic planning can only ever be done in a technocratic, elitist fashion, and it requires an extreme concentration of power in the hands of the state. It cannot ‘empower’ ordinary workers. It can only ever empower bureaucratic elites.”
Here is Nellie Bowles latest reporting on Free Press, July 3, 2026
“New York won’t have landlords anymore pretty soon: Last week, New York City’s Rent Guidelines Board approved a rent freeze on about a million units across the city. Rent freeze! New York mayor Zohran Mamdani announced it with such a cute video of himself opening a freezer.
“He will freeze the rent, as promised. But will he freeze costs for landlords? Will he freeze the cost of a plumber who comes to service the unit? The cost of a roofer coming to patch? Materials for necessary construction? Noooo, silly. And thus will begin a cycle of disrepair and hostility. It’s irrational. Which, you need to understand, is entirely the point. Mamdani’s people are smart—they know the math doesn’t math, nor does it need to.
“The goal is to get to a position where government housing is better than private housing. So you must first destroy private housing. Only when your apartment roof has collapsed, the pipes have burst, and your broke landlord’s best financial decision is burning the building down, then. . . a-ha! A-ha! The government will arrive. Look at these Soviet-style blocs we have for you, they will say. How nice is that, they will say, ours comes with a concrete stairwell! Capitalism was terrible, wasn’t it? And you’ll be like, I guess it was.
“You’ll eat your little climate cube of grasshopper asses (the abdominal segment goes to party leaders) and sit in a sweltering 90-degree dorm room. And you’ll be happy. No matter what suckage the commies incur, the blame will never be on them.”
(End of Bowles report)