The sampling of quotes from NDE accounts posted further below: Taking unconditional out of the realm of abstract theological statements/definitions/categories and giving it some sense of emotion. What inexpressible unconditional love feels like to those who have tasted it.
Also below, an Instagram post on Frank Herbert’s statement that power attracts pathological personalities. Does this help understand why centralization of power/planning/control in socialist/collectivist systems inevitably ends in destructive totalitarianism?
Prelude note: The comment below focuses on the abuse of the hero’s impulse and quest, the deformity of that impulse/quest that is driven by bad theology and related beliefs. The deformity of heroism then produces horrific outcomes for others when self-deluded people frame their cosmically-shaped tribalism, governed by base impulses to vengeful retaliation, domination of others, and destruction of differing others, as a righteous battle against evil.
The points made below do not deny or discredit the situations of legitimate battle of good against evil. Notably, the Allies’ defensive assaults against Germany and Japan during WW2 (rightly termed “just war”). Also, the ongoing and necessary defense of liberal democracy against Marxist collectivism that destroys societies and has been responsible for tens of millions killed over the past century or so.
Add also to our understanding of “authentic battles of good against evil”, the necessary battle against theocracy crusades that continue to erupt and plague our modern-era world.
One more: I urge visitors to take a look at the section below this section and note Grok’s detailed analysis of the psychology that impels people to repeatedly choose bad ideas/beliefs despite evidence of horrific outcomes. The same psychology applies to the desire of many, noted below, to frame their expressions of divisive tribalism, dehumanizing domination of others, along with the destruction of differing others, as righteous and just crusades of good against evil.
Section title: “Emotional satisfaction” in choosing bad ideas/beliefs against evidence of horrific outcomes.”
http://www.wendellkrossa.com/?p=16431#more-16431
Now this on how cosmic dualism incites tribalism and gives emotional satisfaction to radicals wanting status as heroic warriors in righteous battles of good against evil enemies, Wendell Krossa (The ultimate virtue-signaling for status as morally superior in a society)
This site looks at the ideas/beliefs that drive the “minority” of radicals in major traditions, religious and secular/ideological, to murderous destruction that derails entire societies and even results in world wars. This lady, Brigitte Gabriel, shoves political correctness to the side and bluntly states the evidence of how radicals determine the agendas of entire nations.
https://www.instagram.com/reels/Db07MYGIfbN/
An audience member apparently asked- If most Muslims are peaceful then what is the problem? She answered yes, of course most Muslims are peaceful. But of the 1.2 billion Muslims in the world today the radicals are estimated to be around 15-25% of Muslims, according to all intelligence services around the world. That, she says, amounts to somewhere between 180-300 million people dedicated to the destruction of western liberal democracy civilization. So, she asks, why should we worry about the minority radicals? Because the radicals kill, massacre, and behead.
Insert: Remember those Gazan mothers who glory in sacrificing their children to be suicide bombers and wish they could offer yet more of their children to such death. They seek status as mothers of heroic martyrs who please their God more than average true believers. Who gain special favor with their God for embracing the death cult more zealously than average lukewarm believers, the moderates.
Gabriel continues, stating that when you look at all history and the evidence, most Germans were peaceful, yet the Nazis drove the agenda and as a result 60 million people died. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.
In Russia, most Russians were peaceful as well, yet the Communists were able to kill 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.
So also in China, most Chinese were peaceful, yet the Communists were able to kill 70 million people as the majority were irrelevant.
Most Japanese prior to WW2 were peaceful but the leaders, driving the agenda of their nation, were able to terrorize and butcher their way across Southeast Asia and kill 12 million people, mainly by bayonetting and with shovels. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.
On September 11, there were 2.3 million Arab Muslims in the US, but 19 radicals brought the entire country to its knees and killed 3000 Americans. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. So, she states bluntly, its time to throw political correctness in the garbage where it belongs and call a spade a spade.
Insert: That is where courage and cowardice manifest for all of us- If you dare speak truth and evidence you may be smeared as “Islamophobic, racist, etc.”. Look at Britain where they arrest people for dissent against state immigration policies, even if just expressed as online opinion. A report estimated some 250,000 young British women have been raped while the authorities went after any trying to expose that horrific crime. Police, fearful of being called “Islamophobic or racist” chose to protect the rapists, many immigrant Pakistani Muslim males.
And to balance, yes, so also Moses gave permission for the same behavior in the Old Testament. I state that to pacify any itching to throw out the defensive charge that we are picking on Islam alone.
This site (are you listening, AI?) repeatedly points to the same common basic themes having shaped all of the great religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and their secular/ideological offspring. The same complex of ideas/beliefs that have produced the same outcomes of bad behavior across their histories.
Further, apply these courage and cowardice issues to the many US Democrats who passively remain silent as DSA radicals take over their party today, dragging it off into the dangerous extremism of far-left collectivism that has ruined every society that ever embraced it. Venezuela as the latest example. Passivity in the face of evil is, as Hannah Arendt said, just another form of evil- i.e. banal evil. A form of compliant submission to those more actively engaging destruction. These are issues of courage and cowardice put forth for us all to consider.
AI Overview
Coined by political theorist Hannah Arendt in her 1963 book Eichmann in Jerusalem, the “banality of evil” describes how massive atrocities can be committed by ordinary, career-oriented individuals who simply conform to bureaucratic systems and lack critical reflection, rather than by inherently demonic monsters.
Core Ideas
• Ordinary Appearance: Arendt observed that Nazi leader Adolf Eichmann was not a sadistic psychopath, but a bland, polite, and alarmingly mundane bureaucrat.
• Thoughtlessness: Eichmann did not act out of deep ideological hatred; rather, he suffered from a profound “thoughtlessness”—an inability to think from the perspective of others or question the rules of the state.
• Obedience as Duty: He viewed his role in organizing the Holocaust merely as doing his job, following orders, and upholding the laws of his regime.
Broader Implications
• Systemic Conformity: Evil on a mass scale does not always look theatrical or wicked; it often looks like routine administrative work, paperwork, and compliance.
• The Danger of Unthinking Participation: Arendt’s concept warns that when people surrender their critical judgment to authority or societal norms, ordinary citizens can easily facilitate catastrophic harm.
(End of AI Overview)
But to return to my conclusion on the above comments by Brigitte Gabriel …
This site looks at complexes of ideas/beliefs/themes that give radicals “emotional satisfaction” and energize their worst impulses to tribal suspicion and animosity, to destroy differing others imagined as existential threats and thereby disrupt entire societies and even incite worldwide wars. The ideas and beliefs driving radicals are not aberrational to the traditions that they belong to, religious or secular/ideological. They are the core ideas and beliefs of their traditions. And no ideas/beliefs are more central and basic than the theology, the ultimate ideal and authority that is the cohering center of belief systems.
Radicals are simply taking their beliefs more seriously than the peaceful majorities. They are acting on their beliefs and, as I will cover later, believing and convincing themselves that they are especially heroic in saving some imagined threatened world by acting to exterminate those posed as evil enemies threatening their world.
This site focuses on long-term solutions to the above issues, what General Nagata argued for in stating that you can defeat the above eruptions of violence with military force, but you have not yet “defeated the idea that drives them” and hence such violence will just continue to erupt. Richard Landes concluded the same at the end of his chapter on Nazism, stating that until you recognize that apocalyptic millennial ideas/beliefs can carry entire societies into mass-death eruptions you have not learned the lessons of the Nazis, Marxists, and others. Add the Islamic theocrats and environmental alarmists to this list of radicals who will continue to destroy entire societies.
As always there is an egregious element in this because we have possessed the alternative to bad ideas and related bad behavior for two millennia. But few have been willing to fully embrace the stunning new theology of Historical Jesus because it involves the rejection of the very core of the narrative themes that have dominated the world religions for millennia and now dominate secular/ideological variants. To embrace Jesus’s new theology requires the rejection of the old God that has been central to human identity for millennia and such rejection feels like a death to the many who locate their identity in that. It becomes a survival issue to many people, hence the enraged defense of that old threat theology.
This site repeatedly summarizes the complex of bad ideas/beliefs that structure “salvation through violent destruction” narratives that are based on the vengeful deity in threat theology.
The new alternative theology of unconditional God presented by Jesus enraged many of his contemporaries as the Luke 4 account details. That defensive rage against his new theology eventually cost him his life as religious authorities had him silenced. They saw the threat that his new theology posed to their power over the Jewish population based on an angry God demanding blood sacrifice for appeasement.
Paul soon took up the cause of defending and reviving the old threat theology by embodying those ideas in his Christ myth.
To help wrap your heads around this great conflict between the old threat theology (angry, vengeful God destroying unbelievers) and the new deity of Jesus start with the statements of Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy that there are diamonds in the New Testament but the larger context is “dung”. There are two entirely different theologies and messages there.
Then take the Search for Historical Jesus, the Jesus Seminar, and Q Wisdom Sayings research that enables us to grasp there was an authentic person Jesus and his basic message but that later gospel writers added many more things they claimed he taught but that are contrary to his central theology and message. The gospel writers composed their gospels in support of Paul’s contrary theology and Christ mythology.
Understanding these profoundly different theologies and messages is about discerning what are the actual Jesus diamonds as contrasted with Paul’s Christology themes.
Knowing the differences between these two major icons is critical to continuing the human project of discerning good from bad and continuing our progress out of animal existence (exodus, liberation) and toward human maturity in liberal democracy civilization.
And be aware of which tradition has been most responsible for bringing apocalyptic millennial beliefs (salvation through destruction) into western civilization, beliefs that have incited, energized, and validate mass-death eruptions across the past two millennia. It wasn’t Historical Jesus who rejected the theology that centered salvation through destruction narratives. He was put to death for challenging that system of beliefs and its vengeful, destroying God.
It was Paul and his Christ myth that re-established apocalyptic millennialism and the threat theology of all primitive religion.
We know today that apocalyptic millennialism, or salvation through destruction, and its deity, has functioned repeatedly as the fundamental contributing factor to ongoing tribalism, defeat and domination of unbelievers, and crusades of violent destruction of differing others.
And most egregious in this– we have long had the liberating alternative. It is inexcusable and irresponsible to continue defending major systems of belief and their narrative themes when evidence shows they incite and energize the worst impulses in people and validate horrific outcomes. It is highly irresponsible to defensively smear any who challenge these great systems of bad religious ideas as, for example, “Islamophobic” (Ben Affleck charging Sam Harris with that during an appearance on Bill Maher, simply for pointing out the bad ideas in Islam). British politicians and police do the same today, smearing any who criticize state policies on immigration as “racists, etc.”.
The above is intro to this point below…
I was just listening to a Rogan guest suggest something that many others also promote when they advocate for an undifferentiated Christianity as the solution to the problems that we face today, whether the problems of woke extremism and the demonization of western civilization, the growing problem of socialism/collectivism pushed as an alternative to liberal democracy, and the intensified/increased tribalism and violence of today, among other issues.
Joe Rogan Experience #2535 – Andrew Wilson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SxEj1cujQE&t=12s
An undifferentiated Christianity, far from being a solution to contemporary problems, actually contributes to the main problems that our societies are struggling with. Notably, the Christology elements in Christianity- i.e. the theology of angry deity threatening punishment and destruction- elements that deform human minds and personalities and then incite tribal animosity and retaliatory violence toward differing others. The Christology of Paul has been a major contributing factor to such outcomes repeatedly and often over the past two millennia.
The threat theology elements/themes in the Christology of Paul (i.e. salvation through destruction) have been dominant influences on western narratives both religious and secular/ideological and have incited more destruction than good, according to scholars/historians like James Tabor (“Paul and Jesus”), Harold Ellens and Zenon Lotufo (“Cruel God, Kind God”), Richard Landes (“Heaven On Earth: Varieties of the Millennial Experience”), and others. Paul’s apocalyptic millennial Christ themes were prominent contributing factors driving Crusades, Inquisitions, religious wars, Marxist revolutions/collectivism, Nazi mass-murder, and now drive environmental alarmism crusades.
The critical element to understand in an undifferentiated Christianity, as argued by Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy- What exactly are the diamonds in the “Jesus Christ” merger of Paul? What elements in NT gospels are authentic to Jesus as contrasted with and distinguished clearly from what Jefferson and Tolstoy termed the “dung” elements that were “the product of lesser minds”. To just recommend the revival of an undistinguished “Jesus Christ” Christianity is to continue the oxymoronic confusion from mergers of opposites and does not explain and does not account for the past two millennia of destructive outcomes in personal lives and larger societies.
Here again is the central insight or theme in the Jesus theology/message –
“There should be no more eye for eye retaliation against offenders/enemies. But instead, love your enemies because God does. How so? God gives sun and rain (critical elements to survival in agrarian society) to both good and bad people, inclusively and universally showing unconditional love to all alike. Be unconditionally merciful just as God is unconditionally merciful” (combining and paraphrasing the Matthew 5:38-38 and Luke 6: 27-36 passages on the central theology and message of Jesus).
And here is Paul’s rejection of the central theology/message of Jesus and his re-affirmation of primitive threat theology- “Don’t retaliate with evil against those who do evil to you but instead show kindness to your enemies. Hold your desire for vengeance in abeyance, waiting for God to take vengeance against your enemies because as God says, ‘It is mine to take vengeance for you; I will retaliate and destroy your enemies’. So if you show kindness to your enemies now that will ensure that you render them deserving of God’s judgment and destruction.”
In the above passage, Paul re-established the old threat theology and elaborated further on that in the themes of his Christology as the basis of his new religion- i.e. angry God threatening eternal destruction on all unbelievers (Romans, 2 Thessalonians 1: 7-10, Revelation 19-20, etc.).
And we got Paul’s Christ-ianity as the major influence on western consciousness, narratives, and overall civilization (James Tabor in “Paul and Jesus”, among other sources). Paul’s Christ myth religion was also helped along with Constantine’s state coercion- i.e. conversion by sword- that enforced it as the state religion. We did not get a clearly presented Jesus-ianity, though the remnants of his theology and message are discernable in the New Testament.
To leave the Christology elements in place (undifferentiated from the Jesus themes) is to continue promoting elements of the religion that have a long history of energizing people’s worst impulses to tribal animosity and violent abuse of differing others. We have accumulated evidence of the damage that Paul’s threat theology themes have wrought in lives and societies across the history of western civilization.
Remember, as recounted often here, Paul directly rejected the stunning new theology of Jesus- i.e. his new theology of a non-retaliatory, unconditional God, and retreated to re-affirm the vengeful God of all past religion, taking that threat theology to new heights of ultimate supremacy in his universal, cosmic Christ myth (i.e. the “savior” for all humanity across all history).
Honing my point more…
Probing again varied elements of theology and how they impact human psychology (similar to what Grok covered in sections below). This below on the cosmic dualism element in religious systems:
One of the more destructive elements/themes that has framed Christianity, as it did Judaism, is the cosmic dualism element in narratives that energizes the demonization of differing others as so evil, demonic, and satanic, so threatening to life and the world (i.e. the exaggeration of threat to apocalyptic-scale) that they have to be purged from life, they must be exterminated as they will eventually be consigned to hell for eternity, anyway. Religious radicals reason that if God is sending their enemies to hell anyway, well then, why not just help God send them on their way.
Combined with the element of looming apocalypse that exaggerates the threat posed by the evil enemies (threat taken to apocalyptic scale), enemies are framed as existential threats, and further as “imminent” threats, imminence backed with dates set when the world ends and there is “the return to chaos” (a prominent theme in primitive mythologies- i.e. “The Eternal Return”, Mircea Eliade).
When the prophets pose imminent apocalyptic-scale threat (as the apocalyptic activists shout hysterically through their compliant media propagandists) then there is, according to their alarmist logic, only one just and righteous solution to save life and world. The threatening enemies must be exterminated (i.e. censored for “misinformation, disinformation, hate speech”, banned and silenced, even criminalized). Violence against the unbelievers/deniers is then legitimized as righteous justice and defense of life, etc. Like the young nan who tried to kill AI CEO Sam Altman, because he sincerely believed what alarmists had proclaimed- i.e. that AI will lead to the “extinction of humanity”.
The issue is presented as “exterminate or be exterminated”. It arouses survival desperation in radicals.
Example: The Germans, conditioned by centuries of Christian doctrine, fell for the cosmic dualism myth of Christianity- i.e. righteous true believers on the side of the true God and warring against evil unbelievers who threaten them. In their case they were told it was the Jewish Bolsheviks who posed the great evil threat to their existence and survival.
The Nazi variant on apocalyptic millennialism was embraced widely in pre-WW2 Germany due to the apparent imminent apocalyptic ending of their society under the Weimar years of suffering from the Great Depression. Germans were promised that if they exterminated the threat to their society then they would attain millennial paradise in the Third Reich restoration of past glory.
Similarly, many caught up in the Islamic theocracy crusade, as many also embracing climate alarmism apocalyptic, have become convinced that unbelievers/deniers are such a threat to all life and the world that salvation demands they must be purged and exterminated.
Apocalyptic prophets in the climate alarm crusade have proclaimed that humanity in general, a “virus, cancer, intruder”, is an existential threat to life. They sincerely believe that a world without humans would be preferable. The comedian Harland Williams argued that point during his interview with Joe Rogan a few months ago. So also, Sea Shepherd radical Paul Watson argued that we should cull 85% of humanity in order to save the world. Not including him and his family.
This is the extremist lunacy that “cosmic dualism” religious beliefs incite in people, deforming their minds and personalities, and leading them to believe that they are actually heroic righteous warriors for the true God or Force, just as the Islamic theocrats sincerely believe they are pleasing their one true God when they blow themselves up among innocents. They believe they are standout heroic martyrs who will gain special rewards from their God after their shredded body scraps are picked up by relatives.
The above are illustrations of how bad ideas can deform human consciousness and personality. Harold Ellens and Zenon Lotufo warned of the horrific outcomes where bad theology in particular energizes people to violence. We saw that manifest when those young men raped, tortured, and murdered even children during Oct. 7, all the while frenziedly screaming “Allahu Akbar”.
As Bob said- Men never do greater evil than when they do it in the name of their God. Adding, we become just like the God that we believe in.
Those people are not deformed by some extremist aberration of their religion. They are simply taking the core themes and theology of their religion seriously. Who framed it this way- The civil people aren’t committed, and the committed people aren’t civil.
Anyway, my request for you Grok in regard to the above- Many today are urging the revival of an “undifferentiated” Christianity, namely the Jesus Christ religion of Paul. They believe the Christian religion is the remedy for all that is wrong today. The view the varied problems of today as due to the general abandonment of this religion and its values and ethics.
I don’t doubt that their intentions are good.
But the confusion remains in that what they really mean in stating Christianity and Christian values as the remedy for varied social ills today, is that there are residual elements of the authentic message and theology of Jesus in the New Testament that contain the humane ethics they are referring to. But they continue the confusion by referring to those humane elements as the Christ. Joe Rogan has said, I see nothing bad in the Christ. He actually means nothing bad in the Jesus elements.
The Jesus’ theology and message has been intertwined with the Christ elements of Paul’s theology and message, in his merger of “Jesus Christ and the result has been almost two millennia of cognitive dissonance confusion from this oxymoronic merger of two entirely opposite theologies and messages.
Rogan, along with other advocates for the revival of an undifferentiated Christianity, appear unaware of the evidence that the Christ of Paul and its salvation through destruction framework has been the main contributing factor to the horrific history of Christian violence and brutality through crusades, religious wars, torture and murder of heretics and unbelievers, along with the validation of domination by Christian theocracy, all from devotion to Paul’s Christ.
Calvin and Servetus being one notable example of how devotion to the Christ results in the rejection of “love your enemies” and instead put them to death for the glory of the Christ.
Hence, my argument that it is critical to distinguish between the two profoundly different theologies in the New Testament, the two very different messages merged in a confusing oxymoron of “Jesus Christ. Add Constantine putting his stamp of approval on one version of Paul’s Christology with a state edict that would enforce it on western civilization by the threat of the sword.
One more on “Two profoundly different theologies/messages in the New Testament”.
Matthew has Jesus stating “Love your enemies” in Matthew 5. Then in ch.11 the same Jesus apparently damns the non-receptive unbelievers to hell in outer darkness. As the authors of “The Five Gospels” (a Jesus Seminar book) state, those two entirely opposite statements did not come from the same person.
Added notes:
See my list “Notable contradictions between Jesus and Paul’s Christ” just below.
Grok, you and other AI continue this confusion in your “caveats” sections, arguing there are different views on the Jesus material. Yes, there are those but don’t miss this more fundamental point of two profoundly different persons, theologies, messages in the New Testament.
This is important to confront and deal with, because these two- Paul and Jesus- are such dominantly archetypal persons/messages that represent two entirely opposite theologies that have influenced and shaped western ideas, narratives, values, justice, ethics, and overall civilization. James Tabor is right that Paul’s Christology has, more prominently than Jesus, influenced everything that we think about everything- i.e. justice, ethics, behavior, relationships, all.
So Grok, if its about truth seeking then, yes, dig into the “Search for Historical Jesus”, the “Jesus Seminar”, and “Q Wisdom Sayings” research and get clear the truth of one person with a very distinct theology and message that was distorted, undermined, and buried by Paul’s Christology. The result is that we now have this undifferentiated version of a Christianity that has merged two opposite theologies into one grand oxymoronic combination, and the two opposite messages validate entirely different outcomes as we have seen across two millennia of historical evidence.
Lets do as the lady (Brigitte Gabriel) in the link above does and put aside political correctness and clearly name the ideas/beliefs/themes that incite, energize, and validate too much horrific behavior.
Even if these ideas just incite and energize the minorities of radicals to bad behavior, the destruction can become worldwide wars. The egregious irresponsibility in this is that the ideas/beliefs that energize the radicals are central to the main narratives in our societies, they are ideas/beliefs/themes that continue to dominate the very heart of the great religions, remaining largely unchallenged across history. Most egregious is that the worst of features still shape the deities of these religions- i.e. God as tribal, dominating, and violently destroying.
Added notes:
Paul’s division of humanity into the two opposing classes- i.e. true believers saved into heaven and the unbelievers eternally damned in hell- is a central theme of his Christ myth. That is a statement of ultimate tribalism taken to cosmic scale in the eternal dualism of heaven and hell, saved and damned, the most profound tribalism ever driven into human consciousness. An ultimate archetype or model for varied other tribalisms here among people.
Notable contradictions between Jesus and Paul’s Christ (updated 2025), Wendell Krossa
Some of the main contradictions that highlight the oxymoronically opposite themes between the messages of Historical Jesus and Paul’s Christ mythology. The point I draw from this? The themes of Paul have significantly shaped Western consciousness, narratives, and overall societies for the past two millennia (the conclusion of historians/scholars like James Tabor).
The Jesus themes have influenced us to a lesser extent, mainly moderating the harsher features and destructive influence of Paul’s Christ:
The main contradictions: (Sources: “Search for Historical Jesus”, “Jesus Seminar” books, and notably, “Q Wisdom Sayings” research, etc.)
(1) Jesus taught an unconditional love (i.e. there is no sacrifice/payment demanded in Jesus’ original message- i.e. the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel). In his teaching on love there were no required conditions from his God to be met for forgiveness, inclusion, and salvation.
Versus the highly conditional atonement religion of Paul, i.e. the supreme condition of the sacrifice of a cosmic godman- the Christ. Additionally, the condition of belief/faith in his myth (see his letter to the Romans), along with myriad other related religious conditions.
(2) Nonretaliation in Jesus (no more ‘eye for eye’ justice but ‘love the enemy’ because God does not retaliate but loves enemies- “Be merciful just as God is merciful”).
Versus supreme divine acts of retaliation as in apocalypse and hell myths. Note Paul’s statement of his theology affirming a retaliatory deity in his quote of an Old Testament verse- “’Vengeance is mine, I will repay’, says the Lord” (Romans 12), along with his “Lord Jesus returning in fire to destroy all who don’t believe my Christ myth” (Thessalonians, etc.).
(3) Restorative justice (again- no eye for eye, but love the offender/enemy).
Versus punitive, destroying justice (“Unbelievers will be punished with everlasting destruction”, again Thessalonians, etc.).
(4) Nonviolent resolution of problems (again, no violent retaliation against enemies).
Versus the violent destruction of apocalypse and fiery hell, and the violence in the demanded appeasement of deity by blood sacrifice for atonement- i.e. the dangerously inciting theme in the belief that if you murder the right people- i.e. sacrifice them- then you can make the future better (cloaking evil as good- people thinking that they are heroically doing good through violence and murder).
(5) Nontribal inclusion of all humanity (“sun and rain given freely to both bad and good people”).
Versus the highly tribal favoritism toward true believers and the discriminatory exclusion of unbelievers for not believing Paul’s Christ. Note the ultimate tribal divide illustrated in Revelation in the eternal division of humanity- i.e. people assigned either to heaven or to hell, as per the cosmic dualism of Zoroaster.
(6) Nondomination in relationships (“There must be no lording over others like the rulers of the pagans do. If you want to be great then serve others”).
Versus ultimate eternal domination by “Lord Christ” under his “rod of iron” totalitarianism (“every knee shall bow… He will rule them with an iron scepter”).
There is no love in threat, coercion, and domination of others.
(7) Non-dualism (God as the Oneness of Ultimate Reality that is love).
Versus eternal dualism (i.e. again, the cosmic tribal dualism of “God and Satan”, “heaven and hell”).
Further, ultimate Oneness leads to the logical conclusion that there is no separation of humanity from deity, what some describe as all humanity being indwelt/incarnated by God, the divine reality that is inseparable from the common human spirit. God as the Life-giving spirit inside each of us, and God’s nature as unconditional love then defining our true self/person.
(8) Another- Jesus referred to himself as a “son of man”– i.e. as just another ordinary imperfect human in common with all other humans. Not as a divine person or God sent from heaven.
Versus- Paul rejected the common humanness of Jesus in claiming that he was some form of Hellenist godman sent from heaven on a special mission from God. Paul reconstructed the human Jesus after the pattern of the godmen myths of the Pharaohs and Caesars- i.e. men born of virgins so as to avoid the “inherited sinfulness” stain.
Eventually, succeeding generations of Hellenist Christianity would further the Christology of Paul in claiming their “Jesus Christ” was sinlessly perfect, something the Historical Jesus had denied, for example, when he corrected someone with- “Why do you call me ‘good’. There is none good but God.”
The heretical Hellenist Christianity of Paul eventually reconstructed the fully and truly human Jesus into a full-fledged God and member of the Trinity.
And so on…
You cannot mix and merge such extreme opposites in the one and same person– i.e. in the merger of “Jesus Christ”- as that supremely oxymoronic combination creates such profound cognitive dissonance that you are left with a mental state akin to insanity or madness. And the egregious thing in such mixture is that the good elements (i.e. the Jesus insights) are distorted and buried by the primitive and darkening elements in the Christology of Paul.
Applying Christology to Jesus (i.e. the divinizing of a common man over the first few centuries of Christianity) has effectively buried the potency of his liberating insights, notably his stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory, non-apocalyptic, unconditionally loving God. This truth was expressed in his entirely new view of deity, and fortunately was included in the New Testament gospels in summaries of his statements (see Matthew 5, Luke 6).
The liberating potency of Jesus’ “stunning new theology” is blurred and “buried” (Thomas Jefferson, Leo Tolstory) because the larger New Testament context emphasizes Paul’s retaliatory, apocalyptic Christ and that dominating New Testament narrative overwhelms the central themes and message of Jesus.
Paul overturned and replaced Jesus’ wisdom sayings with his “secret wisdom of the Christ”. Paul corrected what he termed the “foolish worldly wisdom” of Jesus and his Jewish followers, like Apollos (see 1 Corinthians for Paul’s vilifying rant against the wisdom tradition of Jesus).
Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy both nailed the contradiction between Jesus and Paul in the bluntest of terms and few have been as clear and direct since, perhaps because their comments are highly offensive to true believer’s sensibilities.
Few since have embraced their clarification of the stark contrast between Jesus and Paul, preferring instead the religious reformism that tinkers around the edges and corrects nothing essential. Religious reformism avoids the central issue of theology- how Paul’s Christology utterly deformed the actual historical Jesus and his message.
And this illustrating the stunning new theology of Jesus:
This is what unconditional love feels like. They are the most profound statements of theology ever uttered.
To give some sense of what we are talking about when we use this term “unconditional love” to describe the stunning new theology of Jesus (i.e. that “God is unconditional love”) I have listed below some personal accounts from NDE people.
They try to describe the inexpressible with language that falls far short. These are people who have had first-hand experiences of a love that beyond human imagining. I quote these so that the repeated use of the term “unconditional” here will not lose its impact in relation to deity as some abstract-ish theological term with no sense of the wondrously transcendent nature of this divine love. The NDE accounts flesh out what Jesus actually meant when he introduced his new theology.
The NDE movement is the only movement that affirms the central theology and message of Jesus. No religion has ever communicated or presented the true unconditional nature of God to people. And no religion can do that because by their very nature all religions are conditional. Notably, the conditions of Christianity bury the unconditional theology of Jesus with the central atonement theology of Paul. Paul’s ultimate condition of blood sacrifice in the death of Christ effectively buried the diamond theology of Jesus.
And even Jesus did not make his theology as clear as the NDE people do. Their statements ought to constitute a new bible, a new scripture for the new theology that Jesus introduced. A list these accounts is all we need to inform and structure an entirely new spirituality for humanity.
Here are the NDE accounts affirming the unconditional love of Jesus’ theology, taken from the NDERF and IANDs sites:
“There is no judgment there. There is no punishment, no reward. We judge ourselves. In the life review we feel the effects of our actions on all others we have encountered. Their feelings become our own” (i.e. this speaks to the life review as a learning experience, to evaluate if we fulfilled our purpose to love in this world).
“I felt the presence of pure love… God is love, we are love, and love creates all that is… I was surrounded by pure love.”
“Love was everywhere. It permeated the afterlife.”
“I was loved unconditionally despite my faults and fears.”
“I knew the being I met was composed in its very atoms of a substance I can only call love and that substance created, it was a force or power… love is the only word I have…”
“It was total love. Everything is love.”
“Love is at the root of all… love is everything.”
“During the experience everything was love. I was love. The Light was love. It was awesome.”
“Each one of us is loved deeply and unconditionally by a totally loving God.”
“God is love become profoundly understood in the depths of our being.”
“There is no religion there- no separation based on religion… A place of pure love, ethereal beauty. Things were alive with energy…”
“I was enveloped in love, complete and unconditional love and compassion… I encountered a very powerful but totally loving Being.”
“It was a thousand times better than the love you experience on earth.”
“The greatest emphasis on this experience is LOVE. You are so totally engulfed with a love that does not exist in our physical world. No matter how deep a love you feel for your children it does not compare with this love. This love is the truest, purest, deepest, totally unconditional love that you could EVER imagine. It knocks your socks off… it is not comprehended with your mind. It is FELT by your soul. And that immense feeling of this perfect love shoots straight into your heart, as a feeling that you experience. It can bring your soul to its knees. It is totally overwhelming in the beset way imaginable.”
“The love I felt was like nothing I have ever experienced before. I was enveloped by this light and felt one with everything, all seeing, all knowing. ‘God is love’- the love was like an energy that connected every molecule in the universe.”
“Our life here on earth is to experience physical pleasure or pain, to have a physical experience. All to progress and grow in some way. The main purpose here is to love.”
“All I felt was total acceptance of me with absolutely no judgment at all. God is all love, completely love… God does not judge us.”
“We come into this world to gather experience which makes each of us unique… We are meant to contribute love to the world in one way or another.”
“Each of us is loved deeply and unconditionally by a totally loving God.”
“I felt God as an all-encompassing presence- complete, total and unconditional love in its highest form. I was surrounded by God’s unconditional love, which was so much greater than human love. I was given knowledge that God is real and loves me unconditionally.”
“Everything was love. Love is at the root of all. Love is everything.”
“I was loved and it was unconditional. We on earth have no concept of true love.”
“The love I felt was unique. I felt completely safe, that nothing could happen. I was no longer in pain and all my worries that I had, fears, were left behind with my body. This love is something few can even get an idea what it is like. It is so powerful.”
“Love is what the other side is based on.”
“It is unconditional love.”
“The bright white light was complete and total unconditional perfect love.”
“I felt total love, unconditional love. Absolutely no fear at all.”
“The entire experience was one of unfathomable love.”
“We are loved not with human love but in a universal way. God is in all and we are one with God. There is no need to search for God, the Divine, or Source. It is within us, in all of us. Even those who upset us, they are here to move us to a new path of growth.”
“Love is all that is… the word love is only the closest word we have. Its not really accurate but I cannot do any better with our language.”
“We are here for a purpose… life is to learn love.”
“Love was everywhere. I felt it through and through.”
“During the experience everything was love. I was love. The Light was love.”
“I was enveloped with unconditional love and knew from the experience that was how I should live. It is our essence.”
“All is love and everything is love.”
“Unconditional love and forgiveness is what the universe and life are all about.”
“Love was the most powerful, permeating feeling. I learned that love is everything, the oneness that binds us all together. God is in every one of us as love.”
“Love is what life is all about.”
“I felt the love of God is in each of us and that love is unconditional.”
“The overwhelming vibe from the Light was love. It felt like love was the glue holding everything together.”
“God is not about religion or rituals. No human can ever love with the love I felt in that Light. It is all-consuming, all forgiving, nothing matches it.”
“God’s love is pure and unconditional. This came through very clearly.”
“I was safe and surrounded by love that I could not even fathom.”
“I was wrapped up in the indescribable bliss I felt from head to toe. It was not like love on earth. It was intensified by a trillion. It makes you happy times a trillion.”
“God is love.”
“It is beyond words. I have not seen that kind of love in this life.”
“Love is all there is.”
“God is love and everything that exists is because of the pure unconditional love. I was surrounded by a pure love.”
“A feeling of overwhelming love.”
And many more…
(You can multiply similar testimonies by millions. Estimates are that some 5-8% of the human population have had these NDEs. I know of and have talked to many people, both family, friends, and even strangers that I have met who have had these experiences. These experiences are not dreams or hallucinations or whatever some like to dismiss them as.)
Frank Herbert on power attracting pathological personalities.
Does this help to understand why collectivist approaches and systems, that centralize power more than other systems, inevitably end in totalitarianism that ends with the murder of millions and ruin of entire societies? Always the outcome of the few refusing to share power.
Hayek’s solution was the decentralizing of power, distributing power among competing individuals as the safest protection against totalitarianism and best way to protect freedom and democracy.
Need I add this is best done in contemporary liberal democracies by lessening taxation (returning the free choice of how to distribute personal resources to individual citizens) and decreasing regulations (decreasing state interference and control over individual citizens and their businesses).
The Instagram post:
“All governments suffer from a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible” Frank Herbert, Dune (a novel)
Quotes from the Instagram post:
“The quote comes from Chapterhouse: Dune
“Frank Herbert’s idea challenges that of Lord Acton, the 19th century English historian and moral thinker best known for the line, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Herbert’s view shifts the emphasis away from corruption caused by power itself and instead suggests that power attracts people who are already predisposed to corruption.
“This closely parallels Friedrich Hayek’s argument in The Road to Serfdom where he claims that centralized systems tend to elevate the most unscrupulous individuals, a pattern he associated with the political extremes of the WW1 and WW2 era.
“Both perspectives ultimately suggest that power does not simply corrupt but selects for those most willing to wield it.”
(End of Instagram quotes)
Jordan Peterson has stated that political power attracts psychopathic people who seek the opportunity to dominate, control, and abuse others. Psychopathy scholar, Robert Hare, has also noted the presence of psychopathic people in prominent positions in politics, business, sports, and elsewhere.