The Unconditional Human Spirit

Section topic: Our mind/consciousness is not in our brains. We are inseparable from the greater Oneness of a creating/sustaining Consciousness that is transcendent and stunningly inexpressible “no conditions love” that permeates and sustains this material reality. We are not our animal brain with its impulses to tribalism, domination, and destruction of differing others. That inner “evil” is shaped by religious deity (i.e. tribal, dominating, destructive) that validates such behavior.

The creating Consciousness is not neutral but has the intrinsic nature of unconditional love. Historical Jesus got this. Paul’s Christ then buried the central unconditional theme of Jesus with the same old theologies of tribalism, domination, and destruction (apocalypse, hell).

New: See also Chat’s response to the Greene video on consciousness research and its comments on the “Great Moral Divide”- i.e. whether fundamental reality is just some form of emergent consciousness (i.e. quantum field-like) or does it have a moral character.

Note Chat’s comments on “The Great Dualism: Competing Models of Consciousness and Reality”

“At its deepest level, the ‘Great Dualism’ is not merely a conflict between moral systems— revenge versus love, domination versus service. It is rooted in fundamentally different understandings of what reality is and what consciousness is.”

Chat then discusses “The Two Deep Structures of Reality”, whether it is fundamentally impersonal, or personal and moral. Read the rest of the opening comment here

As the title points out- “Christ-ianity” presents Paul’s theology of a wrathful, retaliatory God that Carl Jung correctly stated was “a false image of God”. As Jung told a Catholic priest- “Your religion has got God completely wrong”. Christianity presented a false image of God.

And yes, the very different theology and message of Historical Jesus is included in the New Testament, but as Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy stated, that “diamond” is buried by the larger NT context that gives dominance to Paul’s opposite Christology. That is the great contradiction of Christianity.

Further, as Chat and Grok outline in sections below, the outcomes of Paul’s apocalyptic millennial Christ have been devastatingly destructive in human societies across history. Historians Richard Landes (“Heaven On Earth”), and others, have detailed the influence of apocalyptic millennialism in carrying societies into mass-death crusades, i.e. Marxist violent revolutions, Nazi horrors, and now the destructive decarbonization salvation schemes of climate alarmism. Add the outcome of the very same “salvation through destruction” complex of ideas shaping the Islamic theocracy crusade to overthrow liberal democracy. Endless rehashes of the same old.

The response? Get the “Q Wisdom Sayings” message of Historical Jesus clear. Pull the “diamond” out of the “dung” (Jefferson’s terms). We know what went wrong and how to make it right again.

I state below in a brief autobio insert– “This site is the outcome of my battle with my personal ‘monster/enemy’.” Read the rest of the opening comment here

See this new material below: “The long-standing dualism between revenge and unconditional love has not remained confined to religion— it has shaped the psychological foundations of modern political systems.”

Qualifiers on material below:

I have a quibble with Carl Jung in regard to his research on human images of God, and how people develop these. It appears that he misses the stunningly inexpressible nature of the love factor or feature in our images or understanding of God. The inexpressibly wondrous unconditional love of God that the NDE people do much better at trying to express. Jung appears to lean a bit too “academic” and hence dry and lifeless on such things. For a man who had an actual NDE himself, Jung appears to miss the importance of this critical element in the “experience” that he advocates as fundamental to knowing God (i.e. though he does mention it in passing among other factors in the mix).

Also: This new AI stuff posted below adds more to our understanding of what is wrong in our societies today at the deepest levels of human minds and personalities- i.e. what motivates people to embrace certain beliefs that result in harmful outcomes for others. Beliefs that incite our tribal impulse to oppose demonized others as “enemies” that must be defeated, dominated and controlled, and even destroyed in order to get our particular salvation fantasies. Grok and Chat take my cues to explore Carl Jung’s take on all this, on how people acquire their images of God that bring out the worst in many people and alternative images that can bring out the best in us.

Also, this further request for Chat: “You use Jung’s term “the Shadow” without explaining exactly what Jung means by that term. Could you give a very brief summary of what Jung meant by that? Would it be what religious traditions call “sin” or “sinful human nature”? Or what my site refers to as the animal inheritance of an “Evil triad” of impulses, notably to tribalism, domination, and retaliatory destruction?” Read the rest of the opening comment here

Grok has done a great job below explaining how bad ideas in our major religious traditions have promoted “conquest, crusades, and demonization of others as enemies”. Grok details why people continue to embrace these bad ideas (i.e. locating identity too rigidly in them) and how we can free ourselves to embrace better alternatives.

Grok’s homework below illustrates that AI will not become the new apocalyptic threat as many are trying to frame it. To the contrary, Grok performing as it has below will counter those hysterically claiming that AI is the next great apocalyptic threat. Some have speculated that as the climate hysteria appears to be dying, apocalyptic prophets are trying to gin up the next great alarm to keep people traumatized with fear.

Note new material below

The main complex of bad ideas dealt with on this site are not the only factors driving the human history of violence and war. But they are significant and we have past millennia of evidence of the harm that has resulted from people who have held these ideas in their belief systems and traditions.

Also, Grok offers more here on the Q Wisdom Sayings research, the oral tradition of Q that is the closest we get to what Jesus actually believed and taught. And comment on the moderation of Christianity in the modern era. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Note below the link to a new article by Michael Shellenberger on the leftist bias in AI models. Also, his apparent call, as he has done often before, for a revival of an undifferentiated Christianity in response to the abandonment of classic liberal democracy in the West. In response to these calls for a revival of undifferentiated Christianity, I’ve included a reposting of my “Notable contradictions between Jesus and Paul’s Christ”.

“Glenn Greenwald vs. Coleman Hughes Debate: Does Israel Control U.S. Foreign Policy?” on Coleman Hughe’s podcast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEvJQoowZUI

Not to stick my nose in, but Glen Greenwald does not seem to get the point that the US’s apparent favoritism of Israel has varied nuanced complexities like the fact that Israel is a liberal democracy struggling to survive against enemies who are committed to the extermination of Jews and will keep attacking Israel until they fulfill that theological commitment (again, “It’s the theology, stupid”). They pose an “existential” threat and Israel most often has been responding defensively when, in Greenwald’s terms, it has “attacked its neighbors in endless wars”.

Coleman is right to note there is some sort of “psychological bias” in the anti-Israel arguments of people like Greenwald. Not racism, as in antisemitism, but something “ideological” and apparently almost subconscious.

I would point to histories of Judaism that note this goes back millennia, even to ancient Egypt that dehumanized Jews as “disease/vermin” to be eliminated. The author of one book said that nations, across past millennia, have felt obligated to embrace antisemitism as an element of their national identity (“We are against the Jews”). One of history’s oldest hatreds. Does this also explain in part Greenwald and Tucker Carlson’s biases? Read the rest of the opening comment here

Many complain of meaninglessness today, fueled by depression, anxiety, despair, etc., and vented in hedonism, all in a modern era of unprecedented abundance, the “best time ever to be alive on earth”. Where I can get too wordy (see my version with more detail further below) AI does the “chop-chop” of summarizing points more succinctly (i.e. less verbiage, kinda like less foilage).

See also Grok’s good detail further below on applying the ideals/points here to our individual life stories, how we can relate to others nontribally, with non-dominating treatment of others, with non-retaliatory responses. Grok draws on the psychological/behavioral insights of many others from across history.

Here are a few preface quotes from the full outline of my “rough copy” essay posted at the bottom of Grok’s responses that begin just below…

My initial challenge to Grok- Please analyze and summarize the material in my essay below in your own words. Perhaps shorten more.

My ‘rough copy’ essay deals with the primary impulse of humans to meaning and purpose. It suggests framing our personal meaning/purpose impulse, our personal narrative and life story, within the larger meta-story of humanity making the exodus out of an animal past to find the freedom to live as maturely human in liberal democracy civilization.

The larger story of humanity gives us a fundamental template on which to base our personal impulses for meaning and purpose, the template to frame our understanding of why we are here and what is our purpose. Recognizing the meta-story of humanity will provide a framework to then frame our personal story as microcosms of the great human exodus from an animal past to live truly human existence in civilization. Our individual stories are our personal experiences of that grand narrative but lived on an intensely personal scale. In our personal lives we fight and conquer the “monster” of the enslaving animal impulses inside us in order to experience the freedom to think, feel, and act as maturely human. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Note below my reminder “Insert” on the culpability of all three western religious traditions for holding the core “bad idea” themes that validate and motivate the fringe extremists in their traditions. Just taking another poke at tribalism and its tendency to devalue, degrade, even demonize the differing other and, hence, once viewed as some form of “lesser”, then deserving of severe punishment and other forms of dehumanizing treatment.

See also below- “Doing some theology with the AI guys on transcendence and immanence in deity”. AI interacting with Bob Brinsmead, one of the best theological minds on this planet.

Two main threats to liberal democracy, Wendell Krossa (Grok and Google AI comment below on the collectivist threat)

Preface: Who warned us that we can never fully relax our obligation to maintain awareness that freedom has to be constantly guarded, and unfortunately sometimes fought for in order to preserve it?

“Unfortunate” because of the imperfect world that we live in, sometimes facing threat from opponents deformed by psychopathy, sometimes deformed by seriously bad ideas, among other possible factors. The point below is about the need to be fully aware of the actual nature of the threats to liberal democracy today. Hence, my insistence on confronting the core element of theology.

Do we properly understand the two great threats to liberal democracy freedom today- i.e. (1) theocracy crusades and (2) neo-collectivism that come at us through diverse variants? Both persistently come at liberal democracies through varied and sometimes insidious new versions (i.e. deceptively, dishonestly) that are continually mutating, often constructed to hide real intentions. At other times the proponents of these systems publicly admit and declare their intention to undermine, overthrow, and eventually eliminate liberal democracy (e.g. this has been stated by the Chinese totalitarians- see Grok comments below). Read the rest of the opening comment here

Quote from below: “Universal archetypal templates… have wired human storytelling and belief systems from the dawn of culture onward. These aren’t “quoted” or formally credited across generations; they just keep resurfacing because they’re baked into the collective human psyche, as Joseph Campbell (drawing straight from Carl Jung) mapped out so powerfully…

“Campbell’s core insight— yes, exactly in the spirit of what you’re summarizing— is that the world’s myths aren’t random or isolated. They’re variations on the same underlying patterns (the ‘monomyth’ or hero’s journey at the personal level, but also the grand cosmogonic myths at the civilizational level). He called it the one great story humanity keeps telling itself in different masks: ‘Myths are the world’s dreams,’ springing from the collective unconscious— those inherited, primordial images and structures we all carry, regardless of time or culture. The hero’s journey, the fall from paradise, the apocalyptic battle, the redemptive purge… same template, endlessly recycled”, Grok.

And this (from Grok’s comments below) on the Muslim Brotherhood’s commitment and plan to overthrow western liberal democracies from within…

“This directly references the Muslim Brotherhood’s own internal 1991 document, the ‘Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America’ (authored by Mohamed Akram for the Shura Council; entered into U.S. court evidence in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial). Key excerpt: ‘The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [MB] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.’

“The memo frames this as a phased ‘settlement’ and ‘enablement’ strategy: building an observant Muslim base, creating organizations, and adapting to local conditions— non-coercive and ‘gentle’ (infiltration via institutions, media, politics, and freedoms) in the West, while violence remains the norm elsewhere until the movement is strong enough. It explicitly calls this a Muslim’s ‘destiny’ of jihad wherever they are. Other National Post contributors (e.g., referencing similar ‘stealth jihad’ or ‘civilisation jihad’ tactics) have echoed this, noting the MB’s global network uses Western openness against it before shifting to more direct coercion where feasible.”

See articles by Conrad Black and Vivian Bercovici at bottom expressing evidence-based confidence that the US/Israeli war on Iran is producing the desired outcome, contrary to the usual negative reporting by mainstream media. Read the rest of the opening comment here

Do you really want to properly and thoroughly resolve the ongoing problem of theocracy-driven wars? Do you really want to defeat the “idea” that General Nagata said had to be defeated if we are to properly end the repeated ISIS-like eruptions of violence? Then we have to face the fact that “Its the theology, stupid”. And what exactly is the nature of that “theology”?

Also, see Nellie Bowles’s summary below of apocalyptic prophet Paul Ehrlich illustrating the 100% historical failure rate of apocalyptic. Ehrlich preached his unique take on apocalyptic millennialism or “salvation (save the world) through violent destruction (notably against humanity)”.

Note my quibble-level (maybe a bit more intense) tug of war with Grok at the bottom of this section over the climate file and contributing factors (i.e. human or natural) to climate change.

Note: I also posted this insert further below and will repeat it here. It needs to be stated whenever I promote one of the central topics here- i.e. the unconditional ideal as the most helpful guide that humanity has discovered to help us defuse ‘eye for eye’ cycles and maintain peace and order in our societies. I illustrate the practical usefulness of this ideal with, for example, the approach of Nelson Mandela in de-escalating the push for retaliatory treatment of former oppressors in South Africa. It worked at societal scale to avoid civil war there. But he also held former oppressors responsible with a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Unfortunately, many respond to the term “unconditional” as affirming some form of pacifism in the face of violence and abuse. That misconception requires a repeated qualifying of what unconditional involves. Read the rest of the opening comment here

How liberal democracy defangs/defuses the impulses to violence and war by countering apocalyptic narratives with their Zoroastrian dualism of a war of good true believers against evil enemies.

All three AI make the good point that there is no ultimate satisfying resolution when retaliation is engaged. As Grok says, “Short term- sweet. Long term- sour.”

Quotes from below…

Google AI:

“Retaliation is a self-defeating, short-term coping mechanism that creates cycles of conflict and offers little lasting satisfaction. Instead of providing closure, it keeps the emotional wound ‘open and fresh,’ perpetuating anger rather than diminishing it. Retaliation often brings more harm than benefit to the person seeking it, sometimes leading to guilt, shame, or further social alienation… rarely leads to genuine resolution.”

Grok:

“The impulse to retaliate— often called revenge or vengeful aggression— as a universal, evolved human response that serves specific adaptive functions but frequently backfires in practice. It emerges across evolutionary psychology, social psychology, neuroscience, and personality research, with consistent findings that it feels instinctively compelling (and even pleasurable) yet rarely delivers lasting relief… Read the rest of the opening comment here

“The Beatles’ Fastest Single, Recorded LIVE to the World”, Inside the Beat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DvdhqeUwTc

John Lennon on writing “All You Need Is Love” for a worldwide BBC telecast:

“It sort of dawned on me that love was the answer when I was young, on the Beatle’s ‘Rubber Soul’ album. That first expression of it was a song called ‘The word is love’. ‘The word is love’ seemed like the underlying theme to the universe, or to everything that was worthwhile got down to this love, love, love thing. That’s what I referred to ‘The word is love’ on Rubber Soul straight through to ‘All you need is love’.”

Ringo- “We were like that at the time- ‘All you need is love’. We were trying to promote that.”

Lennon: “I still believe ‘All you need is love’. I still believe in the fact that is what we all need.”

George Harrison: “Well, we thought we’ll just sing ‘All you need is love’ because it’s a kind of subtle bit of PR for… um, God basically.”

Paul McCartney: “’All you need is love’ is still a very important statement. And hopefully always will be. It’s a kind of timeless statement.”

Lennon: “It’s called love and there’s nothing to split that up. And, but that’s the secret you know. Its all true, folks. ‘All you need is love’.”

(End of Beatle’s quotes)

Now: A reposting of a revised summary of the human meta-story

“The ultimate liberation narrative: Our exodus from enslavement in animal existence to full liberation in human civilization”, Wendell Krossa

(Or- “Our foundational story: The meta-narrative of our journey from retaliation to unconditional love”) Read the rest of the opening comment here

More probing the psychology of belief, and the refusal of some to admit to evidence that exposes the blinding dogmatism in relation to foundational beliefs, etc.

The linked podcasts and articles below point back to a common thing, people who have embraced the same “salvation through destruction” narratives in their religious and “secular/ideological” variants- whether the theocrats of Iran, the collectivists/Marxists, or the climate devotees believing that they are “saving the world” through destroying societies with decarbonization. All are fundamentally variants on the same old religious narrative of salvation through destruction, a profoundly religious narrative held by the theocratic true believers (e.g. Iran) as well as the more materialist true believers (i.e. climate crusaders, collectivists).

Springboard podcasts/articles:

This first podcast offers some good insights on the psychology behind those willing to live with a lie till they die because its foundational to their worldview, to their very self and hence, to their existence.

This also illustrates what Kristian Niemietz pointed to in his quote that summarized the research of social psychologist Jonathan Haidt: “Emotional satisfaction, not rational thinking, and despite contrary evidence, dominates our choice in beliefs.”

Most of us have no idea why we embrace the beliefs that we hold. They just feel “right, true, just, good”, or whatever else we feel that validates them. We have long been conditioned by deeply embedded subconscious archetypes, that were long ago shaped by the primitive mythological themes of our ancestors, to just instinctively embrace modern versions of these same archetypes even when irrational and despite contrary evidence.

“Jesse Kelly on Obama, Communism & Why the Left Hates America”, Adam Corolla

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vw1PJqbSeDo

I will intermix my paraphrasing comments with their points: Read the rest of the opening comment here