On a second reading of The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit by E Michael Jones

Local Daimyo Sunday 11 Jun 2017

A Gleaming Leprosy said: ↑

I don't think in most paganisms it is of central importance what abstract beliefs you have. Like Taleb says, religion is primarily pisteic not epistemic. "Yoga" comes from the same Indo-European root as the word "yoke". Another hypothesized etymology gives "religion" a very similar origin to yoga, from "religare".

During the communist period Mongolian Buddhists would claim to be atheists, and this was true; they don't believe that Gods exist, because they believe Nothing exists. This does not prevent them from engaging in deity yoga where imaginary rituals are preformed, and imaginary sacrificial offerings are considered just as effective as "real" ones.

All non-Abrahamic religions are either anthropomorphizati0ns of natural forces and "disciplines" relating to them or pragmatic superstitions (often taken to pretty sophisticated levels). Or cults similar to modern cults.

Thoughts Sunday 11 Jun 2017

Notice the favorable Jewish perception of Buddhists.

Buddhist Jews (JewsBus):

http://newvoices.org/2014/05/09/jewbu/
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Alan-Lew-brought-meditation-to-Judaism-dies-3254603.php
http://www.kveller.com/my-daughter-is-a-jewbu-yes-that-is-a-thing/

I'm going to bet that the Jewish perception of Asians is even higher, and this feeling is mutual.

The modern analogue of Buddhism is perhaps Freudianism: both are based on quackery, gibberish and introspection. Buddhism "completes" Freudianism.

The modern analogue of Confucianism is perhaps shit-liberalism, which is the height of journalistic fear-mongering. For shit-liberalism is characterized by its method, not its creed. Confucians (intellectual totalitarians) often use this pattern of thinking: that if an idea is "dangerous" in some respect, it should be banned. Hence, biology should be banned if it causes social discord (wwaaaaaacism). Technology should be banned, b/c it looks "complex" and hence might be dangerous. (Never mind that the judgement about which ideas are 'dangerous', rather than just seeming to be, is a complicated skill and should only be entrusted to a tiny elite who have demonstrated that skill in a wide range of cases. Instead, we should stir up the mob against any new ideas.)

Modern shit-liberalism might actually solidify into a kind of millennia-long "Confucian" state-sponsored religion that lasts for thousands of years, and even far after the entire human species devolves far beyond the point of Idiocracy. Jews would be perfectly fine with this, of course.

Ash Monday 12 Jun 2017

Jones implies that only conversion to Christianity can make a Jew non-Jewish, and obviously the practice of Buddism does not. But I suspect this is more a matter of exclusive membership pertaining to the Magian Consensus; one can only cease to be a Jew by the treasonous act of joining another Magian 'nation'. Surely a Jew who became a Muslim, or a Parsee, would also cease to be a Jew. (I recognise that Western Christianity is not a Magian Consensus, but it appears to be regarded as one due to its origins.)

Rootin' Teuton Tuesday 13 Jun 2017

This is basically correct as far as I can tell and is the point of the parable of the absentee landlord, Matthew 21:33-46.

Hear ye another parable. There was a man an householder, who planted a vineyard, and made a hedge round about it, and dug in it a press, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen; and went into a strange country. [34] And when the time of the fruits drew nigh, he sent his servants to the husbandmen that they might receive the fruits thereof. [35] And the husbandmen laying hands on his servants, beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.

[36] Again he sent other servants more than the former; and they did to them in like manner. [37] And last of all he sent to them his son, saying: They will reverence my son. [38] But the husbandmen seeing the son, said among themselves: This is the heir: come, let us kill him, and we shall have his inheritance. [39] And taking him, they cast him forth out of the vineyard, and killed him. [40] When therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to those husbandmen?

[41] They say to him: He will bring those evil men to an evil end; and will let out his vineyard to other husbandmen, that shall render him the fruit in due season. [42] Jesus saith to them: Have you never read in the Scriptures: The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? By the Lord this has been done; and it is wonderful in our eyes. [43] Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereo f. [44] And whosoever shall fall on this stone, shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it shall grind him to powder. [45] And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they knew that he spoke of them .

Pretty straightforward.

As to why covenant with these people: God has a sense of humor, and He loves to draw good out of evil. Consider the many saints He made out of sinners; that he turned a persecutor into an apostle. It's perfectly consistent with His way of doing things to draw the living Logos out of a nation that rejected it time and again (and that always will).

On a second reading of The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit by E Michael Jones

4 posts