New Testament altruism

The “white race” has no one to blame, but themselves.

Johan Hoeff

jesus

Throughout the latest two millennia most whites have believed in the message of the gospel, and its moral grammar, right? Contrast Hoeff’s quote with the popular mantra in some nationalist circles, “There is nothing inherently wrong with Whites.”

Before jumping angrily to this thread, please take a look at the discussion in the previous thread, preferably by becoming familiar with some of my linked articles there, including my interpretation of the deranged altruism in Wuthering Heights.

Alternatively, see Ben Klassen’s views on Christianity in general and the Sermon on the Mount in particular. Like Hoeff, Klassen maintained that, ultimately, whites are to blame for our current predicaments.

Jesus was a Jewish liberal

Excerpted from the chapter “My Own Spiritual Awakening”
of Nature’s Eternal Religion by Ben Klassen:

 

Bens_book

Now I began to realize that the whole basis of this age-old struggle was race. It was the Jewish race using all the weapons at its command, and it did have a huge arsenal to destroy, mongrelize and enslave the mongrelized product of the White Race.

At this time I had not yet suspected that their most powerful weapon of all was their skillful use of Christianity on the White Race.

I decided to form a new political party polarized around the issue of the White Race. This I did, and formed the Nationalist White Party.

I had the immediate hostility of the Birch Society, which did not at all surprise me. What did surprise me now was I found that the strongest opposition came not from the Jews (as I had expected) but from the Christians. Every time we would discuss the issue of race, somehow or other Christianity and Christian principles would crop up so that in the end we wound up in a hassle about religion rather than trying to get down to the basic issue of the struggle against the Jews. This despite the fact that I had taken a pro-Christian stand. Continually I was told that the Jews were God’s chosen people; that the niggers, too, were God’s creatures; that racial discrimination was un-Christian, that “our Savior” was a Jew, the bible said “I will curse them that curse thee, and bless them that bless thee,” etc., etc.

This was a surprising new development. Whereas up to this time, I had regarded Christianity as something rather innocuous, and perhaps a time-consuming nuisance, it now suddenly hit me like a bolt out of the blue that Christianity was one of the most powerful weapons that the Jews had in their arsenal.

Now I began to study the bible all over again and particularly focused on the Sermon on the Mount. To my surprise I found that it contained nothing but real bad, suicidal advice.

Whereas before, I had heard and read all the bits and pieces of it, it had never occurred to me to examine what this kind of advice would do to a nation and to a race. Now I began to realize that such suicidal advice as “turn the other cheek,” “love your enemies,” “sell all that thou hast and give it to the poor,” “judge not lest ye be judged,” and “resist not evil,” was real suicidal advice. I now dug deeper into it and I found that the so-called Apostles, as well as the man purported to be Christ himself, were all of Jewish origin. Strangely, though, they had never sold their suicidal ideas to the Jews—on the contrary, they had sold it to the greatest civilization of ancient times, namely the Romans.

jesusThen a lot of other things began to fall into place. Looking at Roman history it became clear to me that whereas Rome had established a great civilization, had conquered the world, was completely supreme, that when Christianity hit it like a plague, it began to crumble and fall apart. And after studying the underlying suicidal ideas that Christianity had perpetrated upon the Romans, I could easily understand why the Romans no longer cared to defend their Empire, nor to meet their earthly responsibilities. It became clear to me why the whole great White Empire disintegrated under the influence of this new Jewish poison.

I now felt like an excited detective who unexpectedly had stumbled on the greatest mystery, the most sinister conspiracy in the history of mankind. I began to look more and more towards the eternal laws of Nature for the solution. I began to study the Old and the New Testament with feverish and renewed interest. I studied the history of the races—the great White Race, the Jews, the niggers. I traced the rise and decline of civilizations. Like a detective, I began to feel that all the pieces, at last, were beginning to fall into place.

The more I dug into this, the more all the mosaic pieces began to fit together. I began to get a multitude of answers to questions that had eluded me throughout my life.

Studying Nature’s laws, studying religions and studying history and adding this to the experiences of my own lifetime, I found that I had finally made a breakthrough. My search had been rewarded by a multitude of answers—including the big one—namely, what is our purpose in life. The more I studied the Jewish plague, Christianity, religion, and the laws of Nature, the more compelling the solution thrust itself upon me. I suddenly realized that I had achieved a devastating breakthrough that was sweeping in its implications, compelling in its simplicity, and so overwhelmingly obvious that I wondered why I hadn’t seen the picture a long time ago.

It became abundantly clear to me that what the White Race needed was a completely new approach to the whole problem of extricating itself from the sinister Jewish conspiracy. And in order to get this new approach it seemed overwhelmingly clear that what the White Race really needed was a new religion, a new philosophy of life and a new Weltanschauung. It also occurred to me that my whole life experience had taught me and prepared me to do this fundamental job, namely, of formulating the new religion that was so necessary to the survival of the White Race. It also became overwhelmingly clear to me that to found a new party based on race while trying to coexist with Jewish Christianity was impossible. Every weapon that we needed in such a struggle was already undermined and neutralized by the basic concepts of Christianity itself.

I began to discuss my ideas with friends. I argued and debated with Christian preachers. To my further surprise, I found them completely at a loss to explain the numerous basic questions I threw at them, and usually they became hopelessly trapped in their own set of lies. I corresponded with former Kosher Konservative friends of mine and they, too, either conceded my position on Jews and Christianity, or were hopelessly driven to the wall.

It was then I decided to compile my creed into a book. I decided to formulate a new religion for the White Race that would lead it out of the quagmire of Jewish entrapment, out of despair and degradation, and into the bright light of greatness, to the heights of the wonderful destiny that Nature herself, in her great wisdom, had destined for this magnificent race.

 

_______________________

Chechar’s note:

It’s too late to form a new religion, but we could at least follow Manu Rodríguez wise advice.

After AD: Before and after the Führer

Or:

The fall of the New Constantinople


In the thread on Judeo reductionism, Roger commented today:

Think of the fall of Byzantium. This may have been seen as a great calamity for Europe but on reflection, this helped concentrate power in western Europe and reinvigorated it. Likewise, the utter destruction of America may be the best thing for the White Man… but obviously anyone within those territories will have differing views.

Great point on the need of the fall of Constantinople (which, incidentally, was already too mongrelized ethnically by the time when Mehmed’s cannons made a huge hole on its walls).

I have observed, in the three and a half years that I have been active over white nationalist boards, that quite a few nationalists are infinitely more immature than the leaders of the National Socialist regime insofar as religion is concerned. Even long before the Nazis America was larger and more prosperous economically but more primitive spiritually (just compare German to American music). Genuine spirituality cannot be measured through the American way. Believing in traditional religion or new age nonsense is not enlightening but psychological dissociation.

If homo Americanus is indeed homo Judaicus as Tomislav Sunić maintains, the only way that Americans and Canadians change their so-called spiritual ways is that Murka burns after the dollar crashes and all of their worldwide hegemony be lost. In this New World Order scenario the German people will have a last chance to reclaim their (presently) murdered self-esteem, as a blogger of Germanic origin stated in the post that I have linked the most, “The Red Giant.”

After what the Anglo-Saxons did in the 1940s the only way that these people could possibly atone for their sins is to get rid of the Anno Domini calendar, the one that betokens the birth of “Jesus”—a Latinized, post-Exilic modification of the Hebrew Yĕhōšuă, (Joshua)—as a model for Aryans. In fact, they must get rid of the Jewish god altogether and, instead, base history on the death of Hitler—not on the day when he was born—: a genuine human, all too human model for the white peoples. Only thus will the crime that the Allied forces perpetrated in the century when we were born be remembered for posterity. Books like Hellstorm must be expanded a thousandfold by future scholars in landmark works, just as the Gulag Archipelago functioned like a stake through the hearts of deranged French leftists when I was much younger.

I know that on this issue I am alone among the white nationalists of this continent, which are still stuck in Judeo-Christian values. Today, for example, I received an e-mail that Greg Johnson delivered to all subscribers of Counter-Currents’ newsletter that mentioned Matt Parrott. Although Greg is supposedly an anti-Christian and Matt an Orthodox Christian, axiologically these two Americans are almost exactly on the same page. Greg for one claims to be a fascist in his webzine but he de facto functions like a conservative, as I have pointed out in what is perhaps the most emblematic post of WDH. After the death of William Luther Pierce no American nationalist that I know has transvaluated Christian values back to Aryan values, at least not in such a direct and unabashed way as Pierce did.

My philosophy results from my brutal honesty: Don’t take seriously this politically-correct, new generation of American white nationalists. They don’t feel the same hatred towards the New Constantinople that Pierce felt. As long as, unlike him, they don’t bring Nietzschean axiology to its ultimate consequences, they will continue to function as reactionary conservatives instead of genuine revolutionaries.

Pace the American New rightists, the New Constantinople will fall soon. The commenter Deutscher recently linked at another WDH thread an article that pointed out that it is common that dying empires unravel with unholy speed: a single year for Portugal, two years for the Soviet Union, eight years for France, eleven years for the Ottomans, seventeen years for Great Britain… I predict that the United States will fall in about the same time that the other empire that eventually liberated the blacks fell: Portugal. After all, Austrian economists predict that the collapse of the American dollar will unfold very, very rapidly, with hyperinflation leading to the collapse of all of the US government’s power. (If you don’t believe it and want to discuss the issues, please do it in a thread that has received zero comments: here.)

The good news is that imperial decline tends to have a remarkably demoralizing impact on a society especially after economic privation.

Only decades after the coming eschaton and the ensuing chaos and cure for humility for North Americans could a revaluation of all Judeo-Christian values be manifested by means of replacing the Gregorian calendar by the new one. Only such a cultural shock will convey the westerners in general and the North Americans in particular the eschatological sign that the Christian era, which inadvertently had been responsible for the Judaization of the West after Luther, is over. Like the author of “The Red Giant” I believe that the age of all those centuries since the founder of Constantinople handed over the Roman Empire to his bishops is coming to an end. In the new era no more white children will be taught of the feats of Moses and David and Yĕhōšuă (“Jesus”). Instead, they will be taught the doings of Vercingetorix and Hermann and Hitler—even when these Aryans died most tragically while defending their people.

Covington in uniform

Novelist Harold Covington in uniform

For that reason alone, yesterday I added excerpts of a novel that conveys the feeling of what a future Nationalist Socialist Republic would look in the American Northwest, just in case that the Anglo-Saxons do indeed atone for their mortal sins.

In the following days I will be adding more and more excerpted chapters. Enjoy the coming entries or, still better, obtain a hard copy of a novel where the Swastika will be used in the uniforms of the Seattle and Portland military and police.

Ex Gladio Libertas!
Anno Hitleris 68

The historical Jesus

1.- Gospel Fictions

2.- Jesus: The Evidence

3.- The historical Jesus
and the Platonic Fallacy

St Matthew (painted in ca. 800 A.D.)
Museum of Historical Art, Vienna
Note the way in which the Saint
is wrapped in his Roman toga

Published in: on December 24, 2012 at 2:46 pm  Comments (3)  

Ian Wilson’s chapter

Read what a well-known,
contemporary Christian author
says about the historical Jesus
(in contrast to the Christ of the dogma):





The fallibility of the Gospels (1)

The fallibility of the Gospels (2)

The fallibility of the Gospels (3)

The fallibility of the Gospels (4)

The fallibility of the Gospels (5)

The fallibility of the Gospels (6)

The fallibility of the Gospels (7)

The fallibility of the Gospels (8)

Published in: on July 13, 2012 at 11:35 am  Leave a Comment  

Ten books that changed my mind


1. Maxfield Parrish Poster Book

2. The Sickle

3. Laing and Anti-Psychiatry

4. Childhood’s End

5. A Skeptic’s Handbook of Parapsychology

6. The Relentless Question

7. Final Analysis

8. The Gulag Archipelago

9. For Your Own Good

10. The Emotional Life of Nations

The Sickle

Or:

The ten books that made an impact in my life
before I became racially conscious
2.- The Sickle
(read in 1979)


The very first post of the old incarnation of this blog has a 2006 entry, “Eschatology: The Cult That I Left,” that provides the context to understand The Sickle, authored by William W. Walter. Walter’s Sickle, published in 1918, is one of the two textbooks of the cult I was immersed since December 1978 until May 1980 (though I continued to believe some of Eschatology’s dogmas throughout the ’80s and well into the ’90s).

Eschatology is a comparatively small religious movement that derived from Christian Science. There is no way to transmit why the book made such an enormous impact in my life except by reposting my long article, with several syntactic improvements, in this new incarnation of The West’s Darkest Hour. I chose The Sickle rather than the other Eschatology textbook, The Sharp Sickle for this entry’s title as one of the books that have impacted my life because I did not read The Sharp Sickle until 1984 or 1985, when I officially had already left the cult.


Eschatology: the cult that I left

by César Tort

“Obviously the greatest tragedy that can happen to Christian Scientists occur when they die of a curable disease after postponing a consultation with a medical doctor. A more subtle kind of tragedy afflicts believers who, after not being healed by faith, assume that the failure is a defect in themselves.”

—Martin Gardner

On August 9, 1985 I arrived at midnight to the San Francisco international airport from Mexico City. I was alone and awaiting the immigration department officer, who was interviewing another young man. When the officer finally came to me he inspected all of my luggage belongings. It surprised me he was amiable and that he easily let me go out into the city as a tourist. I had deceived him: my project was to become an immigrant. I told to myself with enthusiasm:

They don’t know what they’re doing! They don’t know what they’re doing! They have no idea about the menace I represent! Now the end of the world is at hand…

I believed I had the key to develop paranormal powers. I believed that I and those who developed such powers would force the eschaton in history; that we would irrupt in human destiny to the point of thoroughly transforming the world just like the novel Childhood’s End (a book I’ll review this Thursday).

How could such a bizarre idea got into my mind?

I had been indoctrinated in a New Age cult called Eschatology. My plan was based on the expectation that I only needed to complement the Eschatology training I received in Mexico with parapsychological studies in American libraries and institutes.

But how did I fell prey of such a cult?

As a teenager I was crushed emotionally by my parents and a witch-doctor they hired. It’s understandable that, once the adolescent crisis was over, in a state of utter confusion I fell in a cult. Although I was pretty sure it would save me, the cult damaged me even more. Since I believed that Eschatology would solve my problems it made no sense to go back to a school I had abandoned due to the extreme abuse at home.

But instead of recounting my misadventures in Eschatology I shall talk about the kind of cult I fell and how I escaped it cognitively.




Mary Baker Eddy (1821-1910), a sensitive New Hampshire girl, was victimized by her father, a zealous Calvinist who inculcated her the idea of predestination to eternal damnation. Mary became disturbed. The physicians who attended young Mary were as naive as today’s psychiatrists: they approached the family problem with physical treatments. Mary rightly became resentful of conventional medicine. The disorder caused by the family was profound. After getting married and becoming an early widower, for decades Mary’s life shipwrecked until she found shelter in the fatherly figure of Phineas Quimby, one of the typical American quacks who flourished in the 19th century inspired by Franz Mesmer. Like Mesmer, Quimby believed in the power of the mind and suggestion to treat diseases. The encounter was crucial. Instead of physical methods Quimby was interested in Mary as a person, and without explicit intention Quimby helped her to transfigure the father’s Calvinism to a more benign version of Christianity with no hell at all. Quimby sometimes used the expression “Christian science” for his quack teachings, a term that Mary Baker subsequently appropriated to name the church she formed.

With no credit for Quimby as her mentor, in 1875 Mary Baker published the first edition of her textbook Science and Health with the Key to the Scriptures. The following year she formed, with some of her followers, a society and in 1877, at fifty six, she married again, with Asa Gilbert Eddy. In 1879 Mary Baker Eddy officially founded a church, which in 1890 counted with four thousand followers. Since then the established Church and its numerous churches grew up exponentially. In 1895 a temple was built in front of New York’s Central Park, and by 1906 another immense temple was built in Boston when Eddy already was eighty five years old. Stefan Zweig wrote:

In twenty years out of a maze of metaphysical confusion she created a new method of healing; established a doctrine counting its adherents by the myriad, with colleges and periodicals of its own; appointed a Sanhedrin of preachers and priests; and won for herself private wealth amounting to three million dollars.

Zweig adds that since Queen Elisabeth and Catalina of Russia no woman obtained such a triumph over the world, nor lived to see on Earth a monument to her rule as Mary Baker Eddy.

Her followers were Legion: hundreds of quacks and dozens of minor sects with varied names sprouted throughout the United States, factions by apostates or those who had been excommunicated by the church. One of them was a young man called William Wilfred Walter (1869-1941).


William W. Walter

Starting as a barber, Will Walter had to earn a living at seventeen in Aurora, Illinois. At twenty one he married Barbara Stenger and the couple had a son. In a cult it is difficult to get basic information about the founder, but one of the very few pieces of biographical info about Walter is that at his late twenties he got a job as a buyer in a large warehouse. He initiated contact with the local Christian Science church after he developed tuberculosis. Walter ignored that spontaneous remission is not unusual in cases of pulmonary tuberculosis; he remained convinced that a church practitioner had healed him by purely psychic means. Walter became a devout follower of the church and reached the position of first reader (though officially there are no clergy in the church, the first reader may appear to outsiders as the equivalent to a Protestant pastor).

In 1912 Walter’s revolutionary idea of God distanced himself from the church. Or perhaps he was excommunicated. The information from eschatologists I have is contradictory. At any event, Walter accepted the title “The Walter Method of Christian Science,” which served his followers to distinguish the incipient organization from the mainstream church. He received correspondence from disillusioned Christian Scientists and claimed to heal his clients through mental means alone. In 1917 he taught his first class at home, but not until 1928 he changed the name of his small movement to “Eschatology.”

With the exception of his abandonment of theism, Eschatology shares almost all the incredible Christian Science doctrines, such as the belief that for advanced understanders it is possible to heal any illness and even old age to the point of staying centuries in this world.

Alas, both Eddy and Walter died at common ages of dying. Walter died without having finished a series of booklets that he promised would be forty. In 1940 he wrote: “This is booklet number thirty-one. The first of the fourth series of ten of the Common Sense Series.” But soon after he wrote booklet #34 death surprised him.

After he passed away the information I possess is, once more, contradictory. Some say that the movement fell apart; others, that Walter’s wife passed on the torch to Genevieve Rader. At any event, in the 1960s the organization moved to California, where all sort of New Age movements flourish. In the 1970s the wealthy Mexican Mario Estrada, who studied with Rader, brought Walter’s doctrines to Cuernavaca. Estrada was the teacher of Juan del Río, whom I met in Mexico City in 1977 through one of his sons.

Well: 1977 had been precisely the year in which my parents confabulated with a witch-doctor to control me through drugs that my mother poured furtively in my meals. (See my paper, “Unfalsifiability in Psychiatry and Licit Drugging of White Children”.) Such criminal behavior could have destroyed my life and I escaped by the skin of one’s teeth. The abuse explains the state of confusion in which I found myself at that time, and why I entered the world of Eschatology.


Walter’s doctrine

Even though Christian Scientists are not very devout of theism, Walter understood deity more or less as the posterior New Age: he became to believe that each individual is God, something like democratizing for mankind what had been said about Jesus Christ in the first Christian councils, the famous formula Vere homo, vere Deus. But Walter suffered horrible inner struggles to get rid from the theism he had been taught as a child in Catholicism: an agony that reminds me my own religious crisis even if Walter was able to overcome the parental introject by eliminating from his mind all belief of God as a personal being. (Chapter 14, where he recounts his spiritual agony, is the most important chapter of The Sickle from the psychological viewpoint.)

In Walter’s worldview Jesus of Nazaret, despite of having been the individual who has better understood the Science of Life (called “Eschatology” by Walter) and that developed paranormal powers best, was a man like any other. Potentially everyone can develop extra-sensory perception as Jesus read the thoughts of the Samaritan woman; and psychokinesis, the domain over the material world as Jesus healed people and walked on the water. The “Master Mind Jesus,” Walter tells us, learned those powers thanks to a long Hebrew tradition of understanders of the Science of Life, as registered in the Bible albeit in veiled form to hide the psi development formula from “the evil minded.” Walter wrote:

The so-called wonders wrought by Moses were done through his own understanding of the mental power; and therefore, they were not miracles, but the producing of mental phenomena through known methods. With the same amount of understanding they could be again reproduced in this age. The fact is that greater so-called wonders are now being produced by students of Mind.

Since not only Jesus but every human being is God incarnate, Walter deduced that the age in which mankind attains consciousness of its divinity, and therefore of its potential powers, will arrive when his students understand—as Jesus and Walter understood—the Science of Life. When this happens the consequences will be eschatological. In The Sickle, a title extracted from a passage of the Book of Revelation, Walter tells us that after the publication of The Sickle the understanding of the application of mental power will come, and with it “the end of the age.”

All of these grandiloquent, though megalomaniac ideas of Walter and his followers infected the altogether confused adolescent I was and explain my soliloquy at the San Francisco international airport. To understand my alienation I have no choice but to enter into detail in the art of developing mental powers as Walter taught it.


The Law of Importunity

In Eschatology there are three laws that Juan del Río taught me and my female classmates since the first formal class; laws that I interpreted in a very practical way.

The first one, the Law of Cause-effect, tells us that given our divine nature we can create ex nihilo whatever we desire.

The second one, the Law of Proportion, tells us which quality our thought should have to be “causal”: it must be an absolute feeling in the objective reality of our desire. Walter interpreted that this is what Jesus tried to say: “Therefore I tell you, all things whatever you pray and ask for, believe that you have received them, and you shall have them” (Mk. 11:24). The textbook illustration chosen by del Río was that of an Apothecary scale. When a pan of the scale accumulates 51 per cent of our positive thoughts and feeling (“Believe that you have received them…”) the scale will tip on the bottom stop and the manifestation of our desire is automatic (the opposing pan would represent the “appearances” and “misleading” shortages in our lives). Hence the name of “proportion” for this Law. But the real problem starts here. If we possess the ability to cause (the First Law) and we know the quality our thinking must have to be causative—a profound conviction (the Second Law)—how can we reach such a conviction?

The Third Law, the Law of Importunity, does the trick. According to the eschatologists Importunity means “to pray insistently and persistently until the mind yields,” that is, until the sum of thoughts generates a positive feeling without doubt. This is something that Walter also deduced from Jesus’ teachings: the parable of the man and his neighbor in the midnight that asks for some bread; the man answers that everybody is asleep but, because of the neighbor’s Importunity, he wakes up and gives the neighbor what he wants (Lk. 11: 5-13). The idea is repeated in the metaphor of the widower that with great persistence importunes a judge pledging for justice, a parable with the moral “to pray always without becoming weary” (Lk. 18:1-8). Walter interpreted the praying of these verses not as a pledge to an nonexistent personal God, but as the mental practice of the advanced student of the Science of Life. The way to reach the state of profound conviction (“believe that you have received them!”) is a repetitive and bothersome mental exercise, an importune praying to oneself which culminates in the feeling of conviction. Following the metaphor of the Apothecary’s scale, through the importune repetition of thoughts the individual mind accumulates the needed 51 per cent on the “right” pan for the scale’s arm to lean toward our favor, that is, to generate the feeling of conviction.

To illustrate how an understander may utilize these three Laws let’s suppose he lost a hand in an accident and wants to have it back. According to the First Law he can since his thought is causative and he can create from nothing. According to the Second Law, to achieve it he has to feel that he already has his hand. Now then, to generate a feeling that contradicts all appearances he must “pray,” the Third Law tells us, he has to say to himself that the hand already exists with inexorable Importunity until the conviction is achieved. The way to do it is to withdraw to a solitary place, maybe hiding the stump where the hand ought to be so that the appearances will not disturb the eschatologist, and to repeat a line of thought such as “My hand exists and I know it’s here” with as much feeling as he can put into it.

With time, the theory goes, thanks to Importunity a mental sate will be reached in which the eschatologist will really believe he has a hand. That would mean fulfilling the Second Law, and voilà, in the objective world a new hand will appear. Of course: students are taught that in order to achieve such a feat they must start with much lesser goals such as healing oneself from a flu or a nervous ulcer. These modest accomplishments will be the platform to develop an invincible faith in one’s own ability to cause; a faith that, with the step-by-step feedback of successes, will allow us to solve increasingly difficult problems (such as the re-expression of an amputated limb).


Cognitive dissonance

In essence, that is the formula to develop psychokinesis according to Walter: a power that, The Sickle claims, when quite a few eschatologists develop it “the end of the age” will arrive. (In this article I use the terms “psychokinesis” and “psi” but the eschatologists do not use parapsychological terms.)

Thirty years ago, when I believed fervently in Walter’s apocalypse, I imagined that if Eschatology teachers got sick, old and died as any other mortal it was because they didn’t apply the teachings adequately; I believed they were mediocre individuals with no ambition whatsoever. One of the reasons I broke away with Juan del Río and with my second teacher, Jaime López, was that I didn’t see any psychokinetic result not only in my life, but in theirs. Del Río, who died of cancer in 2001, looked like a man of his age, a fifty six years old, when I studied with him in 1979. Once a new student told me he had asked del Río in front of other students if he knew at least a single eschatologist who did not age. Del Río stayed silent for a little time and responded in the negative. “Then Eschatology still doesn’t iron out wrinkles!” exclaimed the student. I thought exactly the same. Where were the centenarians that had to exist per force once Eddy and Walter rediscovered the “Science of Life” that had originally been discovered by understanders like Methuselah and the other Biblical centenarians? In theory, the most elemental development of psychokinesis ought to control, through psychic means, one’s own body. Eddy herself taught that her science could forestall the ravages of old age, and many of her devout followers did not expect her to die. What I saw flatly contradicted what Walter had promised.

Walter devoted two chapters to the subject of how to overcome old age in The Sharp Sickle, the other textbook of Eschatology. In the chapter “Youth and Maturity” Walter wrote:

Youth, being a sense of youth, can be consciously continued or maintained with all its vigor, energy, and good emotions. That this is not a mere theory can be established by the longevity of the Bible characters, who understood this fact.

Walter’s disciples swallow this claim. In one of her booklets Florence Stranahan wrote:

“You say yours [the hair] is prematurely gray. Age has nothing to do with it. It is your own thought.”

That eschatologists really believe they possess the elixir of youth is also apparent in the commentary by Genevieve Rader about those chapters of The Sharp Sickle: a commentary that is read to the advanced students and ratifies and elaborates Walter’s statements. But like Eddy, Stranahan and Walter, Rader, who for forty years directed Eschatology until 1981, got old and died.

(The organization’s logo)

So the great masters were getting old and dying just like everyone else. But that didn’t concern me much since I also swallowed the eschatologists’ rationalizations: that Eddy, Stranahan and Rader didn’t understand quite well the Science of Life, and that Walter did his “transition” to the next world because he wanted.

To believe in these ingenious rationalizations allowed me to continue my studies of Eschatology. During my first year in the cult I tried countless times to fulfill the tortuous Law of Importunity but I couldn’t. I felt like a fool parroting so many lines of thought without any result whatsoever and never accomplished the marathon sessions of hours or even days that, del Río told us, Walter had performed. I was twenty years old and wanted to become a virtuous of praying—Importunity—to manifest my youthful desires. But it never occurred me to question the existence of such powers. It didn’t occur to me that the fault was not mine, or that other eschatologists had passed through similar difficulties in the praxis of Importunity. I didn’t dare to think they had fulfilled the Law of Importunity with no result, and even less did I dare to think that the stories of the marathon sessions of Walter were just tale-telling by the eschatologists. Perhaps it was Jaime Hall, my closest Eschatology friend (who passed away in 1996 due to a sudden heart failure), the one who told me that Walter had prayed for days; that he needed money and a former student sent him a check by mail: a miracle he attributed to his marathonic Importunity. It never occurred to me to question that miracle or those attributed to Jesus. I couldn’t conceive that what the gospels tell could not have been historical but literary fiction, and that the “metaphysical” interpretation of Eddy and Walter about the New Testament was humbug. Years, oh how many years had to pass to call into question the historicity of the Biblical tales!

Now that I have abandoned all faith in the existence of such powers I can see some elemental things that I didn’t see due to my blind faith. If Eschatology were a science and its laws as real as the gravity law or the thermodynamics laws, it’s more than elemental that I would have witnessed plenty of demonstrations of such laws by my teachers Juan del Río and Jaime López. (A vignette: During a conversation with my father in the early 1980s I once referred to the latter as “Yoda,” since I had just watched The Empire Strikes Back.) Gravity does not need demonstration: we see it every day. But neither I nor any Eschatology student had seen a relatively modest paranormal feat such as moving a small object psychically, let alone a centenarian Methuselah who re-expressed amputated limbs.


They die younger…

To anyone close to fell prey of Eschatology or any other New Age cult I would recommend considering this litmus test to distinguish a false science from the true sciences:

Scientists can demonstrate the reality of their sciences at sight of everyone: electricity, engineering, computing, medicine, aeronautics, petrochemistry, automotive mechanics and many more. Pseudoscientists can’t. Had I reasoned this way before moving to the States I would have realized that I didn’t need to travel in pursuit of “serious” parapsychological materials to strengthen my eschatological faith. The fact that no eschatologist kept himself or herself young, or at least healthier than the norm, should have been enough for not seeking my salvation there.

According to the Journal of the American Medical Association of 22 September 1989 thousands of deaths of Eddy’s followers were registered along with a control group. If Christian Science was a real science one would expect that its followers lived longer than the control group. But the journal revealed something different. The death rate among Christian Scientists from cancer double the national average, and 6 percent of them died from causes considered preventable by doctors. The non-“Scientists” on the average lived four years longer if they were women and two longer if they were men.

Contrary to what they believe, followers of Eddy die younger of cancer than the average American due to their reluctance to go to the doctor. If similar studies were performed on Walter’s followers, who are also reluctant to ask for help in medicine because “belief in disease causes disease,” I bet that a study would throw very similar results. My former teacher Juan del Río fell seriously ill precisely because he forfeited medical check-ups even after he became rich as a result of having many Eschatology students, and when he developed symptoms the cancer was already in an advanced stage.

I must say that the best lesson I ever received about the Law of Importunity was given to me by del Río in private. His exposition was clearer and more didactic than the very chapters of The Sickle that teach the student how to “pray.” Twenty years later, when the cancer was detected, del Río had a window of opportunity of more than four years to pray with Importunity and overcome the disease. But he failed. And he failed for the simple fact that cancer has no “mental” etiology nor it is healed by “healthy thoughts” or by “eradicating all hate” as predicated by Walter.

My other teacher, Jaime López, went even further than del Río regarding the dilemma of whether or not going to the doctor. He once made a critical remark of the del Río family since they practiced prophylactic vaccination (Juan was a physician and he practiced his profession before entering the cult). In his study at Puebla, López told me that he didn’t vaccinate his sons, and that Juan and his wife had disappointed him for doing it. Jaime López ended his commentary telling me that he functioned in life “as Walter says.”

It is important to notice that presently Raquel Hall, Juan del Río’s widower, teaches hundreds of students of Eschatology, which she now calls “Mental Application.” Incredibly, the long agony of her husband has not moved her to question the dogma that that disease is curable by mental means alone. The believer in a cult, religion or pseudoscience rarely grows up when confronted with what psychologists call cognitive dissonance.

(Juan del Río, 1923-2001)

Yes: as a young man I was ignorant about the study of the American Medical Association and believed that the teachers’ old age and death was caused by their lack of the understanding that Jesus and the Old Testament centenarians had. Once more: it never occurred to me that the “Laws” of Eschatology simply did not exist, that it all was a grandiose fantasy. It didn’t occur to me because I could not conceive the inexistence of the paranormal: an idea that my father had inculcated me as a child with his beautiful tales about the miracles of Jesus. Although as a young man I had abandoned Christianity, I erroneously believed that the existence of extra-sensory perception and psychokinesis, on which the systems of Eddy and Walter are tacitly based, had been demonstrated scientifically by parapsychologists and that I only needed to check and see it for myself in the American labs of parapsychology. Hence the need to emigrate and my soliloquy that night at the airport.


Teach me a Yoda-like lesson!

The terrible experience of 1985-1988 in California after I left the airport is the subject of the last chapters of my autobiographical book. Here I will only quote a passage from my diary that shows the maturity of my ulterior apostasy from the cult:

2 September 1997

Yesterday I read two chapters of The Sharp Sickle after years of not reading it and something important happened. For the first time I doubt Walter’s honesty. Remember my handwritten note in that Skeptical Inquirer article about how should I have reacted before the claim of the Law of Importunity?:

Guru: “Don’t take my word for it. You can learn to do psychokinesis yourself.”

Skeptic: “Great! I’d love to! But before I put in the time and shell out the cash, I want to do a little consumer research. How about a demonstration?”

This is the crux. Neither Walter nor Genevieve or Robert Durling could even do a little psychokinetic demonstration like what Walter claims on page 219: that with his pure thought he affected pieces of steel, rubber, stone, wood and clay. Today my attitude would be to request a demonstration (“before I put in the time…”) or not trying to fulfill the interminable hours of the alleged Law of Importunity. It’s on this point where I have changed. He who now reads this Sickle is another man: a skeptic.

It’s a gem what Walter says on page 207: “Investigate the works [emphasis in the original!] of those you chose as leaders and you will not be far mislead,” because he died abruptly. “That Mrs. Eddy did not discover the whole is seen in that she is no longer here,” Walter wrote in the most treasured book by eschatologists. Another gem, since there’s nothing more fatal for Eschatology’s credibility that Walter died even younger than her!

At the end of his chapter “Conclusion” I wrote with red ink: “OK, Walter or contemporary teachers of Eschatology, I ask you this with no scorn whatsoever: Teach me a Yoda-like lesson by levitating the ship in front of Luke as in the film The Empire Strikes Back and tomorrow I’ll humbly re-start studying the first booklet of the Plain Talk Series!”



A crook

Except for a few syntax corrections, that’s what I wrote in my 1997 diary. The “Plain Talk” booklet is the text for the first classroom lesson in Eschatology.

It is worth mentioning that in his time there were people who considered Walter a swindler. Florence Stranahan, one of his most loyal disciples, wrote in the booklet Messages on Christian Science series I:

You write that Mrs. __ says that Mr. Walter is a crook [...] and that he is promoting a money-making scheme.

Stranahan doubted that the accusation of the unnamed woman was accurate. But Oliver Roberts de La Fontaine, a rich man from Wells Fargo & Co. in California, wrote in The Great Understander that Walter charged him $10,000 for a course for the initiate (the value of a mansion in those times). In his book Oliver confessed that when he heard such a figure he momentarily harbored the thought that Walter had been chasing him with previous courses so that, once convinced, take out from him a fortune.

Oliver paid Walter what he wanted. The anecdote moves me to point out that some paragraphs of his textbook suggest a lack of principles of the man who, in absentia, I took as my spiritual guide and mentor. Walter wrote:

There are two positive stages of unfoldment which precede conscious transition [for eschatologists "conscious transition" is going to the Next World without experimenting death]; and these must be fully understood and demonstrated before the third stage of conscious transition can be understood and demonstrated. Therefore, whenever any student of mine will prove to me through demonstration that he or she understands these first two stages, I will gladly give him the law governing the third stage.

The first stage is the demonstration of invisibility. Jesus could accomplish this at will, as is stated in the Scripture. The second stage is the transfiguration.

Did Walter really believe this? In his words (“whenever any student of mine will prove to me through demonstration that he or she understands these first two stages…”) it is implicit that, if Walter asked the student such a demonstration, he could make himself invisible and transfigured as well, as premiliminary stages of the complete understanding of the Mind.

Years ago I used to think that Walter was simply a crackpot. Now I am starting to look at him under a more sinister light. If Walter didn’t make himself invisible he was not a crank, but a charlatan. The difference between a crackpot and a charlatan is that the crank believes in his myths, whereas the charlatan swindles consciously. Martin Gardner distinguishes between the two in his hilarious book Science: The Good, the Bad and the Bogus: a crank is someone like Velikowski, who believed in his lunatic astronomy; a charlatan is someone like Uri Geller, who deceived us with his “psychokinetic” tricks.

(Will Walter)

So I repeat: Did Walter really believe what he asked his students, that with time they could make themselves invisible? As I said, in such a request it was not only implicit that he, Walter, did master invisibility but that he had transfigured like Jesus too. But it is an established fact that Walter never demonstrated he could made himself invisible before the men of science in his age. Had he done that he would have revolutionized the scientific world.

Presently I do not believe that Walter made himself invisible. And that can only mean one thing: that Walter lied to his pupils and readers by implying, in the above-cited quotation, that he could achieve such parapsychological feat. This conclusion can upset eschatologists, since Walter ended The Sickle stating that, above all, one must be sincere with oneself.

It is impossible to prove a negative; for instance, that Walter did not become invisible. But it is possible to show what science really is. There are two basic rules of the thumb in the skeptical community.

The first one is “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” for example, not only evidence that Walter had demonstrated invisibility publicly but that advanced eschatologists could do it today. But in his book Walter does not even bother to describe an ordinary proof for his extraordinary claims (the same fault appears throughout the textbook of Walter’s mentor, Mary Baker Eddy).

The second one is “The burden of proof rests upon the claimant alone.” It has been noted that in pseudosciences the burden is inverted; for instance, the teacher requests the student to make himself invisible—even if the teacher himself has not previously demonstrated invisibility! (contrast it with the teachers of magic in the Harry Potter films).

Let’s assume for a moment that Walter could make himself invisible. Why didn’t he perform public demonstrations? Was it to hide his secret formula of Importunity to develop such powers from the evil minded?

Don’t make me laugh, Walter! How absurd it would have been that Edison, just after he invented the electric light bulb, showed it to nobody but kept his most important invention to himself. Let’s imagine that he asked his students that they, not the inventor must show Edison how to create a light bulb—before letting them enter into his lab to see the shining light bulb of the teacher!

After pondering over the two Sickles with a healthy dose of skepticism, the inescapable verdict about Walter is that he may well have behaved as a crook, just as the woman mentioned by Stranahan stated in the above quotation.


Recommended readings

To fully understand Walter it may not be a bad idea to read the biographies about the mischievous lives of the creators of religious empires on American soil: from Joseph Smith to L. Ron Hubbard and the reverend Sun Myung Moon passing through those who, like Walter and a myriad others, couldn’t create large organizations and their followers are barely known. Martin Gardner’s The Healing Revelations of Mary Baker Eddy is a good starting point. Whoever wants to know why real scientists do not believe in paranormal powers—which many cults promise to their followers—cannot miss Leaps of Faith by Nicholas Humphrey: a treat!

On 6 March 1941 the Aurora Beacon News, the newspaper of the small town in which Walter spent most of his life, published the note: “William Walter Dies Suddenly in Florida Home.” The article specified that that house was Walter’s “Winter home,” and that he died “of heart attack.”

The note demonstrates that what I heard in Eschatology is a myth: that Walter didn’t die like everyone else but made the “transition” to the next plane just like Jesus. (Eschatologists claim that the gospel tale about the Ascension describes Jesus’ “conscious transition” to the “next plane” of existence.) In the final chapters of Gospel Fictions, which first chapters were already quoted at length in this blog, Randel Helms demystifies the Resurrection and Ascension stories.

For the other nine books see here.

White nationalist Christians—in a nutshell

“Yes, I understand that you’re an anti-Semite who worships a Jew.”

Fender


Published in: on May 2, 2012 at 10:52 pm  Comments (28)  

The Historical Jesus and the Platonic Fallacy

When back in 1985-1988 I was struggling to give up Christianity, with the fear of eternal damnation driving me mad, an article by Cullen Murphy summarized handsomely the extensive reading on the subject about the search for the historical Jesus I had been undertaking by myself.

As I recount elsewhere, I lived in San Rafael, California when struggling against my parental, religious demons. Presently, unlike the Murphy article I would only recommend a thoroughly secular approach of this fascinating field of research to those who are still suffering the agonies of apostasy.

I have already quoted Joseph Hoffmann (pic below) at length in my entry about my favorite philosopher, Porphyry: whose works were destroyed by the Christians in the centuries when the Romans committed cultural suicide. Tonight I would like to reproduce a piece Hoffmann wrote as a response to the Jesus Seminar, “The Historical Jesus and the Platonic Fallacy”:





Crouching somewhere between esthetic sound byte and historical detail is Michelangelo’s famous statement about sculpture. “The job of the sculptor,” Vasari attributes to il Divino,” is to set free the forms that are within the stone.” It’s a lovely thought—poetic, in fact. If you accept the theory of Renaissance Platonism, as Michelangelo embodies it, you also have to believe that “Moses” and “David” were encased in stone, yearning to be released—as the soul yearns to be set free from the flesh in the theology of salvation. You will however be left wondering why such a theory required human models with strong arms and firm thighs, and why the finished product bears no more resemblance to real or imagined historical figures than a drawing that any one of us could produce. We may lack Michelangelo’s skill and his deft way with a rasp and chisel, but we can easily imagine more probable first millennium BC heroes—in form, stature, skin-tone, and body type—than the Italian beauties he released from their marble prisons. In fact, the more we know about the second millennia BC, the more likely we are to be right. And alas, Michelangelo didn’t know very much about history at all. And what’s more, it made no difference to his art, his success, or to his reputation. That is why idealism and imagination are sometimes at odds with history, or put bluntly, why history acts as a control on our ability to imagine or idealize anything, often profoundly wrong things.

If we apply the same logic to the New Testament, we stumble over what I have (once or twice) called the Platonic Fallacy in Jesus research. Like it or not, the New Testament is still the primary artifact of the literature that permits us to understand the origins of Christianity. It’s the stone, if not the only stone. If we possessed only gnostic and apocryphal sources as documentary curiosities and no movement that preserved them, we would be hard-pressed to say anything other than that at some time in the first and second century a short-lived and highly incoherent religious movement fluoresced and faded (many did) in the night sky of Hellenistic antiquity. The Jesus we would know from these sources would be an odd co-mixture of insufferable infant a la the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, a hell-robber, like the liberator of the Gospel of Nicodemus, a mysterious cipher, like the unnamed hero of the Hymn of the Pearl, or an impenetrable guru, like the Jesus of the gnostic Gospel of Thomas. Despite the now-yellowed axiom we all learned as first year divinity students of a certain generation and later in graduate school (the one where we are taught that “no picture of early Christianity is complete without availing ourselves of all the sources”), I will climb out on a limb to say that these sources are not so much integral to a coherent picture of early Christianity as they are pebbles in orbit around the gravitational center we call the canon. They are interesting—fascinating even—in showing us how uniformity of opinion and belief can wriggle out of a chaos of alterative visions (maybe the closest analogues are in constitutional history), but they are not the stone that the most familiar form of Christianity was made from. That recognition is as important as it is increasingly irrelevant to modern New Testament discussion.

So, how do we approach the New Testament? What kind of rock is it? We know (to stay with the metaphor) that it’s “metamorphic”—made of bits and pieces formed under pressure—in the case of the New Testament, doctrinal and political pressure to define the difference between majority and minority views and impressions, once but now unfashionably called “orthodoxy” and “heresy.”

Whatever the root-causes of canon-formation, canon we have. The Platonic Fallacy comes into play when New Testament scholarship labors under assumptions that emanated from the literary praxis of Renaissance humanists and then (in methodized form) fueled the theological faculties of Germany well into the twentieth century (before a staggering retreat from “higher criticism” by neo-orthodox, and then existentialist, postmodern, and correctness theologians).

The sequence of Jesus-quests that began before Schweitzer (who thought he was writing a retrospective!)—and the succession of theories they produced were honest in their understanding of the metamorphic nature of the canon and the textual complexity of the individual books that composed it. The legacy, at least a legacy of method, of the early quests was a healthy skepticism that sometimes spilled over into Hegelianism, as with F. C. Baur, or mischievous ingenuity, as with Bruno Bauer. But what Left and Right Hegelians and their successors—from Harnack to Bultmann to the most radical of their pupils—had in common was a strong disposition to approach the canon with a chisel, assuming that if the historical accretions, misrepresentations, and conscious embellishment could be stripped away, beneath it all lay the figure of a comprehensible Galilean prophet whose life and message could be used to understand the “essence” (the nineteenth-century buzzword) of Christianity.

Whether the program was demythologizing or structuralist exegesis, the methods seemed to chase forgone conclusions about what the Gospels were and what the protagonist must “really” have been like. Judged by the standards of the chisel-bearers of the Tübingen school, Schweitzer’s caution that the Jesus of history would remain a mystery (“He comes to us as one unknown…”) was both prophetic and merely an interlude in the effort to excavate the historical Jesus. If it was meant to be dissuasive, it was instead a battle cry for better chisels and more theorists. In the latter part of the twentieth century, it has involved a demand for more sources as well—not to mention cycles of translations, each purporting to be “definitive” and thus able to shed light on a historical puzzle that the previous translation did not touch or failed to express. Judas, Philip, and Mary Magdalene have achieved a star-status far out of proportion to anything they can tell us about the historical Jesus, let alone consideration of literary merit or influence on tradition. When I say this, I am not asking modern scholarship to embrace the opinions of “dead orthodox bishops” or “winners,” but to get behind the choices the church’s first intellectuals made and their reasons for making them. The politicization of sources, the uninformative vivisection of historically important theological disputes into a discussion of outcomes (winners, losers) may make great stuff for the Discovery channel or the Easter edition of Time, but it is shamelessly Hollywood and depends on a culture of like-minded footnotes and a troubling disingenuousness with regard to what scholars know to be true and what they claim to be true.

Moreover, it is one of the reasons (I’m loathe to say) why a hundred years after the heyday of the “Radical School” of New Testament scholarship—which certainly had its warts—the questions of “total spuriousness” (as of Paul’s letters) and the “non-historicity of Jesus” are still considered risible or taboo. They are taboo because of the working postulate that has dominated New Testament scholarship for two centuries and more: that conclusions depend on the uncovering of a kernel of truth at the center of a religious movement, a historical center, and, desirably, a historical person resembling, if not in every detail, the protagonist described in the Gospels. This working postulate is formed by scholars perfectly aware that no similar imperative exists to corroborate the existence (or sayings) of the “historical” Adam, the historical Abraham, or Moses, or David—or indeed the prophets—or any equivalent effort to explain the evolution of Judaism on the basis of such inquiry.

The Platonic Fallacy depends on the “true story” being revealed through the disaggregation of traditions: dismantle the canon, factor and multiply the sources of the Gospels, marginalize the orthodox settlement as one among dozens of possible outcomes affecting the growth of the church, incorporate all the materials the church fathers sent to the bin or caused to be hidden away. Now we’re getting somewhere. It shuns the possibility that the aggregation of traditions begins with something historical, but not with a historical individual—which even if it turns out to be false, is a real possibility. Even the most ardent historicists of the twentieth century anticipated a “revelation” available through historical research; thus Harnack could dismiss most of the miracles of the Gospels, argue for absolute freedom of inquiry in gospels-research (a theme Bultmann would take up), insist that “historical knowledge is necessary for every Christian and not just for the historian,” all however in order to winnow “the timeless nucleus of Christianity from its various time bound trappings.”

The Jesus Seminar was perhaps the last gasp of the Platonic Fallacy in action. Formed to “get at” the authentic sayings of Jesus, it suffered from the conventional hammer and chisel approach to the sources that has characterized every similar venture since the nineteenth century, missing only the idealistic and theological motives for sweeping up afterward. It will remain famous primarily for its eccentricity, its claim to be a kind of Jesus-vetting jury and to establish through a consensus (never reached) what has evaded lonelier scholarship for centuries.

The Seminar was happy with a miracle-free Jesus, a fictional resurrection, a Jesus whose sayings were as remarkable as “And how are you today, Mrs. Jones?” It used and disused standard forms of biblical criticism selectively and often inexplicably to offer readers a “Jesus they never knew,” a Galilean peasant, a cynic, a de-eschatologized prophet, a craftsman whose dad was a day-laborer in nearby Sepphoris (never mind the Nazareth issue, or the Joseph issue). These purportedly “historical” Jesuses were meant to be more plausible than the Jesus whose DNA lived on in the fantasies of Dan Brown and Nikos Kazantzakis. But, in fact, they began to blur. It betimes took sources too literally and not literally enough, and when it became clear that the star system it evoked was resulting in something like a Catherine Wheel rather than a conclusion, it changed the subject. As long ago as 1993, it became clear that the Jesus Seminar was yet another attempt to break open the tomb where once Jesus lay—I’m reminded of a student’s gospel paraphrase of Luke 24.5, with 24.42 ["They gave him a piece of cooked fish..."] in view—to find a note that read “Gone Fishing,” in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek. It was then that I commented in a popular journal that “The Jesus of the Westar Project is a talking doll with a questionable repertoire of thirty-one sayings. Pull a string and he blesses the poor.” I was anticipated in this by none other than John Dominic Crossan (a Seminar founder) who wrote in 1991, having produced his own minority opinion concerning Jesus, “It seems we can have as many Jesuses as there are exegetes… exhibiting a stunning diversity that is an academic embarrassment.” And Crossan’s caveat had been expressed more trenchantly a hundred years before by the German scholar Martin Kaehler: “The entire life of the Jesus movement,” he argued, was based on misperceptions “and is bound to end in a blind alley… Christian faith and the history of Jesus repel each other like oil and water.”

If we add these to the work of the Jesus Seminar, the “extra-Seminar Jesuses,” magicians, insurgents, bandits [the author is probably referring to the work of Morton Smith and Hyam Maccoby], we end up with a multiplicity that “makes the prospect that Jesus never existed a welcome relief.”

Bruce Chilton is one of a number of scholars who comes away from the Jesus Seminar sadder but wiser and hopes that the Jesus Project will not be another stuttering attempt to break rocks and piece them back together to create plausible Jesuses, as Michelangelo created a plausible Moses for the Italians of the sixteenth century. His challenge to the Project is fair enough. In fact, one of the benefits we inherit from the Seminar is a record of success and failure. It raised the question of methodology in a way that can no longer be ignored, without however providing a map for further study. Its legacy is primarily a cautionary tale concerning the limits of “doing” history collectively, and sometimes theologically, and the Jesus Project must take this seriously.

Let me add to this commentary a special concern as I watch the Project unfold. Jesus-research—biblical research in general—through the end of the twentieth century was exciting stuff. The death of one of the great Albright students last year, and a former boss of mine at the University of Michigan, David Noel Freedman, reminds us that we may be at the end of the road. Albright’s careful scholarship and research, and his general refusal to shy away from the “results” of archaeology, were accompanied by a certain optimism in terms of how archaeology could be used to “prove” the Bible. In its general outline, the Bible was true; there was no reason (for example) to doubt the essential biographical details of the story of Abraham in Genesis. Albright’s pupils were less confident of the biblical record and as William Dever observed in a classic 1995 article in The Biblical Archaeologist. His central theses have all been overturned, partly by further advances in Biblical criticism, but mostly by the continuing archaeological research of younger Americans and Israelis to whom he himself gave encouragement and momentum. The irony is that, in the long run, it will have been the newer “secular” archaeology that contributed the most to Biblical studies, not “Biblical archaeology.” New Testament archaeology is a different house, built with different stones. To be perfectly fair, the biblical appendix lacks the geographical markers and vivid information that suffuse the Hebrew Bible. If the Old Testament landscape is real geography populated by mythical heroes, the New Testament trends in the opposite direction. For that reason, New Testament scholars in my opinion have tried to develop an ersatz-“archaeology of sources” to match the more impressive gains in Old Testament studies.

The reasons for the “new sources” trend in New Testament research are multiple, but the one I fear the most is Jesus-fatigue. There is a sense that prior to 1980 New Testament scholarship was stuck in the mire of post-Bultmannian ennui. Jesus Seminars and Jesus Projects have been in part a response to a particular historical situation. Five gospels are better than four. The more sources we have the more we know about Jesus. Q (a) did exist, (b) did not exist, or (c) is far more layered and interesting than used to be thought. Judas was actually the primary apostle. No, it was Mary Magdalene.

When we considered developing the Jesus Project, it was not out of any malignant attempt to “prove” that Jesus did not exist. (The press releases have done an immeasurable disservice by harping on this as the agenda). As a Christian origins scholar by training, I am not even sure how one would go about such a task, or be taken seriously if it were undertaken. Yet the possibility that Christianity arose from causes that have little to do with a historical founder is one among many other questions the Project should take seriously. Inevitably, scholars and critics (if not always the same people) will ask, And just how do you go about doing that?, and neither the answer “Differently” or “Better” will suffice. The demon crouching at the door, however, is not criticism of its intent nor skepticism about its outcome, but the sense that biblical scholarship in the twentieth century will not be greeted with the same excitement as it was in Albright’s day. Outside America, where the landscape is also changing, fewer people have any interest in the outcomes of biblical research, whether it involves Jericho or Jesus. The secularization of world culture, which will eventually reach even into the Muslim heartlands, encourages us to value what matters here and now. As one of our members, Arthur Droge (Toronto) mentioned at the recent meeting of the Project in Amherst, NY, most of us were trained in a generation “that believed certain questions were inherently interesting.” But fewer and fewer people do. Jesus-fatigue—the sort of despair that can only be compared to a police investigation gone cold—is the result of a certain resignation to the unimportance of historical conclusions.

Reaching for the stars and reaching back into history have in common the fact that their objects are distant and sometimes unimaginably hard to see. What I personally hope the Project will achieve is to eschew breaking rocks, and instead learning to train our lens in the right direction. Part of that process is to respond to Droge’s challenge: Why is this important? And I have the sense that in trying to answer that question, we will be answering bigger questions as well.

_________________

(Original article, here)

The Christian problem encompasses the Jewish problem



judeocristianismo

I update this entry regularly





No subject is so dangerous to address among White nationalists as the Christian religion.

Many Whites make a fundamental mistake when they portray new civil religions as part of an organized conspiracy of a small number of wicked people. In essence, civil religions are just secular transpositions of the Judeo-Christian monotheist mindset.

Christianity became thus a Universalist religion with a special mission to transform the Other into the Same. The seeds of egalitarianism—albeit on the religious, not yet on the secular level—were sown.

Tom Sunic



All of this quoting from dust-covered books of my small library that I had read long ago has to do with our hypothesis that the Jewish Problem can only be understood as the deranged altruism resulting from the secular fulfillment of universal Christian values, a point that most nationalists, especially the monocausalists,* find it too hard to digest:

Basic:

Kemp on Christianity

The Red Giant

Tomislav Sunić


Pierce & Klassen:

On Christianity

Jesus was a Jewish liberal

Pierce on Christianity


Classic:

Porphyry on Christianity

Persecution of Christians

The Fall of Rome


Julian the Apostate:

Julian on Christianity

On Gore Vidal’s Julian

Briefest review


Overmen:

Hitler on Christianity

Nietzsche on Christianity

Nietzsche on the Aryan race


Contemporary:

Franklin Ryckaert on Christianity

White nationalists on Christianity

Greg Johnson on Christianity

Alex Linder on Christianity

Capitalism & the Church

A VNN exchange


My 2 cents:

Bicausalism

Isildur’s mess

On Erasmus

_________________

* Monocausalism is the orthodox view in many white nationalist circles that Jewish influence in our civilization is the sole cause of the decline of whites. Monocausalists do not believe that there is a Christian problem or that whites, including atheists, agnostics or new agers, are inherently wired the wrong way as a result of the programming of Christian meta-ethics through the last millennia.

The Christian problem does not only refer to Christian values, but also to the moral grammar of what we are calling “secular Christians,” a group that could even include the anticlerical Jacobins. See the second entry linked above to clarify this apparently paradoxical issue.

From our viewpoint, allowing the Jews to take over our societies, a process that started right after the French revolutionaries emancipated them, is the primary infection —the “Christian / Secular Christian problem”— and Jewish depredations in our society, a secondary infection. (From this point of view the Islamization of Europe would be a tertiary infection.)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 94 other followers