On The Notion Of Holy Books

Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008 by Gabriel Thy

Holy books...

WHY IS IT THAT OFTEN DECENT people believe anything, and love it just because it’s ancient but only illuminating to the indoctrinated and the hopeless as they pass it through the prism of self-confidence? Don’t they realize that whomever wrote those texts were simply influenced by misconceptions and needs of that era?

Many people disregard and even look down upon with burrowed brow most ideas, fashions, music, literature, et cetera—once the most fabulous evah—but is only 20 years old. However, if it’s 2000 years old or more then it MUST be true! Test the spirits, I heard them say. Well then, sure I will, yes I shall. You betcha!

But let’s start at the beginning. Why do we believe what we believe?

I confess to believe in the I am, Yahweh, only because I have been chasing after Him for so long. Do I know him like a Father. I can say without blushing, “I never knew my father. My father is a closed book.” The bible is a book of a thousand times a thousand interpreters, each sporting just enough of a different doctrine to make it self feel special, alone in its gospel of I AM ONE, and each claiming the truth. What I believe I believe because of the Jews. After all these years of rise and fall migratory civilizations, the Jews still exist in startling numbers which exert not only their cosmopolitan stature but their roots. Their own written history of the world’s hostility toward them is unprecedented and remarkably backed up by facts for such a fabled people. The ONLY measurement I have for determining the essential truth of the bible is my own discerning measurement of the Jews, and my own frank dependence to be among those who validate that measurement. I do not believe IN the Jews, but OF them.

All other ideologies to me seem false, or composite fables of human acquisition, just as much of the Jewish writing are purported to be by critics. But the Jewish fables offer something extra. Their mythology rings true, asks the questions and delivers the answers for all the movements at fault, although with great mystery we must admit. Even the ancient Sumerian texts written about in great detail by the recently departed Zacharia Sitchin lead straight to the Jewish people and Yahweh.

Should I dust off my Eric Hoffer? His phenomenal first book, The True Believer, published in 1951, was widely recognized as a classic, receiving critical acclaim from both scholars and laymen. In fact the title of his book has made it into the American English vernacular often used by police to describe a certain suspect determined to be influenced by a strong ideology. From Wiki:

The book analyzes and attempts to explain the motives of the various types of personalities that give rise to mass movements; why and how mass movements start, progress and end; and the similarities between them, whether religious, political, radical or reactionary. As examples, the book often refers to Communism, Fascism, National Socialism, Christianity, Protestantism, and Islam. Hoffer believes that mass movements are interchangeable, that adherents will often flip from one movement to another, and that the motivations for mass movements are interchangeable; that religious, nationalist and social movements, whether radical or reactionary, tend to attract the same type of followers, behave in the same way and use the same tactics, even when their stated goals or values differed.

With their collapse of a communal framework people can no longer defeat the feelings of insecurity and uncertainty by belonging to a compact whole. If the isolated individual lacks vast opportunities for personal advancement, development of talents, and action (such as those found on a frontier), he will seek substitutes.
Hoffer argues that all mass movements such as fascism, communism, and religion spread by promising a glorious future. To be successful, these mass movements need the adherents to be willing to sacrifice themselves and others for the future goals. To do so, mass movements often glorify the past and devalue the present. Mass movements appeal to frustrated people who are dissatisfied with their current state, but are capable of a strong belief in the future. As well, mass movements appeal to people who want to escape a flawed self by creating an imaginary self and joining a collective whole. Some categories of people who may be attracted to mass movements include poor people, misfits, former soldiers, and people who feel thwarted in their endeavors. Hoffer quotes extensively from leaders of the Nazi and communist parties in the early part of the 20th century, to demonstrate, among other things, that they were competing for adherents from the same pool of people predisposed to support mass movements. Despite the two parties’ fierce antagonism, they were more likely to gain recruits from their opposing party than from moderates with no affiliation to either.

The book also explores the behavior of mass movements once they become established (or leave the “active phase”). With their collapse of a communal framework people can no longer defeat the feelings of insecurity and uncertainty by belonging to a compact whole. If the isolated individual lacks vast opportunities for personal advancement, development of talents, and action (such as those found on a frontier), he will seek substitutes. These substitutes would be pride instead of self-confidence, memberships in a collective whole like a mass movement, absolute certainty instead of understanding.

We can take comfort in the fact that Hoffer does not take an exclusively negative view of “true believers” and the mass movements they begin. Despite the success of his first book, Hoffer believed that his book The Ordeal of Change was his finest work.

The Qur’an is absolute junk. Lies. Theft. Murder. Rape. Desolation. Abomination. Islam or Mohammedanism, is a socio-political entity, a wild revolutionary farce, invented by Luciferian forces to enslave women and their men, dressed up in religious garments. A death cult, a menace to itself and all others it encounters. Christianity meanwhile, through Paul and others, states clearly that unless death has been conquered there is no salvation but brief life trapped in the mere ticks off a clock, which by necessity of nature leads to eternal death. There is no conquering of death in Islam (Muslims schooled to embrace death), but they teach heaven and hell nevertheless.

To be continued.

—GT

 

 

MORE FROM TODAY’S Theosplatz archives…

August 16 - God The Pragmatic Principle

HY IS IT THAT OFTEN DECENT people believe anything, and love it just because it’s ancient but only illuminating to the indoctrinated and the hopeless as they pass it through the prism of self-confidence? Don’t they realize that whomever wrote those texts were simply influenced by misconceptions and needs of that era? Many people disregard […] Read more »

June 6 - Ben Stein Tweaks Academia

HY IS IT THAT OFTEN DECENT people believe anything, and love it just because it’s ancient but only illuminating to the indoctrinated and the hopeless as they pass it through the prism of self-confidence? Don’t they realize that whomever wrote those texts were simply influenced by misconceptions and needs of that era? Many people disregard […] Read more »

 

3 Responses to “On The Notion Of Holy Books”

  1. You’ve got a point there.
    I’m Jewish myself but I can’t understand why Hasidic Jews wants to live like it was the the 18th century and just because they do the think they so much better than other Jews.
    Some even believe that The Holocaust was G*ds way of punishing the Jews that don’t follow their way.

  2. I’m sorry for the rather weird first post, I hope it makes some kind of sense. :))
    I just couldn’t help myself.

    I found you by looking for cool people that likes Bukowski and I saw you liked Wumpscut and such…
    I think you’ve got very good taste when it comes to movies.

  3. Thanks for the comments, Little Rascal, even though I am now just finding them on this day that I am moving this grossly neglected blog over to WordPress.

    Your first post was in excellent taste, however. Don’t sweat it. And yeah, that Bukowski cat had a way about him I found fascinating back in the day.

Leave a Reply