Recreating (and advancing) pk’s censored domains: Macroinformation.org &
Knatz.com / Teaching / Society / Social Epistemology / Religion / Christianity /
2018 03 29 A series of YouTube documentaries update some of the things I’ve written over the decades about the significance of names in Christianity: Jesus, Christ … I’ve said they’re an oxymoron; now I see they’re a redundancy. I urge all to view two in particular:
The REAL Truth About Religion And Its Origins
1) Origin of Christianity – The Piso Flavian Dynasty
2) History Of Christianity – How Christianity Was Invented
As my macular degeneration pro/re-gresses, I am no longer competent to edit this: But, I should have had assistance all along.
2012 11 16 It may be that Christians are saved but how can we know who’s Christian? until God himself shows us?
Or is God just a rubber stamp for any preposterous human claim?
Don’t accept Church members’ testimony: unless Christians are as common as lice.
In heaven Jesus had a vision of how we could live better together.
His tormentors saw that his vision threatened their bad habits.
|Love your enemies.
|Never hate your enemy:
it affects your judgment.
The reality of a Jesus is 99% macroinformational.
That is to say, the information is entirely a social construct.
(That tiny part which might be argued to be “historical” is also a social construct, “history” being entirely a social construct.
2010 09 27
Elsbeth may have a special love for Jesus, but heaven help Jesus if his crown of thorns drips any blood onto her cashmere!
2008 05 08
Crosses everywhere, what does it mean? Well, things that huge never mean just one thing: and sometimes they mean the opposite of what they seem to mean: like “laws” “guaranteeing” “freedom” actually show that you don’t have any freedom without the sufferance of the state: the state has totally taken over what the Jews had claimed was God’s!
As a child I was taught to believe that (taught to believe, now there’s a phrase!) the ubiquity of crosses meant that we Christians would never forget what God did for us, how he loves us, how our salvation is guaranteed … Now I see the ubiquity of crosses quite differently, especially as I see more and more clearly that religious are not religious at all, don’t love God or Jesus … The whole charade is an act of kleptocracy: people living on stolen land, trying to rule it, pretending that it belongs to them, that they have a right to be there … Crosses are like scarecrows: a farmer’s effort to keep birds from the field, non humans from eating the grain (unless deliberately fed to them by the farmer). Crosses are a kleptocratic warning to gods: Stay Away! Here you see what we do to interfering teachers! (And for the secular, we have the story of Socrates: so we kleptocrats are covered on both sides!
In other words, “Look here, God, we kleptocrats don’t believe in any of the old fashioned human virtues; but we must pay lip service to them. We must encourage those who would prefer to be loving and cooperative, convivial, sharing, in this “owned” world, that they abstract their wishes and needs into another life, postponed, removed from this one. If you, God, any god, any teacher, try to interfere, THIS is what you can expect: torture! death! And notice, God: None of your beneficiaries will help you! They’ll stand there and watch you bleed, getting out of the way of the soldiers who drive the nails and make fun of you.
2006 04 15
K. was chock full of unfinished modules and here I am starting another thought with no time to develop it: I intend to though. I propose a trio of terms to make distinctions among the concepts of Jesus, Christ, and Christianity.
The belief that saying that you believe in Jesus, that you join, or are born into, a church with other Christians saying the same thing, will get your sins cancelled, will slip you into heaven, that the sinner who says “I believe” will get the same reward as the martyr for unselfishness.
Disgusting. Balderdash. I hope to Christ it’s not true.
Actually trying to be less of a kleptocratic son-of-a-bitch: maybe turning over some money-changing tables in the temple, maybe actually forgiving an enemy … not willingly taking up arms every time Caesar says Jump.
pk piles up sins aplenty, but I can also claim more than an average amount of cheek-turning. (No one gives a shit.)
Being a Jesus-Follower in more than one detail, plus adding a meta-dimension.
Francis decided to be less of a bastard: then wound up talking to the animals.
Ivan Illich proposed non-authoritarian community learning networks to counter imperial kleptocracy, to foster Jesus-following conviviality.
pk expanded Illich’s design to a cheap, low-tech internet: a network of community bulletin boards including all possible announcements as well as learning resources.
No licenses, no certificates, no degrees. No state- (or church-) fiated experts. Deregulated, anti-authoritarian.
Fiated expertise interferes with the natural emergence of expertise.
Caiaphas and Pilat judge Jesus under kleptocracy. Nixon judges King. The Church judges Illich. Morons judge pk.
Rome looked to high priests to keep the Jewish populace in line.
Trial of Jesus
With regard to the latter, pk offered to actually administer Illich’s network, to be the librarian, a model for the coordinated library of the global village.
Without the group going along, also being Jesus-followers, providing the resources, it was merely an idea. Instead of seizing the tool in 1970, instead of striving for cybernetic anarchist liberty, the public kept its thumb firmly in its ass, waiting till the Pentagon and CERN shoved the busy-busy, ad-raddled-selfish infantile screaming internet up our noses: mortgage pop-ups interrupting your attempts at research.
Oh well, the group gets what the group deserves.
And the Christ-like still get crucified.
2012 03 26 K. modules had a lot of varying indentations that were supposed to clarify, to subordinate … Not all that code works at 2012 blogs. This post had a lot of indentation that wound up just being a mess, I hope I’m eliminating it without throwing the baby out with the bath.
2006 05 26
Jesus, maybe a Christ, a savior, maybe THE Christ, certainly a good and wise man in the common view, got hung on the cross.
Could that be like hanging meat? salting fish? so that it can be preserved? used later? at our convenience?
That way we can take, rather than he give.
The golden goose was magical, laying golden eggs, not bitching when we took the gold for ourselves. Kill and preserve the golden goose, and the magic is yours! and your pleasure!
So think nitwits: think the goose can be killed but the magic preserved: transferred!
I don’t believe in a golden goose. I don’t know if Jesus had any magic. I don’t believe in magic. BUT: if there was any magic, if Jesus had it, tried to give us some, I believe we killed the magic when we killed him!
Fecundity, generosity, emerge, are natural. But not in over-stuffed civilization. We pervert the natural, kill everything.
I believe we killed the magic when we killed Jesus.
2005 12 26
Sometimes I have an itch to say something without an budget of time or energy to see if I’ve said it before. So I gotta stick it somewhere:
Christianity, conventional, tells us that humans are not competent to govern themselves, to judge themselves, to know shit from Shinola. I agree.
But then Christianity offers, first, a church, then a split Church, then a slew of Churches, each saying We’re different. We got the magic. We’re exempt from our own generalizations. You can’t hear God; we can, and do. Trust us as God’s proxy.
I don’t. I buy the premise. I don’t have to buy it, I observe it to be true, all by myself. I do hear things that I trust to be God: or god, or truth, or good sense. But I can’t communicate any of that to any damn Church! Or to any but isolated individuals, no synergy ever forming: at least not sustaining for more than a year or two.
So pk, what do you conclude? God should govern us directly?
Well, that latter isn’t up to me. And besides, I’ve come not to trust God either. But the general conclusion ought to be obvious. It isn’t that we need to be governed by the nitwit Church. And it isn’t that we need to be governed by Marx or Stalin, or the Republicans, or those we vote for. No. We ought not to be governed, period.
Oh, so that means that’s we’ll all be all right once there’s no government?
No. I don’t think there will ever be no government. I don’t think humans will ever get it. There used to be no government. Humans did fine, or at least however they did, long long before there was government. But once we’ve allowed jails and warehouses and institutions to be built, we can’t get rid of them. We have to hope that they’ll die and that someone will still be here afterwards.
It could happen: but probably only through some major disaster. (That’s why I hope some of the bad news is true.)
Being ungoverned wouldn’t make us good, wouldn’t make us anything but what we already are.
Ah, but then everything wouldn’t be the governments fault!
Everything would be our fault. That’s what I want.
2005 03 13
Let’s for the moment not waste time asking if Christianity is true; let’s ask instead if there’s a single thing unique or original anywhere in it.
The question of truth is separate: and I repeat: there are many many true things in Christianity. It’s a shame that Christians can’t see them.
Did you hear about the French biochemist who had twins?
He baptized one and kept the other as a control.
Michael Crichton, A Case of Need
2006 08 15
I just removed a few of these section-date marks from the top of the file. I meant them to be handy for sorting things if the need ever arose, not to clutter or distract. When a file gets edited or added to for the Nth time, signs can do more damage than good: like an arrow to Harvard Yard getting dusted off but accidentally relocated outside the Smithsonian.
I expanded that idea here, but now have transplanted it elsewhere.