the churches were always kind of like chatgpt or another one of those inhuman things. they can only give prepackaged answers. but at least in the churches there is, no matter how remote, the possibility of renegades, of individuality. not so with the machines. also keeping the priests and pastors alive takes a lot less resources, whereas the machines are making the earth barren. anyway, always better to ask the gods directly.
the spirit is stronger than the flesh, which is why the flesh is a very important image of the spirit.
never heard of this Land guy until now. but i’m guessing he won’t survive the flood.
why the flood
because water cleans
and the world is dirty
like our mother Eve
to be saved we must choose
to know good from evil
superatomic tomb
mushroom cloud nine
peripheral fallout
end of days
feral born
exile for domicile
end of days
start the nights
of fuller moons
forces of nature
unleashed, a sift
to gather the elect
i really would like to avoid the corruption of all flesh again. yet, a part of me feels like it is innevitable. and yet another feels like what is inevitable has some rights of its own.
in the woods, by the creek
i am the greatest sinner there
and that by far
crisp mornings
old friends
youth recast
evil will always remain a possibility.
or true freedom does not exist.
mutually exclusive metaphysical assumptions.
Kenshin is a character study of the process of Yahweh becoming Yeshua. the best one i’ve seen.
ever since i can remember my dad always complained that nobody knew how to do anything anymore, and that it was getting worse.
existencialists convinced the gods to come back. they showed fortitude while facing the world alone. both nature and supernature had gone quiet. but out of admiration for the potential of the human soul, they appeared again and opened doors long closed, because now we could enter, not just peer into.
soil is later flesh
flesh is later soil
wind chimes
we are seeing the genesis of proto info european
it is still amazing to me how the doctrines of oneness have so little connection to anything real, that we actually know from experience, both internal and external. it’s like an empty island fortress, and there’s no bridge. nothing gets in and nothing gets out. this is the final boss of nihilism.
gods reveal so much of themselves, in every act and every word, but we are addicted to mystery.
you can worship the fungi that connects the root systems of the forest, but i prefer to worship the most beautiful tree. this analogy is really unfair to the fungi. they have much more personality than the void oneness people worship.
the foundation of true religion is always direct experience of the divine. but not as people understand this. a prophet may have contact with the divine and a religion may form around him, but the true religion is only of those who do like he first did. thus the only true religion is a revealed religion, but again not as this is understood. it is rather for the same reason that a true love language between two people must be learned by willing revelation from both, and more importantly, participation.
i have confidence in my abilities because i am mindful of my disabilities
i started making the aphorism collections for my own use. i like to open them at random and see what they say. to see other people kind of using it in this way makes me happy. and i wish other people would publish their own compilations, i would buy a copy and use theirs too. in fact, people should be doing this of dead authors too. i would love to have my own aphorisms of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and Hugh Nibley (why can i only think of mormons), for random divination. and many others. maybe i’ll make them.
girls are pearls
and sometimes
pearl clutchers
use imagination to write a story, no one reads it. write abstractly about imagination, applause. there should be a name for this. theoretical imaginism maybe. so many comments. if i wanted to make money writing i should set up payments on the stack and just do polemics with the orthodox church. cha ching. and this was me being sincere, and so i’m getting reasonable, though mostly beside point, replies. imagine what i could do if i really wanted to poke people, not as a byproduct of a joke, but as the main course. the bait almost writes itself.
mythic realism
(who’s gonna write the manifesto. and the counter manifesto. which faction will split from which. love, betrayal, scenes. stay tunned.)
supernatural nonchalance
the enmity of my enmity is my friendship
it’s not such a difficult point to understand, is it: that on the question of the one and the many, anybody who believes the one is all, must believe that the second just as much as the ten thousandth addition, is and can only ever be, a sort of degeneration.
to understand Barfield, to really get to the depth of it, better to read Barfield or Bruce Charlton? i would say Bruce Charlton (some kind of heresy i suppose because the man has the unfortunate disadvantage of being alive and, even worse, still writing just as well and as relevantly). because Barfield was not barfieldian enough. Bruce is. he has the secret ingredient (pluralism, mormonism) to actually integrate Barfield, who unfortunately still had ties to a metaphysics where Barfieldian insights cannot really ultimately fit.
The last one is especially interesting.