Christianity

[blue eyed snake]

On 19-10-2024 at 4:40 PM, Thrice Daily said:

@blue eyed snake ♥️ this reply. I’m so glad you kept to the topic of pregnancy so closely too.

 

I will reply in depth soon. Thankyou it really was heart felt as I was reading it. Being a Dad an all, it got me. Speak soon 💧 

 

still waiting

 

8 hours ago, Thrice Daily said:

if you don't listen it will be a shame. You obviously have a lot of missplaced animosity.

"it will be a shame",

now that is something christianity is build on. To make people feel shame, to let kids confess their "sins". To make old people fear dying because of a hell that awaits them because they sinned.

 

Oh yes, i have a lot of animosity, it has not diminished one bit through the decades  and i regard  that animosity as totally valid

 

 

 

 

[blue eyed snake]

6 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

But I do not want to be a dick here, but I do somehow feel like I am not making myself understood here. If you are truly convinced that there is one god and one god only, why bother how and who people are worship? Is it not a paradox?

 

they want to rule the common folk, that is the motivation.

for that the old religion had to be erased.

[Nungali]

6 hours ago, Apech said:

Yes I see what you mean.  Perhaps the only answer is human nature?

 

 

 

Some human's nature .

[Thrice Daily]

10 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

There is a poem written to this pic by Welhaven. Asgaardreien (road to Asgard), 1844. It is translated by AI, so much of the poetry is lost. But regardless, here you go:

 

Great, and bringing it to modern day. If the Athiests and Marxists continue on their plight. We will be ever more estranged from the last.

 

Only now, the seriousness takes form in a childless, sexless and sterilised hashpot of endless subcultures and micro niches further smashing our souls to smitherines.

 

they say each opposite gives birth to its opposite. Where is the life now?

 

These days believing in Jesus doesn’t mean following orders of the church. It largely means not buying into the mesmerising bs we are seeing as options for how to live life. 
 

As I say, the birthplace of opposites. Still one man’s food is another mans poison. 
 

I just think it would be helpful if people had a more balanced view of Christianity. It’s “real root” is on what Jesus Christ was saying and What he did, and the various mechanisms there in.

 

not the church, not the Jewish root. That’s just all argument for the sake of argument. 
 

At the moment we have a chance at World peace here, have a good hard look at exactly who it is causing the arguments and why?? There you will find your answer.

 

Is the past really more prevalent than the moment and our potential future.

 

You can’t see the wood for the trees… and I don’t mean that disrespectfully.

 

I'm sad too that the past has gone and yes I believe things should have been handled differently. But what about right now, do you want Nihalism and Athiesm and Childlessness in the driving seat, or family… it’s really becoming pretty obvious how it’s all finally boiling down.

 

And what’s left when it does…

[Thrice Daily]

3 hours ago, blue eyed snake said:

Oh yes, i have a lot of animosity, it has not diminished one bit through the decades  and i regard  that animosity as totally valid

BES please do me a favour and have a quick look at sociologies model of Functionalism. It will help you understand me better. Especially if you think I’m cold in my responses.

 

I remember being at college, studying it. We were learning about class and status, from old books. Must have been from the 80’s , all talking about people being born to money, all the startling differences between working class and upper class etc…

 

I remember thinking, yes but we have Primark Now, and it was the first year the camera phone came out. I started talking in the class, I stood up and addressed everyone. Inaccurately forecast that the class system would be irrelevant very soon, as people have camera phones and access to good looking clothes every cheap. Further more I explained the function of everyone basically having Sue silence in their pocket and this would further make class and status break, due to coercion and blackmail that could exist between the classes…

 

I also accurately predicted in that lesson that now people would be able to become famous extremely quickly by recording themselves and that would become the new class system.

 

it was 2004 I think, or 5, I just got the first Nokia Camera phone and it was all pretty obvious. 
 

Why am I saying this, well I told the teacher, he smiled and seemed to like it, but didn’t comment. He just got back to the book and teaching this 1980’s material. When I write the essay, I wasn’t able to say anything about the class and status system I could see around me. I had to waffle on about 1980’s society…

 

Now, I hadn’t zoomed in on church, Christian families and seen how ‘one simple element like a camera phone and digital recorder’ in every bodies pocket would change everything and create a complete breakdown of the family as we know it…

 

My Mom used to get the belt and her sisters, her Dad was Catholic.
 

Yes it was strict then, the parents had the authority and it was hard.

 

now that’s come full circle. A parent would simply be recorded by their child now, threatened with social services etc

 

im not judging here right or wrong, just stating facts. We had an old model breakdown largely. And many parents are scared of their children.

 

Similar with infidelity, cheating on partners affairs, in the old days no one knew, they could go on for years no one knew.

 

take one look at TikTok and you will see, this system of sin and forgiveness (as crude a mechanism as it is and childlike) doesn’t really bear the same quality as it did before in this sense.

 

Through a functionalist lens lots of things have changed I’m naming just a couple of big ones. 
 

we can say patriarchy good , patriarchy bad. But it’s helpful to take a birds eye view instead I think. 
 

You have good and bad in every system and a degree to how it works, or not… 

 

Look at Islam, I disagree with most of it. Women worth half that if a man, cutting off clits, women can’t divorce, men can (just by saying it) women can only have one husband , must be Muslim. Men can marry 5 and sleep with as many as he wants, none Muslim fine too etc etc etc.

 

But in evaluating it as a system it has over all functionalism hard baked into it. 
 

Personally I think it’s at odds with the direction we need to go, but that’s my personal belief. I think it’s too inflexible.

 

And Christianity has been pushed beyond its flexible range.

 

should they be completely discarded though. No I don’t think so.

 

it needs to be rethought though, getting back to Christianity for a minute. 
 

I bring my Child up and I don’t brainwash her. I simply use the Jesus story as a tool to help her understand the nature of her mind, and that she has a choice, to make the choices she makes. And they need not all be motivated by what she wants to do.

 

Sometimes it’s nice to go and say hello to someone you might not want to for example, to brighten up their day.

 

Her answer , no I don’t want to. 
 

“we’ll do you think Jesus wanted to carry his Cross” I replied. 
 

it might seem a little harsh but we all have our crosses to bear. The beatitudes and sermon on the mount have a lot of useful bits I can draw on to help negate conflict in the classroom for her.

 

i’m just working with the tools I have at my disposal . But I won’t be beating her with a belt times have changed. She is testing, very testing but hopefully she will not completely take over all when she becomes a teenager.

 

I think I did the groundwork in the first 7 years so that she loves way more than hates. But let’s see, brains developing and I don’t want to do too much too quick.

 

I think it was a bit like that with religion. They are not perfect systems but they are systems that developed none the less.

 

and life is far less savage for our children now than then. Hopefully we can at least agree on that simple point…

[old3bob]

 

we humans are not "God" beyond categories (and neither are stones, plants, animals, angels, archangels or subtle and ancient elder beings) although we have an atom/atman of god hidden deep within under our noses where we mostly can not see.

Edited 20 hours ago by old3bob

[Thrice Daily]

55 minutes ago, old3bob said:

 

we humans are not "God" beyond categories (and neither are stones, plants, animals, angels, archangels or subtle and ancient elder beings) although we have an atom/atman of god hidden deep within under our noses where we mostly can not see.

I’m still getting over the fact that every part of us is recycled material that existed even at the very beginning of the Big Bang (or otherwise) [our atoms at least]
 

I feel the stars hold great sway over the power of these mysteries and our lives indeed and very much like to the lives of stars. From dust to dust. 
 

I probably shouldn’t but I really don’t think it as heretical to view the light of the creator through any aspect of the creation, be that stone, plant animal, or any other being real of imagined that we may choose.

 

Worshiping anything though, devoid of the element of reverence for a source of creation I would argue will potentially cause problems. But such is life… 

 

I think whatever skills or strategies you learn along the way (like Jesus no doubt did in his missing years) can be tools further shaped by the light of the source and used for the good or or (in religious speak divine will) I never really liked that though. By virtue of the meaning of the word divine, it can’t really exist in actual existence in a tangible form.

 

Perhaps the word Divine is still useful down here for the sake of conversation, like the word Chi…

 

Can I ask old Bob, are you a fan of the Hindu Deities? Do you think all of those fantastic stories of warriors and battles and flying machines happened here on the earth plane, or were they pointing elsewhere? 

[Thrice Daily]

11 hours ago, manitou said:

 

 

I grew up on Christianity.  I took up with Eastern thought.  I've read everything there is to read.  I've come to one self-realized conclusion.  That we, humans, ARE god.  The intelligence that manifests our past, present, and future is contained in our DNA.  That the same DNA, although different variations, is contained in all animal and plant life. And maybe rocks have consciousness.  Water does.

 

When a fetus is forming, all the cells that form are identical to one another.  It's not until the cells line up next to each other that the determination is made whether the group of cells will be a fingernail, a blood cell, a hair cell, any kind.  It's the intelligence of the DNA telling the cells of the fetus to go out on the little finger exactly 22,543 times before you gently turn around and come back.

 

Personally, I FIND THAT ASTOUNDING!!!  The incredible intelligence transmitted by the DNA of the mother and father to propogate the line.  But, being in genealogy, I fully recognize that the further and further you go back on Ancestry, the more and more you run into the same people, or 'cousins', as we call each other.  The trajectory of the 'lines' merging together toward the beginning shows me that, as it says in the DDJ, 'the function of the Dao is reversion'.

I know, but who or what created that fascinating computer program like existence?
 

Nothingness. I’m like you in a sense, I’ve come to that same conclusion that we are god. Beyond the spiral there is simply a stoppage point. Then the course of the spiral returns to time and matter.

 

i’m our consciousness I think we can only be the existence of God. As a 3D inhabitant in time and space. And yes all God.

 

I just don’t think we can compute beyond it. To actually see god. IMHO I don’t think that’s possible.

 

we can see allsorts of stuff all sorts of beings inside existence but not what created it.

 

kinda like a computer game program character , could never reach out of the television and see the room he was in.

 

The only clues I get to being created by something is that I’m a faith, so I guess it’s just a hunch/faith 

 

The words are interchangeable to me in this context…

 

So you think there no God at all. I totally respect that. I was there for a bit myself. But it didn’t feel very nice to just draw a blank and kinda hit the thin film edge of television screen glass from the inside… As it were

[Thrice Daily]

12 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

But I do not want to be a dick here, but I do somehow feel like I am not making myself understood here. If you are truly convinced that there is one god and one god only, why bother how and who people are worship? Is it not a paradox?

The reason I downvoted this, is because I wanted to stoke the fire in you to continue with this. 🔥 

 

To me this is where we get to the real crux of the discussion 🌲 

 

Please get into this with several short paragraphs and I’ll get into rapport with you if you feel like it. I think it will be really beneficial for people to read such an exchange 💕 

 

never judge a book by its cover, or a downvote…

Edited 18 hours ago by Thrice Daily

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

To be blunt @Thrice Daily, I do not allways follow your train of thoughts.

[Thrice Daily]

Of course you don’t @NaturaNaturans if you did life would be boring and dialogue meaningless.

 

I probably don’t follow your train of thoughts entirely too.

 

You put forward a complex supposition that if God created all of existence it shouldn’t matter if you want to worship any Gods within that existence.

 

it’s brilliant… When I asked a catholic priest a couple of years back. Who or what is God is to Catholics, he said we believe god is simply “Love & Infinite Grace.”
 

it’s an idea that I wasn’t aware of at the time… If I think in terms of being a father, and god creating us in own image, it makes a lot of sense… 

 

As far as human life in concerned though there was a lot more to it than love and Grace. Survival, protection, discoveries , dangers, lifestyles, politics, relations between tribes, countries etc 

 

So much more going on that dictated responses and baptisms to this new way, than the ideology. There were so many other competing factors at the time.

 

To tribes and kings/noblemen that became aware of Roman life as outsiders and seeing what the Romans had in terms of modern lifestyle perks and this new found fashion amongst the (Christianity) it was almost a bit like wanting the newest iPhone for a lot of peoples exposed to these comparatively modern and in vogue ideas that the Romans were parading around.

 

Marraige and fidelity (or at least feigned fidelity) with the impenetrable veneer of commitment in the home stead.

 

Yes Vanity and unhealthy expressions of ego will always shine through social structures, despite the religious structure as well as envy and greed. And shame. (Shame would be a great topic to get into later on)…

 

Nothing to do with Christianity on its own. These objects of analysis are largely phenomena of the Personality and it’s development. Although Christianity of course addresses this in its own specific way. Having both good and bad repercussion throughout time… 

 

But I digress, is it a paradox to say we should worship only one God.

 

I think it was more a point of reducing confusion, and creating a fixed focus on values. It took a long time for those values to swap in though. It didn’t happen over night did it… It’s easier to do through reduction rather than complication.

 

Having loads of Gods just complicated things .

 

it reminds me a bit of how Traditional Chinese medicine practitioners would view , holistic practitioners in the west. Crystals, reiki, massage, yoga, Pilates, pendulums , aromatherapy…

 

All great but they don’t understand that in TCM do they. They would spend their entire life concentrating on one modality, like Acupuncture, and focus only on one organ like the Liver, OR one Pathology like Eczema  

 

They must think we are nuts 🥜 

Edited 16 hours ago by Thrice Daily

[blue eyed snake]

3 hours ago, Thrice Daily said:

BES please do me a favour and have a quick look at sociologies model of Functionalism. It will help you understand me better. Especially if you think I’m cold in my responses.

 

no need to look at that, i've had some education . I don't think you're cold, you're quite passionate about the point you seem to be defending but incoherent and imho, a bit unsure of your convictions. Over the last days I saw you throwing out all things christian except for ehrm, what could be called the deeper meaning of the crucifiction.

 

I do not buy into that one either, to me it is as much hogwash as becoming pregnant without a a flesh and blood guy. She may have regarded that guy as an angel, but he was not.

 

I do respect Jesus though, just as I respect Buddha and Rumi, as enlightened guys that tried to teach their contemporaries some of the things they had discovered.

 

To me a religion has several functions, one is keeping order and structure in a society, that is the model of functionalism. But also nurturing, giving the folks an emotional safe outlet and haven. Grouphurts and individual hurts, mourning, sickness etcetera should be addressed by the priestesses and priests or whatever they're called.

 

as another important role of religion is offering a spiritual path for those that are ready and capable to follow it, these persons will then have an important role in the overall structure, by nurturing, healing, soothing et cetera.

 

The christian churches have failed spectacularly in fulfilling those roles and now are crumbling.  And with that crumbling society crumbles. Reinstating a failed religion won't help though. 

 

-----

 

Regarding the way they have "converted' most of the world, after europe what happened

 

think of the indigenous people of America, killed off and pushed in reservates. Their kids in "schools" were they had to let go of anything their parents taught them. Horrid. some died, think of that one, some invader takes your children, puts them in a big building and they never come back or come back emotionally traumatized.

I think same happened in Australia and new zealand.

most of africa was "christened" and the old tribal system was ruined, not much fantasy needed to see how this must have been ruinous for the people.

 

@Nungali   remarked that the aboriginals do not have that aggressive streak that is so common in humans, he thought that it has a relationship with not doing sacrifice ( i hope i got this right, else he will correct me)  I added the San and the Saami, and now add the Inuit.

 

those 4 indigenous people have one thing in common, their environment is harsh, without good relationships the chances of survival would be much smaller i guess. They are truly dependent on each other. They do not hit their children and, as far as I know, have no forced monogamous relationships.

 

-----

 

apart from the people there is mother earth herself to consider, roughly western world equates to christian world and it is the western world that has chopped down forests, burnt coal, oil and gas, polluted the streams, polluted everything. 

 

so no, I will never be friendly towards that religion.

 

I guess it will be the sparse little groups of people that still live closely to the ways their forebears lived that will survive the horrid climate crisis that has started in earnest now.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Thrice Daily said:

i’m just working with the tools I have at my disposal . But I won’t be beating her with a belt times have changed. She is testing, very testing but hopefully she will not completely take over all when she becomes a teenager.

 

you chose christianity as a tool, you could have chosen differently.

My atheistic parents hardly hit us as they thought ( with their brains, they did choose for themselves what they wanted their children to learn and that was finding out morality for themselves. ) they totally had no need for the crucifixion to teach me about burdens and sorrows to bear.

 

well, that's about it

 

i think I need to bow out of this discussion now, it's going nowhere

 

 

 

[Thrice Daily]

I’d rather it didn’t happen too BES but it did unfortunately. Hope to speak with you again soon ❤️ 

[old3bob]

5 hours ago, Thrice Daily said:

I’m still getting over the fact that every part of us is recycled material that existed even at the very beginning of the Big Bang (or otherwise) [our atoms at least]
 

I feel the stars hold great sway over the power of these mysteries and our lives indeed and very much like to the lives of stars. From dust to dust. 
 

I probably shouldn’t but I really don’t think it as heretical to view the light of the creator through any aspect of the creation, be that stone, plant animal, or any other being real of imagined that we may choose.

 

Worshiping anything though, devoid of the element of reverence for a source of creation I would argue will potentially cause problems. But such is life… 

 

I think whatever skills or strategies you learn along the way (like Jesus no doubt did in his missing years) can be tools further shaped by the light of the source and used for the good or or (in religious speak divine will) I never really liked that though. By virtue of the meaning of the word divine, it can’t really exist in actual existence in a tangible form.

 

Perhaps the word Divine is still useful down here for the sake of conversation, like the word Chi…

 

Can I ask old Bob, are you a fan of the Hindu Deities? Do you think all of those fantastic stories of warriors and battles and flying machines happened here on the earth plane, or were they pointing elsewhere? 

 

lets not forget: "the Tao that can be named is not the great Tao"  (paraphrased from Chapter one of the T.T.C.) or to me "God" beyond categories and evolution - although being Source for categories, evolution, and multitude of temporary and changing forms. (aka the Ten thousand)

Edited 13 hours ago by old3bob

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

2 hours ago, blue eyed snake said:

@Nungali   remarked that the aboriginals do not have that aggressive streak that is so common in humans, he thought that it has a relationship with not doing sacrifice ( i hope i got this right, else he will correct me)  I added the San and the Saami, and now add the Inuit.

 

those 4 indigenous people have one thing in common, their environment is harsh, without good relationships the chances of survival would be much smaller i guess. They are truly dependent on each other. They do not hit their children and, as far as I know, have no forced monogamous relationships.

 

-----

 

apart from the people there is mother earth herself to consider, roughly western world equates to christian world and it is the western world that has chopped down forests, burnt coal, oil and gas, polluted the streams, polluted everything. 

 

so no, I will never be friendly towards that religion.

 

I guess it will be the sparse little groups of people that still live closely to the ways their forebears lived that will survive the horrid climate crisis that has started in earnest now.

Lets take a look at four different societies. Three of them described in Graeber and Wengrows "dawn of everything," and one theory put forward in "12.000 med norsk historie."

 

1. Heroic societies:

Spoiler

Writing in the 1920s, Chadwick – Professor of Anglo-Saxon atCambridge, at much the same time J. R. R. Tolkien held that post at Oxford– was initially concerned with why great traditions of epic poetry (Nordicsagas, the works of Homer, the Ramayana) always seemed to emergeamong people in contact with and often employed by the urban civilizationsof their day, but who ultimately rejected the values of those samecivilizations. For a long time, his notion of 'heroic societies' fell into acertain disfavour: there was a widespread assumption that such societies didnot really exist but were, like the society represented in Homer's Iliad,retroactively reconstructed in epic literature.But as archaeologists have more recently discovered, there is a very realpattern of heroic burials, indicating in turn an emerging cultural emphasison feasting, drinking, the beauty and fame of the individual male warrior.80And it appears time and again around the fringes of urban life, often instrikingly similar forms, over the course of the Eurasian Bronze Age.Insearching for the common features of such 'heroic societies', we can find afairly consistent list in precisely the traditions of epic poetry that Chadwickcompared (in each region, the first written versions being much later in datethan the heroic burials themselves, but shedding light on earlier customs).It's a list which applies just as well, in most of its features, to the potlatchsocieties of the Northwest Coast or, for that matter, the Māori of NewZealand.All these cultures were aristocracies, without any centralized authorityor principle of sovereignty (or, maybe, some largely symbolic, formal one).Instead of a single centre, we find numerous heroic figures competingfiercely with one another for retainers and slaves. 'Politics', in suchsocieties, was composed of a history of personal debts of loyalty orvengeance between heroic individuals; all, moreover, focus on game-likecontests as the primary business of ritual, indeed political, life.81 Often,massive amounts of loot or wealth were squandered, sacrificed or givenaway in such theatrical performances. Moreover, all such groups explicitlyresisted certain features of nearby urban civilizations: above all, writing, forwhich they tended to substitute poets or priests who engaged in rotememorization or elaborate techniques of oral composition. Inside their ownsocieties, at least, they also rejected commerce. Hence standardizedcurrency, either in physical or credit forms, tended to be eschewed, with thefocus instead on unique material treasures.It goes without saying that we cannot possibly hope to trace all thesevarious tendencies back into periods for which no written testimony exists.But it is equally clear that, insofar as modern archaeology allows us toidentify an ultimate origin for 'heroic societies' of this sort, it is to be foundprecisely on the spatial and cultural margins of the world's first great urbanexpansion (indeed, some of the earliest aristocratic tombs in the Turkishhighlands were dug directly into the ruins of abandoned Uruk colonies).82Aristocracies, perhaps monarchy itself, first emerged in opposition to theegalitarian cities of the Mesopotamian plains, for which they likely hadmuch the same mixed but ultimately hostile and murderous feelings asAlaric the Goth would later have towards Rome and everything it stood for,Genghis Khan towards Samarkand or Merv, or Timur towards Delhi.

("dawn of everything", chapter 8. "IN WHICH WE DESCRIBE HOW (WRITTEN) HISTORY, ANDPROBABLY (ORAL) EPIC TOO, BEGAN: WITH BIG COUNCILSIN THE CITIES, AND SMALL KINGDOMS IN THE HILLS")

 

2. Indus valley

 

Spoiler

But it’s this last point that leads us in more promising directions. Despite all its problems, Mohenjo-daro and its sister sites in the Punjab do offer some insights into the nature of civic life in the first cities of South Asia, and into the wider question that we posed at the start of this chapter: is there a causal relationship between scale and inequality in human societies? Let’s consider, for a moment, what archaeology tells us about wealth distribution at Mohenjo-daro. Contrary to what we might expect, there is no concentration of material wealth on the Upper Citadel. Quite the opposite, in fact. Metals, gemstones and worked shell – for example – were widely available to households of the Lower Town; archaeologists have recovered such goods from caches beneath house floors, and bundles of them are scattered over every quarter of the site.90 The same goes for little terracotta figures of people wearing bangles, diadems and other flashy personal adornment. Not so the Upper Citadel. Writing, and also standard weights and measures, were also widely distributed across the Lower Town; so too evidence for craft occupations and industries from metalworking and potting to the manufacture of beads. All flourished down there, in the Lower Town, but are absent from the city’s Upper Citadel, where the main civic structures stood.91 Objects made for personal display had little place, it seems, in the most elevated quarters of the city. Instead, what defines the Upper Citadel are buildings like the Great Bath – a large sunken pool measuring roughly forty feet long and over six feet deep, lined with carefully executed brickwork, sealed with plaster and bitumen and entered on either side via steps with timber treads – all constructed to the finest architectural standards, yet unmarked by monuments dedicated to particular rulers, or indeed any other signs of personal aggrandizement. Because of its lack of royal sculpture, or indeed other forms of monumental depiction, the Indus valley has been termed a ‘faceless civilization’.92 At Mohenjo-daro, it seems, the focus of civic life was not a palace or cenotaph, but a public facility for purifying the body. Brick-made bathing floors and platforms also were a standard fixture in most dwellings of the Lower Town. Citizens seem to have been familiar with very specific notions of cleanliness, with daily ablutions apparently forming part of their domestic routine. The Great Bath was, at one level, an outsized version of these residential washing facilities. On another level, though, life on the Upper Citadel seems to negate that of the Lower Town. So long as the Great Bath was in use – and it was for some centuries – we find no evidence of industrial activities nearby. The narrowing lanes on the acropolis effectively prevented the use of ox-drawn carts and similar commercial traffic. Here, it was the Bath itself – and the act of bathing – that became the focus of social life and labour. Barracks and storerooms adjacent to the Bath housed a staff (whether in attached or rotating service, we cannot know) and their essential supplies. The Upper Citadel was a special sort of ‘city within the city’, in which ordinary principles of household organization went into reverse.93 All this is redolent of the inequality of the caste system, with its hierarchical division of social functions, organized on an ascending scale of purity. 94 But the earliest recorded reference to caste in South Asia comes only 1,000 years later, in the Rig Veda – an anthology of sacrificial hymns, first committed to writing around 1200 BC. The system, as described in later Sanskrit epics, consisted of four hereditary ranks or varnas: priests (brahmins), warriors or nobles (kshatriyas), farmers and traders (vaishyas) and labourers (shudras); and also those so lowly as to be excluded from the varnas entirely. The very top ranks belong to world-renouncers, whose abstention from trappings of personal status raises them to a higher spiritual plane. Commerce, industry and status rivalries may all thrive, but the wealth, power or prosperity being fought over is always seen as of lesser value – in the great scheme of things – than the purity of priestly caste. The varna system is about as ‘unequal’ as any social system can possibly be, yet where one ranks within it has less to do with how many material goods one can pile up or lay claim to than with one’s relation to certain (polluting) substances – physical dirt and waste, but also bodily matter linked to birth, death and menstruation – and the people who handle them. All this creates serious problems for any contemporary scholar seeking to apply Gini coefficients or any other property-based measure of ‘inequality’ to the society in question. On the other hand, and despite the great gaps in time between our sources, it might allow us to make sense of some of Mohenjo-daro’s otherwise puzzling features, such as the fact that those residential buildings most closely resembling palaces are not located on the Upper Citadel but crammed into the streets of the Lower Town – that bit closer to the mud, sewage pipes and paddy fields, where such jostling for worldly status seems to have properly belonged.95 Clearly, we can’t just project the social world evoked in Sanskrit literature indiscriminately on to the much earlier Indus civilization. If the first South Asian cities were indeed organized on caste-like principles, then we would immediately have to acknowledge a major difference from the system of ranks described over a millennium later in Sanskrit texts, where second-highest status (just below brahmins) is reserved for the warrior caste known as kshatriyas. In the Bronze Age Indus valley there is no evidence of anything like a kshatriya class of warrior-nobles, nor of the kind of aggrandizing behaviour associated with such groups in later epic tales such as the Mahabharata or Ramayana. Even the largest cities, like Harappa and Mohenjo-daro, yield no evidence of spectacular sacrifices or feasts, no pictorial narratives of military prowess or celebrations of famous deeds, no sign of tournaments in which anyone vied over titles and treasures, no aristocratic burials. And if such things were going on in the Indus cities at the time, there would be ways to know. Indus civilization wasn’t some kind of commercial or spiritual arcadia; nor was it an entirely peaceful society. 96 But neither does it contain any evidence for charismatic authority figures: war leaders, lawgivers and the like. A small, cloaked sculpture made of yellow limestone from Mohenjodaro, known in the literature as the ‘priest-king’, is often presented as such. But, in fact, there’s no particular reason to believe the figure really is a priest-king or an authority figure of any sort. It’s simply a limestone image of an urbane Bronze Age man with a beard. The fact that past generations of scholars have insisted on referring to him as ‘priest-king’ is testimony more to their own assumptions about what they think must have been happening in early Asian cities than anything the evidence implies. Over time, experts have largely come to agree that there’s no evidence for priest-kings, warrior nobility, or anything like what we would recognize as a ‘state’ in the urban civilization of the Indus valley. Can we speak, then, of ‘egalitarian cities’ here as well, and if so, in what sense? If the Upper Citadel at Mohenjo-daro really was dominated by some sort of ascetic order, literally ‘higher’ than everyone else, and the area around the citadel by wealthy merchants, then there was a clear hierarchy between groups. Yet this doesn’t necessarily mean that the groups themselves were hierarchical in their internal organization, or that ascetics and merchants had a greater say than anyone else when it came to matters of day-to-day governance.

IN WHICH WE CONSIDER WHETHER THE INDUS CIVILIZATION WAS AN EXAMPLE OF CASTE BEFORE KINGSHIP

 

3. The Indigenous Critique: native Americans as a mirror to European society

 

«I have spent six years reflecting on the state of European society and I still can't think of a single way they act that is not inhuman, and I genuinely think this can only be the case as long as you stick to your distinctions of 'mine' and 'thine'. To imagine one can live in the country of money and preserve one's soul is like imagining one could preserve one's life at the bottom of a lake.»
Kondiaronk, Huron chief, 1600s

 

https://www.shortform.com/blog/indigenous-critique/

 

So, all the above is from "the dawn of everything by Wengrow and Graeber. The central thesis is that there is no "state of nature." Societies are not predetermined to develop a certain way, they are built consciously and vary greatly. Truth be told, the book as attracted some criticism, but make up your own mind.

 

4. Scandianavian trust based societies

 

Alright, now I am entering etnocentric and politically iucorrect territory. but fact is, the Scandinavian countries do have the highest amount of social trust of all nations on the plant. Sturla Ellingsvåg, who is a genetics and historian who have done research with Max Planc institute, David Reich lab at harward and Kristian Kristiansen at the university of Copenhagen (all this to say, he knows what he is talking about), put the high degree of trust down to genetic heritage from the Scandinavian hunter gatherers. There were simply no way to survive in an environment like Scandinavia with out it.

Edit: continuation: it is also interresting how he argues for the Aesir being the indo euro invaders, vanir the early european farmers and jotuns the scandinavian hunter gatherers. The aesir are certainly a so called heroic society, the vanir asscociated with fertility and probally more egalitarian.

 

edit two: ill refrain from making any value judgement. To me, they are all just different expressions of culture, each with their pros and cons. I do not want to be a slave in Mesopotamia, nor do I want to be invaded by the indo europeans. Allthough… the hunther gatherer life style strikes me as quite romantic.

Edited 13 hours ago by NaturaNaturans

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

@Thrice Daily

I do not want to ignore you. As @blue eyed snake said, you seem genuine and passionate. But in order to respond to you, I need some help: what exactly do you want my input on?

[Apech]

34 minutes ago, Sir Darius the Clairvoyent said:

@Thrice Daily

I do not want to ignore you. As @blue eyed snake said, you seem genuine and passionate. But in order to respond to you, I need some help: what exactly do you want my input on?

Exactly how clairvoyant are you Sir Darius?

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

Just now, Apech said:

Exactly how clairvoyant are you Sir Darius?

It is just a playfull name apech, dont take it to serious

[blue eyed snake]

1 hour ago, Sir Darius the Clairvoyent said:

Alright, now I am entering etnocentric and politically iucorrect territory. but fact is, the Scandinavian countries do have the highest amount of social trust of all nations on the plant. Sturla Ellingsvåg, who is a genetics and historian who have done research with Max Planc institute, David Reich lab at harward and Kristian Kristiansen at the university of Copenhagen (all this to say, he knows what he is talking about), put the high degree of trust down to genetic heritage from the Scandinavian hunter gatherers. There were simply no way to survive in an environment like Scandinavia with out it.

 

well, its nice to read that my adhoc hypothesis is supported by some scientists.

 

 

[Thrice Daily]

3 hours ago, Sir Darius the Clairvoyent said:

@Thrice Daily

I do not want to ignore you. As @blue eyed snake said, you seem genuine and passionate. But in order to respond to you, I need some help: what exactly do you want my input on?

. Yes Yes, quite quite. I will put my thinking cap on and get back to you.

[Thrice Daily]

4 hours ago, Sir Darius the Clairvoyent said:

the hunther gatherer life style strikes me as quite romantic.

I will say I agree with this… 

 

If there were a magic button to press, that would rewind the world to its natural state. With us all still living..

 

Totally back to nature, no phones cars computers, no governmental structures no nothing.

 

As shocking as it might be I would be tempted to press that button. 
 

I agree it is Romantic. But I think looking at the world now and moving forward is also a super way to treat this thread.

 

Compatibility as one possible fork in the road, (with other practices) or Adaptation and growth in these times.

 

For one and I know this is highly controversial. But I think, monogamy in modern living should probably be rethought. It’s not leading to a very good outcome if you look at birth rates.

 

The challenge is preserving enough family structure so it’s fair in kids though, and addressing the challenge of housing and resources for multiple families. I see this as something that could possibly save western civilisation … Maybe, but as I say controversial and a complete 180 on Monogamy that the church insisted upon for all these years… 

 

I think if it continues on this trajectory it will fail, and that’s just simple maths, numbers wise…

 

So much of its Cultural, I don’t think hedonism is the key though, birth rates are too low as it is. And more people going on birth control, becoming sterile or not mating with the opposite sex,,, could just mean the Wests decline in numbers will crumble the whole thing. And the replacement will happen. We will return to tribal life but quite honestly, it will be the tribe of Islam.

 

Thats not needless speculation, that’s a blunt and honest fact…

Edited 9 hours ago by Thrice Daily

[Cobie]

 

7 hours ago, blue eyed snake said:

… The christian churches … now are crumbling …

Christianity is thriving and growing fast globally.

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Cobie

[Cobie]

 

7 hours ago, blue eyed snake said:

... I will never be friendly towards that religion …

Enjoy.  Globally more than half of all people are of an abrahamic religion. 

 

[Nungali]

8 hours ago, blue eyed snake said:

I do not buy into that one either, to me it is as much hogwash as becoming pregnant without a a flesh and blood guy. She may have regarded that guy as an angel, but he was not.

 

me climbing through BES's window at night  ; "  Dont worry, I am an angel ... an angel    "  Ooooooooo Ahhhhhh Ooooowwww " ( chanting heavenly chorus )

 

...

The christian churches have failed spectacularly in fulfilling those roles and now are crumbling.  And with that crumbling society crumbles. Reinstating a failed religion won't help though. 

 

Thats why 'God' made a new one !   The Baha'is !       - equality of sexes and 'races', protecting cultural diversity and the environment , a new system of elected representatives that replaces clergy , than be outvoted and removed by the people ... etc etc ... what more do ya want ? !   ( if you want religion )

 

 

-----

 

@Nungali   remarked that the aboriginals do not have that aggressive streak that is so common in humans, he thought that it has a relationship with not doing sacrifice ( i hope i got this right, else he will correct me)  I added the San and the Saami, and now add the Inuit.

 

Mostly , thats close enough, for us . Any clarity I might want to make on that statement  would be only to defray my stalker , who is back and looking to pick any little misdemeanor of mine apart .  Suffice to say , I didnt actually say that , they can have such a streak . But they didnt seem to have pain as punishment , maybe  for ordeal and testing  ( to see if someone was 'Man', leader , hubter material , as such it was more of a spiritual thing  .  Thery where horrified to see white people getting flogged as punishment . They had spearing as punishement but that was different . Anyway, this is veering too off topic . I can explain to those interested , if they want , elsewhere .

 

 

[Nungali]

4 hours ago, Apech said:

Exactly how clairvoyant are you Sir Darius?

 

It was either that or 'Prince Sourdough'  ,  I suggested  (with avatar ) ;

 

 

Sir Darius Sourdough III

 

 

But he chose differently . I  cannot force people to do what I want .

 

However if anyone knows how I could do that , please PM  me with details .

Edited 7 hours ago by Nungali