Amoral egoistic Judaism in the book of Amos

I found an excellent Old Testament analogue for Amoral Egoistic Christianity. This quote from Möller is copied from ch. 26 of Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh and Sean MacDowell, emphasis mine.

Without any transition or introduction, Amos then goes on to invite the people to come to Bethel and Gilgal. Both—the former being Israel’s national sanctuary or the king’s sanctuary, as the priest Amaziah preferred to call it (Amos 7:13)—were important cult centres. Imitating a priestly invitation to worship, Amos sarcastically calls the Israelites not to come to these places and worship, but to come and sin. Thus, whereas the purposes of such a pilgrimage should have been, and in the eyes of the prophet’s audience would have been, thanksgiving and the fulfilment of vows, Amos equates the Israelites’ cultic performances with the war crimes condemned in Amos 1–2. . . .

The sinfulness of the worship is underlined by the ironic command to multiply their sins . . . as well as by the use of another heptad, in this instance consisting of seven imperatives, which, again ironically, calls on the people to outperform the law’s cultic requirements. Mocking their attitude, especially their reliance on outward gestures, Amos asks the Israelites to offer sacrifices every morning instead of once a year and give their tithes every three days rather than once in three years. By the same token, he calls on his audience to offer thank offerings along with freewill offerings but what is missing, rather conspicuously, is any mention of sin offerings or indeed anything related to the issues of sin and repentance. What Amos does stress, referring to “your offerings”, “your tithes”, and so on, is the people’s egotism, which is at the heart of their remarkable display of religious zeal. . . .

The transition from the initial oracle in 4:1–3 to the present one may seem somewhat abrupt, given the lack of connectives . . . as well as the change of topic. Yet, the combination of social issues (vv. 1–3) with religious or cultic ones (vv. 4–5) is a recurrent feature in the book of Amos. . . . From a rhetorical point of view, it should also be noted that the present arrangement results in an interesting ironic effect, as the people are said to display an impressive religious drive that goes far beyond the requirements of the law while at the same time disobeying the heart of the law by exploiting and abusing the poor. . . . Punctilious as they were in their observance of cultic requirements they believed that they would not have to face Yahweh’s punitive intervention. Amos responds to this with heavy irony, inviting the people to come and revel in a “gala barbecue” consisting in a multitude of offerings and sacrifices, only to condemn their religious zeal, quite brutally . . . as something akin to the horrible war crimes committed by Israel’s enemies. (Möller, PD, 262–264, 266–267)

If the political and social movements we’re witnessing in the West are indeed the firstfruits of k-selection, then it must be observed that the religiosity predicted by Darwin’s Cathedral is self-righteously opposed to the morality preached by Jesus Christ. Indeed, the religious impulses of k-selection appear to be so perfectly in line with the Gnostic heresies that we might describe these heresies as the emergent natural religion of evolutionary winners.

The advice given by self-help gurus always agrees with Baron Rothschild: associate with high-status people and avoid losers.

Dr. David McClelland of Harvard found, after twenty-five years of research, that the choice of a negative “reference group” was in itself enough to condemn a person to failure and underachievement in life. Your reference groups are the people you identify with-the ones you work with, socialize with, live with and get involved with in community or nonwork activities. Like a chameleon, you unconsciously adopt the attitudes, behavior and opinions of the people with whom you most closely associate.

In selecting the people that you will spend time with, follow Baron de Rothschild’s advice and “make no useless acquaintances.”o meet new, positive people, you usually have to stop associating with your old group. Especially, get away from negative people. They are the primary cause of most unhappiness in your life. Staying in a bad relationship can be enough in itself to cut off your full potential for success and happiness. There is no suggestive influence more powerful than the people: around you. Select them with care.

-Brian Tracy

-Brian Tracy

The way to win in this life and the way to win in the next life are often opposed. Christians who are very high in IQ, willpower, and ego strength ought to take warning from this, because they are at the highest risk to accidentally combine their faith with Gnostic elitism.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Amoral egoistic Judaism in the book of Amos

  1. Mycroft Jones says:

    Aeoli, are you saying the Bible books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes are “gnostic elitism”? Because they completely agree with the Baron Rothschild’s dictum. Be merciful to the weak and powerless, yes, and don’t completely turn your face away from the poor and needy, but also don’t get sucked into their drama. In my life experience of doing the “Christian” thing, Brian Tracy is 100% right and I wish I’d paid attention to that advice much sooner.

    The problem with gnostic elitism isn’t about spending time with the wise to become wise; it is the abundance mindset that won’t even let you acknowledge someone elses suffering or weakness. How often have you heard the new age prosperity types say it is all in your head, and you must “manifest abundance” and therefore you must not speak “anything negative”. This sort of thing is no different than the Catholic abomination “don’t think an evil thought about anyone”. Why abomination? Because that is how pedophilia and other sins are covered up, so that they rot, fester, and spread. Whether Catholic or New Age, such things amount to sticking your head in the sand, and telling a drowning man to “think positive thoughts” for fear of “getting sucked into his drama” is egosim and cruelty of the worst sort.

    • bicebicebice says:

      “Mycroft Jones says:
      July 6, 2019 at 12:28 am
      Aeoli, are you saying the Bible books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes are “gnostic elitism”? Because they completely agree with the Baron Rothschild’s dictum. Be merciful to the weak and powerless, yes, and don’t completely turn your face away from the poor and needy, but also don’t get sucked into their drama. In my life experience of doing the “Christian” thing, Brian Tracy is 100% right and I wish I’d paid attention to that advice much sooner.”

      If people born naturally evil follow the 10 commandments they will reach ye olde live long and prosper. If people born naturally good don’t follow the 10 commandments, we end up where we are now.
      Aeoli can’t reconcile Edenism (genetics) and Christianity, he always wounds up back in this dilemma. This is not news, only if you are a poor reader, is this news, today the 6th of july 2019.
      There are evil stupid people on this planet born this way, stay this way despite anything and you should never associate with them and preferably lock them up in institutions, send them abroad or push them off cliffs.
      How much “patience” can one afford when people tell you who they are everyday, waiting for the holy spirit to save this lost/evil soul? This is Stockholm-syndrome, trust me I know what the hell I am talking about here. If you can’t sense if there is something wrong with a person, any sape, then I feel sorry for you, theorizing on how you will circumvent the inevitable of getting saped.

      This is the Koanic/Aeolid schism. I lean towards Koanism but admire the Aeolid “positive optimism” in lack for a correct term where you keep “faith” whilst being simultaneously drowned in sin all around you, at least you drown last.

      inb4 “muh muh”, if you want “muh muh”, then tell me what the obligations of orangutangs are towards chimpanzees, other than staying away from them and vice versa.

      Based Rothschild tell the tharded autists how to make a buck or two, treestumps are cheap but they still cost a little. Buckle up buckoo itz happening

      • Obadiah says:

        >Aeoli can’t reconcile Edenism (genetics) and Christianity, he always wounds up back in this dilemma. This is not news, only if you are a poor reader, is this news, today the 6th of july 2019.

        One way or another, the old man of the broken Earth will come around. Cain is a melonhead!

      • Obadiah says:

        The Koanic/Aeolid schism is that camp Koanic wants a general Altrugenics movement as a cooperative effort between various altruism-shifted Edenic types while camp Aeoli wants only T-Back people.

        Koanic’s model has an actual chance at working but will probably get pretty ugly at places and points.

        Aeoli’s model will never get off the ground, but will satisfy Aeoli’s inner purity-drive.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          >The Koanic/Aeolid schism is that camp Koanic wants a general Altrugenics movement as a cooperative effort between various altruism-shifted Edenic types while camp Aeoli wants only T-Back people.

          Maybe there is a way this is true I’m not aware of, but I don’t believe this is what I want or that it’s a consequence of what I want.

          • Obadiah says:

            >Maybe there is a way this is true I’m not aware of, but I don’t believe this is what I want or that it’s a consequence of what I want.

            It’s kind of the vibe I’ve picked up from reading your various postings from throughout the years, but I’m glad to hear its not your official stance.

            Any movement with any chance of success is necessarily going to be a coalition of different types with different aptitudes, and the only thing that will unite these different people to common action is the banner of Christ (Christianity being the original Altrugenics movement).

        • Koanic says:

          I support extreme patrilineal segregation for genpop, ala OT. Phenotypic segregation is an intermediate step thereto. From face control to race control.

          NT rules for personal association in mixed modernity are clear. Additions thereto are superfluous.

          • glosoli says:

            NT rules on loving thy enemy are also clear, yet you call for the mass slaughter of all leftists, here and now, (from the safety of a Chinese apartment of course).

            Explain how you reconcile this position with the words of Jesus?

            Or, continue to fake your credibility as a Christian man, your choice, coward.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        >Based Rothschild tell the tharded autists how to make a buck or two, treestumps are cheap but they still cost a little. Buckle up buckoo itz happening

        This is why I said the troo treestump is a penthouse suite at the apex of a pyramid.

        • bicebicebice says:

          “This is why I said the troo treestump is a penthouse suite at the apex of a pyramid.”

          Don’t forget the Hitlerian-treestump on how he sold himself to the germans as member of the Nibelung race… “they mostly come out and meme at night, mostly…”

          Walking in and out of society coming and go as you please, Roffschild can’t do that, he has the penthouse but his adress is still “The nicest part of the Citydump, Goldmuckpath number 101”. Every race is welcome to live in his shadow looking at this nice House, but the sapes will still sape him one day. Western gay.io will do him in.
          Ludditetreestumping does not have this problem, but it has all the amenities of modern life, sapes don’t want that because itz boring but it really isn’t.

          Look at my Borgonizer thread, American white demographics will be the luddites and in CHYNA they enforce honesty on everyone in the city but not as much in the countryside (yet or ever because there needs to be a place of punishment). In the west you are punished if you live in the cities.

          Edenism is unironically for everyone, only real racism can be “anti”-racist by working off your capabilites (limitations). CHYNA are unironically the guys that can get things done and do, and they won’t give a shit if some white retards living in treestumps in some western outback deals in barter consisting of old video games.

          “The way to win in this life and the way to win in the next life are often opposed. Christians who are very high in IQ, willpower, and ego strength ought to take warning from this, because they are at the highest risk to accidentally combine their faith with Gnostic elitism.” If you win in the west you definitely loose, if you fail you win. justin turdeau was right if you beat your enemies they win because you now occupy that spot, nobody will fight you for a treestump.
          If you want unironic real future City-topia get with the Borgonizer.

          there really is no real actual problem for anyone when you think about it

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Aeoli, are you saying the Bible books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes are “gnostic elitism”?

      Proverbs arguably, but Ecclesiastes no. In Ecclesiastes the author discards all previous advice as he goes, except for his conclusion:

      “Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.

      13
      Now all has been heard;
      here is the conclusion of the matter:
      Fear God and keep his commandments,
      for this is the duty of all mankind.
      14
      For God will bring every deed into judgment,
      including every hidden thing,
      whether it is good or evil.”

      >The problem with gnostic elitism isn’t about spending time with the wise to become wise; it is the abundance mindset that won’t even let you acknowledge someone elses suffering or weakness.

      This is true. That’s why a good king has to go out among the poor to get a sense of their suffering, without becoming one of them and thus abdicating his responsibility to them as king.

  2. Obadiah says:

    Indeed, the religious impulses of k-selection appear to be so perfectly in line with the Gnostic heresies that we might describe these heresies as the emergent natural religion of evolutionary winners.

    “Cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.”

  3. Obadiah says:

    “I don’t have an answer because the vicious spiral of societal entropy is deterministic, except to remind you that only God can save humans from ourselves or each other. There is no earthly salvation–the Greek tragedy writers understood this. Christianity takes a strong influence from that Stoic tradition, except that we believe the longer story is a divine comedy.”

  4. Obadiah says:

    Indeed, the religious impulses of k-selection appear to be so perfectly in line with the Gnostic heresies that we might describe these heresies as the emergent natural religion of evolutionary winners.

    From: http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htm

    “GNOSTICISM IS THE TEACHING based on Gnosis, the knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means. Although Gnosticism thus rests on personal religious experience, it is a mistake to assume all such experience results in Gnostic recognitions. It is nearer the truth to say that Gnosticism expresses a specific religious experience, an experience that does not lend itself to the language of theology or philosophy, but which is instead closely affinitized to, and expresses itself through, the medium of myth.

    “The second strategy is to rally the dreamers by seeking them where they can be found, drinking deep from pools that reflect reality in strange forms that mesmerize, seeming more real than reality itself. I am talking, of course, about fairy tales.”

    So the really important distinction/question between Gnosticism and Christianity is the Jehovah question, and from there the burden of responsibility for the fact that we have to predate upon and eat other life forms to survive.

    This broken world: whose fault is it? Man’s or some distant demiurge? Are you morally accountable to someone?

    And

    Promise of Heaven vs Promise of Godhood

    ^A few crucial points of distinction

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >So the really important distinction/question between Gnosticism and Christianity is the Jehovah question, and from there the burden of responsibility for the fact that we have to predate upon and eat other life forms to survive.

      This will interest you:

      “…when God created the human race, He commanded that they eat only fruit and vegetables (Gen. 1:29). But later, when conditions changed after the flood, God commanded that they also eat meat (Gen. 9:3).”

      McDowell, Josh. Evidence That Demands a Verdict (p. 595). Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition.

      • Obadiah says:

        >When God created the human race, He commanded that they only eat fruits and vegetables

        Then we have to ask why God favored Abel’s carnivorous contribution over Cain’s garden-grown gift.

        In Genesis 1:29 God makes it clear that humans are to consume horticulture–but not exclusively.

      • Obadiah says:

        K-Selected humans are optimized to consume cooked meat. Your brain doesn’t develop properly if you don’t eat meat.

        Maybe the curse on the ground doesn’t have to do with predation/Dominion over animals, and instead has to do with something else.

  5. Fox says:

    Gnostics = People living apart from society, in small communities, living ascetically (fasting, meditating, abstaining from meat, sex and alcohol), trying to leave this world and everything in it (ie everything worldy) behind them.

    What do these people have in common with the “evolutionary winners” who “associate with high-status people and avoid losers” and focus solely on worldly success?
    I think some of your sources have the habit of attributing religious/political movements they don’t like to a remarkably ill-defined “gnosticism”.

    If you want a “religion of evolutionary winners”, read your OT.
    The whole isr4elite LARPing (british isr4elism, christian identity) comes down to other groups wanting to have that awesome “evolutionary winner” religion*.
    Half the OT is about god punishing the shit out of his people bc they relaxed and stopped being evolutionary competitive.

    – “associate with high-status people and avoid losers”, that’s what josef did, how he became No1 in egypt after the pharao + daniel + esther + prob a bunch of other people + historical flavius josephus

    * try to come up with an idea that is better for group selection than the notion of being “the only chosen people of the only real god” and its corollaries (“a kingdom of priests and a holy nation”, “You may charge a foreigner interest, but you may not charge your brother interest” etc).

    • Mycroft Jones says:

      Amen.

    • Obadiah says:

      >I think some of your sources have the habit of attributing religious/political movements they don’t like to a remarkably ill-defined “gnosticism”.

      Gnosticism is another thing Aeoli has trouble reconciling. Aeoli “drinks deep from pools that reflect reality in strange forms that mesmerize, seeming more real than reality itself” then turns around to chastise Gnosticism, defining it as “in brief, ‘mind over matter'”.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        Discernment is defined as a spiritual sixth sense in that book that says I have a lot of it. So it’s not like I’m a materialist or basing my criticisms of Gnosticism on those grounds. It’s a distrust of the human spirit and, when it comes to outside phenomena, fear of making oneself vulnerable to evil spirits.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Gnostics = People living apart from society, in small communities, living ascetically (fasting, meditating, abstaining from meat, sex and alcohol), trying to leave this world and everything in it (ie everything worldy) behind them.

      >What do these people have in common with the “evolutionary winners” who “associate with high-status people and avoid losers” and focus solely on worldly success?
      >I think some of your sources have the habit of attributing religious/political movements they don’t like to a remarkably ill-defined “gnosticism”.

      Gnosticism is a broader umbrella than you’re allowing in your definition here. The Pneumatics, who conceive of themselves as the highest race of man, do not live ascetically.

      Against Heresies, book 1, ch. 6, § 3.. . . “They maintain, therefore, that in every way it is always necessary for them to practise the mystery of conjunction. And that they may persuade the thoughtless to believe this, they are in the habit of using these very words, “Whosoever being in this world does not so love a woman as to obtain possession of her, is not of the truth, nor shall attain to the truth. But whosoever being of this world has intercourse with woman, shall not attain to the truth, because he has so acted under the power of concupiscence.” On this account, they tell us that it is necessary for us whom they call animal men, and describe as being of the world, to practise continence and good works, that by this means we may attain at length to the intermediate habitation, but that to them who are called “the spiritual and perfect” such a course of conduct is not at all necessary. For it is not conduct of any kind which leads into the Pleroma, but the seed sent forth thence in a feeble, immature state, and here brought to perfection”.

      http://www.womenpriests.org/st-irenaeus/

      >If you want a “religion of evolutionary winners”, read your OT.
      >The whole isr4elite LARPing (british isr4elism, christian identity) comes down to other groups wanting to have that awesome “evolutionary winner” religion*.
      >Half the OT is about god punishing the shit out of his people bc they relaxed and stopped being evolutionary competitive.

      This is basically the thesis of “Darwin’s Cathedral” and one of the foundations for my model of Zodiacism.

      • Fox says:

        I generally trust Y, a declared enemy of X, more when he says something good about X then when he says something bad (counterbalancing the “bias against X”).

        Those statements referred to the “most perfect” of certain sects – the mass (“animal men”) was living ascetically.
        Since other sources generally describe the gnostics as ascetics, I’d categorize those mentioned in “against heresies” as atypical of gnosticism itself.

        The cathars (who were destroyed in the so-called “albigensian crusade”):
        “If you question the heretic about his faith, nothing is more Christian; if about his daily converse, nothing more blameless; and what he says he proves by his actions … As regards his life and conduct, he cheats no one, pushes ahead of no one, does violence to no one. Moreover, his cheeks are pale with fasting; he does not eat the bread of idleness; he labours with his hands and thus makes his living” [St Bernard of Clairvaux, Sermon 65 Song of Songs]

        “The perfecti were the spiritual elite, highly respected by many of the local people, leading a life of austerity and charity. In the apostolic fashion they ministered to the people and travelled in pairs.”
        “Killing was abhorrent to the Cathars. Consequently, abstention from all animal food (sometimes exempting fish) was enjoined of the Perfecti. The Perfecti avoided eating anything considered to be a by-product of sexual reproduction.”
        “Cathars also rejected marriage. Their theology was based principally on the belief that the physical world, including the flesh, was irredeemably evil—as it stemmed from the evil principle or “demiurge”. Therefore, reproduction was viewed by them as a moral evil to be avoided—as it continued the chain of reincarnation and suffering in the material world. It was claimed by their opponents that, given this loathing for procreation, they generally resorted to sodomy. Such was the situation that a charge of heresy leveled against a suspected Cathar was usually dismissed if the accused could show he was legally married” [infogalactic]

      • Fox says:

        “later French Cathars, which taught that women must be reborn as men in order to achieve salvation. Another one is that the sexual allure of women impedes man’s ability to reject the material world” [infogalactic]
        “Among the Manicheans … there was an elite group called Electi (the chosen) who were Lacto-Vegetarians for ethical reasons and abode by a commandment which strictly banned killing. Common Manicheans called Auditores (Hearers) obeyed looser rules of nonviolence” [infogalactic]
        “Some modern scholars have suggested that Manichaean ways of thinking influenced the development of some of Augustine’s ideas, such as the nature of good and evil, the idea of hell, the separation of groups into elect, hearers, and sinners, and the hostility to the flesh and sexual activity” [infogalactic]
        According to german wikipedia, the manichaean “electi” had to abstain from meat, blood (?), wine and fruit, weren’t allowed to work, and had to be celibate.
        Further, german wikipedia writes that marcionism demanded celibacy and abstinence from meat and wine as well.

        Were there self-described gnostics (or people described as such by contemporaries) in positions of power or close to it (ie.g. counselor of the emperor tasked with educating his children/ court physician) ?
        If the answer to this question is no (which I believe it is), then gnosticism was without noteworthy political clout, and hence cannot be responsible for any developments in the political sphere.

        The only example I could find so far was of one or two rulers of the first bulgarian empire being influenced by or supporting bogomiles (+ the regional influence of the cathars in languedoc).

  6. Obadiah says:

    >Gnostics = People living apart from society, in small communities, living ascetically (fasting, meditating, abstaining from meat, sex and alcohol), trying to leave this world and everything in it (ie everything worldy) behind them.

    For what its worth I don’t think ur-Neanderthals abstained from psychoactive substances. They certainly didn’t abstain from sex and meat.

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/even-cavemen-liked-to-get_n_5316914

    One of the earliest documented examples suggestive of mind-altering substance use by early hominids was found at Shanidar IV, a Neanderthal burial site from roughly 60,000 B.C. in what is now northern Iraq. At the site, which Science magazine describes as a “flower burial,” researchers found evidence of a number of plants known for their medicinal use, suggesting that the grave may have been the final resting place of an ancient shaman.

  7. Dumbo says:

    follow Baron de Rothschild’s advice and “make no useless acquaintances.”

    Ah, a Rothschild! Now there’s someone to emulate, known for his kindness, honesty and generosity.

    The question remains, if we make friends with people just depending on how useful they are for us, can we really call them friends? Won’t we, or them, dissociate from ourselves and vice-versa the moment they or us are no longer useful for each other?

    “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the children of men, in whom there is no help.”

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Good distinction.

    • bicebicebice says:

      Grown men don’t have “friends”, women certainly don’t have friends only children have friends.

      Grown men have families, colleagues, associates, work-buddy chums, amateur soccer teammates, fellow cigar aficionados and “we go to the same church together”. If you don’t have a Confrérie as a grown ass man, then you don’t have Friends.
      Having friends as a grown man is Not “we grew up together”, “he borrowed me 20 dollars and drove me home” or “I also like japanese cartoons for children”.

      Rotschild is so generous kind and honest he gave his family half the world. One can also call that a punishment but according to his genetic blueprint this was peak Kindness.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s