So God Is a Forger, huh?????

Okay, I cannot resist

Here is a contemporary headline---like this week, of May 14, 2011

Is the Bible full of 'forgeries'?

From MSNBC:

A biblical scholar has raised a holy fuss by declaring that more than a third of the books of the New Testament were "forged" — that is, written by scribes other than the apostles to which they've been ascribed. By itself, the suggestion that nearly half of Paul's epistles....

For starters, God didn't write the Bible?  Are we charging god with forgery? If he made the world, can't he do what he wants? If he inspired people, aren't they just being tacky by claiming they wrote something themselves anyway?

Alright, enough with the jokes. And so much for that childhood.

Forged huh? You know, what I grew up believing, that god wrote the bible,  might be closer to reality. Can someone fake being awake? If the author of those books did a better job than the person they were supposed to be by, what is the harm here, harm in the sense of diminishing a spiritual tradition. At least in the medieval European period, art was not signed, people did not imagine that an individual could claim credit for what was an act of worship. This whole idea of individualism might be a lack of historical imagination. So could we be misunderstanding historical reality by even raising the question whether some books of the bible were forged?

Am I going to have to read this article, to find out if any of these questions are mentioned?  Nah.

Of COURSE he was set up

This talk, speculating about how a banker might have been "set up" is amusing really. The French say, well the Americans, they do not protect the rich like we do." What, we don't? No one will notice this incident with a banker is just a classic case of misdirection on life's part. Look over here, while the real changes are elsewhere. After how many episodes of taking your luck for granted, and then, the gears shift, in larger mechanical churnings beyond a specific pool of people, and the result, must be, what --- explained. The explanation is  part of the misdirection. Like World War II, and the shock about the camps. It is not that the histories written to explain the war are wrong, it is that these explanations function to obscure the real significance, -- that any country could have played the role Germany did. Or what Jan Cox pointed out, the news about lottery winners, that news is that you will NOT be a lottery winner, that is the news. So what is the explanation this time? ---that the rich will have their comeuppance, that America is a country where the rich are not spoiled, that justice will prevail. Stories dear reader, explanations, to deflect your attention from what is really going on. Of course he was set up, we all are. 

Dogs Don't Get Sarcasm

Dogs Don't Get Sarcasm. This I noticed when, as the pooch was, as it seemed with a single huge tongue slurp, cleaning out several cat food bowls, I said: don't let me get in your way. No response at all. Rather like, I imagine, gods treat human speech.  At least mechanical, that is typical, human speech. Okay, good point, all human speech.

Just Think It

"Just do it," says Nike, and they really mean, just give us money.  But I am finding the phrase useful in that it describes human behavior. It is just done, nothing is planned. But people are programmed not to see this. My use of the word programmed does not imply a "planner,"somewhere,  though I am perhaps just avoiding a larger metaphysical topic which must be investigated by any student concerned to grasp the meaning of the words of the 20th century mystic, Jan Cox. People do not perceive the actual mechanical and helpless nature of their actions, and this situation is encouraged by the fact words, ideas, are, to most, and to all of those adults who have never experienced real effort in their lives, but ideas are something people in actuality treat as objects on a mantel. Words are -- for the mechanical reality in which all of us are often immersed, -- just objects on a mental mantel. The actual structural function of words is part of a path few even know about, and fewer walk towards or on. Actions and thoughts are equally the result of helpless mechanical outcomes. Thinking, real thought, is invisible to humanity at large, humanity loose, comparable to the way in which dark matter is extant now in the thoughts of astrophysicists. That is, most people never even dream of it. Though rumors abound.

Alternate Fairy Tale Version

Are Weddings Obsolete? Weddings are, contrary to common misconceptions, for men. To be blunt,
women, generally speaking, know who the fathers of their children are.
Men, have our word for who the father is. Now is not the place to
explain why our word may not be enough to give men confidence about
the paternity of their offspring. But weddings function to maintain
faith in lineage. We have weddings for the same sentimental reasons
that tomcats kill kittens. A far more ancient motivation than any
individual could muster is at play here. And is it not lovely how life
whirls us around to the point that most people think weddings are for
the bride. Not really though. Now that we have DNA testing, perhaps we
won't need a ceremony, at which (crucially) guests attend, and vows
are repeated, vows about fidellity and so on. I guess the real
question is, is wedding cake obsolete? That idea, surely, is outrageous.

The Royal Wave

Jan Cox drew our attention to that "royal wave." Stalin, Idi Amin, and
of course royalty all over, have a distinctive hand wave in their
relating to crowds. The wave is both acknowledging and distancing. I
am not quoting Jan here, I don't recall his commentary. But once you
start looking for the royal wave it is interesting and standard. There
is something bloodchilling about it's robotic self-satisfaction. The
royal wave views with satisfaction the herd's need for a leader.
And this morning at Britain's Buckingham Palace balcony, there was one
perfect royal wave---the youngest flower girl. Three years old, a
woman, and she had it perfectly. Surely it will show up in some video.
Kate doesn't quite have it yet, she wiggles her fingers too much.
William's wave also is a bit personal. That child's wave though---she
got it.

Is monarchy Life's experiment with ordinary objectivity

Simon Schama is one of the leading historians in the world, and one I read with enthusiasm. He is a famous guy. He recently spoke in a televised interview (Charley Rose) about the shallowness of the British monarchy. Schama told a story about a luncheon he attended with "just a few other guests" and the husband of the Queen. Prince Philip at this luncheon looked at Schama and said, "You're a writer?" Schama did not need to elaborate on how such phrasing reflected the speaker's bored disdain and ultimate ignorance, masked as polite sociability.

This instance of British boorishness, which Prince Philip instantiates, is actually a shining example of how a more awakened man, to use the phrase Gurdjieff and Jan Cox, made familiar, would treat his own mechanical, that is, verbal, views.