21st century prophecies

In 21 Lessons for the 21st Century, the GREAT prophet spoke, saying mockingly, “After all, we are God’s nation, so the argument goes, so what’s good for our nation is pleasing to God.  There certainly are religious sages who reject nationalist excesses and adopt far more universal visions. Unfortunately, such sages don’t wield much political power these days” uttering the excellent, profound, and provocative words, “the handmaid of nationalism is religion” as well, “Religions, rites, and rituals will remain important as long as the power of humankind rests on mass cooperation and as long as mass cooperation rests on belief in shared fiction” and “past experiences of the whole of humanity, will become less reliable guides” “The Zionist story fails to ascribe any meaning to Chinese Empires, to the tribes of New Guinea, and to the Andromeda galaxy, as well as to the countless eons that passed before the existence of Moses, Abraham, and the evolution of the apes” and “eternity is at the very least 13.8 billion years---the current age of the universe . . . the city of Jerusalem was established just 5,000 years ago, and the Jewish people are at most 3,000 years old. This hardly qualifies as eternity” Many languish in the words of the prophet, but many sustain themselves regardless of the words of the prophet. Why the hell are so many humans studying and exploring ancient texts? If our emotional states are at the dictates of computer equations known as algorithms, then why is the story of the Bhagavad Gita and the GREAT movie Lion King considered by the prophet to be so blasted relevant to human existence? What in the world makes this prophet-scholar so impressive and impressing? Because, He is on the Left! That is it in a nutshell.     

Comments

Anonymous said…
He really is awful intellectually speaking. His arguments are circular, presumptive, and overblown. His rationale begin at a subjective point and make their way along a prescribed trajectory to a predetermined destination. I admire your willingness to wade in those fetid waters to engage on a cultural level - you are made of much sterner stuff than I, sir.
Assumption=“sir” I prefer to remain anonymous, please. I agree that one’s outcomes are stirred toward by the use of assumptions, in the tradition of the empirical realm as well as the soft sciences, including critical theories, social sciences, humxnities, and astrophysics (not really). I think it takes a lot of imagination to participate in science; a whole industry can be created to fight an illness that, though real, the solutions to it are dangerous. Fetit waters are just where I find myself these days. I have considered political office, in order to fight these Leftists that I have been writing these short posts against. However, politics is a dirty business. I will use my energy to serve the living God, the image of whom is our Lord Jesus Christ. I intentionally use pointers to the Left like the “x” in humxnity. These markers show my former engagement with Leftists. I have many years of education in the liberal academy; nothing comes as a surprise to me. You may notice the flowery so-called scholarly language that YN Harari uses to enamor the fertile soiled mind of the liberal reader. Anytime they write or speak the liberals are picking up on keywords, buzzwords, and sitting on the edge of their seats. I will find a key point that Harari makes and present a clear argument to demonstrate your point and mine. Harari operates on assumptions that so-called scholarly readers and popular readers find to be legitimate.
So, almost immediately Harari slips up and refers to God as him, but quickly then refers to God as her or it. When talking about God as two different God’s, one of whom we know noting and the other we know too much about. This is a world explanation coming largely from Harari’s experience and not from truth or truths. See Rudolf Otto’s The Idea of the Holy to get at how difficult it is to discuss God, and the trap that Harari sets with his supposed expertise. Harari is definitely pitching ball in the dark, and admits to this subjective opinion when he utters “this is the God I don’t believe in.” I cannot believe that anyone can take this guy seriously. What makes him legit is his coagulating the current cultural ideations and diatribe and kowtowing to certain interest groups. On my YouTube feed guess who shows up next? Sam Harris the popular atheist. Go figure.

Popular posts from this blog

Let's spread MISINFORMATION

Dirty words