Dissecting Christianity's Mind-Snaring System
by Stephen Van Eck
While Judaism was never a proselytizing religion, contenting itself with born adherents (and as Thomas Paine wrote in The Age of Reason, "The Jews made no converts; they butchered all." The editor), Christianity was a significant departure from the culture that spawned it, a faith built from converts. This created a foundational need to convince others, or at least intimidate them into acceptance. Thus, the discipline of apologetics is as old as Christianity itself, and comprises a significant part of the religion.
Apologetics is an interesting word. Semantically it suggests an apology, and skeptics would hasten to point out that apologetics was necessary only because there was so much to apologize for! And no one was more apologetic than Paul.
Paul, though not the originator, was the principal founder of Christianity as a religion. It was he who composed an entire theology incorporating doctrines that Jesus never mentioned. These came to supersede the simple homiletics of the obscure itinerant rabbi, and transformed what was a Jewish reform sect into a new, and increasingly Gentile, religion. When people think of Christianity, it is primarily Paulism they have in mind.
Paul's epistles predate the written Gospels. Their purpose was to build and sustain a Church, and one of their most prominent aspects was their apologetic content. Paul used every means at his disposal to convince others of the validity of his doctrines. He invoked the authority of the soon-to-be "Old Testament," making abundant references to support his arguments. He claimed that "[w]hatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning" (Romans 15:4), rendering it into a precursor and prologue to his theology. And lest anyone dispute their value, he and his successors need only insist that "[a]ll Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Tim. 3:16). That these Scriptures had been subjected to severe abuse in their interpretation was a problem that could only be paved over with guile.
In Paul's apologetics, he cleverly anticipated and headed off any objections or reservations that waverers might have; and once netted, sought to keep them that way. Paul's arguments have been the staple of proselytizers for two millennia now. Although the illogic of these arguments is apparent to the rational, they become more and more effective and compelling, the deeper one succumbs to the Christian line. In combination they make Christianity into a virtually escape-proof mental trap.
First and foremost is the heavy emphasis on faith, as in Romans 1:17 & 4:5. Jesus hardly stressed faith at all, but it was Paul's primary mantra. Now why God would insist that we believe a particular quizzical story in the complete absence of proof, and make that the fundamental test of our existence, defies all explanation. The impossibility of proof provides the answer, since faith makes the tricky matter of proof seemingly irrelevant. And to require proof would evidence a lack of faith, thus placing one in imminent peril.
When propagating a religion where proof is not available, one that contains logical absurdities, it is essential that the logical processes of the mind be short-circuited. Paul attempted this with his facile quips, "The wisdom of the world is foolishness with God." (I Cor. 3:19), and "The foolishness of God is wiser than men." (I Cor. 1:25). This summarily rejects all logical quandaries as if they're of no consequence, and saves the trouble of having to explain them away. We are merely to trust that, as I Cor. 2:14 informs us, "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, for they are spiritually discerned." In other words, you're incapable of understanding the "truth" of their doctrines because you're working with a sinful, carnal mind, rather than a spiritual one. Once you give up and give in, then you'll understand. This inverts the process of knowing from "see it to believe it" to "believe it, then you'll see it." But should one expect to gain real knowledge subsequently, Paul crushes that by informing us "his ways [are] past finding out!" (Romans 11:33) So don't even try--just comply.
This might be followed up with the familiar saying of Jesus to Thomas "Blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed." (John 20:29) Doubting Thomas is such a useful negative role model that if he hadn't existed, it would have been smart to invent him. And perhaps they did. The Synoptic Gospels don't report this episode, only John does. Mark (16:14) implies that Thomas had been present with the others, but John (20:19, 24) says he was not.
Romans 8:6-8 further articulates Paul's strong bias against the sense one was born with. It claims that the carnal is inherently anti-God, which is strange since one would assume God made it that way. It also states that those "in the flesh cannot please God" and "to be carnally-minded is death." You can't get any more emphatic than that.
For anyone not gulled by this tactic and who persists in defiance, a proselytizer might invoke II Thess. 2:10-12, in which Paul claims that "God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie." This section is often used to suggest that textual problems could look cut and dried to you, but only because God made it look that way as punishment for your willful refusal to believe. Certainly it would be within God's power to so confound your mind. (Skeptics should correlate this dastardly measure with Hebrews 6:18, which states that it is impossible for God to lie.) Anyone in this position is clearly at the brink of doom, and had better relent now!
Another coercive tactic of proselytizers is invoking the "unforgivable sin" of Mark 3:28-29. Jesus was vague about this, but to later exegetes it meant resisting the work of the Holy Spirit in his efforts to save your soul. This, of course, is manifested by the proselytizers trying to convert you, so to oppose them is neatly construed as opposing the Holy Spirit, and becomes, by extension, unforgivable.
Backing up all these tactics, of course, is the Ultimate Stick: the threat of Hell Fire. Countless millions have gone along with Christianity merely as a form of "fire insurance." Better safe than sorry, which may be intellectual cowardice, but what a safe, and what a sorry.
Once sucked into the parallel universe of Christianity, the adherent is too intimidated by the existing framework of threats and rationalizations to attempt escape. Even thinking along alternative lines will induce severe feelings of guilt. And should one run the risk of losing faith by examining its true foundations, he is certain to be chilled by the dictum, in Hebrews 6:4-6, that "It is impossible for those who were once enlightened...if they fall away, to renew them again..." Those who originated a religion based on deception and delusion clearly knew that if the conditioning broke down or wore off, it could not work again. But that's when the true enlightenment occurs.
The conversation techniques of Christianity are crafted with a powerful psychological insinuation. Once roped in, people tend to stay in, since every passageway out has been systematically sealed. It is much easier, therefore, to inoculate people against Christianity in advance, using well-developed educational efforts, rather than attempt to extract them once they've already succumbed. Skeptical activists should be making a special effort to reach those still perched on the fence, the lukewarm rather than the firebrands.
8
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
12 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Why is this so hard to comprehand? Sacred texts are religious fiction. You want to debate thr fine points of theology then jump down the rabbit hole of apologetics. The professors of this ilk are trained in the art of obuscation & equivocation. Lawd have mercy, put a stop to my misery!
Atheist3
Level 7
Dec 24, 2019
1
Yes, Christians are Paulists and they don't even know it.
One of the many issues I had, when I was a believer, was wondering why god-- if he wanted everyone saved, and wanted everyone to know the truth-- would keep revelations/meanings hidden from some people yet allow others to understand. It seemed to me that he would make everything as clear and concise as possible, leaving no room for error or disagreement.
Some denominations explained it through the doctrine of pre-destination; but I was not taught to believe that. We got around the scriptures that supported pre-destination, and god having a plan, vs free will by being taught that god did cause things to happen, but it was because he already knew it was going to happen so he made it happen--you seriously have to let go of all logic to accept that excuse--yet, many do just that.
But, the best way to deal with things was to just chalk it up to the "fact" that we simply cannot understand all of this god's ways; and, once we die, and are not hindered by our sin-polluted human nature, all things will be made perfectly clear.
Well, I didn't have to wait. Things came perfectly clear to me once I let go of the Bible being in any way inspired by a god. What is unclear now, is how this collection of mostly nonsense still holds so much power over people.
Joanne
Level 7
Dec 22, 2019
0
I do not give one rat's ass about Paul/Saul, this was too long to read, IMO.
AnneWimsey
Level 9
Dec 22, 2019
1
Saul was scourge of christians, until he converted, became "Paul", and continued whatever cruelties he was accustomed to committing in the name of xians. Having found profit of this support, he became their champion. A childhood with 3 years of Lutheran private School and Sunday school wherever we were stationed as an Army brat, I left with knowledge of the biblical teachings up to my eyebrows. I always thought of it as a history book written by ancients. nuff said.
Source:
biblical teachings
KittensandSage
Level 6
Dec 21, 2019
1
Army brat answered a question I had.
So now I know: The Truth? I can't handle the Truth. I want Jesus on that wall. I need Jesus on that wall.
At least according to Paul.
I do wish they would rename that silly religion 'Paulianity".
Would be more honest.
David1955
Level 8
Dec 21, 2019
2
A friend who’d studied theology wanted to rename it Paulinanity
The following is where I had typed this for a different post of discussion, I am copying it for ease from thumb typing all over again on my phone.
Psychological meme with out using supernatural terminology. Out of Egypt, thru Israel, into Rome and across the Atlantic.
You do not have to debate truth ot fiction ". You just take what is written and understand how all the written text points to Jesus being Angelic lord of host Lucifer the devil.
The LORD Almighty will bless them, saying, "Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance." Isaiah 19:25
The "Lord" of Israel was Egyptian.
As to Osiris of Egypt:
But he did not just represent death in the physical world, also rebirth or what you may call being born again.
a) John 3:3 Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again."
As to Osiris of Egypt:
He was married to his sister Isis, who was goddess of the sky and love. Isis and Osiris had a child Horus, who is believed by many to be a reincarnation of Osiris.
John 14:9 9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
Osiris is usually identified as the God of the afterlife, the underworld and the dead. He is also called the King of eternity, King of the living, Master of souls; He who appears as ram in Mendes, and the Sovereign of Amenti.(1) Another curious title that you will find for Osiris is the “Morning Star.”
This same Morning Star of Osiris found in the Book of the Dead, appears to be the same Morning Star that we can find in the Book of Revelation, where Saint John says, “I will give him the Morning Star (Rev. ii. 29).
Lucifer (UK: /ˈluːsɪfər/ LOO-si-fər; US: /-sə-/; 'light-bringer'
is a Latin name for the planet Venus in its morning appearances, and is often used for mythological and religious figures associated with the planet. Due to the unique movements and discontinuous appearances of Venus in the sky, mythology surrounding these figures often involved a fall from the heavens to earth or the underworld. Interpretations of a similar term in the Hebrew Bible, translated in the King James Version as "Lucifer", led to a Christian tradition of applying the name Lucifer, and its associated stories of a fall from heaven, to Satan. Most modern scholarship regards these interpretations as questionable, and translates the term in the relevant Bible passage (Isaiah 14:12) as "morning star" or "shining one" rather than as a proper name, "Lucifer".[1] wikipedia
John 18:36 Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place."
"beast" in the book of Revelations is metaphor for laws of government. Mark as in give a mark for identification: mark of the beast means identification for taxation and government control .
Written almost 2000 years ago in metaphor and riddles not always understood.
It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name. Revelations 13:16-17
The uneducated with no interest in mystical traditions and the esoteric may regard Ancient Egypt as little more than a place of pagan worship, strange hieroglyphics, and monuments erected by thousands of Hebrew slaves. But those more learned, especially those having undertaken the initiative rituals of Freemasonry, will see a link between the Egyptian metaphysical tradition and modern mystery schools, of which Freemasonry is one. [gaia.com]
Lord of host Lucifer the devil leading the Masonic lodge secret religion racist devil worshippers in the establishment of the mark of the beast 666 identification for taxation and government control. No justice for the innocent, more children can be trained to speak and act abused to wrongfully prosecute innocent people especially those that oppose there Masonic lodge secret religion racist devil worship "my teacher made me touch her p.p ". Rape the original indigenous inhabitants of their land call it America call them such as Mexicans, Indians and native Americans
Word
Level 8
Dec 21, 2019
0
I am copying this from another conversation s I do not have to thumb type again so much. But, a lot of what I use is from Paul's understanding because it us purported he was "Pharisees amongst pharisees " I take it like he was very educated on the old testiment and had understanding t by at others not so well educated had.
I do not consider it anything of finished product of a writing. I do use this platform as a place to get thoughts initially written down, use it as a sounding board and on some occassions someone might comment on the general context that better helps me get my understanding organized.
For clearifing your Isaiah to John connection:
Isaiah says [prophesies for "the lord" ] blessed be Egypt my people.
The "lord" is Egyptian.
Then I found Osiris stuff that I am not much familiar with but giving alternating comparisons between what I found about Egyptian Osiris compared next to what is written as to what Jesus said according to John.
So, it appears that what was written about Osiris is something that could be viewed as comming about.
Osiris was widely worshipped until the decline of ancient Egyptian religion during the rise of Christianity in the Roman Empire.[15][16] wikipedia
Horus gradually took on the nature as both the son of Osiris and Osiris himself. He was referred to as Golden Horus Osiris.[27][28][29][30][31] In the temple of Denderah he is given the full royal titulary of both that of Horus and Osiris. He was sometimes believed to be both the father of himself as well as his own son, and some accounts have Horus Osiris being brought back to life by Isis. Wikipedia
Can we say Christianity is the son of Egypt but it is still itself as Egypt as was the father but they are the same? So, it is Golden Horus Osiris leading the Masonic lodge secret religion racist devil worshipper governmental terrorist.
As to your comment about ... Scottish rite is "OF" Freemasonry ... Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, or simply Morals and Dogma, is a book of esoteric philosophy published by the Supreme Council, Thirty Third Degree, of the Scottish Rite, Southern Jurisdiction of the United States. It was compiled by Albert Pike, wikipedia
@Geoffrey51 it is looked at as conspiracy theory crap but it IS connected with these words.
Psychological meme [of a form of government/religious control]
Cognition - though/word capabilities
Logos - Within Hellenistic Judaism, Philo (c. 20 BC – c. 50 AD) adopted the term into Jewish philosophy.[7] Philo distinguished between logos prophorikos ("the uttered word" ) and the logos endiathetos ("the word remaining within" ).[8]
The Gospel of John identifies the Christian Logos, through which all things are made, as divine (theos),[9] and further identifies Jesus Christ as the incarnate Logos. Wikipedia
Ruach - force [like breath] or [could it be the force behind breath which would be the thought of the mind/brain. ]
Spirit is used to replace ruach in biblical text.
The "mythological" thoughts of Egypt Osiris while Israel was there before being lead out by Moses gave for the "son" thought/words ... John 1:14 ... the logos become flesh.
Paul the apostle understood trying to explain 1 Corinthians 2:16 for, "Who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ.
So. Christianity/Masonic lodge secret religion racist devil worship "New world order" is the son/father of Egypt Father reincarnated into the mind of current modern people as psychological meme.
Word
Level 8
Dec 21, 2019
0
That was pointless, and far too long. What do YOU think? It wasn’t a quote or comment to debate around.
Paraphrase would have been an improvement. We can all copy and paste. Doesn’t show the most fruitful of minds.
Write what you think or feel as people will most likely just ignore you.
The author’s conclusion elicits proselytising to those about to become Christians. Just sounds like Paul with another hat.
The piece is well written with no new content and no critical analysis of Paul. It seems like the disillusioned remarks of an ex-Christian.
Geoffrey51
Level 8
Dec 21, 2019
2
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.