Hi, all! Sorry for not mentioning this sooner, but just FYI I have adopted a policy of moderating ALL comments. So…don’t take it personally!

Love you all,

Zach (Argo)

Search for Zach Vandermeer

That’s me with the really short hair and the glasses.

The eye alone cannot make the distinction between what it sees and what it does not see; the brain alone cannot make the distinction between consciousness and unconsciousness.  Put them together and you have neither strictly sight nor strictly consciousness.  You have something much greater than the sum of the parts.

So far we’ve learned that entering into structured relationships…

[Wrong…everyone knows that according to the doctrine of Total Depravity, truth must be bestowed, because it cannot be learned…human beings are intellectually incapable of learning truth by nature.]

…is critical for spiritual progress and those relationships need to be open, honest, and accepting.

[Traits, again, by nature impossible for those who are TOTALLY depraved.]

That’s the kind of environment that encourages us…

[Actually terrifies us, but we are too “re-educated” to know the difference.]

…to become all that God wants us to be.

[And apparently, God wants us to be DEAD, because the crux of this doctrine–and make no mistake–is the CATEGORICAL sacrifice of the individual SELF to the collective as ruled by His human proxies, which the unredeemed masses cannot, AGAIN, BY FUCKING NATURE, and shall not, distinguish from the real thing.]

But the journey from here to there will be far from smooth. The propensity to drift…

[Your “sin nature”…which, which the Bible never defines to my satisfaction, if I’m being honest.]

…is in all of us.  That’s another reason to live in community.

[Er…let me get this straight.  The reason to live in community is so that a bunch of totally depraved God-hating reprobates–who all have an equal measure (absolute measure) of the “propensity to drift” residing within them–will somehow, simply by being herded under one soaring, ostentatious roof with a giant LED screen in front with Big fucking Brother babbling on and on about our sacred duty to navel gazing and self-loathing, magically transmogrify into a fluffy, glittering pure white mist of of sweet-smelling holiness acceptable to God? My word…I cannot believe people fall for this codswallop; that I fell for it.  Crimey…He must be sick with  laughter. I mean, this is undeniable proof that human beings could not possibly have been created by God in the premeditated, determined sense. Who could worship a God who determines man to actively and methodically seek his own destruction?  For indeed, to purposely dismantle and consign to nothingness that which one purposely creates to in fact be something which is NOT nothing, is, I submit, impossible for God.  God cannot create something that is purposed to be nothing!  Which is what the doctrine of Total Depravity screams! He is NOT omnipotent thus, because He simply cannot do such a mad thing and rationally impossible thing; and this for the simple fact that God is neither insane nor a fucking idiot].

When we start to get off track…

[Inevitably, it is assumed…see? “When”, not “if”.  Speaks volumes.  I mean, really, this is Marxism 101 shit.  People are fuck-ups by nature, so we need to control them; compel-force-threaten–terrify–blackmail–them into “right” thinking and behavior. And to whom this task falls is a cosmic lottery, so to speak.  So who become these lucky royals and debs? Why, those who are called by the Primary Consciousness (that which “divinely” bestows the enlightened “Word”…the gnosis), of course.]

…,when commitment and conviction…

[To the ecclesiastical “authority”, who make a living pretending to be God.]

…start to wane, we need to be surrounded by people who will be there to pull us back.

[And since all the laity is Totally Depraved, even after salvation, the only ones in a position to “pull us back” are, again, the elders (or pastors, or priests, or whatever the fuck they call themselves these days in the protestant cults…whatever makes the totalitarianism easier to swallow) who ominously warn, “You better watch out; you better not cry; you better not shout; and you better damn tithe.]

*

Now, here is the quote without the (much warranted) heckling from moi.

“So far we’ve learned that entering into structured relationships is critical for spiritual progress and those relationships need to be open, honest, and accepting.  That’s the kind of environment that encourages us to become all that God wants us to be.  But the journey from here to there will be far from smooth.  The propensity to drift is in all of us.  That’s another reason to live in community.  When we start to get off track.”

(p. 31, Community:  Your pathway to progress; North Point Ministries, 2008).

Keeping with the Total Depravity theme, and continuing with the most excellent and infinitely amusing pastime of bashing this bullshit doctrine to smithereens, let’s hone in on this manipulative doozy:

“The propensity to drift is in all of us.”

Bullshit!  How the fuck do they know?!  Have they met everyone in the whole world?!

Of course not. They are appealing to the mysticism which passes for “theology” in the Christian religion today (and, pretty much ALL days since, at the very least, Augustine).  The idea is that they have this “special knowledge” that is measured only by the yardstick of “infallible scripture”…which is really just an appeal to a particular interpretation of said scripture which they do not wish to defend, because it utterly defies reason and rational argument and they fucking know it:

“I know, let’s tell them our opinions are not really ours, but the Bible’s, which is code for “God’s”, which is code for “infallible”, which is code for “don’t disagree…don’t you dare”, which is code for… “die, heretic!”.”

All of this is first and foremost predicated upon the lie you are fed bit by bit from the day you were born until this: that you are metaphysically and thus epistemologically insufficient for apprehending and appropriating goodness or truth.  And this is the sum and substance of the doctrine of Total Depravity.  And it is used, to great and terrible effect, upon all men in all places of all creeds and all kings.

Thus, alakazam! Poof! (As John Immel says.) DISCIPLINE, PUNISHMENT, FEAR, COERCION!.  Which translated for the unreformed rebels among us is:  COMMUNITY, ACCOUNTABILITY, AUTHORITY, COVERING!  Which gets a full lathering and a fresh coat of calcimine in pretty little Marxist primers like “Community:  Your pathway to progress.” Sent out to quiet suburban neighborhoods everywhere. Devils as angels, and so it goes.

Welcome to the Christian Orthodox Ideal, circa United States, 2015.

Happy fucking new year.  Same as the old year.

“But if the only people in your circle are those who [sic] the wind blows your way, you run the risk of being pushed in directions you really don’t want to go.”

(Community:  Your pathway to progress, North Point Ministries, 2008, p. 17)

To begin, this question is deceptive because according to the group metaphysic to which the author(s) of this manifesto subscribe, there is no “risk”, there is only certainty.  Meaning, since your existence is only legitimate, efficacious, and actual as a direct function of the collective, you will pursue life and act in accordance with the dictates of the group.  There is no “risk” because there is no individual will.  Once you are in a group of “those the wind blows your way”, there is no maybe about it.  You will exist as a function of that group and do what that group does.  Period.  And you will then summarily become guilty of metaphysical insufficiency and moral depravity because this group of barbarian nomads is decidedly not the group which the author(s) of this primer declares is the only right group.  The assumption behind this question is that those people “blown your way” are indubitably an evil influence.  The only “good” collective is the church collective…specifically, the protestant reformed church collective.

In other words, you are either a member of the group they are espousing, or you are a member of an apostate group by default and bound for hell.  Never mind that YOU, in this metaphysic, do not exist at all and therefore it is impossible to argue that YOU will be eternally punished (for as the group rises, so the group falls…there is no individual suffering because there is no individual).  But remember, all the inconsistencies are forever punted into the cosmic abyss of God’s mystery.  All logical contradictions are only contradictions because you have not been given the grace to perceive God’s “real” truth, because you are epistemologically incapable of perception because you, individually, are totally depraved as a function of your root metaphysic.  So, in other words, shut the fuck up, do what your told, and leave the hard questions and paradoxes for the group leadership to understand, which has all divine authority over you, because they alone are standing in the stead of God.  Which literally means that they are God to you; there is no difference as far as you are concerned.

Nervous yet?  Sure you are…as you should be.

And finally, and most obviously, the idea that “the wind” indifferently blows people your way is a rank rejection of the reformed view of God’s sovereignty.  According to their determinist philosophy, not only does nothing happen which God does not ordain, but nothing happens which God does not specifically ordain for a specific purpose, which may or may not remain a mystery (well, at least in whole, for it is always a mystery in part) to those who are merely the vehicles (extensions) of His divine Will.  This means that it is then, by philosophical definition, impossible for you to randomly fall into some group by happenstance, blind fate, or even free choice (which you already know they categorically deny…even though they lie, or are ignorant, and say they don’t).  And again, this idea that things happen just because they happen even though God is “in control of all things” (and how often we are treated to that little gem of irrational thinking) is merely another paradox punted into oblivion, left to the pastors to apprehend for you.  You just gotta believe.  The acceptance of things as true which cannot possibly be true in any measure of human reality is a badge of holy faith, sure to bring the blessings of God immeasurably to all those who believe.

But of course since the root of reality is found in assertions which are mutually exclusive it makes it extremely dubious that you can or will possess the epistemological sufficiency to apprehend said blessings when they occur…but that’s not really your concern, either.  Your job again is simply to believe, by hook or crook, no matter what the consequence, and to never assume that you should ever know why you believe nor think that you should, nor have any right (because you are totally depraved) to, observe some kind of logical, and pleasant, outcomes of your faith.  For if the outcomes were logical then the belief would be logical, which means it would not be contradictory, which means it wouldn’t require much faith (again, these are the doctrinal assumptions of reformed “scholars”).  In other words, irrational faith will lead not to a logical outcome, but an irrational one, by definition.  And so any blessing derived from your faith will not be rationally observed.  Thus, you need to have that same blind faith to accept that the consequences will make sense, and be blessings to you, even though you cannot understand these blessings for the same reason you cannot understand the contradictions which form the root of what you are supposed to believe by faith.  And the reason is simply because you can’t understand.  Ever.  Because it is your very SELF which is depraved, wicked, flawed, and insufficient, and thus is categorically and perpetually exclusive of the morality and truth of God, by nature.

So the natural outcome of the reformed epistemology is belief for the sake of belief, and nothing more.  Thus, the ability to concede rationally and efficaciously impossible ideas is the pinnacle of collectivist enlightenment.

*

“Simply put, your progress spiritually hinges on your willingness to enter into structured relationships with other believers…

…God works through relationships and that’s what this group is all about.  It’s about being part of a community.  It’s about doing life with a consistent group of people for the sake of spiritual progress.”

(Community:  Your pathway to progress, North Point Ministries, 2008, p. 18)

Since “spiritual progress” (whatever the fuck that means) is the only relevant progress, according to the “orthodox” Christian dualistic metaphysic, your worth, existentially speaking (meaning, as a function of your very being), is a direct function of not only relationships with other believers, but “structured relationships”.  Of course, this naturally begs the question:  Just what does “structured” mean in this context?  Because this word simply appears out of the blue, never mentioned in the preceding pages, and is given no attention once it is submitted.  The reader thus is left with the conspicuous absence of any meaningful definition of “structured”.  Nevertheless, I do not mind hazarding a guess…and truly even more than a guess, I would bet money, and I mean real money, that “structured” means “authority.  Which means a hierarchy of rulers, culminating in the Senior Pastor who possesses the full mandate of heaven to compel your behavior.  “Structured relationships” then is merely a euphemism…a Christian collectivist code for the massively unbiblical and downright villainous reformed doctrines of Authority and Submission.

*

“Discussion: 

1.  Tell the group about one or two of your friends.  Why did you choose them?  What was the basis for your connection?”

(p. 19 of preceding citation)

My criticism of this section of the primer will not deal directly with it as it is stated.  Rather, I wish to discuss briefly the underlying authoritarian premise behind relationships amongst people in collectivist organizations, most conspicuously observed in the modern American neo-Calvinist movement:

No secrets.

That’s the rule which is the foundation of your relationship with the group and everyone in it.  But why is your life to be an open book to the group which claims proprietorship over it?

By now the answer should be obvious.  Your life is not your own, of course.  It belongs to the collective.  It IS the collective.  Any attempt to harbor a life of your own is likened to sinful deception and will get you labeled a subversive, and your personal life will be targeted mercilessly, and you will be hounded for information; and if you are not forthcoming and obedient, you will be summarily dismissed, ostracized, or worse, depending on how much destruction they think they can get away with.

As a member of the group in good standing you are obligated to disclose the deepest and most intimate aspects of your existence to people whom you may have only recently met.  How often have you been in a new church “home ” or “care” group and scarcely three or four meetings go by before the moderator begins to speak about the importance of “accountability”?

Incidentally, accountability is merely the protestant form of Confession.  But at any rate, ideally your accountability “partner” will be a member of the same care or home group, but must at least be a member of the same church.  By no means shall they be someone who attends a different “local” church; or worse, one who does not regularly attend church at all.  The purpose of keeping accountability “in house” ensures that your “areas of sin” or “struggles” are owned exclusively by the leadership of the church, tucked away for a rainy day, so to speak, brought up in case of church disciplinary actions or for convenient manipulation.  A great example of this is the outright blackmail of former Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM) pastor, Larry Tomzcak, by SGM president C.J. Mahaney, whereby Mahaney threatened to go public with some very personal and intimate information concerning Tomzcak’s son.  The vicious evil of this kind of rank criminal behavior by church leadership, that is, the using confidential information to manipulate the behavior of church members and/or subordinate employees, should cause us all to shudder in fear and set our jaws in anger.

The moral is: think long and hard before agreeing to “be held accountable”.  You better believe that if you ever dare to threaten the reigning status, power, and wealth of the ecclesiastical authority you motherfucking will be.

But the point of a question like the one excerpted above is to surreptitiously teach you that there should be no pretense of self-ownership; which means that there shall be no pretense of any personal (read individual) context.  Once the group is made aware of the intimate details of your life, the group is at liberty to compel your responses in any and all contexts whereby those details have occurred (e.g. work life, family life, personal thoughts, dreams, desires, lusts, emotional struggles, even hobbies, likes, or sundry interests).  And remember–and this cannot be stated often enough–the point of suggesting you cough up the secret details of your life is for leverage, period.  There is no other rational reason…and there is certainly no Biblical reason for any of the people in these churches to know your personal business, period.  Full stop.  They are entitled to know nothing beyond what you freely choose to share; they haven’t the authority to demand to know what you fucking had for breakfast let alone your deepest emotional struggles.  And further, might I add that if the group is the only legitimate manifestation of your existence because it is the only means by which God has given to pursue your “spiritual progress” (again, whatever the fuck that means), and your spiritual progress is the only progress which matters, then your personal life, including your emotional struggles, is irrelevant.

Lay that shit on them the next time they ask you how your “quiet times” are going.  Or…you could say, “They are still very quiet, thanks, and I would prefer to keep them that way.” And conclude it by muttering (audibly, though) something to the effect of “nosy git”. 

And sure, you may lose your accountability partner, but on the upside you’ll finally get a bunch of pretentious tools to mind their own damn business for a change.

Last week I received this very honest and despondent comment from someone on the comments thread of another article.  I have kept even their pseudonym anonymous because I did not obtain direct permission to publish this as a separate post, and given the nature of the comment, I simply thought it considerate.  (I know that I don’t ask permission from other commenters to publish their contributions in articles, but the nature of those comments, compared to this, is usually quite different).

I have added my response to the body of the article, but I would love to get your counsel and opinions and ideas as well, because you have all, I think, experienced similar things, and each of us offer unique and personal insights which may very well be extremely enlightening to both this person and the rest of us.

And so, my brilliant readers, one and all, please add your two cents, or even a tithe, to this fellow victim of the philosophy which kills and wrecks, but which will never ultimately vanquish.  I say up the individual!  And let them who cry out for life and the God-ordained right to pursue the interest of the SELF without fear or shame or harm be validated, elevated, promoted, and affirmed, both by us and by the Divine, who continuously observes the distinction between Himself and His children, whom He loves because they are uniquely THEMSELVES, and their LIFE is theirs to live; and this the most beautiful gift!

*

I am a survivor of a calvinist takeover in my church, and a husband who has became a narcissist. This has been a slow fade for about 10 years. He started attending a mens bible study which was teaching biblical manhood. He was taught that men were the head of the house, and their job was to make the wife and children submit. Even if the wife protests, she really does not mean it because she desires and want to have someone rule over her. Of course, this was packaged with a beautiful bow. It made the men think that having a family was like being the CEO of a company. The family did not have feelings or opinions, but they were to be managed like a company. I would try to express my feeling, hurts etc., and he would justify his behavior, twist and turn his words, lie, tell half truths, and finally say that I am unforgiving which means that I am the one with the problem. I would go away, pray, read my bible, cry out to God to change me and help me forgive him. I have even asked him to pray for me that I would be able to forgive him. The whole time he was guilty of the accused action , but he would never never never admit it. He let me suffer for years. How could someone say that they love you when they are willing and causing your suffering. I began to think I was crazy. I lost myself. I became depressed and gained a lot of weight. I was involved in a church that had a calvinist pastor who lied when he was hired. He knew the church he was going into was not reformed. The church ended up splitting, we left, but the abuse continues on. My job (according to this theology) was to never talk bad about him to anyone and to make him look good. I did my part, but I have recently found out that he threw me under the bus to my kids. He turned them against me by using brainwashing and subtle hints to accomplish this. If he wanted them to clean their rooms, he would not just tell them he would say, “Your mom is so tired, and you should not make her do all this work blah blah blah.” My kids were convinced that I was complaining to him, but I never did. He is a coward. This theology tears people and homes apart. They may look beautiful on the outside but the victims are just shells because the narcissist has snuffed out every bit of life from the family.”

*

Welcome to the blog, and thank you for sharing. I know how hard it is to talk about these things and how difficult it can be to put into words. I think you will find many understanding voices on this blog; almost all of us, like you, have witnessed first hand the destruction Calvinism can wreak upon a church, and not the least of the fallout is the obliteration of individuals and their families, as you well describe. Indeed, the individual and the ones they love most are a purposefully chosen target of this vile doctrine.

I am terribly sorry for what has happened to you. But know this: you are not alone. Many of us have had our families and our psyches wrecked by this deceptive philosophy, and for as many as it spits out and destroys, that many are able to rise from the swaths of smoldering ashes it leaves behind as it attempts to cast the individual into the abyss of oblivion; an objective which it cannot ever truly or finally accomplish, as its foundations are dry sand, and brittle are the pillars which bulwark its assertions.  For its assertions need only a speck of the light of reason cast upon them, and the rest of the philosophy quickly flames and withers.  It burns bright for a moment, but it is the fire of mere kindling; for there is no substance to sustain it, so it is quickly snuffed out, offering neither lasting heat nor light.  Of this I am convinced.

And you must further understand that by simply questioning the lies…by seeing, though perhaps not altogether articulating, the contradictions and observing the massive discrepancies between what is taught and what is observed, you already know more than those who abuse you. You are already beginning your journey to recovery. Don’t stop. Don’t give up. And never forget that what you are rejecting, having witnessed its very real destruction and felt its very real pain, has nothing to do with the Christ they pretend to promote. It is a lie. It is unworkable. It is death worship. NEVER forget this. No matter how cleanly packaged and scrubbed the philosophy may be presented to you, it is no angel of light. On the contrary, It is an evil which rejects both God and man, and those who demand you concede its rule over you have NO interest in YOUR life; indeed, they reject it out of hand. You exist to be exploited and consumed for THEIR good pleasure, nothing more. And even if they themselves are too intellectually lazy or vacant to apprehend the depths of its evil, the reality is that by that very small, first glimpse of its dissonance, you have shown that you are absolutely not.  And though that first glimpse may seem small, you are already intellectually and philosophically and theologically and morally miles and miles ahead of those who sell their souls to Satan, and exchange truth for lies just to acquire a little comfort, a little momentary power.  They exchange perpetual heaven for brief flash of self-importance and the illusion of metaphysical superiority.  But you are NEVER obligated to participate in their make-believe; the cartoons which pass for legitimate interpretations of reality.  On the contrary, reason and morality demand that you reject it as patently false, and pursue, happily, your SELF as the only legitimate, God-affirmed metaphysic.

You are on the right track. Just never forget that YOU are good and YOU are SUPPOSED to exist as YOU, and that YOU and the pursuit of YOUR own life are necessary to truth, reason, and reality. YOU have nothing to be ashamed of. YOUR reflection in the mirror is God’s perfect will for you. Pursue that, and LIFE, even life eternal, shall be your reward.

Blessings to you,

Argo

I wasn’t going to go here, but things moved quickly for me today…I explain in the text below.  So, after working through a big issue today I figured I am in a position to post an explanation of what’s going on here, if that makes any sense.  Maybe it doesn’t.  Anyway, it’s nothing earth shattering, just…er, details I suppose.

*

Thanks everyone for you kind words and encouragement. You guys are all great..and I mean you, too, Dee. 🙂

Nothing big is going on. I just have an awful lot of material here and I’m trying to decide where to focus the blog, or even if I need to focus it at all. Meaning, should I continue to do what I do here and just post whatever catches my fancy, or should I make a concerted effort to keep myself to some of what I consider my most pertinent themes and write articles specific to those themes, and little else?

The problem I’m having is, again, I have a LOT of content here at home that never makes it to the blog because I always seem to get “sidetracked” (by my own fickle attention span) into writing articles that are more impromptu…that is, written on the fly, as opposed to a concerted effort to post the stuff that I spend hours and hours both thinking about and also writing down in article form.

So, there’s that.

The other issue I was having is trying to decide who I thought my reader should be. I never stopped to think about what kind of “market” I’m going for. Not that I’m interested in the blog as a means of financial profit…that’s not what I mean by that at all.  I’m not in a position where that’s necessary (thankfully, because I’m not convinced it’s possible anyway…I’d have to go get a day job 🙂  ). I have a sugar momma for that, who sees fit to take care of my material needs because I watch the kids and do the homeschooling, and because she makes three times what I made doing what I used to do and loves her job where I hated mine.  So, we both win!  (But I have a doctorate and she only has a masters…so I win in the education category; that’s how my ego deals with that, LOL).

But I figured that if I could decide who I’m writing for it might help guide my content so that it isn’t so scattered.  (But the other issue is that I’m not sure that scattered is a bad thing.) Please know that I welcome ALL readers, of course…but I think having a specific audience in mind really helps to organize not only my article content but even the writing itself.

Today I solved that problem. I thought to myself: I don’t believe in “groups” except as an abstraction. So I stopped thinking of the “market” in terms of bunches of people and began to realize that everything is rooted in the individual, even an “audience” for a blog. For “groups” is merely how we conceptualize a specific number (also an abstract concept) of individuals (existential singularities of SELF). So I stopped asking myself which “group” should be the focus and began to ask myself which PERSON I am writing for. The answer came quickly: the people who already read here. People who are no longer interested in blindly accepting the philosophical ideas that pervade society and the world and which find their most abusive and oppressive conclusions, thanks to their obvious-but-sort-of-not inherent contradictions, in organized “orthodox” religion (specifically dealing with the neo-Calvinism movement, which I know WELL) and in government; and in some instances, even in personal relationships. People like me who for years have been told they are crazy and now are on a quest to determine if that really is so, or if there is something inherent in the thinking which disallows us to truly exist as a SELF, instead maintaining that we are nothing more (or should strive to be nothing more) than a “component” of some external standard (outside the existential singularity of SELF)…just because it is assumed that the people who are the “keepers” of the standard simply know better. People who wonder if “knowing better” is nothing more than conceding a bunch of fucking contradictions and then resorting to some form of violence to silence those who have the gumption to stand up and say, “Er, wait a minute…”.

So the problem of “who is the audience” was resolved very quickly, to my surprise, and happily so. That’s fully half the battle there, so I would think that this hiatus shouldn’t be very long. Perhaps a few days or a week or so to think about what I actually what to SAY to everyone now that I know who “everyone” is, so to speak. Do I want to continue to post seat-of-my-pants retorts to things I read on other blog articles, or responses to commenters (which are my favorite things to write), or should I discipline myself to post the material which I spend 90% of my time musing over and writing with the intention of posting but never sees the light of the LCD (I hand write most of my material…I just love to write with a pencil; something about being in elementary school…I miss those days)? Is that stuff of any interest to people? Too esoteric…theoretical…heavy? And should I care? It is important stuff…no, I wouldn’t be reserved in admitting that, but it may be dry…and why should that make a difference?  Where is the line between reader consideration and personal fulfillment in posting material I think is fresh and enlightening but which may not be appreciated by an audience who might (rightly and understandably) reject its…hmm, more clinical and less sardonic nature?

Anyway…that’s what’s going on. Like I said, nothing big, just a little administrative thinking with respect to where to take this thing, and how to get it there. I mean, I guess in the grand scheme of things it’s not a big deal; I’m not particularly popular relative to other blogs (DEE 🙂  ). Still, with the amount of time I invest in this thing I do want to try to get it as right as I can.

I will be taking a break from blogging for a while…the length of hiatus is not determined, however.

Thanks to all who read and share here.  Your contributions to this site are very much appreciated and very highly regarded.

I know I have a few articles with subsequent parts still pending.  I apologize for my truancy regarding their completion.  There’s a lot to think about and discuss and only so much time.  I hope to conclude them at some later date.

The blog is not closing…I am just taking a hiatus from posting new articles for the time being.

Very kind regards,

Argo

A reader here, Jason Coates, left this excellent observation in the comments thread of the last post:

This the church is not: “We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.”

Sitting at a church conference this weekend I was not surprised to hear the WOF/Hillsong preacher start babbling on about the believer not being separated from church and the importance of tithing and rightful submission to apostles. These guys are from the Delta quadrant after all.

*

Jason,

The Borg.  LOL.  That’s a good way of putting it.

The irony about the Borg…they say, as you quoted “we will add your…distinctiveness to our own.”  But the very fact that they feel it is their right to absorb you into their collective is proof that they, in fact, deny your distinctiveness.  They deny that you have any right to BE you, and instead declare that your existence is the sole property of them. That you don’t actually possess you; but that they possess you, which means that YOU don’t exist in the first place; which means that YOU, by definition, cannot be “distinct”.

Kinda like the local…

Wait.  Let’s think some more about this.  This is fascinating.  Jason, you’ve hit upon something here.

For all their “logic”, it came down to one thing only with the Borg:  force…which is violence.  They sounded impressive with their robotic voices and their unemotional waxing eloquent about their efficiency and power, but when the metaphysical assumptions are taken to their logical conclusion, the only thing the Borg really knew was that the the supreme ability to destroy is the root of existence.

That is…what they believed was that the destruction of all OTHERS is what leads to the perpetual existence of the SELF.  And what this really means is that death is the sole vehicle for life. That the creative process is accomplished solely via the banishment of what IS (in this case, YOU) into the endless chasm of what is NOT (in this case, NOT YOU, but them; that is, YOU are them, and as such YOU, strictly speaking, are NOT).

This is of course impossible; anyone with ten seconds of free time to spare mulling this over will realize that this is a rank a contradiction in terms. If OTHER is destroyed then how can one know the SELF?  Without OTHER by which to juxtapose the SELF, the SELF ceases to have any meaning.  In order to say I AM, one must be able to say I AM NOT.  If AM is endless and absolute, to the exclusion of all OTHER, then AM cannot have any definition. What is, is, goes the “logic”.  AM…or IS, becomes a circular and irrelevant concept. In other words, without an IS NOT, the IS means nothing.  There is no such thing as what IS unless there is also something which that IS, IS NOT.

It is hard to get your head around this, but give it a try.  Here, get ready for some fucking egregious discursive logic:

The point I’m trying to make is that without OTHER the SELF cannot be given a value.  The SELF is what it is, period…SELF is the sum and substance of its definition.  And if the sum and substance of the existence equation–where x is the SELF and SELF is infinite–is:  x = x, then x cannot even be qualified as existing in the first place.  You see?  Existence at its root is movement and movement is relative.  Think about it:  If there is no movement (and think of movement not only as directional (linear) but also as “existence through time”, or “temporal being” if that makes it easier) then there can be no relationship with OTHER; and if there is no relationship with OTHER then there is no inherent value to the SELF.  And if the value of the SELF is zero then existence is, by definition, NOTHING.  So, in order for the SELF to have any relevancy it must understand–via consciousness/self-awareness–how it is distinct from OTHER and then it must interact with OTHER in order that its efficacious-ness as a distinctive SELF can be realized (which is why God cannot simply create and then dash away as the deists believed).

Think of it this way:  What is consciousness without senses?  And I don’t simply mean sight; I mean all your senses.  No smell, taste, sound, nor touch either.

It is simple:  without sense, there is no way for the consciousness to realize that it is, in fact, conscious. And this makes consciousness what?  It makes consciousness, by default, unconscious.  Which is a contradiction in terms.  Meaning that sense and consciousness must exist in tandem or there is NO practical consciousness at all.  Now, I say “practical” because I am not suggesting necessarily that sense and consciousness are metaphysically one; that your consciousness is a direct function of your senses.  There is something interesting about, and something to be said for, the fact that even with all of your amazing five senses you cannot observe your own consciousness.  This makes your consciousness indeed the infinite singularity of your existence, which always IS, without any qualifiable or quantifiable location in “space or time”, which means that you cannot directly observe its relative relationship to OTHER.  Hmm…yes, very interesting.  You cannot look back in on yourself, so to speak.  So what I’m saying is not that the consciousness does not exist without the senses but that the consciousness cannot be defined as existing without the senses.  I know this seems like the same thing but I submit that their is a delicate difference.  The senses allow the infinite SELF to be aware of itself, by observing OTHER–which is a purely relative relationship–and thus acknowledge its “existence”.  Without the senses, existence cannot be valued or defined, and thus, it can have no practical application or efficacy…it is irrelevant.  And irrelevancy is FUNCTIONALLY–according to how we observe our relative existence with OTHER in our reality–the same thing as non-existence when practically applied.

This begs more thought, and warrants a post of its own at some later time

Wheeeeeeee….wasn’t that fun?

So, anyway…back to my point.  What are the senses for?  They are explicitly for making the SELF aware of what it is NOT in order that it may define itself.  And the definition of the SELF is the root of ALL existence relevantly and practically speaking…even for God.  And this requires the existence–the presence–of OTHER.  Which means that if we seek to integrate all OTHER(S) into the SELF, then we are, in fact, destroying the very SELF we think we are perpetuating.  And that is the great logical fallacy of the Borg.

Which is why the Borg were murdering thugs and nothing more; and this is evident from their rank philosophical hypocrisy.  They were murdering thugs for the same reason ALL murdering thugs are murdering thugs; for the same reason that ALL despots are despots:  They held irrational, incompatible, and irreconcilable root assumptions concerning the metaphysics of reality.

And you know what…

This makes the Borg a perfect metaphor for the theo-marxist collective known as the neo-Calvinist “local church”.

Well done, Jason.