Tom Profile picture
21 Nov, 12 tweets, 3 min read
This is an important subject, so I'll expand on it.

Firstly, Christ was a philosopher: a genius. He also strikes me as the best recorded example of the Platonic Idea of a perfect human being.

I therefore lean towards Christianity, but I must be frank about my feelings on this.
On this subject, Schopenhauer has put into words what I have long felt.

Essentially, everything with material instantiation has an expiry date—which is why prophets must return time and time again, so to speak.
The Christian religion is essentially true, but it is in a "heterogeneous age". This means that the inspiring myths no longer have psychological force, which, like it or not, means people don't believe them.

If this means God's voice isn't heard, something is wrong.
Our current age is pedantic and scientific. The referents of our language are too specific and lacking in poetry to rely on religious myths.

Religion is essentially true, so philosophers like me and Schopenhauer are capable of translating it into secular vocabulary.
This is not enough for the masses, as they want quick and easy material referents.

Philosophical discernment requires far too much self-abnegation and patience for most people.
Jesus Christ is one of the saviours of mankind, but because the material world is basically synonymous with degeneration and decay, his effects are not for all time.

However, because the Platonic Idea of the perfect human being still exists, he can still return in a new body.
What I'm really saying is this:

Christianity is true, but the mythology no longer has a strong psychological effect. Therefore, the precise mythological content should be understood in a purely allegorical sense. In so doing, however, you undermine the whole tradition.
This is fine for gifted philosophers, but for the masses this is insufficient. The masses need rules, rituals and a superhuman story.

Someone needs to step up and provide this. It will not come from the sky. This is lazy thinking, the sort of thing we ought to avoid.
Also, it hasn't escaped my notice that the Eastern tradition is just as wise and ethical, and it predates Christianity.

This is because wisdom is baked into the universe. It's there for intelligent people to see. It doesn't need a cloak of mythology.
I am not at all convinced that Christian mythology (much less the Judaic aspect) is necessary for God's will to prevail on Earth.

I might change me view on this, but I think there is a great danger in clinging too hard onto them. I really believe something new is needed.
It is not for us mortals to decide in advance just what this "new" thing is. Just as a person should follow their heart and conscience, so too should history run its course authentically.

Come the hour, come the man.
I doubt that the next coming will resemble Jesus Christ.

This is just speculation on my part, but I believe this time it will involve the sword more than it involves words.

Our Satanic world will regard anyone with the courage to punish sin as a war-monger.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Tom

Tom Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @tom_username_

21 Nov
Just think, for instance, of how the average person is mortified by the slightest harm done to a dog, but happily eats a burger from a tortured cow.

When you point out the hypocrisy, they lazily—often-times mockingly—gloss over it. They just want their slimy indulgence.
I'm not against eating meat that is properly sourced, but I've always been plagued by contradictions like these in my life.

The modern human is so disgustingly lazy when it comes to ethical output. They cannot for a moment interrupt their freedom of action.
Just think of how addicted the average person is to alcohol. They cannot let go of it for a single evening.

Look at the absolute rubbish they watch on TV. Much of it is borderline pornographic. They're perfectly fine with this objectification of life. Ethics is for schmucks.
Read 17 tweets
21 Nov
The basis for my saying this is two-fold.

a) The problem today isn't that the masses don't have enough bread and healthcare. The average person today behaviourally resembles an Oriental despot in their manner of consumption and attitude toward life. Punishment is required.
For the same reason Jesus said a rich person had a slim chance of getting into heaven, the average glutton today doesn't have much of a chance either.

Punishment requires temporal power, i.e. the state, in order to overcome all this. Temporal and spiritual must come together.
b) Even if this punishment is not forthcoming, the world would degenerate into such a low moral state that only the most radical (and even barbaric) moral reformer could prevail.

In any case, there is no soft-spoken route of this mess. A moral reformer must aspire to power.
Read 6 tweets
20 Nov
Taking pleasure in food is one of the more forgivable forms of degeneracy, but it is still something to be surmounted. (I'm being a hypocrite here)

All great spiritual leaders agree on this, which is why fasting and gastronomic modesty is an important component of all religions.
It tends to immobilise you, just like all worldly pleasures do (including women). In fact, it's no coincidence that women love to cook for a man they love. They want to see him stalled in his satisfaction, thus making him more dependent on her.
Because I am still a sugar addict, it doesn't yet fall to me to explain the essential nature of gastronomic pleasure.

If I understood it fully, I would not have such a sugar tooth. Still, I have made great strides in this area, so I'll offer some incomplete thoughts on this.
Read 30 tweets
20 Nov
I hesitate to write the following thread, as it is a disgusting topic. But it's precisely on account of this disgust that one can achieve celibacy.

I'm talking here about the nature of ejaculation, and the pleasure one takes in it.

My previous thread was insufficient.
I regard it as one of the great philosophical triumphs of my life that I have phenomenologically understood what is happening during orgasm.

It has greatly diminished my desire to have sex, much less to watch it. A life of celibacy is perhaps the most liberating feat possible.
Something which has so impacted me personally should be shared, even if I find it embarrassing to discuss.

If enough people can be liberated (if only partially) from blind sexual desire, the current system will be in for a mighty shock.
Read 33 tweets
20 Nov
The life review, when you're falling to your death, is phenomenologically similar to when you're reflecting on the stupidity of your youth.

You reflect on how totally governed you were by the desire to fit in the material world (i.e. the will-to-life), and this disgusts you.
When falling to your death, you realise "This entropic descent is not me; it is not who I am. I want no part in it anymore."

This is also what's happening when you reflect on your youth.

You're disgusted by what lies in store if you continue along that path, so you transcend it
Letting go necessarily entails falling back in judgement with regard to your life.

You let go of all your silly investments (because your memory consists only of your investments, aversions and outstanding debts, which is why adrenaline is a correlate of memory).
Read 6 tweets
20 Nov
Also contributing to a well-defined appearance is uniformity of surface.

Taut skin is attractive for this reason, and I also take this to be the reason why people have a fetish for rubber latex.

Wrinkled skin shows that no definite thing is prevailing. It's failing.
This is a general feature of objects.

The ideal object is a circle with uniformly distributed boundary.

I have tried to explain before in other essays that an object is characterised by its *repetitive* qualities, both in space and time.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!