STUDIES IN THEOLOGY - Popular Christianity 07/22/2006

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity- 07/22/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

07/22/2006

Further in the effort of documenting my present understanding and perspective in regard to the idea of "religion" and "Theology" - as per modern Christianity at this point - It is as I have stated, that I perceive such as having been developed in the effort to better "understand." Obviously there is the aspect of population control as well - this I see as having been a byproduct of the initial intent although such is very much status quo in modern applications of such solidified social structures - this as well resulting in things such as immediate changes I have described in other notes and as well being due to a type of numbed familiarity as per said over application and solidification of imposed limitations - such losing a considerable degree in the interpretive value which was initially intended (in my opinion). ~

I can imagine that this tendency was being addressed even centuries ago with the advance in human intellect and understanding from different areas of approach.

As I observe it, it readily becomes my belief that the idea of this "Third Degree Of Civilization" was as result to some degree, of such explorations and developments as much as it was of a naturally occurring result as per said larger process. Simply put - as result of alternative efforts to address our relationship with existence beyond those already rigid and overly familiar structures of thought within society.

Further as I look to the ideologies set forward and embodied within the version of that "concept" being "Third Degree Of Civilization" - more so, directions within its development, I recognize a purposeful area which seems to have been created as much in the interest of further exploration of that relationship as much as insuring an individuals "right" to recognize beliefs within given boundaries of civility within and of, society.

That potential is rather promising even today as I consider it - but obviously creates an area of concern and even perceived danger from those who may perceive it as effort in removing said existing belief structures. There are those who have employed it as such and as well there are those who have employed it in the always ill fated effort of forcing their belief structure onto the given example society.

In my opinion, such a check and balance was by design - but more for the sake of allowing for that area of further exploration of said relationship.

Laughably, within that supposed battle there are even those in our society who proclaim there is no such thing as "God" while simultaneously demanding within that area, to be seen and treated as though they personally (and perhaps even exclusively) embody such a vast concept and idea as is "God."

In my personal perspective, such is a misuse beyond the result of insuring "boundaries" and then further insuring that area meant to be used in such explorations.

To proclaim the non-existence of an omnipotent idea/concept - then to lay claim to such omnipotence is rather amusing in my opinion and entirely misses the point with such a structure and concept as is that idea of "Third Degree Of Civilization" under which ever name it is described with.

Personally, I find the idea and results in allowing for such an area to be no less than brilliant in the broadest sense - and for more reasons than are topically perceived in our modern day. ~

As I have observed and noted - within those established and now rigid structures, there is a numb and somewhat trite majority within them - I have explained my beliefs as to why, even beyond "familiarity."

At some point it is obvious that the stagnating results of attempting a relationship through such removed means solely, was recognized as was the need for other means with which to approach said relationship.

This isn't in an effort to discount those structures - in my opinion they have done so of their own, and further need such an area as much for their survival as does that relationship - and further our existence - itself.

I am also not referring to topical schisms of cultural fad.

I am referring more to an area where it is that such a relationship (and those established structures) can churn, and flow, and gestate as it were - in the observed larger process and motion - though admittedly as I have stated - not in a frivolous "cultural fad" manner.

True enough, such schisms are healthy in some degrees, but just as stagnation is a detriment, so then is over saturation of such schisms. ~

This direction of exploration pertaining to our "relationship," compliments my analogy in comparison with a metaphorical representation of the idea of "Christ," being that within said reference is the "wage" to comply with those stagnating structures effortlessly provided - and applying said explorations within the freedoms of existence from them, there-in. Further then in such a metaphor and hypothetical action - provides metaphorically a sort of "eternal life" for said area as well as said concept in emulation of the idea and concept of "Christ."

Even further then, and in regard to those rigid structures, such is safely done relatively within the body and that "wage" having been "paid" in full - provides safety for the mis-steps and innate short comings of humanity in general. Such appeases the requirements of those long rigid structures without being of them entirely or at all in some cases. Doing so in a removed fashion, unobtrusively and within a designed efficiency utilizing even levels of inefficiency.

Further in regard to those needs of said stagnating structures - such developments and motion of said explorations (as well as other "corruptions") then contribute vicariously to and through the health of a vibrant society and said relationships.

This isn't to say that the "Government" be worshiped as "God" or "Christ."

It is to say that, whether intentional or as result of a process similar to that which I have observed, the comparison is quite interesting.

I am sure, given the consistencies of our reality, that other comparisons could be drawn as well - and within said area produced of that "Third Degree Of Civilization" be just as applicable with no conflict in "interest" what so ever. In fact, I tend to see this aspect as "by design."

Further I feel I should note that I am not referring to a specific body of "government" employees or buildings - but more so to the intangible idea in which - of which, they reside. ~

As a note in observation as I transpose these notes, it is observable that within the developmental direction of that "consumer mentality" combined with the common belief that such structures of religion are inherently meant as population control - "people movers," as it were - that such a direction of speculation as per said designs and metaphoric representation are not entirely unfounded. In fact, given the observable path of said social developments toward that more topical aspect we reside in today, such an idea is very much supported within that modern consistent usage of such structures comparatively speaking in reference to the consistency in said path of development in other social aspects.

They are often used in that sense, though within that modern approach of having lost insight through the generations and changes, that "use" is seen as all it was to be without consideration of larger, deeper and more profound ideologies and applied concepts. Concepts which I suspect are very much where the ease in "automation" was made possible, which in turn (whether for the better or worse) created that progressing loss of understanding within the growing consumer mentality.

This then would mean that the success of such directions depends almost entirely on addressing that area of "concept" into "application." If only in the effort to avoid hastening the effects of that process into solidification as to say.

This "area" further provides for the possibility of said explorations while absolving those existing structures of "responsibility" within their own structure and likewise absolving those explorations of "offense" to those existing structures, simultaneously.

I do not believe that "one" is specifically for the other to "consume," but more to sustain a healthy existence and relationship with existence - again, vicariously.

Then of course, is the modern loss in efficiency with the application of the frivolities within the consumer mentality and the provided ease of said automation, most times in the interest of fiscal designs.

This though, in our day has been very much relative to those proclaiming no existing "omnipotence" while demanding themselves to be seen as of such a station. "Omnipotence" being a reference even to the idea of a larger process in which and of which we exist, much less the idea or concept of something now as limited in perception as "God" for instance.

Then of course are the numerous other less than efficient applications of such potential in a governing structure - many of which being perpetrated in the name of a given, trite and empty pseudo social movement, most times based upon and working within the topical designs of some other - or simply in the name of frivolity itself as representation of an existing rigid, and then obviously desperate structure.

Funny as it may seem, within these more frivolous movements are often times individuals seeking recognition which actually posture as (and some even becoming self absorbed enough to believe they are) "Christ" in representation. But, and again in an entertaining note, this if it were a truthful embodiment, most times would only result and even implement that "Self Adulation Paradox" I have described - but within their desperation there always seems to be an excuse to keep from addressing it, if in fact they have recognized it in their direction of action at all.

Perhaps a use of mimicry, and perhaps a bit of seepage from a mentally unstable fictive transfer which served to convince only themselves of such embodied qualities as per transformation. ~

Further I have observed within the frivolous "Christ" representation, seems to be a pronounced concern with being seen as "truthful."

Again, this must be more unintended humor as most of their existence is based on fictitious fabrications - even outright fictive transfer, and further is largely done so for nothing more than the pursuit of money - which itself within our modern society, is based upon a form of fictive transfer. The use of fiction-fabrication, to represent something else entirely. ~ Then of course is the aspect of attempting to embody "Christ" while being concerned with being truthful, which immediately contradicts much of the design in that idea and concept as well - being predominantly a concern as per "image"within the populous. ~

It is as if, within the direction of such misuses (in my opinion), that such possibilities and "relationships" are systematically relegated to nothing more than "mechanical" excuses through which to pass ones life without meaning - or reason other than "that is what it says to do" - which to me, seems a bit of a waste. A burdensome waste at that - regardless of which or who's "Christ" claims righteousness while declaring the absence of any such existence or validity - or even that ongoing relationship with/within existence itself. ~

Something else I find curious about our modern society is the ease with which self proclaimed "atheists" participate in the worship of said "Frivolous Christ" representations. But even in such practices is the evidence in emulation of a larger relationship - if only in the act of said emulation and tendencies.

It is evidence itself of that innate human want and tendency toward such exploration of something greater than ourselves. That version of adulation is simply removed from the capacity realization/exploration - of something beyond said "frivolous" representations.

Perhaps such is just as well in many respects for several reasons? One of which being the preservation of value of such actual opportunities for said exploration within that now seemingly "disposable" atmosphere and topical areas of our society - distractions as it were, to satisfy those leanings while providing an insulation to "that which is" - in a subconscious effort of sorts - potential and very possible.

Let's face it. The "Frivolous" representations are enough for some people - on both sides of that relationship and within that "area" in which such should be allowed (in my opinion). But likewise, should in no way be allowed to command those with differing interests pertaining to said relationship. Especially under the guise of being "holy."

How funny! "Holy, Frivolous Jesus!" ~

In regard to a given level of "cult" application... to a given level, such is even a healthy part of our emulation within that larger process, in my own opinion.