For Acharya's Main Website, go to
TruthBeKnown.com

TBK News Table of Contents

Bookmark and Share
Join the TBK Mailing List!
Enter your name and email address below to receive news and cutting edge commentary from Acharya!

Name:
Email:
Subscribe  Unsubscribe 

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

A Truly Sacred Scripture

Scripture:
1. a. A sacred writing or book.
b. A passage from such a writing or book.
2. The sacred writings of the Bible. Often used in the plural. Also called Holy Scriptures.
3. A statement regarded as authoritative.
What is a sacred or holy scripture? Hundreds of millions of people around the world hold sacred the Bible, the Koran, the Dhammapada, the Vedas, Puranas and many other texts that are considered to be "divinely inspired" in some way or another. Countless people claim that there is a single god somewhere "out there" who directly inspired these texts, which are therefore infallible, since this god "himself" is infallible. Others see these texts as manmade and containing errors, although they may also possess much divinely inspired wisdom. Still others consider these so-called scriptures to be entirely contrived by human beings and a reflection of human understanding, rather than divine inspiration.

What is the truth? Is a book that contains endless stories of warfare and slaughter against infidels or unbelieving nations and individuals really "holy writ?" One which dictates that there are "chosen people" who are superior to others, who may thus be unreservedly dominated and exploited? Or that human beings are revolting "sinners" who can only achieve grace by believing in a "Son of God" who was hideously tortured and murdered "for our sins?" Is this sort of "scripture" truly the most appropriate and intelligent writing the God of the cosmos could come up with?

Let us briefly examine some of what these "holy scriptures" say:
"For you are a people holy to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his own possession, out of all the peoples that are on the face of the earth." Deuteronomy 7:6
"You shall suck the milk of nations, you shall suck the breast of kings; and you shall know that I, the LORD, am your Savior and your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob." Isaiah 60:16

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but with a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's foes will be those of his own household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy." Matthew 10:34-37

"For nation will rise up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places: all this is but the beginning of the sufferings." Matthew 24:7-8

"This Book is not to be doubted.... As for the unbelievers, it is the same whether or not you forewarn them; they will not have faith. God has set a seal upon their hearts and ears; their sight is dimmed and grievous punishment awaits them." Koran 2:2-6

"God's curse be upon the infidels! Evil is that for which they have bartered away their souls. To deny God's own revelation, grudging that He should reveal His bounty to whom He chooses from among His servants! They have incurred God's most inexorable wrath. An ignominious punishment awaits the unbelievers." Koran 2:92-6
Phew! That's a whole lotta spewing. Now, of course, this collection represents only a small fraction of what is contained in those "holy texts." And, of course, there is some "good" stuff to balance it...slightly. But, again, is this type of sentiment - which permeates not only the so-called scriptures but also the ideologies themselves, oozing out of believers like some supercilious and smug sludge, heartlessly hurled at all who do not believe likewise - really the best and holiest concept in the cosmos, such that it merits the distinction of being deemed "divinely inspired" and representing the "infallible Word of God?"

Or could there be something much more enlightened that deserves to be held up in a higher sacrosanct position?
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
The American Constitution may well be the "holiest of holies." It is not "infallible," nor does it address religion specifically, except for this particularly pithy amendment that is not only wholly relevant but also holy in its implications for securing liberty from religious imposition of all kinds:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
These remarks do not suggest that the constitutions of other nations are necessarily inferior or that the U.S. is flawless, but at least in this well-considered and well-written scripture - as defined by the third definition: "A statement regarded as authoritative" - there is a chance for humanity to be truly free and to reach its best.

If we were to fling open the doors of nations around the world and allow free movement in either direction, which way would most of the traffic flow? Would most people up and run towards "Oppressivestan," under the dominion of so-called holy law, or towards "Libertyland," governed by such a constitution? Think about it.

(This essay is updated and included in my book The Gospel According to Acharya S.)

37 comments:

Dave G. said...

Entertaining and enlightening as always A.S. I've enjoyed "christ conspiracy" and am currently reading "suns of god" both truly jewels on my bookshelf. I'm sometimes frustrated when I think of the potential we as beings have on this planet when compared to what the powers that be actually do. And the sheeple that allow the leaders to abuse ones peoples or another in the name of one god or another -- it is pathetic. I wish more people were aware of and appreciated your work. I see much more in common with the worlds religions/mythlogies than differences thanks in part to your work. Maybe (and it's a big maybe) if people were aware that the roots of their faith are more connected than they currently know perhaps tolerence for varying faiths will grow, and we can move past the "my god is better than your god" silliness. Thank you for all your hard work fighting the good fight Acharya. You keep writing and I'll keep reading. Dave

Daniel D. Ziegler said...

Well said. GREAT piece! Thanks. Dan

Mike Conner said...

It is a sad comentary that we oftimes lose sight of the fundamentals in our headlong rush into politics, religion, education and economics. This country is great because it enables the individual to rise to greatness. The Constitution is an empoering document... not a restrictive document. Thanks for reminding us Acharya.


Mike Conner

Anonymous said...

The Dhammapada has never been considered "divinely inspired". It contains the teachings of a human philosopher named Shakyamuni. No one is compelled to accept them.

Acharya S said...

Thanks.

It's probably too strong a generality to say that the Dhammapada has "never" been considered divinely inspired. I don't know in what light the Tibetan Buddhists, for example, hold that text. Considering that this alleged author Sakyamuni - "Buddha" - is most definitely considered a divine being within Tibetan Buddhism, I would be surprised if the Tibetans didn't consider this major Buddhist scripture to be "divine." The fact that there ARE Buddhist "scriptures," with that very term being used, indicates that said texts ARE considered "divine."

Anonymous said...

The Dhammapada did not have its origin in Tibetan Buddhism. The Tibetans do not have dibs on "Buddhism". Moreover, no one has ever killed someone else in the name of the Dhammapada.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Luis E. said...

I agree with you! The US Constitution is not perfect but it is one if not the most humane document ever written by men and or creation. Our Constitution is the closest that you can get to Anarchy, which is total freedom.

Dillon said...

Ah, c'mon, don't be so down on Buddhism. I've not read any of your books but I've read quite a bit about Buddhism & yes, what you're saying can apply to some types of Buddhism but if you look at most of the core 'teachings', they're nothing like the Bible & the Koran in terms of crazy 'stoning homosexuals' stuff. Especially the 'philosophy' of Zen Buddhism. And as far as I know, Shakyamuni or Gautama or Buddha, never asked to be worshippedin any way, in fact he encouraged people not to take his word on anything, instead asking them to think for themselves in order to become enlightened. Sounds like good advice to me, whether you think he ever actually existed or not, doesn't really matter does it?...

"The fact that there ARE Buddhist "scriptures," with that very term being used, indicates that said texts ARE considered "divine.""

The fact that there are 'scriptures', doesn't really 'indicate' that they have to be divine. As you pointed out amongst your definitions of the word in question, scriptures can mean...

3. A statement regarded as authoritative.

Of course, some people might consider these scriptures divine, but some people might consider Britney Spears is divine, does it really matter what people think of Buddhist scriptures? I've not read any that encourage killing, stoning, sacrificing or any similar such things. If you have, I'd love to hear about it.

Here's something I quickly googled from the Dhammapada

As the fletcher whittles
And makes straight his arrows,
So the master directs
His straying thoughts.
Like a fish out of water,
Stranded on the shore,
Thoughts thrash and quiver,
For how can they shake off desire?
They tremble, they are unsteady,
They wander at their own will.
It is good to control them,
And to master them brings happiness.
But how subtle they are,
How elusive!
The task is to quieten them,
And by ruling them to find happiness.
With single-mindedness
The master quells his thoughts.
He ends their wandering.
Seated in the cave of the heart,
He finds freedom.
How can a troubled mind
Understand the way?
If a man is disturbed
He will never be filled with knowledge.
An untroubled mind,
No longer seeking to consider
What is right and what is wrong,
A mind beyond judgments,
Watches and understands.
Know that the body is a fragile jar,
And make a castle of your mind.
In every trial
Let understanding fight for you
To defend what you have won.
For soon the body is discarded,
Then what does it feel?
A useless log of wood, it lies on the ground,
Then what does it know?
Your worst enemy cannot harm you
As much as your own thoughts, unguarded.
But once mastered,
No one can help you as much,
Not even your father or your mother.

Like I said, sounds like good advice to me, an authoritative statement even.

Dillon said...

I just re-read your blog, you weren't really down on Buddhism at all were you - I must apologise, I think I may have come across as being a little 'previous'.

Acharya S said...

I am well aware that the Dhammapada is not a Tibetan text. No one has suggested the Tibetans have "dibs" on Buddhism - that would be a preposterous notion. It is not, however, possible to say that the Dhammapada has never been perceived as "divinely inspired."

Moreover, no one here has ever asserted that anyone has been killed in the name of the Dhammapada, although Buddhism is certainly not without its violent history as well.

Acharya S said...

Where do I say anything in this blog about Buddhism being "so bad?"

Acharya S said...

Again, where in this blog post am I "so down on Buddhism?" Nor is my previous remark anything critical of Buddhism. In fact, I rather like the color and pageantry of Tibetan Buddhism, and Zen is certainly very sane. If there had to be a dominant world religion, I would vote for Buddhism or Taoism.

Dillon said...

Like I said, I must apologise, this is the first time I've ever posted something on anyone's blog, ever. I'd been reading one of your other blogs from your Myspace page, the one about Islam & Europe (this might explain my comments about stoning homosexuals). I then found myself on this particular page, (where I am in the world, it was late & I really should've been in bed instead of trying to take part in serious conversations.) So having got it all wrong & all mixed up, I then felt the need to say my two penneth, I wrote my comment then had to join Google or something, then I thought it hadn't been posted, so I wrote it again, adding stuff (I really should've given up at this point), then I re-read your post & realised that I'd pretty much got entirely the wrong end of the stick, and was unable to retract anything that I'd written. I went to bed feeling a bit of a twat really. So this evening I thought I better check back & see how you'd reacted, I am grateful to you for not slaughtering me too much & I can assure you that I do feel somewhat embarrassed by the whole thing. I don't think I'll be posting any more comments for a while, not unless it's mid afternoon & I have all my faculties about me. From what I've read of your blogs & things, it's obvious you're a very intelligent person & I'm glad to hear, like me, if it came down to it, you'd vote for Buddhism or Taoism (can't someone please set up that election?)
Again I do apologise, please ignore my previous comments, if I could delete them I would.

I wish we had a constitution here in England.

By the way, (sorry to change the subject) do you know that whole thing about not having to pay income tax in America?

Check out this film -

http://www.freedomtofascism.com/

Acharya S said...

It's okay. They make for an interesting debate. However, I will delete one or two. I left this last one, because you've brought up an interesting issue, i.e., that of taxes.

Dillon said...

Thanks.

Anonymous said...

I like the U.S., I like most Americans I have ever met. The constitution? It's cute in the
idealic manner a child muses over
the notion of the perfect life to unfold under his cheery command: butterflies, honey, liberties unfettered and peaceful hours unending. I imagine no child that wouldn't scribble down such a document and parade around, rosey-cheeked, waving their paper at passersby. Of course, living up to such common fantasy is another thing. The only thing, really. At the end of the day the paper is irrelevent, and the hard facts of the lifestyle one has in fact been able to manifest on the whole is the only measure: reasoned against flowery rhetoric. I guess even the best of us has found slavery in his freedom , wanton violence in his sidearm, hollow victories in accumulation. Libertyland, I would imagine, is as varied an ideal as religion.

Silent K. said...

In this context, why are people not referring to Lysander Spooner?

http://www.lysanderspooner.org/bib_new.htm

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

I like the U.S., I like most Americans I have ever met. The constitution? It's cute in the
idealic manner a child muses over
the notion of the perfect life to unfold under his cheery command: butterflies, honey, liberties unfettered and peaceful hours unending. I imagine no child that wouldn't scribble down such a document and parade around, rosey-cheeked, waving their paper at passersby. Of course, living up to such common fantasy is another thing. The only thing, really. At the end of the day the paper is irrelevent...


It doesn't sound like you've even read the U.S. Constitution to be making such comments about it, poetic and inane as they may be.

The American Founding Fathers were very intelligent, well educated and inspired individuals who together formed one of the most perfect institutions and constitutions humans have ever achieved. They and their endeavors were not perfect - no one is claiming that, and, yes, of course, I am aware of the very black spot of slavery.

However, at that time these profound and highly MATURE individuals set about to accomplish something extraordinarily enlightened and generous towards humanity, not to be denigrated by the mealy of mouth.

They may as well have been spitting into the wind for all the mediocre of mind who have followed their hard-earned efforts.

Anonymous said...

Acharya,

Cudo's to you in keeping the torch lit for the truth. I have your "Christ Conspiracy" book and I loved it.

As you know, there are numerous authors who preceded you in this attempt to get the truth out; Gerald Massey, Alvin Kuhn, Joseph Wheless, Karen Amrstrong, Elaine Pagels, et al. You're in good company. Keep up the 'good' work.

I found nothing in this post to suggest that Buddhism was bad. Your quotes were specifically from the Koran and the Bible.

You should in all fairness include the Mahabharata, or at least the Bhagavad Gita. I take it you've read the Acharya's too? :-)

All the best in the new millenium.

Tom Z.

JerryMychael said...

Acharya S., I wonder if you could elaborate on the " Black Spot" of White Slavery in the United States prior to and after the signing of the Constitution? I've spent a few evenings reading your work on your site. I think maybe your investigative skills in this area could prove to be very informative and enlightning.

Sincerely,

JerryMychael

Anonymous said...

"The American Founding Fathers were very intelligent, well educated and inspired individuals who together formed one of the most perfect institutions and constitutions humans have ever achieved".

Oh, I'm sure they were bright, bushy-tailed and eager, acharya. Really, at their age, it would be expected.

Were their hearts in the right place? Sure. Did they , or their flock, achieve - achieve, the operative word -their "most perfect" ideologies? I will leave that up to Americans to address introspectively, with judicious interpretation of the documents weighed against their documented character and dispositions.

I do apologize if I insulted something sacrosanct .No blasphemy intended...All the best.

JerryMychael said...

Acharya, I've never used the blog feature before. Forgive me for not posting that last comment correctly. I believe I have it working now. Thank you..

the K is Silent. said...

Spooner is an "authoritative statement maker" on the subjects of the constitution, and " sacred scripture ".

"The Constitution of no authority", a section of "Not reason", and his comments on the miracles are enlightening. Also
" A Deist's reply to the alleged supernatural evidences of christianity."

The "constitution of no authority" should be required reading for those who have never encountered a system of social-political organization superior to the constitution of the united States of America.

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

"The American Founding Fathers were very intelligent, well educated and inspired individuals who together formed one of the most perfect institutions and constitutions humans have ever achieved".

Oh, I'm sure they were bright, bushy-tailed and eager, acharya. Really, at their age, it would be expected.

Were their hearts in the right place? Sure. Did they , or their flock, achieve - achieve, the operative word -their "most perfect" ideologies? I will leave that up to Americans to address introspectively, with judicious interpretation of the documents weighed against their documented character and dispositions.

I do apologize if I insulted something sacrosanct .No blasphemy intended...All the best.


Of course, it's easy to be snide, supercilious and smug when sitting safely behind a computer screen. Your airs of superiority towards the Founding Fathers are reflective of your own inadequacies, not theirs.

Obviously, the U.S. Constitution HAS allowed us to keep one part of the world from becoming a hellhole of fascism and slavery.

What the depraved leaders do with it is another issue - or, rather, what they do AGAINST the U.S. Constitution.

Ever heard of Ron Paul? He knows the value of the Constitution - and because of his highly intelligent and well-educated perspective of it, I support him, regardless of his born-again Christian position.

And THAT'S one of the major values of the Constitution - it allows us equality in a wide variety of manners.

The reason I wrote this essay in a manner of depicting sacredness is because in my opinion the protection of the Constitution should be considered a sacred duty, held with no less fervent devotion as the religious fanatics spend on their so-called holy texts, which are in reality full of hatred and violence.

So, yes, consider it "blasphemy," so to speak, to attack the U.S. Constitution. Perhaps that will make some people think twice about destroying it - which they are actively attempting to do now, including to replace it with the revolting and barbaric sharia law.

(Yes, folks, there are those actively working to turn the U.S. into Saudi Arabia, complete with public executions, limb amputations, enslavement of women, along with assorted other tortures and evils - and these barbarians have a large following and loads of money, as well as the will of many unthinking individuals in this country and elsewhere who foolishly believe they are being "superior" in their "tolerance" of this barbarism.)

NB: To the loving Christian who attempted to post vile insults against my person, sorry, but I'm not interested in promoting your hateful and ugly views. You need to grow a conscience and some compassion for your fellow human beings. Christianity has obviously made you sick, entirely proving my point.

Acharya S said...

JerryMychael said...

Acharya S., I wonder if you could elaborate on the " Black Spot" of White Slavery in the United States prior to and after the signing of the Constitution? I've spent a few evenings reading your work on your site. I think maybe your investigative skills in this area could prove to be very informative and enlightning.


Thanks, Jerry. I made that comment about the black spot of slavery in order to demonstrate that I am well aware that some of the Founding Fathers of the U.S. kept slaves. I cannot excuse it in any way, shape or form. (Some might argue that it was a "cultural practice of the time," the same they do with the barbarism in other parts of the world today.) It is probable, however, that the institution of slavery was one of the main motivating factors behind the creation of the U.S. Constitution, at least for some of its signers:

Prior to the Convention in 1787, many "Founding Fathers" expressed opinions that condemned slavery.

Constitutional Topic: Slavery

I am not an expert on the Constitution or its history. Nor do I know the minutiae of American history as well as I would like. My interests tend to wander farther back in time.

One thing we can say is that, while slavery remains rampant in many parts of the world, it has not happened in the U.S. on a large scale for a significant period of time. Naturally, the same can be said of Europe and elsewhere, which, of course, is a good thing and to be encouraged.

As we know, many people of the time used the Bible to justify slavery, so, again, the emancipators were butting heads with religious fanatics, just as we continue to do today in our attempts to free those who are mentally enslaved by depraved and hateful ideologies - which to this day are used to justify slavery.

Acharya S said...

the K is Silent. said...

Spooner is an "authoritative statement maker" on the subjects of the constitution, and " sacred scripture ".

"The Constitution of no authority", a section of "Not reason", and his comments on the miracles are enlightening. Also
" A Deist's reply to the alleged supernatural evidences of christianity."

The "constitution of no authority" should be required reading for those who have never encountered a system of social-political organization superior to the constitution of the united States of America.


Of course, no one needs the U.S. Constitution or any other document to figure out a moral way of life for the individual. I don't go running to the Constitution to determine what I should do on a daily basis or at any time. Innate morality is desirable but is in short supply, and, as concerns the governing of a large group of people, innate morality doesn't generally work very well, as we can see from the world's history.

The point is that the U.S. Constitution provides a morally superior analysis of and blueprint for governance on a large scale - and that it is more than good to get these ideas into the heads of the masses at large.

The point is also that it needs to be protected against attempts to replace it with a morally inferior system of governance - an assault we are seeing on a regular basis.

Hatrinne said...

The idea about "divine inspiration" you line out is a bit superficial.

What happens with the people who write these works is that they get glimpes of the divine/God, yet they themselves are unchanged mentally (peak experiences do not need a regenerated personality).

So, normal, and even fanatical people, have a glimpse of something greater, something that definitely shines in any Holy Book, and combine that with their own bigotry and dogma, because they think that is the sole reason they had the glimpse.

The result being they become even more fanatical in their views. Yet, anyone who cares to look will see the divine in such works (yes, He is there in the Old Testament as well).

This should be well understood, because if it leads to an entire throw away of the concept Holy Book it is harmful.

The constitution is a mental work, although some of the directions it takes are towards an ideality that tries to approach, but most certainly not is, spirituality.

JerryMychael said...

Thank you Acharya for your response. I mentioned it because I have only recently become of aware of it's depth and scope. As children we are lead to believe the version of history we are handed by those in control. I think many are finding out that our blind, childlike faith in our elders and educational institutions have been abused and the truth often hidden from our sight. Truth being the very mechanism that has the power to free us all from this very methodical and insidious slavery of the mind and heart. Some retaliate in anger from the fear of the unknown they feel welling up inside themselves. They often attack the messenger out of desperation and panic, like a drowning man grasps to overcome his rescuer. So understanding and empathy become the guiding rule of thumb in realizing their plight. I think we can all appreciate the sense of betrayal and fear of the unknown they find themselves in. I find myself there from time to time too. I also share an interest in ancient cultures to gain an understanding of the point of origin of many of the theological ideologies that affect myself and other interpersonal relationships to this very day.

I have often wondered myself about the Divinity of the Constitution of the United States of America. The creation of a Republic by imperfect men instituting Democracy within it's framework as the mechanism to ensure the liberty and freedom of the individual. This Demonstrates an aspiration and willingness to the betterment of all under it's umbrella in my mind. Although, I think often times these two terms are confused and misapplied Republic and Democracy, using them interchangeably as one and the same, creating a mob rule mentality due to a lack of understanding of these terms.

My understanding is: Our Republic recognizes our individual innate "Divinity" if you will. We are not granted these by our Republic rather our Republic is designed to protect what we already posses by the very nature of our individual existence. It is designed to serve us not enslave us. Our Republic is also designed to use "Democracy" majority vote, along with a series of checks and balances to ensure and bar any infringement upon these recognized innate individual rights. Now it's construction and intended design is one thing and its misapplication is another thing altogether. This is my understanding of our Constitution's intended construction and design by imperfect men to serve us all.

Anonymous said...

Please remember that the constitution was written by patriarchal patricians (mostly masons and the rest being christian dupes) who lived in a society that condoned slavery and second class (practically) citizenship of women. By the way, the terms 'President' and 'Vice President' were appellations before the U.S.A -- it's called a CORPORATION, (as opposed to a country)

bert said...

Is the Constitution arising now, and returning, as the distant stranger that was long amongst us? Are its writers returning, to speak to us now as though they were queer and outcasts, but who in their day suffered all variety of calumnies and usurpations of their souls (which pain goes contrary to the modern historical lie, which springs invariably from the lies of Marxist materialism), and who even in their own day searched for the reason for existence, and could find none except for reason alone, and who by reason alone can again become the required and estranged, giver of our laws? And can this odd stranger now amongst us be somehow unstrung from his originating idea, which was amply set forth in the Declaration of Independence? And might not that have been called our Declaration of Independence and Sovereignty -- were it not that the origins of sovereignty are to be found only in the powers of harmonics and choice (re-read that), which by predestination, as God’s first act of creation and love, were deeply implanted in the natural substrates of each individual and powerfully creative human mind? Can that originating idea of this stranger amongst us, that a government might be instituted amongst MEN, who are men because they recognize the harmonics of their duty to love and protect women and children, who because of their affinity for poetry and music have brain organs knowably worth protecting, wherein a nation might be born where “live, liberty, and choice” are openly defended as natural rights of man? Have we, as men, by our cowardly and sullen usurpations, fallen so low that we cannot see the Unconstitutional and Unharmonic wounds that are now inflicted on the souls of our women and children, but on the souls of these strangers amongst us? Are wounds of injustice, which steal happiness from the harmonics of the whole to remain forever unresolved, as with the slave trade, and its successor racism today -- do not the woundings of the human soul, and there is only one, begin with an unlawful restraint somewhere, on the desire of each of us to be harmonically fulfilled by our choices, which the Philadelphia fathers expressed as “pursuit of happiness?” And what is pursuit of happiness other than the right to make choices that augment the multitude of harmonic congruencies and similitudes in the entirety of the Universe, which were long ago implanted in the mind of man, as the replication child of our Creator?

I have drifted from Constitution to Choice, with happiness as an expression of harmonics and reason, for a reason.

Is it not the case, that democracy is nothing other than a form of surrender -- as if defeated in a war, we surrender reason, to a vague collage of lies that daily spew out from the main, and unaccountable, heads of today’s “talking stream media?” Might there not be an alterative to usurpations of political harmonics and reason, otherwise known as surrender of choice to a “Media-controlled Democracy?” Did not our estranged forefathers, now returning as if to be amongst us, foresee the inherent danger of surrender of choice, and of political reason, to the hollow collage of lies by enemy propaganda artists?

As strangers amongst us, our founding fathers gave us an alternative to the collage of media lies that is now destroying us, and they put it in writing, right in our Constitution, and yet we are still too blind to see it. Might it not be that to restore our Constitution, as the stranger amongst us, the main-stream ideas that we have lived by, of Democracy by surrender to Mass Media, and the bizarro-world Choices “it” makes for us, we have to turn over still deeper soil?

An Elector is someone who is himself, or herself, also elected. But that is where the similarity ends, and the beginning of reason and sound choice begins. Because the idea of an Elector is so strange to us, permit me to first run through a few basics. Before your parents were married, let us say that your father, then a bachelor, said his name was “Mr. Smith,” for example. Then, after your parents were married, and had given birth to you and were raising you as a child, he may have used the same name for himself -- but that name referred to an entirely different person, because he is wearing a completely different hat, if you will. After your father was married, every thought that he entertained (while he was healthy) simply had to include the consequence of his choices on his wife and his children -- in a society not distrained from the natural rights of man, he would have been too fulfilled by the obligations of his family to have excluded them.

Let us say that we are all very busy making magic wooden horses, or wondrous mechanical fishes, or whatever. As we get together and start talking about politics, we soon realize how ignorant we are. We are all too busy with our families and our day-by-day economics, to exercise due diligence and do competent and faithful investigations into the backgrounds and potentials of the candidates who are offering to be our future representatives and leaders. But the time was when, that we were cautious enough to realize that anybody who shows up on our doorstep (or in our living room) uninvited, and anoints himself as “faithful political investigator” or even as our “trustworthy elector,” who was never elected by us, is both incompetent per se, and untrustworthy per se. He sees himself not as the stranger amongst us, but rather as the stranger apart from us.

So, hypothetically speaking, we get together and ask ourselves, is there anyone amongst us, who knows about these things, and who is in contact with lost of people, and knows about advancements in science. Let us say that we identify the host of this board, to be our Elector, because she has a general reputation of being reasonable and trustworthy. If Acharya S agrees, then much like your father in the example above, though Acharya S may still use the same name, she has changed -- now her brain organ is burdened by the higher question, which candidate will be the best for the nation? In short, as Elector, she has to put on her hat of higher reason, that is of reason higher that her own so-called “self interest.” (In a real world example, we would also know where she worked, where she lived, where her children went to school, etc. etc. And, we would give her a small budget, to travel, and to make proper investigations, for us as our agent, and we would give her time to organize a forum, called a college, wherein she could in a collegial way, discuss her findings with Electors chosen by other districts. During the deliberations of this college of Electors, there would be discussion and arguments, and voting, as juries do, to find the best candidate. Notwithstanding that there might even some name calling and some fist fighting, reason, there would still be the possibility of reason, rather than self-interest, carrying the day. This collegial forum of Electors, is known as the Electoral College. If the various districts were to choose Acharya S-type personalities as our Electors, and she were to participate as best she could in her political deliberations with her fellow electors, there is the possibility that, as a nation, we might end up with a better set of representatives and leaders than are now being chosen for us, in the collage of propaganda and lies which is otherwise known as the “Talking Stream Media.”

The alternative to democracy by surrender to media, is a college of Electors, each of whom lives in our communities, and was elected by proper voting for their honesty and their trustworthiness.

My apologies for the length -- I’m sure that someone out there could say it better in fewer words. Democracy is a form of surrender. The better alternative is a college of Electors, each of whom was elected by our choices, as provided for in our Constitution.

Tony Bernhoffer said...

I was studying in I Peter where hte Apostle commands Christians to obey the duly instituted authorities. But for that past 20 years I have been dealing with blackmailers and vigillantes and gangsters here in crooked Toledo, Ohio. I am sure that America began as a place of refuge for persecuted Christian faiths. But now it is a place for the greedy and the overly ambitious and the money hungry! Times have changed.

Anonymous said...

Scriptures translated from one language to the next can loose much of the intended meaning. What I find ludicrous is that no one really knows what the sacred scriptures actually are about. Things get "lost in translation".

I ♥ this verse personally:

2Pe 1:19
"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and day-star(Christ in the NLT : Lucifer in the LATIN) arise in your hearts:"

So in one verse we have Phosphorus being translated as CHRIST, LUCIFER, and DAY STAR.....

GO figure.... if that isn't Divine, I don't know what isis....

Anonymous said...

It is sad, to me, that many people who consider themselves "scholars" (whatever that means) have never see or understood the principles and "big picture" of the Christian Bible. I do not claim to be a scholar of anything. I do know; however, you cannot argue logically with a person who has an experience. I have been an ardent student of the KJV of the Holy Bible and have seen and experienced thousands of scriptural "truths" to be, well, true. The best way to test any scripture is to put it to the test and see if what the passage says actually manifests itself or comes to pass. I have personally read of casting out demonic spirits in the Christian Bible and have personally been involved in casting out demonic spirits just like the scriptures instructs us. The same goes for reading about people being healed and, praying the prayer of faith and watching people healed...some, raised from the dead after being certified as dead by medical personnel. In addition, I have personally received the infilling of the Holy Spirit as outlined in the book of Acts. So, to me, I have read the scripture, put it to the test, and have been actively engaged in the Word of God becoming TRUTH. I am sorry that so many professed Christians 1) have not read the bible in the proper manner, 2) refused to believe the words, 3) exercise true FAITH, as given by God to every man, and 4) experience signs, wonders, and miracles throughout their entire life. Please do not discount something you have not completely tried, proven, and hold as true. I have seen too much, felt too much, experienced too much of the Holy Bible's declarations to allow an unbelieving, inexperienced "scholar" to take away my personal, verified, qualified experiences. God bless you and I trust you will allow yourselves to believe the Christian Bible for what it says and prove it in your life. Without faith...it is impossible to please God...
Thanks for reading...I look forward to your replies, if any.
Anthony (at agjudene@aol.com).

Anonymous said...

Sorry to burst your bubble, Anthony, but it's called EUPHORIA. Which happens to go hand-in-hand with faith.

Acharya S said...

I see, so all your experiences haven't taught you that it is bad form to go around into someone else's blog and insult them, as if you have absolutely no respect for them as a fellow human being?

If that is what "experience" is vis-a-vis the "Christian Bible," then I want even less of it than before. With your derogatory remarks about someone you do not know in the slightest, it is clear that your "experience" is worthless in terms of soul maturation and true enlightenment.

Contrary to your erroneous and insulting remarks, I have experienced numerous things in the many years I have been alive on this planet - most likely much more than you, in fact.

Moreover, your experiences certainly do not prove the truth of the Bible in any way, shape or form. Plenty of people have such mystical experiences with their own religions, including many Hindu people having visions of their various gods. I guess their experiences "prove" the veracity of their Hindu holy scriptures and their gods.

Thousands of years ago, Egyptian religionists - of whom there were many hundreds of millions, quite a few of whom were undoubtedly just as pious you believe yourself to be - had experiences with the gods Osiris and Isis, among others. They believed they were visited by their gods and that they knew what the Egyptian afterlife was, so much so that they portrayed "heaven" in massive HOLY TEXTS that are every bit as valid - if not more so - than you believe the Bible to be.

This "appeal to mystical experience" fallacy has been addressed many times in the past. Insults and superficial retorts will not nullify the fact that it is a logical fallacy.

What you have displayed throughout your post is a nearly complete ignorance of history and the world's cultures. And THAT'S what your bibliolatry has done to you, as well as to encourage you to come to my blog and sling insults at me.

Thank you for exemplifying why Christianity has been harmful to the human mind. It obviously makes people nasty, conceited and insulting.

Danny M. Pierce said...

Bravo Acharya! I agree that IGNORANCE of the truth as explained comprehensively in your books prevails on this planet. Until people educate themselves and step outside their "spiritual" box, they will never know the truth.