WHAT [...]]]> For a long time, my copy of “The Passion of the Christ” has sat on a shelf and gathered dust. So many reviews had slated this film that it seemed that watching it would be a waste of time and effort. Having fallen and partially immobilised myself, it finally has had a viewing.

WHAT A REVELATION!

Mel Gibson has produced an horrific film potraying the evils that come with a demented priesthood, an occupational army without sufficient numbers of troops and the mob mentality that demented priests can engender. As an historical representation of the times, the film appeared quite credible. Mob rule created by the fear of the priesthood that it was in danger of losing a very lucrative industry was illustrated in a subdued but effective manner.

The pathetic washing of hands by Pilate was an eloquent illustration of the sheer incompetence of a ruling force to ensure that due, legal process was followed.

The scourging of Jesus by two hulking Roman centurians was just a little drawn out and lost it’s way because the scene simply didn’t seem to know when it was finished.

The eventual journey to Golgotha was a tour de force and brought out the best in the principal players. The total disregard for the value of human life and the massive indifference to the suffering of a fellow human being by the crowds of on-lookers was something of a revelation and bore some resemblance to the modern day indifference of “rubber neckers” at the sites of human tragedy.

My feeling, after watching the film, was that it was a reasonably accurate depiction of the events. Certainly, more than lip service was paid to the stories to be found in the Bible but it left me with an answer to a question I have been asking for some years.

I am now fairly sure that Jesus was not sent to earth in order to “take upon himself the sins of all mankind”. It seems clear to me that ONLY contemporaries of Jesus were to be saved. Seeing the written word performed shows that the words of Jesus were addressed to those people in His presence. The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at the last supper was not invoking that activity for all time but was an intimate act between close male friends. The obvious misogyny of Jesus and His followers was the final indicator that there was a huge, empty rift in the teachings of Jesus. Jesus came to Earth to be an example and a teacher – a DIVINE example and teacher – and yet he adopted the belief of his contemporary males and taught the second class position of females.

This, out of all the contrary and disappointing aspects of the teachings of Jesus on Earth, double under-lined his true mortality and lack of divinity.

At the creation, God made men and women as living souls from the dust of the Earth without assigning superiority to either sex. If there really was a serpent that tempted a woman to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, wasn’t that just a little too convenient for misogynyst philosophy?

Wasn’t the story of Adam and Eve a mere contrivance by a greedy and corrupt priesthood to allow men to subjugate women?

There are some people who should not drink alcohol – I am one of them.

Alcohol can be a massively injurious substance but can also create lucid dreams that make perfect sense and which are often the sources of the revelations claimed by holy men.

Dog owners will be familiar with the 1,000 yard stare that many dogs exhibit when they simply stop walking and gaze into the distance but the behaviour of my [...]]]> Sometimes, when I am out with my dogs, they give me the verydistinct impression that there are things they can see that I can’t.

Dog owners will be familiar with the 1,000 yard stare that many dogs exhibit when they simply stop walking and gaze into the distance but the behaviour of my two little gems this afternoon was – err – creepy.

Both Chap and Stanley decided that it was time to sit down and watch something. My video camera was not with me or I would have filmed the synchronised “star-gazing” that they indulged in for about ten minutes. There was no doubt at all that, not only had something caught their attention, but that it was the same something.

My sight is not good but, with two noses pointing at something apparently interesting, I should have been able to spot what had engaged them.

Stanley, who has only recently found his voice, was crooning quietly and Chap was giving out quiet whinges (for want of a better word).

This is not the first time this has happened and I often wonder if dogs can see the ghosts of people and creatures that are “hanging around”. Maybe they can see ancient Roman legions or Moslem soldiers marching through the hills? Maybe, as the purest souls around, they can see angels or other dimensional beings.

Whatever it is they see, this hot afternoon it was a chilly experience.

My current dogs, Chap and Stanley, are as different as chalk and cheese when it comes to walking. Chap likes to pull ahead and to alternate sides – he probably walks at least twice as [...]]]> I have always tolerated the antics of my dogs while on walks as being personality traits.

My current dogs, Chap and Stanley, are as different as chalk and cheese when it comes to walking. Chap likes to pull ahead and to alternate sides – he probably walks at least twice as far as I do as he zig-zags along – while Stanley is more conservative and tends to follow behind me at as slow a pace as I will put up with.

Now that we can walk in the campo with Stanley off the lead, I have noticed that the dogs have exactly the same characteristics in their progress. Chap likes to explore at the extent of his fifteen foot extending lead while Stanley spends a great deal of time examining areas as small as one square foot.

Both dogs are very busy with their noses so I can only assume that they are reading the recent events disclosed to them by the various smells. I must further assume that Chap, with his rapid transit from place to place, is reading only the headlines while Stanley, in his own pedantic fashion, is reading the small print.

Is it possible that the devout Norsemen not only created Odin but also Valhalla? Are there immortal Vikings living out eternity  in daily battles [...]]]> I suppose that we must also consider something else following http://www.askoldcoot.info/2012/03/20/are-we-solipsists because if we can create a god with our combined mental energy, could we also create our own heaven?

Is it possible that the devout Norsemen not only created Odin but also Valhalla? Are there immortal Vikings living out eternity  in daily battles and over-night recovery? Are the faithful followers of Zeus now living an idyllic eternity in the fields of Elysium?

Do the religions of today have the devotion from their followers that could create an after-life according to their beliefs?

My belief is that there are not enough devoted people to do the solipsist magic. Our extended knowledge of the world and universe around us has denied us the absolute certainty that ancient civilisations seem to have been able to embrace.

Maybe Jesus came to Earth when he did because He knew that the developing sciences were going to be a threat to His own existence as the numbers who believed in him started to fall.

Maybe He came to earth to consolidate the existence that mankind had created for Him?

Maybe mankind brought Jesus to Earth in order to bolster the faith that they could see themselves losing?

There is ample evidence that the religions of today do not have devout followers in great numbers. The Christian religion is so segmented that it is possible there is not enough solipsist power in any segment to maintain a god and other religions, with the possible exception of Islam (even though it, too, is segmented), do not seem to be able to imbue their followers with great passion.

Has our sophistry and science damned us to non-existence by destroying our mental cohesion?

There is a sublime insanity that has infested the world over the past forty to fifty years – the idea that women should be equal to men! Not only has this insanity been allowed to flourish and spread, absolutely no-one has asked a question that is simply begging to be asked:-

“Why have women allowed themselves to be conned into believing that assuming part of the mantle of masculinity makes them equal?”

There seems to be no real reason that women ever thought themselves inferior and yet they allowed militant feminists to convince them that they were. Just a few screeching harridans have denied women their proper place in society and, in consequence, have helped to demolish that society to such a degree that now, nobody has a proper place.

The cost of women’s liberation has been horrendous!

The most damaging cost has been to the structure of the family and the society based upon it. Men have never been capable of taking full responsibility for the care and welfare of their children. A few exceptions might exist but basically, we are a matriarchal society. We have been cared for and nurtured for hundreds of years by women in their proper superior place – at the controls of the family.

The liberation of women removed their hands from the tiller and we have seen society flushed down the tubes as a result.

Once, men were content to work in the belief that they were free agents while women were quietly confident in their own superiority. The ancient drives of hunter gatherer were sublimated by the acts of going to work, earning money and supporting the woman and children in his life. Once women demanded a share of the available work, men found themselves competing in a work-force that had, potentially, doubled (which, of course, has nothing to do with high unemployment rates). They discovered that the structure that had made nations great had been sabotaged so badly that his place in it was no longer clear.

Women, in their desperation to be equal, allowed themselves to be manipulated into accepting much lower wages for the same work and so, taking the legs from under their men.

Some women fooled themselves into thinking that their extra income was a blessing to the family where, in fact, it was simply a curse. Her wages became like a cancer eating away at the self esteem and  self confidence of her partner. Every dollar she earned was like a knife in his guts while he smiled and tried to accept that she still needed him.

Equality for women meant lowering themselves from a position of control and influence to one in which they were simply one more bread winner.

Equality for men was an absolute disaster.

After centuries of playing the lord of the manor, he had to try to emulate the superior abilities and attitudes of women. He had to start to take some responsibility for the welfare of his family from a nurturing point of view – something that men are really not suited for in the long term. This unsuitability is now painfully obvious as we watch the new generations becoming more and more stupid, belligerent and self centred. With two wages coming into their homes, the younger generations have seen that they can condition their parents into giving them everything they want by timing their demands at the most propitious moments.

The dragging down of women by their lunatic sisters has caused irreparable damage.

Society is no longer ordered and the men in charge no longer seek the wise counsel of their women as they once used to do.

Now we find that women have so debased themselves that they want to take on another aspect of manhood – the guiltless slaughter of the innocent.

Just as men have always killed, women are now seeking to under-line their equality by insisting upon their own unique form of slaughter – abortion.

Society has paid, and continues to pay, a very high price for dragging women down to the level of men. I fear there is now no hope for the human race. Without women in charge, it is like a great leviathan rampaging in a china shop.