Well, Then There is No "Media," First Of All. Media Is But A Secular, Cheap, Fallen And Fake "Church" That Feeds Us The Sins Of Others, So That We Never Have To Feel Our Own. I Agree With You Fyodor.
Humm…not so sure about this one. As individuals we are in fact “responsible for our sins”. I was raised in the Catholic faith, and I am quite familiar with the idea of “original sin” and the concept of “sin” in general. I never really bought any of that “sin” crap. Sure people do bad things on various degrees and levels, but should they be labeled as “sinners”? Sin to me is term associated with religions, (mostly organized ones) which has filtered down into our modern vernacular.
As far as “being responsible for the sins of the collective”, because we have “sinned” ourselves, I am not really buying what y’all are selling here.
At this point in our collective journey we are ALL responsible for raising the energy and vibe of the collective though loving kindness, compassion, and respect towards our fellow travelers.
I find it strange that you would disapprove of Owens' passionate quest for the Truth, in the face of the obvious panoply of lies and magic fakery that constitutes the opposing side.
I wonder if your particular, private ‘faith’ leads you to such erroneous ideas?
Both “religions’” I grew up taught me about “free will.” Erasmus and Martin Luther has a lengthy theological discussion about it. Since I can’t follow their dissent into the theological minutia, since both beliefs agreed that it existed, I have always lived by that and think that individuals must be held accountable for them actions, yes and called out for them. As to “original sin,” I retranslated that to the “collective unconscious” which has many lessons to teach.
Sorry. It seems the Owens reference was a carryover somehow from another conversation. Better ignore my entire post I guess as only some of it appears to have been meant for you.
But I will say that I try to always discern the difference between judgment and discernment.
When I said "faith" I was suggesting something in a playful (I thought) way. Everyone believes something. Therefore everyone has 'faith' or 'a faith.' I hope you see that point.
The Catholic Church was almost destroyed by Enemies Within the Gates.
Orthodox (Eastern Christianity) was almost destroyed from without. By Bolshevik Jews in the Middle East most recently, and by Bolshevik (90% Jews) in Russia and Eastern Europe between 1917 and 2000. But it had gone underground there and experienced a rapid and deeply rooted Renaissance under President Putin. That is why Russian love and the West hates him. The Bolsheviks are wailing and gnashing their teeth.
The Catholic Church I was raised in was in SoCA near the U.S. Mexico border. There is a heavy Latino (Mexico) influence on the Catholic Church in that area of SoCA.
This is not the Euro centric Catholic Church which you speak of.
Well the Bolsheviks Jews may have tried to destroy Orthodox Eastern Christianity, the Catholic religion remains quite strong in many countries Latin America.
"Saint" Augustine was quite intelligent, and worked to hammer Christianity into something which could sereve the needs of the Roman Empire, but Bad Science was the basis of his "Original Sin" Doctrine.
All men came from "the seed of Adam" he thought, because he did not know that women contributed 50% to genetice.
The thinking then was that a woman's womb was like "soil" and the man's sperm was "seeds".
Mary's "soil" got planted with "God's seed", not "Adam's seed".
It's bad science. People don't understand that, but that was his rationale.
Unless we believe in sin for which we need to repent before God, we can never have our sins forgiven & the Precious Blood of Christ will have been shed for us in vain.
If you were raised Catholic after the mid-1960s, it was in the false Vatican II Council church, a Judeo-Masonic creation & with false popes, & therefore had a false understanding of authentic Catholicism, like almost everyone else.
FL, I always read your comments with expectation. As a former Catholic, your words are well received. Keep up the good "work"
I will be commenting to MS Farber's article. My experience in VOLUNTARY participation in individual and group therapy (age 28-32) - 2 1-hour individual and 2-90min GROUP sessions per week taught me different from religion. What I learned re-affirmed what our Dad often said: 'If you knew what that person has had to go through in their life, you would see him/her quite differently. " And this also applies to evil - BUT Dad advised vociferously: 'Don't argue with evil. Stop them" Kind've close to Matthew 18:6.
I have never read Dostoyevsky so I wonder if he will be just another "expert" on the trash heap of history. It's getting tougher to keep up and tougher to stomach.
No, I don’t say his faith was gnostic. I say his argument here appears gnostic to me.
My belief is not futurist, but preterist. The “End of Times” already happened in the past. In A.D. 70 to be precise. The book of Revelation speaks about the events that actually happened that year. There will not be a third coming.
But that is irrelevant to our discussion.
The topic is whether I am co-responsible for another man’s sins. I think I am not, in general.
My comment is that I disagree. Here is a bit of an explanation: if you believe that your ability to sin is greater than the Grace of God, and if you want to damn anyone, then you only have sin once, even a little bit, to destroy any soul. Which would make you more powerful than God, which is impossible.
You may dislike proofs by reduction to the absurd. You may prefer positive proofs. I suggest re-reading the Gospel of Saint John for a positive proof.
Well, then that is a belief indeed which cannot be proven. Since reality is practically unknowable, and many argue that it does not even exist. Try finding Epstein, yet he almost certainly still exists.
Many, believe him dead as shown and explained. Billions of others were not even aware of his existence in the first and last place.
Your somewhat personalized history may not repeat for you. But do you argue that practically the same things that happened to you have not, do not and will not happen to others?
I am making this up as I go along, so please bear with me.
I refer you to Bulgakov's (truly) great novel The Master and Margarita.
The appearance of the Prince of this World to a couple of Moscow Charlatans in a lovely park one summer's day. It is near the opening of the novel but I will try to find a vid for you as I never tire of seeing their argument about reality and what exists and what does not.
I think that reductio ad absurdum is part of the Apophatic Way, unless I have lost track of the meaning of the latter term. I like it.
I do not believe that Raskolnikov, or even Verkhovensky, the model Anti-Christ, were in any sense ‘damned’ by Dostoyevsky, neither, by him, nor by extension, by his Orthodox Christian ‘views’.
The Book of Revelation was written 20 or more years after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD & also refers to the future. The early Church Fathers, who received the teaching of the apostles, say so. Two good sources:
The Church fathers wrote a lot of things, sometimes in contradiction.
The dating of the book of Revelation is a disputed topic since the first century. Martin Luther was not the first person to argue that the text should not belong to the canon of books of the Bible. Modern scholars also dispute the traditional view that Saint John the Evangelist and the Apostle is the same John who wrote the Apocalypse.
I do not understand where the belief of “the end of the world” comes from. It doesn’t seem to be biblical. Why should God destroy the world? He already did one flood, and he did not destroy the world. The purpose of the flood was the destruction of very bad people, not the destruction of the world. The world is good, all creation is good. It’s Man who causes trouble.
The most important text in this regard seems to be Matthew 24, verse 3. In the Vulgate, it says “consummationes saeculi”. This cannot be translated as the “end of the world”. The first word is plural, and it can be translated as “fulfillments”. The second word is better translated as “time” or “era” or “age” rather than “world”. I think Jesus was referring to the destruction of Israel, in the Day of Wrath. No more distinction of Jews and Gentiles after that day.
The most important thing in all this is to remember the Jesus Christ is the Third Temple. There will not be a third physical temple being built. The religious authorities were destroyed because they betrayed God. The Covenant ended, and was superseded with the New Covenant. Everything in history regarding the so called “Jews” building a third temple is not biblical. All that is yet another religious fraud that, very sadly, causes harm to a lot of people.
As you probably know, the canon of Scripture was definitively determined at 2 Catholic Church councils in the late 4th C. The Jews in the 3rd C., then the Judaized Protestants in the 16th C. rejected 7 books in the Greek Septuagint, even though those books are widely quoted in the NT.
Scripture & Christian tradition say the end of the world will be by fire. - 2 Peter 3:10-12
The Jews tried to rebuild the Temple in the 4th C. with the blessing of the Emperor Julian "the Apostate" but miraculous occurrences prevented them from doing so, proving Christ's words true that "not one stone will be left upon another that will not be thrown down." The amazing story is here: archive.org/details/julian-the-apostate-and-the-doomed-temple
First, I don't like to debate scripture or theology, so I'll be brief.
Second, in that epistle there is no reference to "the end of the world", neither in Latin nor in Greek.
It mentions the Latin word "transient" and the Greek word "pareleusontai". Both words are used in the figurative sense in this context, not in the literal sense.
I still don't see any reason why God would destroy the world. This idea seems to be a Hellenistic contamination that was imposed on the interpretation of the divinely inspired text. But the text itself says nothing to be interpreted as a literal destruction of our material and natural reality.
It is a highly symbolic text, like all other eschatological texts. I believe we cannot interpret the literal parts of scripture as symbolic or poetic, and we also cannot interpret the symbolic or poetic parts of scripture as literal. To do so, would be to abuse the word of God. And to impose that abuse on the people is an egregious error, and it constitutes a form of ecclesiastical abuse, in my fallible opinion.
Third, it's funny that the Christian Zionists reject Luther's anti-semitic texts. The Modern Catholics reject those too, although the traditional Catholics tend to agree with some of what he wrote there, but on their own terms. But then, we see anti-Zionist Catholics and some Orthodox polemicists who reject Luther for being subservient to the Jews. Or, perhaps, they are accusing other first-generation protestants as having been Judaized.
The comedy in all this is even greater if we consider the Karaite sect of Judaism, which rejects the Talmud and the Tanakh, and imitate the protestant principle of "sola scriptura" (scripture alone) when they focus exclusively on the five books of Moses. So, the Karaites willfully forget all the prophets, including Samuel and David and Solomon, and they forget the poetic and philosophical texts too, like the Psalms and the Proverbs. What if the Torah is too protestant even for the Protestants?
And, where in the Torah is written anything about God destroying this world or the Universe? I cannot find any reference to that idea there.
Fourth: when the Mock Temple is built, and when it is destroyed, and after many innocent people perish, and when the dust settles, what new madness will the liars invent to keep abusing the believers? What new lie will be concocted to explain that the world has not been destroyed, again? How many times do we need to see this terrible fraud? Why there is no compassion for victims of spiritual abuse?
On the topic of Candace Owens rise to the top of her profession (podcaster? gossip journalism?).
What happened, exactly?
First, there was the "attack" by "Hamas" against people in Israel, whose main crime was poor musical taste.
Then, there was a genocide.
As the genocide was happening, many people began to wake up: the State of Israel is not a friend.
Candace Owens was one of such people who realized had been living enslaved by a Big Lie.
Charlie Kirk talked with Patrick Bet David (a Christian from Iraq) in episode 314 of his podcast, which happened a few days after October 7th, 2023. There, Kirk asked the hard question: did Israel let the attack happen, to create an excuse to start a genocide?
Kirk was executed 23 months later, on September 10th 2025.
Candace Owens began her investigation.
People went C.R.A.Z.Y.
It cannot be true, it must not be true.
The psyop was fully deployed and running.
Cult victims deny reality. There is no need to buy opiates for those who have a well trained brain.
Confusionists had a field day: Erika was cast as Maleficient from the Sleeping Beauty.
The multitudes went completely bananas
A windfall in ad revenue, Jews most affected.
Money, that unknowable Platonic idea. Silver, the fetish of all mystics, including the quantum mystics.
Anyhoo...
I argue that the Candace Owens case of cornering the podcast market is a consequence of the escape route of the perpetrators of a genocide.
Moreover, the destruction of the MAGA movement, executed by Zionists of all stripes, is a necessary development in the total domination of the minds of American citizens.
Candace Owens has seen, before anyone else, the shipwreck of Trump's platform and "Conservative" power, and she started saving victims long before Kirk's assassination.
The people who oppose Owens do not realize yet they are politically dead in the water.
The divide and conquer program has been executed almost perfectly. The confusion and resentment are overflowing the dam.
In the near future, President AOC will sign into law the use of automatic wombs made of polyester and silicon, and natural pregnancy will be banned, to make women equal to men, and to combat global warming. Billionaires will become first trillionaires and then cuatrillionaires. The trick that always work: privatize something natural and sell it back at a monopolistic price. Monopolies and Oligopolies necessitate the violence of the State. Only some of the Roman Catholics will oppose this ultimate tyranny. Black people will die out, as well as Mexicans and Native Americans. Only the Master Race will be able to afford State Run Reproduction. The green left will agree. The communist left will agree. The centrists will submit, as always. The centrists are the proudest of all bootlickers. The right will sob in the corner and will begin to dissociate, imagining that Blessed Destruction of the World that will never happen in reality. The libertarians will go live in quasi-anarchist communes at the bottom of the sea, in cities built using ancient alien technology based on the non-existing graphene material.
Sustainable development means mass murder and mass theft. That's all there is to it. The psychopaths in charge only know one trick.
So... yes, the press is in on it. The death cult of politics is winning because of the work of journalists and editors.
I am so glad you kept that light! ;-) See the movie I mentioned or at least the first five minutes. Go to the settings wheel, the English subs are quite good. The Master and Margarita by M. Bulgakov, Dir. Bortko https://youtu.be/1ovcyF_ynJs
yeah, not buying into the Epstein crimes that I had nothing to do with. I am not responsible. I'm only responsible for myself, my actions and my thoughts. That is sometimes more than I can handle.
It's very basic to me, if you want to know what's going on in your life, look in the mirror. A classic victim blames others for their lot in life. If you want to help your fellow man, help yourself so you can be of use to others in need. If you remain a "victim" there's no personal growth, helpless individuals cannot help others. Read the Book of Thomas.
A classic victim can never be trusted, they'll turn on you. They have zero personal growth and you will drown trying to help them. Forgiveness is difficult. It requires personal growth and that's a difficult road to travel. That's how you help those around you, be an example. I've raised children, it's like looking in a mirror to understand. They seldom do what you tell them, they certainly replicate what they see you do. Never teach them to be a victim.
That's not what true Christianity believes and teaches. We cannot save ourselves let alone everyone else. Most people don't realize that the majority of politicians that we THINK we are electing are actually selected members of the SAME secret societies that want to rule over everyone else. A little background research goes a long way!
All this presumes faith and participation in Christ, through Whose righteousness we find forgiveness and reconciliation (as righteousness, also, is communal). Otherwise it's a dark abyss.
Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Weirdly, what Dostoyevsky wrote in the quote you shared, Celia, actually feels like another condemnation. I don’t personally feel in a condemnation mindset when I read your posts, or Candace’s posts, although I’ve only recently started listening to her posts regarding her research into what dark systems seem to surround the Charlie Kirk assassination so I have had a limited exposure to her work. That said I do work on developing the qualities in myself that I want to see in the world and also work to evolve the lesser qualities in myself that I don’t want to see expressed in the world. This may be the same thing Dostoyevsky was getting at but he is directing his philosophy at others while I am working on making the changes within myself. It’s a constant self-evaluation process. In any case, I agree that condemnation is not productive and it also feels like a tool of the divisive dark forces.
I’m currently simpatico with Luis Buñuel. “I would give my life for a man who is looking for the truth. But I would gladly kill a man who thinks that he has found it.”
“The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.” - G. K. Chesterton.
That "something solid" is the truth. The unaided human reason can know much of the truth, but it will always be mixed with error without believing what God has revealed.
Seriously and respectfully, what do you believe now? That we are damned alone and saved together or something else? [note I do NOT follow any organized religion but was raised catholic (centered in evil).
While admittedly we all do bad things and can be greedy, lazy selfish, ignorant, foolish, apathetic etc, the road to fulfillment begins within inside of me and you and everyone else.
I began practicing meditation at a young age and now 50 + years later, it’s the one thing I continue to do daily that keeps me in one piece. What do I get from it? Gratitude, humility and simplicity which are worth more than all the wealth in the world. Who benefits? Me and you and all who come into my life. If we let our ideas run loose, where will it take us? Maybe we need to just slow down a little bit and realize how beautiful it is just being here. The meter is running and at the end of the ride what do we want?
Ezekiel 18:20 is instructive here: “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”
While I admire Dostoyevsky the novelist, I am way too western Protestant, or way too western secular Freudian/psychoanalytical, to accept such a "codependent" (for that is what it seems to me) view of "sin." While Dostoyevsky probably did not mean his view as such, it reeks of the codependent "I feel everyone's pain" liberalism imposed upon me by my own family when growing up. I was constantly made somehow to feel responsible for other people's "sins," even though I barely understood such things as a young child. My mother did this often, and it was a cancer to my mind and soul.
Years ago, I also went through a period of reading some Russian anarchist books, such as Kropotkin's Mutual Aid. Perhaps there is something in the Russian spirit and history that leads to such collectivist views, whether they are religious or secular.
My comment is grounded on the fact that I grew up in a Catholic family, church and school (12 years) a half-century+ ago. In early 2021 (?) I heard Leo Zagami, who grew up Catholic near Rome, say to Alex Jones: 'The Vatican is at the center of child trafficking worldwide." I kind've suspected something like this in my childhood. Weird unexplainable/unspeakable stuff. Years later I learned that Dad had to take rough action, arguably violent, against our Monseigneur and did not get into trouble (was that man a pedophile afraid to press charges against a man with impeccable character throughout the community?)
As we see other "experts" fall - Fauci, Biden, Obama, actors, experts, etc - why believe ANY "expert". Why should I trust modern medicine god's when I have been totally "devoid of illness" for over 8 years by following Jesus wisdom from the 1st C.E AD - in ancient documents (2 copies) Here's yours: https://essene.com/GospelOfPeace/peace1.html The Jewish historian, Josephus, of that time and location wrote "The Essenes are long lived (averaging 120) AND NEARLY DEVOID OF ILLNESS." The indigenous Cherokee Indians (1762) had "elders that are 150... and still quite active, per the British Lt Henry Timberlake who lived with them for a couple of months.
If you are thinking "Why didn't I hear of this?" Here's the history. Dr. E. B. Szekely found the first one in the Secret Archives of the Vatican (lost only for 1700 years) in 1923. The 2nd was amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls (1947-1950's). I was in Catholic school soon after so why weren't we told that the Vatican had a 1st person copy for 1700 years. Where were the experts? I quit Church at 18. Do you see now why Jesus and Essenes (Masada) had to die? The Essene were outliving the Romans by 50 to 70 years. How do you control such long-term wisdom?
My main comment about Dostoyevsky's "wisdom" is based on my experience from age 28 to 32. I voluntarily put myself through intensive "psychotherapy" counseling. Two individual 1hr sessions and 2 90 minute "group" sessions PER week for four years. Why? "To be a better person" - what a participant told me, she and others experienced. That doesn't make me special or learned or better or worse than anyone - just better understanding myself and my life journey and that of others. I am an "expert" only about my life.
Some people in "group" suffered at the hands of great evil. Some was massively life-changing. Some was unspeakable. Even what we learned (on the periphery) was horrible because one wondered what is not being told because it is to horrifying. My experience proved what our Dad taught us (A WWII FIGHTING Veteran): "If you knew what that person has had to go through in their life you would see him/her quite differently."
I cannot separate, as my Dad taught us and as my therapy experience taught us, what happened to someone in their life, especially as a child - from how they feel, think and act as adults. I "see people quite differently" than Dostoyevsky's blather (not wisdom). Sounds like another BS "religious" control mechanism by the evil ones. Making us feel guilty and sorry for causing others to sin. Like "the unvaccinated" and other BS. I can envision Dostoyevsky having a beer/wine with others laughing at what he wrote - it's so outlandish. As though there is an "energy" of goodness pervasive in the universe and if one person sins then it impacts everyone.
And religious history experts are revealing now that people in the Christian community referred to "Paul" as "lying", "a liar", "lying again" and (brace yourself) "our enemy" See Eisenman for one.
Well then, I wonder how is it that I grew up in the 50's, 60's 70's but I never smoked cigarettes or marijuana, nor did drugs, nor drank alcohol until my HS graduation party, nor ever harmed anyone physically or financially, nor "accidentally" impregnated any woman NOR was involved in an abortion. Committed no crimes. Never reprimanded for poor work performance.
How did I escape Dostoyevsky's "sin effects all" ether)? I didn't live in a glass bubble. Am I a god? I say mockingly. That I was impervious to this "sin ether".
So let's converge on Jesus' wisdom per Matthew 18:6 - "It is better that a man be tossed into the sea, tied to a heavy millstone and drowned, than for that man to cause a child to stray away from my goodness." It couldn't be any clearer - "Evil begets evil. Stop evil before it begets evil."
NO mention of a "sin ether" affecting all. Hold others accountable for actions even proactively.
Jesus was asked, in the url above, "Which laws of life should we follow, that of Moses and Scriptures, or that of which you preach? ISN'T that a great question to ask Christ? In his response He said "Those are dead words of dead men. Learn the laws of life by living life." So, by divine Decree Dostoyevsky's words, like Moses, Dr. Fauci's etc are "dead words of dead men." Another asked how should we pray and Jesus' response included: "The best way to connect with our Spiritual Father" is to be outside in the hour before sunrise, alone, with our "Earthly Mother (Nature)"
NO church, priests, popes, bishops, EXPERTS, preachers - a personal relationship with God.
Evil is at the individual person(s) level. Stop evil before it begets evil.
God bless all people following Ms. Farber writings - it's biblical but not the Catholic biblical :)
Humm…not so sure about this one. As individuals we are in fact “responsible for our sins”. I was raised in the Catholic faith, and I am quite familiar with the idea of “original sin” and the concept of “sin” in general. I never really bought any of that “sin” crap. Sure people do bad things on various degrees and levels, but should they be labeled as “sinners”? Sin to me is term associated with religions, (mostly organized ones) which has filtered down into our modern vernacular.
As far as “being responsible for the sins of the collective”, because we have “sinned” ourselves, I am not really buying what y’all are selling here.
At this point in our collective journey we are ALL responsible for raising the energy and vibe of the collective though loving kindness, compassion, and respect towards our fellow travelers.
Christianity also promotes forgiveness, which may be the missing link about others.
Father they know not what they do.
The Sanhedrin always knows "What they do". They were not included in Christ's absolution from the Cross.
None of them ever went to Golgotha, they stayed in Tuscany and Brighton Beach.
How very Humanist of you to prefer disorganized religions.
Humm? 🤔
I find it strange that you would disapprove of Owens' passionate quest for the Truth, in the face of the obvious panoply of lies and magic fakery that constitutes the opposing side.
I wonder if your particular, private ‘faith’ leads you to such erroneous ideas?
Both “religions’” I grew up taught me about “free will.” Erasmus and Martin Luther has a lengthy theological discussion about it. Since I can’t follow their dissent into the theological minutia, since both beliefs agreed that it existed, I have always lived by that and think that individuals must be held accountable for them actions, yes and called out for them. As to “original sin,” I retranslated that to the “collective unconscious” which has many lessons to teach.
I fail to see how my comment has anything to do with Candace O? I never referred to her once.
And when have I mentioned “my faith” except to say “I was raised in the Catholic Church”?
You have made an assumption about me that does not apply. I “left” the Catholics a very long time ago. And “organized religion” as well.
I also find your comments to have a strong tone of judgement in them.
Sorry. It seems the Owens reference was a carryover somehow from another conversation. Better ignore my entire post I guess as only some of it appears to have been meant for you.
But I will say that I try to always discern the difference between judgment and discernment.
When I said "faith" I was suggesting something in a playful (I thought) way. Everyone believes something. Therefore everyone has 'faith' or 'a faith.' I hope you see that point.
The Catholic Church was almost destroyed by Enemies Within the Gates.
Orthodox (Eastern Christianity) was almost destroyed from without. By Bolshevik Jews in the Middle East most recently, and by Bolshevik (90% Jews) in Russia and Eastern Europe between 1917 and 2000. But it had gone underground there and experienced a rapid and deeply rooted Renaissance under President Putin. That is why Russian love and the West hates him. The Bolsheviks are wailing and gnashing their teeth.
The Catholic Church I was raised in was in SoCA near the U.S. Mexico border. There is a heavy Latino (Mexico) influence on the Catholic Church in that area of SoCA.
This is not the Euro centric Catholic Church which you speak of.
Well the Bolsheviks Jews may have tried to destroy Orthodox Eastern Christianity, the Catholic religion remains quite strong in many countries Latin America.
"Saint" Augustine was quite intelligent, and worked to hammer Christianity into something which could sereve the needs of the Roman Empire, but Bad Science was the basis of his "Original Sin" Doctrine.
All men came from "the seed of Adam" he thought, because he did not know that women contributed 50% to genetice.
The thinking then was that a woman's womb was like "soil" and the man's sperm was "seeds".
Mary's "soil" got planted with "God's seed", not "Adam's seed".
It's bad science. People don't understand that, but that was his rationale.
Unless we believe in sin for which we need to repent before God, we can never have our sins forgiven & the Precious Blood of Christ will have been shed for us in vain.
If you were raised Catholic after the mid-1960s, it was in the false Vatican II Council church, a Judeo-Masonic creation & with false popes, & therefore had a false understanding of authentic Catholicism, like almost everyone else.
novusordowatch.org
I was raised in the Catholic Church pre Vatican II. We had the Latin Mass.
You can believe in the concept of sin and all the various components around it, but I am not “buying what you are selling”.
FL, I always read your comments with expectation. As a former Catholic, your words are well received. Keep up the good "work"
I will be commenting to MS Farber's article. My experience in VOLUNTARY participation in individual and group therapy (age 28-32) - 2 1-hour individual and 2-90min GROUP sessions per week taught me different from religion. What I learned re-affirmed what our Dad often said: 'If you knew what that person has had to go through in their life, you would see him/her quite differently. " And this also applies to evil - BUT Dad advised vociferously: 'Don't argue with evil. Stop them" Kind've close to Matthew 18:6.
I have never read Dostoyevsky so I wonder if he will be just another "expert" on the trash heap of history. It's getting tougher to keep up and tougher to stomach.
At least read The Brothers Karamazov. You won't regret it.
While I'm at it, check out the great Gk Chesterton's Orthodoxy:
https://www.ccel.org/ccel/chesterton/orthodoxy.html
or pretty cheap at bookfinder.com
I disagree.
This argument by Dostoyevsky sounds gnostic to me. Anti-Christian. Very subtly so, like most gnosticism is anti-Christian.
Nothing 'gnostic' about Dostoyevsky's faith. Saying it does not make it so.
In Christianity the Church is all of us, The mystical Bride of Christ, and we are saved, or sink, together.
As we speak, there are events happening in the vicinity of a town called Armageddon so it will soon be proven one way or another.
No, I don’t say his faith was gnostic. I say his argument here appears gnostic to me.
My belief is not futurist, but preterist. The “End of Times” already happened in the past. In A.D. 70 to be precise. The book of Revelation speaks about the events that actually happened that year. There will not be a third coming.
But that is irrelevant to our discussion.
The topic is whether I am co-responsible for another man’s sins. I think I am not, in general.
My comment is that I disagree. Here is a bit of an explanation: if you believe that your ability to sin is greater than the Grace of God, and if you want to damn anyone, then you only have sin once, even a little bit, to destroy any soul. Which would make you more powerful than God, which is impossible.
You may dislike proofs by reduction to the absurd. You may prefer positive proofs. I suggest re-reading the Gospel of Saint John for a positive proof.
Re: "AD70". Naturally, the same things happen again and again, but the players change as does some of the scenery.
I believe history does not repeat.
"History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes." - Mark Twian
Well, then that is a belief indeed which cannot be proven. Since reality is practically unknowable, and many argue that it does not even exist. Try finding Epstein, yet he almost certainly still exists.
Many, believe him dead as shown and explained. Billions of others were not even aware of his existence in the first and last place.
Your somewhat personalized history may not repeat for you. But do you argue that practically the same things that happened to you have not, do not and will not happen to others?
I am making this up as I go along, so please bear with me.
I refer you to Bulgakov's (truly) great novel The Master and Margarita.
The appearance of the Prince of this World to a couple of Moscow Charlatans in a lovely park one summer's day. It is near the opening of the novel but I will try to find a vid for you as I never tire of seeing their argument about reality and what exists and what does not.
Reality exists because I (shamefully) scored 0 on the NPI test.
https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/NPI/
I was worried about such a low score. Then I realized it's not my fault, but my hippocampus fault. Damn you, dried up hippocampus!
In particular, normal scores correspond with a normal hippocampus volume, and high scores correspond with an inflated hippocampus.
My conclusion is that only the most extreme Narcs are certain that reality does not exist.
Pardon my jokingstry here.
Master and Margarita: https://youtu.be/1ovcyF_ynJs
I think that reductio ad absurdum is part of the Apophatic Way, unless I have lost track of the meaning of the latter term. I like it.
I do not believe that Raskolnikov, or even Verkhovensky, the model Anti-Christ, were in any sense ‘damned’ by Dostoyevsky, neither, by him, nor by extension, by his Orthodox Christian ‘views’.
The Book of Revelation was written 20 or more years after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD & also refers to the future. The early Church Fathers, who received the teaching of the apostles, say so. Two good sources:
Fr Herman Kramer, The Book of Destiny: docdroid.net/CIPkztv/the-book-of-destiny-herman-bernard-kramer-2mur2ayackua6ald3vqyhk6dd-pdf
Fr E Sylvester Berry, The Apocalypse of St John:
fisheaters.com/srpdf/xtheapocalypseofstjohnberruoft.pdf
The Church fathers wrote a lot of things, sometimes in contradiction.
The dating of the book of Revelation is a disputed topic since the first century. Martin Luther was not the first person to argue that the text should not belong to the canon of books of the Bible. Modern scholars also dispute the traditional view that Saint John the Evangelist and the Apostle is the same John who wrote the Apocalypse.
I do not understand where the belief of “the end of the world” comes from. It doesn’t seem to be biblical. Why should God destroy the world? He already did one flood, and he did not destroy the world. The purpose of the flood was the destruction of very bad people, not the destruction of the world. The world is good, all creation is good. It’s Man who causes trouble.
The most important text in this regard seems to be Matthew 24, verse 3. In the Vulgate, it says “consummationes saeculi”. This cannot be translated as the “end of the world”. The first word is plural, and it can be translated as “fulfillments”. The second word is better translated as “time” or “era” or “age” rather than “world”. I think Jesus was referring to the destruction of Israel, in the Day of Wrath. No more distinction of Jews and Gentiles after that day.
The most important thing in all this is to remember the Jesus Christ is the Third Temple. There will not be a third physical temple being built. The religious authorities were destroyed because they betrayed God. The Covenant ended, and was superseded with the New Covenant. Everything in history regarding the so called “Jews” building a third temple is not biblical. All that is yet another religious fraud that, very sadly, causes harm to a lot of people.
That’s my opinion on this topic.
As you probably know, the canon of Scripture was definitively determined at 2 Catholic Church councils in the late 4th C. The Jews in the 3rd C., then the Judaized Protestants in the 16th C. rejected 7 books in the Greek Septuagint, even though those books are widely quoted in the NT.
Scripture & Christian tradition say the end of the world will be by fire. - 2 Peter 3:10-12
The Jews tried to rebuild the Temple in the 4th C. with the blessing of the Emperor Julian "the Apostate" but miraculous occurrences prevented them from doing so, proving Christ's words true that "not one stone will be left upon another that will not be thrown down." The amazing story is here: archive.org/details/julian-the-apostate-and-the-doomed-temple
or video: whitesmoke1958.com/articles-interviews-mr-gary-giuffre (Interview #4; includes Jewish plans to rebuild it even though the Temple foundation is under the Al Aqsa Mosque)
See also the contemporary 4th C. sources on it: fisheaters.com/juliantemple.html
First, I don't like to debate scripture or theology, so I'll be brief.
Second, in that epistle there is no reference to "the end of the world", neither in Latin nor in Greek.
It mentions the Latin word "transient" and the Greek word "pareleusontai". Both words are used in the figurative sense in this context, not in the literal sense.
https://biblehub.com/greek/3928.htm
I still don't see any reason why God would destroy the world. This idea seems to be a Hellenistic contamination that was imposed on the interpretation of the divinely inspired text. But the text itself says nothing to be interpreted as a literal destruction of our material and natural reality.
It is a highly symbolic text, like all other eschatological texts. I believe we cannot interpret the literal parts of scripture as symbolic or poetic, and we also cannot interpret the symbolic or poetic parts of scripture as literal. To do so, would be to abuse the word of God. And to impose that abuse on the people is an egregious error, and it constitutes a form of ecclesiastical abuse, in my fallible opinion.
Third, it's funny that the Christian Zionists reject Luther's anti-semitic texts. The Modern Catholics reject those too, although the traditional Catholics tend to agree with some of what he wrote there, but on their own terms. But then, we see anti-Zionist Catholics and some Orthodox polemicists who reject Luther for being subservient to the Jews. Or, perhaps, they are accusing other first-generation protestants as having been Judaized.
The comedy in all this is even greater if we consider the Karaite sect of Judaism, which rejects the Talmud and the Tanakh, and imitate the protestant principle of "sola scriptura" (scripture alone) when they focus exclusively on the five books of Moses. So, the Karaites willfully forget all the prophets, including Samuel and David and Solomon, and they forget the poetic and philosophical texts too, like the Psalms and the Proverbs. What if the Torah is too protestant even for the Protestants?
And, where in the Torah is written anything about God destroying this world or the Universe? I cannot find any reference to that idea there.
Fourth: when the Mock Temple is built, and when it is destroyed, and after many innocent people perish, and when the dust settles, what new madness will the liars invent to keep abusing the believers? What new lie will be concocted to explain that the world has not been destroyed, again? How many times do we need to see this terrible fraud? Why there is no compassion for victims of spiritual abuse?
On the topic of Candace Owens rise to the top of her profession (podcaster? gossip journalism?).
What happened, exactly?
First, there was the "attack" by "Hamas" against people in Israel, whose main crime was poor musical taste.
Then, there was a genocide.
As the genocide was happening, many people began to wake up: the State of Israel is not a friend.
Candace Owens was one of such people who realized had been living enslaved by a Big Lie.
Charlie Kirk talked with Patrick Bet David (a Christian from Iraq) in episode 314 of his podcast, which happened a few days after October 7th, 2023. There, Kirk asked the hard question: did Israel let the attack happen, to create an excuse to start a genocide?
Kirk was executed 23 months later, on September 10th 2025.
Candace Owens began her investigation.
People went C.R.A.Z.Y.
It cannot be true, it must not be true.
The psyop was fully deployed and running.
Cult victims deny reality. There is no need to buy opiates for those who have a well trained brain.
Confusionists had a field day: Erika was cast as Maleficient from the Sleeping Beauty.
The multitudes went completely bananas
A windfall in ad revenue, Jews most affected.
Money, that unknowable Platonic idea. Silver, the fetish of all mystics, including the quantum mystics.
Anyhoo...
I argue that the Candace Owens case of cornering the podcast market is a consequence of the escape route of the perpetrators of a genocide.
Moreover, the destruction of the MAGA movement, executed by Zionists of all stripes, is a necessary development in the total domination of the minds of American citizens.
Candace Owens has seen, before anyone else, the shipwreck of Trump's platform and "Conservative" power, and she started saving victims long before Kirk's assassination.
The people who oppose Owens do not realize yet they are politically dead in the water.
The divide and conquer program has been executed almost perfectly. The confusion and resentment are overflowing the dam.
In the near future, President AOC will sign into law the use of automatic wombs made of polyester and silicon, and natural pregnancy will be banned, to make women equal to men, and to combat global warming. Billionaires will become first trillionaires and then cuatrillionaires. The trick that always work: privatize something natural and sell it back at a monopolistic price. Monopolies and Oligopolies necessitate the violence of the State. Only some of the Roman Catholics will oppose this ultimate tyranny. Black people will die out, as well as Mexicans and Native Americans. Only the Master Race will be able to afford State Run Reproduction. The green left will agree. The communist left will agree. The centrists will submit, as always. The centrists are the proudest of all bootlickers. The right will sob in the corner and will begin to dissociate, imagining that Blessed Destruction of the World that will never happen in reality. The libertarians will go live in quasi-anarchist communes at the bottom of the sea, in cities built using ancient alien technology based on the non-existing graphene material.
Sustainable development means mass murder and mass theft. That's all there is to it. The psychopaths in charge only know one trick.
So... yes, the press is in on it. The death cult of politics is winning because of the work of journalists and editors.
I am so glad you kept that light! ;-) See the movie I mentioned or at least the first five minutes. Go to the settings wheel, the English subs are quite good. The Master and Margarita by M. Bulgakov, Dir. Bortko https://youtu.be/1ovcyF_ynJs
🤣
yeah, not buying into the Epstein crimes that I had nothing to do with. I am not responsible. I'm only responsible for myself, my actions and my thoughts. That is sometimes more than I can handle.
Well said Carol. Guilt controls just as we saw with the shaming of the "unvaccinated."
Just another snake in our garden. I grew up Catholic and guilt was THE tool and of course only a priest could forgive our sins.
Yes, I went to Catholic school through 5th grade. Guilt was King of Control at school and home.
It's very basic to me, if you want to know what's going on in your life, look in the mirror. A classic victim blames others for their lot in life. If you want to help your fellow man, help yourself so you can be of use to others in need. If you remain a "victim" there's no personal growth, helpless individuals cannot help others. Read the Book of Thomas.
Victimhood can be cowardice, or a profession.
A classic victim can never be trusted, they'll turn on you. They have zero personal growth and you will drown trying to help them. Forgiveness is difficult. It requires personal growth and that's a difficult road to travel. That's how you help those around you, be an example. I've raised children, it's like looking in a mirror to understand. They seldom do what you tell them, they certainly replicate what they see you do. Never teach them to be a victim.
Doesn't truth need to come first? How can we know what's bad if we don't know what's true?
Definition of "cult". We never know when we are a member.
That's not what true Christianity believes and teaches. We cannot save ourselves let alone everyone else. Most people don't realize that the majority of politicians that we THINK we are electing are actually selected members of the SAME secret societies that want to rule over everyone else. A little background research goes a long way!
I see there is no Q in John Public.
All this presumes faith and participation in Christ, through Whose righteousness we find forgiveness and reconciliation (as righteousness, also, is communal). Otherwise it's a dark abyss.
Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
We are all responsible for our own personal sins and failings, but sin does affect the whole of mankind and the order that should be there.
Weirdly, what Dostoyevsky wrote in the quote you shared, Celia, actually feels like another condemnation. I don’t personally feel in a condemnation mindset when I read your posts, or Candace’s posts, although I’ve only recently started listening to her posts regarding her research into what dark systems seem to surround the Charlie Kirk assassination so I have had a limited exposure to her work. That said I do work on developing the qualities in myself that I want to see in the world and also work to evolve the lesser qualities in myself that I don’t want to see expressed in the world. This may be the same thing Dostoyevsky was getting at but he is directing his philosophy at others while I am working on making the changes within myself. It’s a constant self-evaluation process. In any case, I agree that condemnation is not productive and it also feels like a tool of the divisive dark forces.
Dostoyevsky, like all good Scientists, experimented on himself first.
I’m currently simpatico with Luis Buñuel. “I would give my life for a man who is looking for the truth. But I would gladly kill a man who thinks that he has found it.”
“The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.” - G. K. Chesterton.
That "something solid" is the truth. The unaided human reason can know much of the truth, but it will always be mixed with error without believing what God has revealed.
newadvent.org/summa/1001.htm
Love love love.
Love God & love our neighbor. And love the truth, which often conflicts with our own selfish & disordered carnal desires.
How would you know the difference? Might as well push people under Subway cars a la Albert Camus who was a Talmudo Satanist fake "Jew".
One suspects that Bunuel did not end well either.
Some have fancy names like existentialist or transcendentalist to replace Christianity or other ancient beliefs.
He did not. As Celia points out through Fyodor, “None of us do.”
I used to think that we are damned together but saved alone. I no longer think that.
Seriously and respectfully, what do you believe now? That we are damned alone and saved together or something else? [note I do NOT follow any organized religion but was raised catholic (centered in evil).
Maybe a little of both. Things that are too easy are not worth much. Soundbites are tempting but prone to grave errors.
Catholic Church was invaded by homosexual predators. Someone had to have organized it. It was not perfect, but it was better once.
While admittedly we all do bad things and can be greedy, lazy selfish, ignorant, foolish, apathetic etc, the road to fulfillment begins within inside of me and you and everyone else.
I began practicing meditation at a young age and now 50 + years later, it’s the one thing I continue to do daily that keeps me in one piece. What do I get from it? Gratitude, humility and simplicity which are worth more than all the wealth in the world. Who benefits? Me and you and all who come into my life. If we let our ideas run loose, where will it take us? Maybe we need to just slow down a little bit and realize how beautiful it is just being here. The meter is running and at the end of the ride what do we want?
Ezekiel 18:20 is instructive here: “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”
While I admire Dostoyevsky the novelist, I am way too western Protestant, or way too western secular Freudian/psychoanalytical, to accept such a "codependent" (for that is what it seems to me) view of "sin." While Dostoyevsky probably did not mean his view as such, it reeks of the codependent "I feel everyone's pain" liberalism imposed upon me by my own family when growing up. I was constantly made somehow to feel responsible for other people's "sins," even though I barely understood such things as a young child. My mother did this often, and it was a cancer to my mind and soul.
Years ago, I also went through a period of reading some Russian anarchist books, such as Kropotkin's Mutual Aid. Perhaps there is something in the Russian spirit and history that leads to such collectivist views, whether they are religious or secular.
My comment is grounded on the fact that I grew up in a Catholic family, church and school (12 years) a half-century+ ago. In early 2021 (?) I heard Leo Zagami, who grew up Catholic near Rome, say to Alex Jones: 'The Vatican is at the center of child trafficking worldwide." I kind've suspected something like this in my childhood. Weird unexplainable/unspeakable stuff. Years later I learned that Dad had to take rough action, arguably violent, against our Monseigneur and did not get into trouble (was that man a pedophile afraid to press charges against a man with impeccable character throughout the community?)
As we see other "experts" fall - Fauci, Biden, Obama, actors, experts, etc - why believe ANY "expert". Why should I trust modern medicine god's when I have been totally "devoid of illness" for over 8 years by following Jesus wisdom from the 1st C.E AD - in ancient documents (2 copies) Here's yours: https://essene.com/GospelOfPeace/peace1.html The Jewish historian, Josephus, of that time and location wrote "The Essenes are long lived (averaging 120) AND NEARLY DEVOID OF ILLNESS." The indigenous Cherokee Indians (1762) had "elders that are 150... and still quite active, per the British Lt Henry Timberlake who lived with them for a couple of months.
If you are thinking "Why didn't I hear of this?" Here's the history. Dr. E. B. Szekely found the first one in the Secret Archives of the Vatican (lost only for 1700 years) in 1923. The 2nd was amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls (1947-1950's). I was in Catholic school soon after so why weren't we told that the Vatican had a 1st person copy for 1700 years. Where were the experts? I quit Church at 18. Do you see now why Jesus and Essenes (Masada) had to die? The Essene were outliving the Romans by 50 to 70 years. How do you control such long-term wisdom?
My main comment about Dostoyevsky's "wisdom" is based on my experience from age 28 to 32. I voluntarily put myself through intensive "psychotherapy" counseling. Two individual 1hr sessions and 2 90 minute "group" sessions PER week for four years. Why? "To be a better person" - what a participant told me, she and others experienced. That doesn't make me special or learned or better or worse than anyone - just better understanding myself and my life journey and that of others. I am an "expert" only about my life.
Some people in "group" suffered at the hands of great evil. Some was massively life-changing. Some was unspeakable. Even what we learned (on the periphery) was horrible because one wondered what is not being told because it is to horrifying. My experience proved what our Dad taught us (A WWII FIGHTING Veteran): "If you knew what that person has had to go through in their life you would see him/her quite differently."
I cannot separate, as my Dad taught us and as my therapy experience taught us, what happened to someone in their life, especially as a child - from how they feel, think and act as adults. I "see people quite differently" than Dostoyevsky's blather (not wisdom). Sounds like another BS "religious" control mechanism by the evil ones. Making us feel guilty and sorry for causing others to sin. Like "the unvaccinated" and other BS. I can envision Dostoyevsky having a beer/wine with others laughing at what he wrote - it's so outlandish. As though there is an "energy" of goodness pervasive in the universe and if one person sins then it impacts everyone.
And religious history experts are revealing now that people in the Christian community referred to "Paul" as "lying", "a liar", "lying again" and (brace yourself) "our enemy" See Eisenman for one.
Well then, I wonder how is it that I grew up in the 50's, 60's 70's but I never smoked cigarettes or marijuana, nor did drugs, nor drank alcohol until my HS graduation party, nor ever harmed anyone physically or financially, nor "accidentally" impregnated any woman NOR was involved in an abortion. Committed no crimes. Never reprimanded for poor work performance.
How did I escape Dostoyevsky's "sin effects all" ether)? I didn't live in a glass bubble. Am I a god? I say mockingly. That I was impervious to this "sin ether".
So let's converge on Jesus' wisdom per Matthew 18:6 - "It is better that a man be tossed into the sea, tied to a heavy millstone and drowned, than for that man to cause a child to stray away from my goodness." It couldn't be any clearer - "Evil begets evil. Stop evil before it begets evil."
NO mention of a "sin ether" affecting all. Hold others accountable for actions even proactively.
Jesus was asked, in the url above, "Which laws of life should we follow, that of Moses and Scriptures, or that of which you preach? ISN'T that a great question to ask Christ? In his response He said "Those are dead words of dead men. Learn the laws of life by living life." So, by divine Decree Dostoyevsky's words, like Moses, Dr. Fauci's etc are "dead words of dead men." Another asked how should we pray and Jesus' response included: "The best way to connect with our Spiritual Father" is to be outside in the hour before sunrise, alone, with our "Earthly Mother (Nature)"
NO church, priests, popes, bishops, EXPERTS, preachers - a personal relationship with God.
Evil is at the individual person(s) level. Stop evil before it begets evil.
God bless all people following Ms. Farber writings - it's biblical but not the Catholic biblical :)