The confusing history of monotheism, using the eonic model to assess its overall pattern in world history.

This material contains the key to sorting out the confusions in the history of Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastarianism and Buddhsim. It won’t make any sense at first and requires up to six months work on world history, religious histories, and the so-called eonic model. As the post notes, the idea of god in history fails: ‘god’ would not produce the kind of mess we see in Christianity and Judaism, which ended in collision. I recommend you walk away from these monotheistic religions and at the same time consider that secular humanism can’t either make sense of the case here. In a complex history, the monotheists never got ‘god’ straight and turned the whole thing into a mess of pottage…It makes sense taken as an artificial challenge to polytheism with the ‘one god’ to replace the pagan pantheons. Buddhism was far more successful and its relation to earlier ‘Hinduism’ (bad word!) is also clear. Let’s note that ‘enlightenment’ and ‘salvation’ are not the same, but the case with salvation is unclear. It seems related to a kind of ‘sufi soul’ factor soon lost we suspect in the later religion which turned into a useful crowd control ideology for the Roman emperors. That said, later Christianity is obscure to us now, and along Islam a very hard to evaluate. The eonic model is a powerful tool but has its own limits. The eonic effect is not theology: its looks intelligent, but its effect is more like ferlizer and amplifies its local region, and then diffuse beyond that region. That is still another limited analogy, but…
Study the eonic model for six months and start reading some of the hundreds of books connected to the material.

The post revers to an earlier one yesterday:

Source: Religious Trauma Syndrome: Former Christian explains how organized religion can lead to mental health problems –

The secular era has moved out of religion, but then looks backward and asks, what was all that? The enigma has always remained unsolved and the mystery of early Christianity remains veiled in its own propaganda of a savior who conveniently disappeared almost as soon as he had appeared, and history is left with an unknown around which still others created a religion of myths, mostly, and created from Jesus an imaginary figure. The status of its claims of salvation remain obscure.
Here we interpolate the material below. The original ending is below at the end of the post:

    A look at the eonic model can help somewhat: the status of Judaism and/or Christianity are different from that of Israelitism, which we use to point to the period of the transition from 900 BCE to 600 BCE. This short interval is truly remarkable but is misleading until we compare the phenomenon to the emergence of Buddhism: in the parallel interval we see a theist and an atheist religion appearing in parallel: we cannot safely take Israelitism’s claims about god in history. What we see is a case of the eonic effect, producing two world religions in parallel. The whole phenomenon ended in tragedy in both cases as Mahayana and Christianity collided with their starters. Let us note Judaism is like Christianity is outside the eonic series, while the part, Israelitism, is inside that sequence. Christians had equal ‘right’ therefore to that early section which they made into the Old Testament, while in the immediate succession to Israelitism, Judaism emerged after 600 BCE and became a religion in its own right. It is small wonder that the Isrealites thought in terms of ‘god’ but we can see now that this can’t be the case. Israelitism is a kind of cargo cult built around the earlier materials in the Canaanite Zone (the vestigial element of child sacrifice still survives in a myth in the Old Testament, this is the stream and sequence aspect of pre-Isrealism with is myths of Abraham and Moses). We cannot in a secular future now, seriously claim that the god revelation myth is believable. God would not create such a tricky mess as what history shows as the succession to Israelitism; two religions in collision. Further, the real history shows that at the point of the Exile Israelitism suffered the loss of its kingdom and transport to Persia where Israelitism blended with early Zoroastrianism, a truly stunning development that made the Israelites wonder how whole nations could be manipulated as shown in history. The eonic model makes much better sense. Its distinction of system action and free action will help to show that while early Israelitism shows macro action the double succession is ‘free action’,  which means you might produce mistakes relative to what seems some teleological action in the eonic series. And the case of Christianity is tricky because it is not inside the eonic series but springs from the Judaic milieu but turns into something else, and a true universal religion. There is something missing in the Christian case history: something seems like it is guiding what emerged, a missing factor a sort of hidden guru effect. Sure enough, Christians claimed as much with the tale of the Three Magi. The latter is now myth, so we don’t know but there are some ‘usual suspets’ here: India, Persia zone, and Egypt. Some have thought early Christianity had an Egyptian element. It is hard to decipher all this. But the early Christian world seem to have a doctrine of soul, absent in Judaism. Perhaps this springs from Egypt, where unlike Indic religion with its reincarnation legacy, we see an obsession with ‘souls’ and afterlife, rendered into some new form in early Christianity. But it seems to have died out, and suspiciously still exists in sufism. Let us note that the strange disinformation effect in Christianity which suffers incoherence in its texts, and a veiled prophet who seems to disappear almost at once. Something, as noted, is missing in the account. Something seems to have guided early Christianity in its first few centuries, something beyond its strange figure, Jesus. Our point is that this is not the same as the eonic effect. Again, the Christians seem to have sensed this and soon distinguished Jesus and Christ soon larded over with mythology. It is possible that a ‘soul effect’ with a dead/mortal jesus was such a guide. It is not believable to a humanist, and fails to see the connection to a larger history. But a dead Buddha hovering over a religion is not something secular humanism can rule on. Note that Hinduism shows a far more complex type of religion has existed millennia before Judeo-Christianity which are a path to a kind of global integration culture with a religious ideology. Note the eonic model with its ‘Axial Age’ parallel action: it picks one region for each rough sector and acts on what is already there: Greece Canann, Persia zone, India, China.

We must be careful not to confuse the early history, with what came later, but at the same time not try to rig the tale to what it is not, as we fail to grasp what it is. The resemblance of Jesus to later sufi figures is remarkable, the ‘prophet’ who speaks in parables, and is and accused magicians, in an aura of false miracles closing the real man of miracles, as the sufi. Those miracles are lost to us, but even a part-time meditator can often retrace the steps of such figures, as the psychic field jumpstart odd synchronicities, very humble miracles, but proceeding by laws different from the standard psychology of man. It was to become a cynical game and little but mystification. We must suspect that NICE GUY jesus was closer to a figure like Gurdjieff who was a self-confessed devil, another miracle peddler and a mesmerizing and dangerous hypnotist, and we suspect, a proto-fascist. But fascism is a modern phenomenon, yet an ancient vein attempting to attack the modern world and overthrow it. The perps here were too clever to get caught, as the tragi-comic superidiots like Trump and, hey, Hitler get full marionette treatment from dark figures depicted in the wrong myth.
This revenge game reminds us that there is no going back, even if the hasbeens of the Christian dark side consider fascism the beginning of the endgame of modernity.
Salvation must come in a new key, and a future still unknown. Buddhism was always more sensible there and didn’t produce such misleading myths destined to cast a spell on the victims of religion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s