Comments by "Taxtro" (@MrCmon113) on "ESOTERICA" channel.

  1. That's baseless speculation.
    7
  2. You must be really down bad if you're trying to build a task force of Satan, Cupid and Jesus to secure your crush.
    3
  3. Yeah they gave all kinds of non Christian magic way more importance than it wouöd otherwise have had in people's minds.
    3
  4. ​ @willyrules55 But the authors of the bible also recorded that their own people and god don't give a fuck about the well being of children or defenseless people in general. If they wanted to virtue signal, why portray themselves as the villains so often. Why have their own god encourage mass slaughter and slavery of children, why have him demand child sacrifice explicitly?
    2
  5. ​ @angelina6543 Did none of you guys watch the video? Moloch wasn't a god. People sacrificed to Yahwe. And no a sacrifice is not a burial.
    2
  6. Living things are the only things in nature appearing "purposeful" superficially. So it makes sense for religious people to resent explanations of them in terms of simpler processes.
    2
  7.  @Tsotha  His party was originally secular. Maybe he had the quran made to appease the more devout people in his country and show them how dedicated he is to the faith.
    2
  8. I partly agree. But only if you're already happy while pursuing goals. I think it's a big problem with people inspired by Buddhism that they discount working towards concrete improvements in the world in favour of being ok in the moment. On the one hand it's possible to experience pure bliss before anything good happens, on the other hand, you should want to change the world to make more good things happen for more people.
    2
  9. ​ @benjaminburns6336 Yahwe can fail in his own promises, which he frequently does such as in the example in the video. But yes, as a textbook narcissist, he doesn't apply any standards to himself and always blames others when he fails.
    2
  10. ​ @phantomleaves That's because Gandalf is an angel obedient to God and not a witch I guess. : /
    2
  11. ​ @BrenoSobral71 Yahwe demands human sacrifices multiple times. He's not against that at all. The "textual proof" is literally discussed in the video itself. Also more briadly speaking Yahwe doesn't give a shit about children or really anyone vulnerable that he can't gainfully manipulate.
    2
  12. That's projecting your modern views backwards. They didn't believe in a "divine feminine" or masculine for that matter.
    2
  13. No, the sacrifice is explicitly to Yahwe. Yahwe granted the victory and in return he gets his human sacrifice.
    1
  14. ​ @ulyssesm.daniels6927 Your dancing stuff makes the entire idea of fate obsolete. The entire point is that it takes place in spite of you knowing about it. Regardless of what you do.
    1
  15. ​ @AENock Yahwe says he wants everyone's first son murdered. That's even mentioned in the video.
    1
  16. Well, the OT doesn't shun human sacrifice.
    1
  17. ​ @phyllisjeanfulton You ARE the one twisting history to fit your politics.
    1
  18. That's the worst garbage I ever had to read. My eyes are angry at me for putting them through this.
    1
  19. That's because Latin typically isn't properly taught as a language. Aquiring a language isn't about learning grammar or doing translations. When you've actually learned a language, you understand it directly and think in the language, you're not translating into or from it.
    1
  20. It's just transparently bullshitting yourself and asking others not to question you. It makes no sense to think you understand the history of Nazism better by actually being a Nazi. Even if you don't have a horse in the race it can be super easy to deceive yourself. Your "phenomenological approach" begins and ends with self deception.
    1
  21. Yeah, I'd rather do the dog skin and dove heart thing than make a tinder account.
    1
  22. Do you think that's a bad circumstance? If yes, then you're already indentical with the negation of it. You're already that part of the cosmos that effects positive change.
    1
  23.  @lucasjordan911  There's zero evidence for that and that's not what a sacrifice meant at any time.
    1
  24. Doesn't he have an entire lecture series in which he completely ignores the historical and archeological background of the bible and instead injects his Jungian archetypes?
    1
  25. Perennialism is extremely frustrating to me. I have infinitely more respect for people, who actually believe they have magical powers or in Christianity or whatever, than for perennialists. At least the former are to some degree honest about history and the actual contents of historical doctrines and the beliefs of people. Perennialists just bulldoze all of history and superimpose their dumbass modern trivialities.
    1
  26. Giving yourself a name doesn't mean you get to define that word.
    1
  27. Amen.
    1
  28. ​ @hobbyhorse5848 Zeus is also called omnipotent even though he obviously isn't. Yahwe as he appears in the OT can be defeated in many ways.
    1
  29. Free will is simply nonsense you hold on to, because you hold on to hatred. It's like holding on to broken glass and holding more the more it hurts. A cycle of ignorance and anger.
    1
  30. But there's zero indication that they objected to child sacrifice on ethical grounds. And those biblical texts don't hold back on telling the reader what god is against. Actually it's a repeated theme that prophets are compelled to speak out unpopular things Yahwe wants to push through.
    1
  31. ​ @seventhirtytwo505 Jungians and Perennialists basically just ignore all historical context and the expressed intent of authors and superimpose some psychological take. It's fine for some text to remind you of sth, but they maintain that their take is what it's really about.
    1
  32.  @Guidus125  The kind of god described in the bible and lots of other claims therein are pretty much falsified. But modern believers simply move the goalpost to ever smaller and smaller claims. The same is true for modern "believers" in witchcraft, whose spells get less and less impressive. I think way more often there is a belief in belief, ie a belief that believing in certain kinds of bullshit is good, rather than an actual belief in the stuff people say they believe.
    1
  33. Kid refers to a deer, not a goat, doesn't it? Anyways people don't have first born goats, they have first born sons. There's no ambiguity between sons and goats.
    1
  34. I don't really see it. The will is bad, the Dao is good and you should flow with it. It's way more like Buddhism: there's desire and aversion locking you into samsara.
    1
  35. As far as the OT is concerned Satan is Yahwe's sidekick. As far as Christian theology is concerned he's Yahwe's sock puppet, controlled opposition. Only in a kind of folk Christianity is Satan a real antagonist to Yahwe.
    1
  36. Are you capping or for real? Genuinely can't tell.
    1
  37. No, everything is a potato to a certain degree. And the boundaries of each "thing" are fuzzy.
    1
  38. What a bunch of total horseshit. Under capitalism women achieved equal rights. Moreover economic freedom was directly responsible for women gaining independence and influence. Be it during medieval times or after WW2.
    1
  39. That's a good argument in the case of later Christians, but not for those early texts, because the authors transparently didn't give a fuck about children themselves.
    1
  40. Not just Satan and Cupid, but also Jesus are made to join forces.
    1
  41. Well you'd have to do the milk and honey thing as well, not just read the text.
    1
  42. ​ @ct-gt2dt That's completely wrong. Did you even watch the video? Christianity is for child sacrifice. The OT is still part of the bible. Abraham and Moses are central figures. Jesus reaffirms Yahwe's laws.
    1