Kingdom of God (rewilding the bible)

Regenerative Culture Spiritual Technology
#1

Idk I keep noticing people blasting ‘Christianity’ (or abuse of) and rightly so, but it always seems this blast of misuse of ‘religion’ discredits the religion and creates it into a 'mythology of civilization.

Well here’s my view from the ‘Kingdom of God’ (IE the gospel of the NT and Jesus) and how I think it plants the seeds in civilization for ‘rewilding’

I’m posting this in response to numerous things I’ve seen and mainly stemming from Urban Scouts critique on Rabbit Stick. I don’t want to take away from the rabbit stick thread so I am posting it here.

I don’t see how ‘Christianity’ does not fit into rewilding. So often it is perpetrated to remove people from the land. It is true it is written very much of civilization and empires etc. but I don’t see how principles of the Kingdom of God (which the bible is mostly about) really goes against ‘rewilding’. Perhaps, only the definitions. But to me, the ideologies are quite the same.

Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?

Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?

And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:

Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, [shall he] not much more [clothe] you, O ye of little faith?

Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?

(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day [is] the evil thereof.

Mat 6:25:34

If you ask me Jesus planted the seeds for modern day rewilding. This seems so much against modern civilization philosophy. And the whole ‘going to heaven’ thing, that somehow puts people against, or disconnected from the earth, as heaven being portrayed as the invisible place where God reigns, is also a fallacy, the Bible never talks about that, though it does talk of everlasting life, resurrection, death, and a new earth.

I recently met a guy who has taken this Kingdom of God philosophy to heart (after recovering from overdosing multiple times on drugs and hitting rock bottom) and is traveling ‘homeless’ from Canada to Mexico, helping homeless people , and of course he gets attacked by people and even pastors and what not who ask him what he does for money and that he needs money and blah blah blah, and he just quotes these scriptures to them and goes on. He was a pretty cool guy. And if you ask me, that can hold the beginning of rewilding.

And so what does it mean to ‘seek the kingdom’, from what I gain from the bible is synonymous to seeking the spirit. Which, if one follows the whole love and forgiveness thing… really encompasses everything. And so what biblically is the Kingdom of God, where is it? This remains tough question (sorry mind my b-english but I can’t think to write it another way atm…) because of the statements

Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. Luk 17:21

It also gives a pretty powerful way of not being a citizen in Civilization…

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Mat 6:24

I hope I’m not sounding all preachy and stuff though it’s hard, I am trying to shed light onto an issue that I keep feeling is attacked (rightfully so) but discredited because of these ‘myths’ (ahem like that of the ‘immortal soul’ and ‘burning in hell for eternity’ which goes against everything of the bible…)

I also hope this post helps more with rewilding than the last person who posted some random thing about ‘the room’.

3 Likes
#2

Many people have interpreted Christianity differently, many people have interpereted the bible differently. Many groups of “christians” are divided over this.

But if we look at what most people mean when they say Christianity we see several principles that conflict with a native world view.

  1. That “man” has dominion over the planet.

  2. That humans are flawed and need to be “saved.”

  3. That if we toil in this life we will be rewarded in a distant-from-this-planet afterlife.

  4. Monotheism (classic civilization)

  5. God lives far away, not on earth but “in heaven.”

When you know the history of civilization, and how these religions came about, it de-bunks the very tenants that make up that religion. Now, rix and Jason both current or ex-christians may dissagree and are probably more apt to carry this conversation into a thoughtful place than I, who came left church at 10 because it made no sense to me.

#3

Here are some links that Jason wrote about this:

http://anthropik.com/2005/02/my-catholic-faith/

http://anthropik.com/2005/02/a-very-different-bible/

http://anthropik.com/2005/10/techno-salvation/

#4

The ‘sad’ truth no matter how you look at it is that man does have ‘dominion’ over the planet. I mean, look what man can, and has done, if that’s not dominion over the planet I have no idea what is. And if our current dominion isn’t perpetrated by ‘evil’ seeing the destruction of our planet than I have no idea what is.

2. That humans are flawed and need to be "saved."
Man isn't flawed, just mortal. The 'salvation' isn't mandatory. That man needs to be saved comes from the misconception that man has an immortal soul. Man lost the tree of life by believing to be immortal. Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die.
3. That if we toil in this life we will be rewarded in a distant-from-this-planet afterlife.
As I already pointed out, the after life is on this earth, or at least a 'new earth' (which I see as the result of the current world being removed)
4. Monotheism (classic civilization)

Don’t see concept of this against rewilding or anything in general. Monotheism goes to being represented by one authority, and if that one authority is God, the laws of the world, than what’s the problem? It’s when you throw mans many different governments and other rulers claim to be God, or like the roman empire making up Gods, etc…

Native peoples, like the Iroquois had monotheism, the great spirit, etc. Same thing as God to me, Just a different name. The evil always comes with the immortal soul myth.

5. God lives far away, not on earth but "in heaven."

For man to reign on earth it has to be in a way a separate ‘territory’ than that of God’s. But it is still a part of ‘heaven’

When you know the history of civilization, and how these religions came about, it de-bunks the very tenants that make up that religion. Now, rix and Jason both current or ex-christians may dissagree and are probably more apt to carry this conversation into a thoughtful place than I, who came left church at 10 because it made no sense to me.

I’ve read them, and it’s funny some ‘religious’ people I mingle with conspire that the catholic church is the ‘whore’ in revelations or something like that. (I was raised catholic as well, around age 10 didn’t “go to church” (what a cock and bull statement anyhow, you can’t go to church by the definition of church) and became a ‘communist’ ‘buddhist’ ‘atheist’ ‘animist’ ‘pagan’ etc. etc. Now, I’d consider myself (or rather aspire to be) simply a citizen in God’s earthly kingdom. If you take Jesus’ teachings into a political view (because they were) it gives great legal power on existing outside of civilization (even if you are within its borders). See ambassador.

#5

From the Catholic Link

My feet were now firmly planted on the road to revolution, but I’ve never really given up on Christianity. It would be more accurate to say that Christianity gave up on me. If anything, it has deepened and transformed that faith. I can no longer understand how a civilized person can read the Bible and consider it “their” book. Civilization and agriculture is G-d’s curse. He calls Abraham to leave civilization behind and found twelve tribes to be his chosen people. He must constantly rescue them from civilization–the Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, every successive, great civilization is G-d’s implacable enemy. The Torah creates a subversive system that undercuts civilization at every turn (I wrote a paper [PDF] that touches on this); the prophets advance an incredibly liberal agenda that assaults the most fundamental tenets of civilization–the concentration of wealth and power. The Hebrews demand a king, a state–a civilization–despite G-d’s warnings, and their suffering for that mistake has yet to end.

The Gospels only underline this unremitting, brutal assault on civilization. Jesus incites his disciples to leave it all behind, move beyond civilization into small, cooperative tribes, for lack of a better word. The Romans kill him for it, and Paul inverts it for his own power (see John Dominic Crossan’s The Historical Jesus). After all that, the Bible ends with a stark prophecy of a final battle between east and west, the emergence of a single, global empire, and how G-d will destroy civilization and return us to the idyllic, utopian existence of Eden, where we began, where G-d meant us to be–in tribes.

I think this quite supports what I say, in that proper use of the Bible remains an exceptional tool in ‘rewilding’, and that discrediting the whole thing because of mis interpretation or abuses of it… well…yeah.

#6

The bible is not Christianity though. You know? I mean, try to tell the above paragraph to anyone in civilization that identifies as Christian and I highly doubt they will interpret it that way.

Of course, I like what Jason has done; re-mythologized the bible in his own terms. Though, to call what he believes now Christianity only confuses me since the ‘majority’ of Christians are not and never will be anti-civilizationists. :smiley:

I don’t doubt that people can rewild their own personal myths (the Mayans absorbed Jesus into their Mythology very quickly without becoming ‘Christians’), but Organized Religions are a different beast.

1 Like
#7

Yesm, exactly, when I try not to call myself or anything ‘Christian’ because it’s so awkward and what not, I know exactly what you are saying. If there was a better word for it to sometimes convey “true” ‘Christianity’ I would gladly hearken it, the best things I can use are just being citizens of the earth, caretakers, as we were meant to be. Making it political, and not religious, as it was in effect meant to be, helps with this.

#8

heh

well, i spent several years as a southern baptist, so…

then, for several years after that, i was very anti-christianity (of course)

during that time i ran into taoism, asatru, gnosticism & neo-paganism (tho by this point i had too many issues w/ organized religion to join any community)

then, slowly, i started realizing that jesus was alright. all these bastards running around calling themselves “christians” were full of shit, but jesus himself i could get along with quite well.

so for a few years now, i’ve been prone to saying to some of those previously mentioned bastards “i’m fine w/ jesus, we get along fine. it’s you i have a problem with. bye now”.

#9

The Christian story infects all Christian believers with complacency. The story revolves around oppresion.

Look at Satan. The Christian deity claims omnipotency, all knowing. he [yes, he] knew his creation would rebel, he knew he would make an example of the Lucifer. An example which says : Do not question THE authority, do not behave autonomously, do not try to find anything out on your own.

Sound like any other system of beliefs?

The megalomaniacal masterminds of christianity said ‘digest this yarn and go to sleep, debate the convolutions if you like but never doubt their Truth, chant Mu-Adib a few times and try to love everyone [wouldn’t that be grand?] especially the ones brainwashing you, thank you for surrendering your $ and power’

1 Like
#10
If there was a better word for it to sometimes convey "true" 'Christianity' I would gladly hearken it, the best things I can use are just being citizens of the earth, caretakers, as we were meant to be.

How do you define “true” christianity? You obviously have a definition. Jason seems to have a concept. Those concepts work for you. But I doubt that they would work for anybody else who aligns themselves with any organized version of christianity.

well, i spent several years as a southern baptist, so....

then, for several years after that, i was very anti-christianity (of course)

during that time i ran into taoism, asatru, gnosticism & neo-paganism (tho by this point i had too many issues w/ organized religion to join any community)

my history follow a similar route to jhereg’s. i grew up in the southern baptist church. i “felt the call” to become a minister around the age of 15. my local church licensed me as a gospel minister (woo hoo, i can perform weddings).

then i went to a southern baptist college. i met some “jesus freak” kind of people and sat in classes under “cutting edge” professors that taught us to think about the text and the behavior of the church with a critical eye. it became obvious to me that a huge disparity stood between the text and the church – especially if you practiced a hermeneutic approach that (1) looked at what the text meant to the original audience, (2) discerned a universal principle from that meaning and (3) applied the universal principle to your current modern context. i looked around and realized that the church had very little to do with christ and his true message. i started realizing as well that paul was a bully who wanted to horn in on the new hype.

a few years later i read quinn and found myself realizing that christianity and even judaism just weren’t old enough to account for what i really wanted: to live like i had evolved to live.

eventually i had to do the unthinkable and actually deny christ. i had stopped believing in sin, and so i had no need for someone to save me from it. i couldn’t accept that humans exist in a corrupted state by nature (and need to find salvation from that state) because i realized that the corruption resulted from civilization and not from some mythological fruit eating that supposedly happened after the beginning of the agricultural revolution.

i decided to embrace witchcraft for a while because i appreciated the reverence for life that it embodied. it helped me commune with the non-human world. eventually, i gained a concept of animism and realized that it embodied my yearnings toward the non-human world even better. i currently practice a hodgepodge of witchy animism. i still pray to the mother and the moon, but i also try to recognize the closer spirits as well like the ants under my recycling bin and the persimmon tree in my back yard.

having said all that, i advise you to embrace what works for you. syncretize a faith that you can believe. if you had grown up wild in an indigenous culture, you would already have a working faith. but we have the burden and pleasure of forging new cultures for ourselves and our progeny. we have to find a new way to make things work.

certainly the texts of christianity have a lot of passages that you can use to open the gates of civilization for yourself and step out into the wild world. as a whole, i still don’t think you can make a case for jesus sewing the seeds of the modern rewilding movement. he certainly had a background in one of the most enduring animist-retaining religions: judaism. and he definitely bucked against the establishment of his time from which we can take inspiration for bucking against the establishment we dwell with. in the end, i still can’t accept more than a few scraps of christianity for myself.

even the caretaker/steward business implies that the earth needs a caretaker. certainly we can work with our non-human neighbors to foster a rich, diverse and thriving ecology – like the amazon and the great plains. but really, the natural balances of how life interrelates will work themselves out – very slowly perhaps, but they will find their own balance. they don’t need us to do it. we can work with them to bring about a quicker balance, but we don’t provide a necessary function.

I’m glad that you find inspiration from the gospels. You could find them anywhere, really. I could find them in Harry Potter, or a Modest Mouse song or a TV show like Firefly.

Good for you for finding the seeds of rewilding in the gospels. But know that others (almost all the others) have found the seeds and roots and stalks and leaves of civilization there as well.

#11

Matthew 6:25 – Thank you! How in the hell did constantine ever allow that to get into the bible? I’ve been meaning to smack that one in the face of peopel for a while!

Jesus – The first telepathic gorilla

Christianity – A religion created to control the in-fighting of slaves.

Why is that so hard for people to get?

The Jefferson bible, as well as the Apocrypha(omitted books fo the bible), are great sources for the ‘true’ teachings of Jesus.

It’s that simple. Jesus was a leaver, Constantine was an emperor struggling to unite an empire. I mean, it’s so simple, so base, why the long monologues when it’s so obvious that what church is is the basis of Jesus’ arrival; to overthrow the orthodoxy of Judaism and rewild his fellow man. If only Jesus had a message board…

#12

Wilderix, I present the bible for the main reason, to use the ‘masters’ tools, to bring down the masters house.

Really, I don’t get how people say you can’t… most of what people say against ‘religion’ is true (but then again, I don’t think people will ever know the full details)… But it remains that we reside in civilization… use the masters tools to break out of the masters house…

Anyhow here’s a nice documentary by paganBear that I feel should be shared… he runs the LJ community Tribal Paganism.

http://www.thestumblingblock.com/FramePages/Movieframe.html

Edit: still I have much to learn, and many fallacies may mark my words here, that I may rescind as I forge my mind anew.

#13
If only Jesus had a message board...

Yeah. Who wouldn’t find pleasure in rebuking that guy directly? First thing I would ask : So you are the one and only son?

No one right way? John 14:6

#14
Wilderix, I present the bible for the main reason, to use the 'masters' tools, to bring down the masters house.

I like that. I tried to work to change my church “families” from the inside when I still lived in that realm. I think I did some good. I shook a few people’s world views. And since I live in the Bible Belt now, I feel glad to have had those experiences and know the lingo in order to talk to the people here within their own idiom.

I think we should use whatever tools we can. The tools of Christianity failed to help me after a certain point, so I left them behind, but whenever I come upon them again from time to time, my hands still remember how to hold them and wield them. I think any experience that you actually experience makes for a good experience.

Yeah. Who wouldn't find pleasure in rebuking that guy directly? First thing I would ask : So you are the one and only son?

No one right way? John 14:6

I would have fun at that.

One of my religion professors used to say “Jesus might be the only way to get to the Father, but there are many ways to get to Jesus.” He had made a step in the right direction, but it still fell short because it kept the lock on salvation – civilization loves its locks.

#15

that reminds me of a rather… lively… debate i had with a guy in college.

i had taken issue with the concept that the only way to be saved (and thus allowed in the presence of god) was to accept jesus christ as your personal saviour, yada, yada, all the rest of that roman road crap.

my point was that, if we accepted this as true, then we were de facto saying it was okay for everyone who had never heard “the lord’s word” to never be “saved” or allowed to enter the kingdom of god. and any kind of god that takes that stance is one i’ll happily spit in the eye of any day.

didn’t change his opinion tho’…

#16

Ahh and so I fall to find even more false teachings of Christianity which go against this from the Bible itself… le sigh… I will have to therefore conclude that ‘Christianity’ is a false teaching. So what are the key elements of Christianity which make it a false teaching? These are the things that if you don’t believe, you’re not a ‘Christian’ (in terms of majority). What’s a big one? The doctrines. W00t a doctrine by the ‘church’ who have once again locked something away.
Notably the immortality of the soul, trinitarianism, the pre-existence of Jesus Christ… anyhow, there’s also this view of the Bible as infallible… which… if we take into fact that the modern bible has been changed from it’s original language, and in some cases, interpreted for cultural views… than uhh it is fallible, or at least the interpretation… More to come…

Oh and so that guy I met, traveling from Canada to Mexico… and how the old Pastor criticized him about money…
Just say, are ye of so little faith, that you don’t think God will provide for you as he provides for the lilies in the field?
And he will say, well you have to work for your keep…
And you can say, isn’t work and toil the result of not relying on God? (see genesis… )

#17

Good idea…nice to hear that!!! Happy that you editted. 8)

#18

Okay here are some of my latest findings… (a lot of this is in response and inspiration from the stumbling block doc.
http://www.thestumblingblock.com/FramePages/Movieframe.html

Two names for god are distinct in Genesis and throughout the bible, however, it is quite hard to tell this with our modern translation because we don’t have the different words and names. So lets look at the original language.
http://thehighwaytoheaven.com/OneGod-TwoNames/hebrewnames.htm#Here%20is%20an%20overview
In that link it talks of the two different Gods, LORD God and Lord GOD, difference is capitalization in the KJV. These refer actually to the dualism of God. Adonai YHWH is Lord GOD. This is God the Father, the creator, the deity, etc. This ONLY refers to the Father.

"“Adonai” is used only of God, and never of man, and contrary to Trinitarian dogma, it is never used of Christ. . The other Hebrew word Adon is never used of the Father. It is used of men, angels, and of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Okay so the other God, is LORD God, or YHWH Elohim. This points to the union of the father and son and is only used in reference to the Son. So what does the dual nature mean…? http://thehighwaytoheaven.com/OneGod-TwoNames/dualnature.htm#The%20missing%20piece
VERY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND. At least I think so. Okay so then you have the two creations, which are really one creation, but created dually. Again, we have the first account, which simply uses elohiym, which is plural, and I’d say refers to the dual nature of God.
Okay lets quit talking bible and lets talk real world, ‘culture’ etc. The first account effectively makes the entire system, this actually goes CONTRARY to the other theory put in… Okay so what does that make the other creation (or rather, formation) (and remember these are the same creation really link coming at end for scripture to support this…) The second creation (formation) is actually the agriculture, the domestication, help meet, etc. As they were ‘of the field’ not of the earth, like the previous creations were. This is also why the tree of knowledge comes with the ‘culture’ creation. You don’t see it in the other way.
http://www.tektonics.org/jedp/creationtwo.html
These have actually both been apart of human history that we (scientifically) know… in that there was no strictly hunter-gather society (from what I’ve gathered from Jason), all to a degree had some type of (perma or horticulture?). The second, ‘humanitarian’ creation tells us to be care takers. Okay contradiction? Dominion or caretakrs? See that duality post and you’ll see how with both together comes the real deal. So lets see we’re given dominion over the planet (obvious because of what man has done today…) but told to care for it (obviously what man has not done). Oh boy, see where I am going with this? Oh also, the God mainly present in the old testament is actually LORD God (of the second creation)… it is in the New Testament with Jesus that Lord GOD (the father) takes effect through Lord Jesus (elohim)(the son).
Anyhow this discovery was a shocker for me. But I think it really makes sense and is quite supported by the scriptures no?

So what’s the end goal…?

I Cor. 15:24-28 -- "Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power .For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. For "He has put all things under His feet." But when He says, "all things are put under Him," it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all"
#19

Just wanted to say that the “Great Spirit” was an invention of jesuit missionaries and that pre-contact, they had no such thing.

#20

Ah, so that’s prolly how the immortal soul got in there too then.