The Golden Rule

How victimhood dictates violence without reason

The variation of the Christian Golden Rule exists in some form in nearly every single religion or philosophy. If one thing stands out about the current persecution perceived by Evangelicals - it is the concept of being a victim. Basically, in many translations of the Bible these two passages define it —

Matthew 7:12: “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets”.

Luke 6:31: “Do to others as you would have them do to you”

It is not, however, what we see in the victims of today (nor, to be fair, those of yesteryear). It rather appears that if you are feeling underrated, unrespected, and without the sense of being regarded - you must inflict punishment on another to ‘get even’. This leads to the idiocy of a War on Christmas - the idea that respect for other faiths by saying Happy Holidays is a strike against your faith; that the posting of a series of religious tracts in local schools makes your faith stronger and more important.

This extends to the ‘victimhood’ of young men who need to feel more empowered. After all? Alpha? To be respected requires having a basis for such respect. Somehow, the incessant whining of underappreciation does not speak to that. Turning Point purports an exceptional academic view - and does not. Kirk tried his ‘debate’ model at Cambridge and lost badly to an actual scholar. Kirk is another of the many I have met over the years: They do not regard college or higher education as any type of value. They attend for a few weeks or months. They make a lot of noise that they are already smarter - and then? They are victims and whining about the lack of respect. They use a limited selection of texts without purpose. They rely on emotional response without active academic proof. There are some such as Dr. Joshua Bowen who were evangelical and educated in that sect. He studied over years eventually moving to Johns Hopkins and achieved his PhD in Assyriology and the Sumerian language. Those studies were revelatory as they pointed out that the biblical illustration was not entirely accurate. It showed Dr. Bowen that the tales told to him as an evangelical were tainted. Kirk has never been able to defend his positions with such scholars. and, thus? Turning Point is for the less-than-educated who prefer half-baked conspiracy and victimhood as their base. And their rationale points to conspiracy theory as proof. It points to plain biblical notation as proof. And, in the process? That relies on translation. You do realize that translation is largely opinion? The primary choice of Bible is the King James Version - there are volumes that fully expose the political alignment of the KGV. (I hope you will go read some of them.)

We celebrate the invasion of a continent by hapless religious fearmongers. Thanksgiving was a show of how the Pilgrims were treated - but instead? Did they reciprocate? No, they trembled and fought with the actual owners of the land. The reason that the Pilgrims left Europe was dictated by the churches of other structure - it meant that the precepts were not honored. Pilgrims lost rights and were imprisoned or punished in other ways — To be reasonable? They were not in general executed. During this period, religious wars blossomed, and many died - The 30 Years War, the removal of Catholics from Tudor England, the Inquisition, and minor skirmishes of that ilk. But the Pilgrims avoided that by migrating first to the Netherlands, where they were treated with care, then to the New World where they imposed their victimhood on others.

In fact, the very fears shouted aloud in our society are based entirely on those imposed on the real owners of this New World. We see that the diseases brought here by those ultra-responsible colonials, killed those who lived here. We see that the belief that these were mere savages (didn’t speak the language of the invaders; didn’t subscribe to a vision of a god entity; didn’t wear the same clothes; and more and more and more.) Those dismissives are what the victims of the Right see now. The concept of multiple languages distresses them. Mono-lingualism is seen as the only possible plan. (Note: I interacted with a MAGA yesterday who explained to me that the immigrants of yesteryear were fine. Those people spoke our language. Those people spoke our culture. Today we get people who do not even speak English. Sigh.)

The Bible they claim to fully understand was not written in English - it was written in an array of ancient languages and gathered together over centuries. The pieces gathered came from many ancient worlds - Sumerian, Assyrian, Greek, Latin, and many others. Even more disturbing is that the King James Version had a serious political basis ordered by the Stuart king to set forth the world James wished to see portrayed. As I discuss this with modern Christians, it is often surprising to me that those Christians do not understand that the Bible exists in more than a thousand individual translations. Therefore, when they bring up their disputes, I ask which version of the Bible they use as their basis of argument. The understanding is that there is ONE bible and nothing else. Naturally, that is false. And the interpretation requires these Christians to invoke the precepts of our world. That is in opposition to the world in other ages.

Belief in any religion, at all, that is not evangelicalism is another strike. So those hordes of invaders over our borders? Pretty much in that alignment. And what is the appropriate punishment? Removal to a concentration camp - some form of slavery - terrorist attacks, and more. The question then becomes why? And does being a victim entitle you to redress? And if your actions result in diminished respect? Are you more a victim than you were before?

There are some details of the ‘New World’ that are now overlooked. Colonization by Europeans occurred in both North and South America. We now see that those of the Southern continent are regarded as lesser. Those who came to the continents were relatively similar - and now based on specific territorial inhabitance some are lesser? Please do explain that. It is based a bit on the social construct of race. Race was created to explain that people come in a variety of colors. Actual science has proven that no such genetic test exists. A human race? Yes. But other forms of that? Color does not hold up as a division. Race was a simplistic explanation. It is to some extent as simplistic as the argument and dismissal of intersex. Realistically? Some humans are born with sexual organs or other characteristics of both sexes. That is reality.

And in the end, all of this takes us to a single point - the Golden Rule or Punishment because you feel that you are a victim?