>>13151591>How the fuck is something evolved on our bodies potentially worse for us? As if nature intended we mutilate our bodiesI'll repost a thread I made elsewhere:
I'm not sure why it took so long to hit me, but it would seem the "Abrahamic" religions aren't "a" disease, they are disease. The Bible is a set of allegories of the diseased body and the diseased mind, they describe incomplete beings (which may constitute parts of a greater, but fragmented mind). It's right in the name, Braham becomes A-Braham, without Brahma. A being apart from nature, creation, and truth, and therefore striving to thwart its natural order. Alien, unnatural. Like a golem. The Bible describes the developmental stages of that new being (similar to how one would describe early childhood development), that new order, which would overtake the old. And indeed, it did. Hence why Abrahamic religions tend to include apects of "completion". Tikkum olam, and others. Yet it's a doomed design, a prison, a labyrinth with no escape. Hence following their unification, they try to construct the tower of Babel, already expecting they would be thwarted by a greater force. There is no way out. And so perhaps it cycles over and over, no different than the patterns of a post-traumatic labyrinth in a human mind. This fragmented greater "mind" begins to come together, to wake up, and emerge, only to be cast back into ignorance and scattered yet again. Either way, the parallels with the architecture of the mind and early childhood development are striking. As above, so below.
>Short versionGod demands the foreskin be removed as a sacrifice because he turned Abraham into the first of an invasive species meant to overthrow the existing natural order. Judaism, the mere Jewish concept, has carried on for millennia and done so quite completely.
