We can learn much about mutation-fed atheism by a comparison with Real Jewish morality.
Evolution remains speculation.
Yet our morality is based upon it.
Remember it has not one scintilla of proof as has been admitted by the true scientists, yet billions base their values on this myth.
No one has found a single beneficial mutation in the universe.
I can write that ad infinitum and you still will not believe it so I might as well do so.
Why be logical?
Why Jewish Morality?: Establishing Judaism’s Authenticity
Conversely, we can establish the authenticity and accuracy of Judaism after a full judicial review based entirely on non-Jewish sources beyond any reasonable doubt.
This creates an enormous dichotomy because old fashioned Abrahamic religion is the source of nearly all of our ‘values’ – basic, old-fashioned ‘decency’.
So we are trapped between the lures of evolution’s ‘amorality’ and our historic post-Christian ‘morality’.
Are we to be altruistic and ‘kind’ or is that absolute nonsense and anti-St Charlie’s ‘Law’ of Evolution?
The Evolution of Moral Decency
Even ‘moral decency’ has carefully removed all those things that might limit our physical pleasures but, otherwise, the broader ideals of being a ‘good’ ‘moral’ individual are embedded in our post-Christian post-Jewish world.
Like it or not, the honest, intelligent and logical Jew is faced with a real problem.
The case for his discarded religion – Real Judaism – is water-tight.
Learned Jews steeped in the Talmud have known this for millennia.
He cannot change himself to start observing Jewish Law.
That would be utterly ridiculous.
The Non-Woke Nature of Jewish Morality
But what of its morality??
Talk about non-woke!!
Judaism accepts only a morality which does not rely on transient values.
Without the imperative of the Sinai Argument and all the inevitable non-Jewish documentary, archaeological, historical evidence, there is no authoritative morality.
Make it up as you go along.
Why not?
Why be a decent sort of chap??
That’s just hubris and hypocrisy.
Comparing Ancient Codes and Modern Consensus
Even Hammurabi’s Code was merely a means of creating a disciplined cohesive society with altruism limited to utility.
There was no spiritual imperative.
Today’s consensus of morality is very similar – with a good helping of political rectitude.
The great god – Evolution – blesses such mortalities.
They are that of survival.
The Unique Plane of Sinai Morality
The morality given at Sinai is in a different plane entirely, creating a personal religious obligation to follow all the laws – whether religious, civil or criminal or merely ‘moral’ – entirely immune to human foibles or fashions.
An observant Jew feeds his animal before himself not from kind-heartedness, but because the Torah says he must.
He returns his enemy’s lost item not from a vague societal impulse or guilt but because the Torah says he must.
He must never make his wife unhappy because the Torah says he must not.
Yes, of course, not every observant Jew does the right thing every time but his life is centred on trying so to do – and quintessentially, this is a religious obligation.
The Trap of Knowledgeable Jews
The knowledgeable Jew is, yes, ‘trapped’ by Sinai et al into knowing his role and duties.
There is no faith.
There is logically no wriggle room.
You can of course ignore and disobey but you cannot find a way of arguing your way out of it.
We have proven that.
If you disagree please try to do so.
As mentioned, millions have tried it for 3000 years.
Idealist Yet Realistic Jewish Morality
Jewish morality is ‘idealist’ but realistic about Man’s limitations.
That which secular Jews will never know is that we Jews were clearly the first real cynics, sceptics and agnostics.
We rejected paganism.
Rejected idols.
Rejected magic.
We have rejected blind faith.
Therefore we must reject evolution.
We accepted Judaism and its morality only because you cannot be cynical about that which you witness personally.
Sinai is the foundation of every aspect of Judaism.
Altruism in Judaism
Further, Jewish morality requires altruism far beyond that necessary for communal functionality.
That which is truly shocking, to the modern world, about Judaism is that I must be ‘decent, honourable, kind, tolerant, civilised … etc. etc.’ absolutely not because these are ‘good’ universal values – but because I am commanded so to be.
The Golden Dictum and Its Command
I must ‘treat my fellow human only as I would want to be treated’.
This ‘golden’ dictum of Hillel the Elder, often attributed to others, was an answer given to a sarcastic pagan.
The latter offered to convert if Hillel could sum up Judaism while the pagan stood on one foot.
Hillel quietly replies, ‘Do not do to others that which is hateful to you – now, go away and learn.’
But, vitally, again, the ultimate reason that we must follow this and all the attendant morality is because we are commanded so to act.
We do not have a man-made, reasonable, logical morality.
We have already discussed that this does not exist.
The Chain from Sinai
So, my only reason for behaving in any way is because I heard my father tell me that he heard his father tell him that his father told him ….. that we were told this at Sinai.
The reasons for our laws may be beyond our grasp or may be incredibly clear and ‘acceptable’ to my tiny mind, but as they are from Sinai they absolutely bind me.
The atheists scream that this leads to blind inhumanity.
A person surely must remain the final arbitrator of his actions.
With only pure faith and no palpable proof of Sinai, this scream is correct.
Hypotheticals on Human Arbitration
But think for a moment – if your environment, upbringing and most basic values teach you to round up all Germans and Poles and starve them and torture them to death, then as the final arbitrator you must do what is correct.
It seems impossible to imagine that anything like this could happen.
But let’s pretend that an entire society decided genocide was correct and justifiable.
Then as final arbitrators each individual would do just that or certainly support such noble efforts.
Of course it is unimaginable – which humans could do that?
But just imagine.
Evolution’s View on Morality
So mutationalists scream in vain.
Evolution established beyond their doubt – a very low level – that there cannot be any morality.
We are all animals and must behave in the best interests of our survival – whatever the cost to other humans or animals.
That is the only measure.
Yes, of course, you can try to argue that being ‘nice’ is a survival need because we feel good about it and it binds humans into families and societies that survive.
But that is no more than we see amongst baboons or wild dogs.
We never see being soft on those outside as being advantageous.
Indeed this is one of St Charlie’s own observations.
It may ‘erroneously’ result from the need for bonding within a group, he writes in his Nazi ‘Decent of Man’.
It cannot spill outside.
Very rarely a leopard might ‘adopt’ a lost gazelle calf.
But before the humans have all said, “Aah”, the gazelle will be abandoned or eaten.
Yes, dogs are hard-wired to fit into a pack and therefore adopt humans as that pack.
But that is merely observed subjugation to pack leaders being misplaced.
And this is ultimately to that dog’s disadvantage.
It will live the same empty, meaningless existence as it human captors – and in Brooklyn.
It could have died of hunger and disease as a wolf in Alaska.
The Divine Imperative
But we have the relevant evidence.
We have the inevitable, irrefutable evidence – with proof beyond any reasonable doubt of a Divine imperative.
His instructions must outweigh everything.
Faith religions whether Christianity or atheism lack this completely.
Now the Jew must investigate fully and utterly exhaustively that Judaism’s instructions are truly Divine, but after that, how can there be a choice?
Whether Divine morality ‘rings’ true for me or not, is irrelevant.
Demanding that I am the final arbitrator is utterly illogical and a self-congratulatory deception.
Those noble Germans and Poles, cannibals and the Catholic priests at the inquisition were their own final arbitrators.
They chose to have blind faith.
This is why I discuss here Christianity’s own definition of faith.
Understanding Faith in Christianity
That faith was their own blind decision to obey and have ‘faith’.
They could equally decide to have no faith.
Yes, they can and do indeed keep to that faith despite torture and death.
But again that is a quasi-emotional decision – an inner command to themselves to be strong enough to die for that which they have decided to believe.
Nothing is based on their reason or rationality.
This is accepted by all faith’s philosophies.
In the study of theology and philosophy, the specific element of faith that constitutes a person’s decision to believe in the absence of judicial or empirical proof is actually identified as the act of the will.
You will yourself to have ‘faith’.
Of course, they may add that your god influences you to adopt that faith, as a gift.
But you need faith in that presumption.
So the will forces the brain to accept.
While the intellect perceives a proposition, it is the will that commands the mind to assent to a ‘truth’ when there is no judicial or scientific evidence.
This is faith.
This volitional component distinguishes faith from “knowledge”.
The latter is where the mind is compelled by the sheer force of evidence, such as in mathematical or immediate sensory observations.
Christian philosophy very transparently describes faith as “an act of the intellect assenting to the divine truth at the command of the will”.
The intellect remains in a state of deliberation because there is no proof.
The will must intervene to “tip the scales,” choosing to trust in the authority of the revealer rather than waiting for a mathematical demonstration.
Judaism’s Reliance on Proof
Now of course Judaism never had this fundamental problem because we never ever relied on faith.
We constantly repeat Maimonides’ famous –
‘The Jews did not believe in Moses because of the miracles … If one believes in something because of miracles, he may suspect that they were performed through trickery ….. We believe in Moses because of what happened at Sinai. Our own eyes saw, not a stranger’s, our own ears heard, and not another’s… The Revelation at Sinai is the only real proof that Moses’ prophecy was true and above suspicion …’
We relied on ocular proof and the unbroken chain of human testimony from Sinai that averred to this within our own family.
We of course thoroughly and very cynically scrutinise this elsewhere.
It is the heart of my Book One – ‘Let’s Really Try To Disprove Judaism’.
Obviously I did not succeed – to disprove – otherwise I would have told no one and crept away.
If this human judicial evidence fails then we are just like all faiths.
.
Types of Mental Assent
To understand why the will is the deciding factor, scholars distinguish between different types of mental assent.
“Judicial proof” or “demonstration” leaves the mind no choice; one cannot “choose” to disbelieve that 2+2=4 once the terms are understood.
However, in matters of faith, the evidence is considered “non-compelling.”
Paul Tillich, in his seminal work Dynamics of Faith, argues that faith is a state of “ultimate concern,” an act of the “total personality” that involves the will to risk everything on a possibility that cannot be verified by the scientific method.
All faiths are based upon this and all cry that their faith is different because they do have ‘proof’.
None has ever produced any relevant, coherent judicial evidence that a court would accept.
The volitional element is often described as the “venture of faith.”
Because there is a lack of sight, the act of believing becomes a moral and personal choice rather than a mere cognitive recognition.
This is why faith is categorized as a “virtue” in classical ethics; it requires the exercise of the will to remain committed to a truth that is not perpetually obvious.
Philosophical Defenses of Faith
In the 19th century, William James provided a psychological and philosophical defense of this volitional element in his essay ‘The Will to Believe.’
James argued that in cases where an option is “live, momentous, and forced,” and cannot be decided on intellectual grounds, the “passional nature” (the will and emotions) not only may but must decide.
This perspective posits that waiting for “judicial proof” before committing to a faith is itself a volitional decision—a choice to remain skeptical—which may result in missing out on the truth entirely.
He is actually being perfectly logical and honest but in being so he is actually dismissing faith as being a firm basis for anything.
He says rather ridiculously that you ‘must’ have faith – it is a virtue because it is irrational.
This is playing into the hands of all atheists.
Similarly, Søren Kierkegaard emphasized the “leap of faith,” suggesting that the very lack of objective certainty is what makes faith valuable.
If there were judicial proof, the “leap” would be unnecessary, and the personal, volitional commitment that defines a relationship with the Divine would be replaced by a cold, disinterested acceptance of facts.
This is like saying the egg is rotten but we still should eat it because … … Well, we just should!!!!!!!!!!
The Mockery of Faiths
This is why most of the world mocks faiths.
And all of the world is convinced that Judaism is the same as all the others.
And so are you.
I cannot succeed – what about that super cheese MacBurger at the match on Saturday afternoon?
But presuming a higher sense of purpose, and given the evidence in this book, given that we have been provided with a morality and given that we can apply it accurately, our moral landscape is uncluttered – even by super Mac… .
Our morality is deep and unadulterated by emotion.
Talmudic Debate on Morality
There is a famous Talmudic passage discussing two men crossing a desert.
Only one has water and this is only enough for him to survive.
Should he share and hope for a miracle?
Should he give it all to his fellow?
‘No’ is the answer: that is suicide and forbidden.
Can one steal it from the other, pleading that he is saving his own life?
No, of course not.
So what would be a ‘moral’ answer?
Rabbi Akiva debates this with an unknown ‘Ben Petura’.
The argument of Ben Petura, who says that they should share the water, is stunning.
He says this is better than one witnessing the other’s death.
This is nonsense.
First, it is suicide and secondly, obviously, sharing the water means that finally one must still witness the other’s death – which he knows will shortly be followed by his own.
Rabbi Akiva, who rules that he with the water should keep it and drink it all, regretfully insists that this cannot be controlled by human feelings or hope for a miracle.
We must simply follow the Torah.
It is forbidden to commit suicide.
Full stop.
Feelings do not come into it.
Emotional vs. Torah Morality
This is precisely the problem.
‘Emotional morality’ is no morality; it is an anathema to the Jew.
What of that innocent little Muslim child unknowingly carrying explosives into a crowded area: do we gun her down?
As to the concentration camps – the true moral German believed with blind faith that Jews were vermin who simply had to be annihilated.
This was not immorality; it is doing the world’s dirty work for it.
The 8 million other camp victims were also fully justifiable – invalids, traitors, spies, enemies of Der Vaterland.
Ask any 85 – 90 year old German.
I have.
Can there perhaps be a morality even in that?
Remember its creators read and lauded Darwin’s ‘The Descent of Man’.
But they are not describable as men.
In other words, a morality can be constructed that justifies the ‘worst’ behaviour as well as the ‘best’.
This happens when we humans define good and evil.
No one can accuse the Vatican of being ‘immoral’ in torturing and murdering up to 300,000,000 (stet!!) innocents over two millennia.
Historical Atrocities and Morality
Check it out.
‘The Church of Rome has shed more innocent blood than any other institution that has ever existed among mankind’, wrote W. E. H. Lecky, ‘History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe’.
Another – J. A. Wylie’s ‘The History of Protestantism – Crusades against the Abigenses et al’ has plenty of gory evidence.
Obviously the stories of the Jews and the crusaders are all false Zionist whining.
They gave us chocolate as they quietly passed through the ghettos.
The heaps of corpses with crosses daubed in blood on top were imaginary.
It was doing this for the highest morality and the greater glory of the church.
It was saving their souls.
The holy task was not meant to be sanitised and bloodless, nor without pain and horror for the victims.
This was the entire plan.
Sources of Western Morality
Most people with a western ‘post-Christian’ education find this an anathema to any morality.
But from where do they source their morality.
Catholicism?
Protestantism?
Common sense?
The Law of the (pink and fluffy) Jungle?
Do what you want – just don’t make me look.
Distinctive Jewish Morality
Utterly differently, Jewish morality flows from neither blind faith nor idealism nor necessity.
Our scholars are the ultimate sceptics and accept nothing on the face of it.
We have argued out the authenticity of the Torah in every generation.
Also, we have argued out the morality of the Torah in every generation.
We have argued out all the alternatives in every generation.
And have asked every question and answered it, researched and proved every minute detail and we constantly rehearse the questions and arguments, their challenges and refutations.
Our morality was given at Sinai.
Evolution as a Fig Leaf
YOUR FIG LEAF
But evolution constituted a new element – a new fig leaf – of tissue paper – but just about enough to pretend that we are all properly, morally attired.
For evolution is doubly attractive.
It not only helps to explain away a Creator (nearly), it establishes and rationalises Caucasian Man’s supremacy.
Even better and, more importantly, it validates his worse behaviour.
The upper class, public school – Darwin’s clade – become untouchable.
Every superior white male is a self-proclaimed perfect god.
The fittest are meant to survive.
It is our birth right.
Whatever we do to that end is only natural and forgivable.
We are at the top because we are meant to be.
Elitism is the natural order.
Ergo, that shabby little rich boy’s ‘The Descent of Man’.
If I come from an animal, what can you expect of me when not controlled by my self-interest or public image?
Further, if I am hurting no one, what does it matter?
Morality – schmorality!
Ironically, this very clade is annihilating itself by selfish childfree greed – and regrettably it is taking the rest of the planet with it.
Irony of Self-Annihilation
As stated, from our point of view, Real Judaism can easily encompass all proven scientific facts.
Elsewhere you can read the details proving this.
I am speechless at the sight of intelligent – otherwise sane – men actually believing in it.
Mutation is different however and above has been exposed for what it really is.
This astonishing degree of self-deception can only be explained as an obsessive need to find order in an amoral existence, or, as stated, justification for heinous elitism.
Atheists and Evolution
For atheists, not only is the world explained and put into neat little boxes, but also a self-perpetuating oligarchy of their own clones is legitimised.
Heroes of the games, they are paradigms of the fittest survivors – famous, sophisticated, Caucasian males at the top of the intelligenzia pack.
Darwin has justified the worst of them preening themselves and preying, or magnanimously not preying, on the rest of us.
Self-fulfilment and liberation have become gods.
The only boundary might be political rectitude – being a decent chap.
And they scorn Wokeism.
And we really should not be concerned by this perhaps.
The Absence of Fig Leaves
Figs do not grow in the Arctic.
And then?
No leaves.
And then?
Meet a close friend of mine – Xnuit – a seal hunter (and tourist guide) – living on the Arctic Circle.
Neither the Inuit nor the seals they spear (for the tourists) feel any sense of outrage whether the spear finds or misses its mark.
There will be pain or disappointment – but no more than that.
There are no moral overtones.
The noble savage, untutored and unaffected, accepts whatever lot he draws.
Until he meets a missionary, this wisdom saves him from screaming into the wind.
Xnuit’s mind is not cluttered by our false expectations.
But for us, the Snowflake generation, we need our fig leaf.
Real Judaism whips it off.
This is yet another reason for paying exorbitant fees to some shrink.
And if Life does not deliver – then you must blame … well someone, or Someone.
Leave a Reply