SPLINA ULTRAGIATĂ A ZIONULUI

Șalom și salut, necredincioșilor, fiarelor, și Paisanoviților! Bine ați venit la casa căinței. Priviți coafura zionistă, refractară a Babei Z cum scînteiează, în timp ce ea izgonește pe Curvele Gramsciene, Porcii Fasciști, Papii din Laodicea, și Fiarele prădătoare ale Islamului, dîndu-i pe Mîna Atotputernică a Dumnezeului lui Israel. După ce se va termina de biciuit, se vor servi pișcoturi gramsciene și lapte de capră în salon. Vă rugăm și să gustați din plăcinta ocupației zioniste. L’Chaim!

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Sherab Zangpo: The Problem of Evil ~ Chapter Two

METALLICA: AM I EVIL?

PART TWO (of three)

And there will be a part three, that I have already written.
The first of the three parts can be found HERE.

But I can't publish the next part without a double premise that is much needed because today, unfortunately, the prejudices spread by nihilism live and blossom in everyone’s mind and the discussion of any major philosophical issue is inevitably going to clash with “ideas” that we consider too familiar and absolutely safe but that have been instead subtly manipulated and perverted.

Two points.

One:
the penetration of the nihilist propaganda has gone so deep in everyone's mind that today any NON-nihilist framing of the "problem of evil" will cause (nearly) everybody to scream bloody murder.

Two:
the Light shining from the scriptural foundation of the single most important theoretical point of the Tradition concerning the "problem of evil" is so strong that anyone could at first run for shelter (for...a shadow, maybe; for the shadow, probably).

In other words: the "problem of evil" - as you know it from the "new common sense" with which nihilism has brainwashed everyone - claims to be strong (i.e., theoretically devastating for the Tradition itself), but the Traditional answer is so much stronger that I invite the Reader to use prudence.

A very clarifying example of the first of the two points is mostly evident in the last sixty years’ discussion about the Holocaust: it would be pointless and impossible to try here any synthesis of such debate but on the whole it must be highlighted that any strictly traditionalist position in the debate has been repeatedly labeled as “insensitive”.

For the “sensibility” created by the nihilist propaganda, a strictly traditionalist approach to the theological discussion about the Holocaust is “insensitive” because the traditionalist will firmly state that the Holocaust has been the work of satan (maybe even the worst work of satan ever) and, AS SUCH, it does NOT imply any discussion about “where was God ?”.

It is easy to understand that the subject of the debate is the cause of so much moral and personal suffering that the traditionalist approach sounds “cold”, too “rational”, and somewhat lacking of the due respect for the Victims.

It is not so, of course, but it is understandable that if the question of the debate about the Holocaust is “Why God didn’t break through the finite and didn’t save the Jews ?” the traditionalist position has been and is to reject the question; but that’s because the question is simply wrong, although dictated by a wonderful love and by suffering compassion.

Before you, dear Reader, approach the next part of this series about the “problem of evil”, you will have to reflect on this point and put it in perspective with what I have already written in the first part of the discussion.

The second point on which I want to call your attention is Genesis 44:10.
King James: “let it be according unto your words”

In my personal translation from the Hebrew text: “As per your words, so it will be”.

Now, this point too cannot be reduced to a short abstract, but it is you, gentle Reader, who will have to make the effort to remain faithful to the strategic Principle that the Scripture highlights here.

It is evident that the common nihilist perspective is here completely subverted and that this is a point of capital importance when discussing the “problem of evil”: any discussion that forgets this Principle will be doomed to absolute, complete, and pure meaninglessness, because it will subvert the Truth.

As you can see, both my premises, both these points, hinge on you, Reader: you must be able to remain absolutely faithful to a truthful idea of God: in both cases in fact, but more remarkably in the second, the idea of God remains the idea of Infinite and Perfect Love and the discussion of evil is directly, and even aggressively, moved to the human side of the problem. With the second point, the Principle dictates even more than that, it dictates the necessity to understand an idea of God whose Infinite Power HALTS at the border of Free Will. At least in the sense (see both the first and the third chapters of this same discussion) that it is no longer IMMEDIATELY present.

And Genesis 44:10 calls for a GREAT role of the “Free Will”.

This is probably the highest and most explicit Call that the Tradition ever transmitted.

The Infinite Love rains Infinite Miracles on all, but your words (in the full sense of Word, your true thoughts) will allow you to receive it or not, the true words of the world will decide if humans plunge from hell to hell or not.

And before you read in these sentences something that I didn’t say, I quote the Kotzker Rebbe who said : “If I had ten persons ready to come with me on top of the roof and ready to scream that God is Great, the Messiah would come NOW.”

There are secrets in this sentence, at least as many as in the original Principle.

I purposely use a provocative language to allow you a sound reflection and to unleash a serious debate.

With these two points in mind, and without forgetting what I said in the first article, you have a chance of reading the third part without being hindered by the usual nihilistic perspective that chokes any serious thinking.
~ Sherab Zangpo