* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Macro-Analysis Of Paine's Ironic Critique Of Christian Establishment, Dogma
(Apollonian, 2 Dec 16)
(Apollonian, 2 Dec 16)
Considering Paine's critique of Christianity, we see he well upholds the Holy Spirit for reason, honesty, and integrity as he opposes the utterly corrupt, anti-Christ Vatican officialdom and mystic doctrine styled in Christianity, though Paine does make an egregious error as he totally overlooks the actual story-line to Christian literature, esp. for the dialectic of Christ (= truth, Gosp. JOHN 14:6) vs. Pharisaic satanism and lies (JOHN 8:44), Christian truth necessarily founded in Aristotelian objectivity vs. satanic (extreme) subjectivism. Thus Paine fails for the substance of Christian literature, entirely pre-occupied w. method (reason vs. mysticism/superstition).
Paine failed to see, as Martin Luther did not fail, the Vatican officialdom had become simply another and/or new Pharisaic establishment, mystic, subjectivistic, hence satanic, an enemy of Holy Spirit of reason, honesty, integrity, which reason, Paine upheld so nobly.
So regarding the full and proper philosophic task and analysis, Paine fell short, seeing only to method (reason vs. mysticism), failing for the basic substance, the metaphysical premise of objective reality vs. Pharisaic (extreme) subjectivism.
Most interesting then is that present culture and society continues for this complete failure, as of Paine's, for Christian philosophy and substance, so many people imagining that Christianity and Judaism are mere variations/versions of one another rather than ABSOLUTE OPPOSITES and Hegelian-style anti-theses.
Further, for Paine also the Christian lesson for ethics is lost, so many people believing, evidently, Christianity preaches surrender, passivity, even suicidal defeatism, as for example, Nietzsche--thus the horrific misconception of society which only benefits satanists who now so much control and dominate the society, the central-bankers who want to genocide the people and are quite well on their way to success by the looks of things.
But the real Christianity is still well capable of resurrection, though it will probably require a back-ground of horrendous tragedy to supply motivation for the people of USA if not inspiration.
So if we compare the two critics of establishment Christianity, Tom Paine and Martin Luther, we see Paine well upheld the Holy Spirit for Christian rationalist method, though he mistakenly imagined mysticism/subjectivism was part of the real, proper Christian substance. Luther saw further to the substance, how Christianity had become corrupt and Pharisaic. But Luther didn't see all the way for proper Christian substance and analysis, unfortunately.
Heidegger was yet another who strove for a great macro-analysis of Christianity in philosophic terms, and his failure was instructive, along similar lines to Nietzsche. But Paine surely did the best job, most useful and informative for humanity and society, so outstanding for method, even if failing for that basic substance.
I'm glad I studied Homer who provided the very best comparison for aesthetic literature by which to grasp and assess our dear Christianity. Thus Paine was a failure, everything considered, but instructive and informative nonetheless, much like Luther and Nietzsche, Nietzsche so entertaining.