The Difference Between Dalrock and Heartistes & Great Men on the Great Books for Men!
While Heartiste understands that the true Christian context hath been destroyed and that game is one of the only ways to survive with women until things change, Dalrock wants to replace the true Christian context with gamey gamezlzlzozo, which is why he stipulates that “Christians need game,” as opposed to stating, “Christians need Christ who came to Fulfill the Law of Moses (Which Dalrock falsely teaches that Christ came to abolish).” Because women have violated the Christian contract by leading with their butt and gina tinzgzlzlzozz and fornicatiinzg instead of following God, Man, and Honor, Dalrock commands all the men to man up, get in line, and learn to serve those butt and gina tinzgzlzlzo so as to keep the women from stealing the children and their assets. In the name of Churchianity, Dalrock has thrown in the towel on Natural Law, God, Christ, Homer, Plato, Socrates, and Moses, and placed his faith in gaming da tinzgzzlzo butztz zztzzonzzlzl.
Heartiste does not state that “Christians need game,” but rather he points out that with all the butetehxtxing fiuckcingz suckingz going oionz zlzlozoz with women fornicatingz forniiciatzing and acting on butt and ginata tainzgzlzzoozo, women are simply not behaving in a Christian manner. While Dalrock wishes to rewrite the Christian contract, so that it includes and exalts his gamey gamezlzozo and sevresz butt and gingz itnglzlzoz, Heartsiste sees that women have broken the Christian contract, and thus, all bets are off. Rahther than teaching the Law of Moses which Jesus Came to Fulfill, Dalrock teaches da law of da butt and gina tingzlzolzozo, while teaching that Jesus came to abolish the Law of Moses, to make way for da rule of da dalorckkain tinzgzlzlozoz.
Long story short, while HEartistse sees that for men and women to kneel before god, women must also kneel before god, Dalrock stipulates that it is OK for women to rise and follow thier butt and gina tainzgzlzlzlzoz, but then men must stay kneeling, not only before god, but before the womenz butt and ginz tingzlzozoz tinzgzzlozoozozlzooz omgz zlzozolzolzoozz.
And while Dalrock continues his long march ogf deconstruction and destruction through the halls of westerrn civilizationz, exalting in his purple robe and gamey bathoils and chainsz in the midstz of his flock of fatherless franakfartian followers who have flocked to Dalrock to learn of glorious da butt and gina tingzlzlzozo which replaced the law of moses which dalrock tells them jesus came to abolish, here is what the GReat Menz said abdout da Great Booksz for Mensz:
John Adams: These are what are called revolution principles. They are the first principles of Aristotle and Plato, of Livy and Cicero, of Sidney, Harrington, and Locke—the principles of nature and eternal reason.
Thomas Jefferson: When young any composition pleases which unites a little sense, some imagination, and some rhythm, in doses however small. But as we advance in life these things fall off one by one, and I suspect that we are left at last with only Homer and Virgil, and perhaps Homer alone. –Thoughts on Prosody circa 1820
Matthew Arnold: When I say, the translator of Homer should all be penetrated by a sense of four qualities of this author: that he is eminently rapid; that he is eminently plain and direct both in the evolution of his thought and in the expression of it, that is, both in his syntax and in his words; that he is eminently plain and direct in the substance of his thought, that is, in his matter and ideas; and, finally, that he is eminently noble.
William F. Buckley: The numbing, benumbing thought that we owe nothing to Plato and Aristotle, nothing to the prophets who wrote the Bible, nothing to the generations who fought for freedoms activated in the Bill of Rights; we are basket cases of ingratitude, so many of us. We cannot hope to repay in kind what Socrates gave us, but to live [our] lives without any sense of obligation … is spiritually atrophying.” -William F. Buckley, Jr., speech at a testimonial dinner, on receipt of the Julius Award from the School of Public Administration, UCLA, March 21, 1990.
Sir Isaac Newton: If I have seen further, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants. (Newton demonstrates both the West’s classical respect for the Greats who came before, and the primal aspect central to the West’s heroic advancement—the pioneering spirit that values Truth over convention, while yet honoring the convention. Newton cites Aristotle and Plato, who were mentored by Scorates, who was exalted by Homer: Amicus Plato — amicus Aristoteles — magis amica veritas — Plato is my friend — Aristotle is my friend — but my greatest friend is truth.)
Jeremiah 6:16: Stand at the crossroads and look;
and ask for the ancient paths,
ask where is the good way, and walk therein,
and you shall find rest for your souls. –KJVB (Dalrock teahcesz Jeuss came to abolish this)
Percy Bysshe Shelley: The poems of Homer and his contemporaries were the delight of infant Greece; they were the elements of that social system which is the column upon which all succeeding civilization has reposed. Homer embodied the ideal perfection of his age in human character; nor can we doubt that those who read his verses were awakened to an ambition of becoming like to Achilles, Hector, and Ulysses: the truth and beauty of friendship, patriotism, and persevering devotion to an object, were unveiled to the depths in these immortal creations: the sentiments of the auditors must have been refined and enlarged by a sympathy with such great and lovely impersonations, until from admiring they imitated, and from imitation they identified themselves with the objects of their admiration. Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822): Defence of Poetry, 1819
Dante: Virgil—O light and honor of all other poets/ may my long study and the intense love that made me search your volume serve me now./ You are my master and my author. –The Inferno. I 82-85. (As Virgil mentored Dante, so too did Homer mentor Virgil, as the first half of the Aeneid resembled the Odyssey, and the second half followed the Iliad)
Dante on Aristotle:
When I had lifted up my brows a little,
I beheld Aristotle—Master of those who know,
Sitting with his philosophic family.
All gaze upon him, and all do him honour.
There I beheld both Socrates and Plato,
Who nearer him before the others stand;
Democritus, who puts the world on chance,
Diogenes, Anaxagoras, and Thales,
Zeno, Empedocles, and Heraclitus;
Of qualities I saw the good collector,
Hight Dioscorides; and Orpheus saw I,
Tully and Livy, and moral Seneca,
Euclid, geometrician, and Ptolemy,
Galen, Hippocrates, and Avicenna,
Averroes, who the great Comment made.
I cannot all of them portray in full,
Because so drives me onward the long theme,
That many times the word comes short of fact.
—Dante
Socrates: Employ your time in improving yourself by other men’s writings, so that you shall gain easily what others have labored hard for.
Thomas Edison: Tom Paine has almost no influence on present-day thinking in the United States because he is unknown to the average citizen. Perhaps I might say right here that this is a national loss and a deplorable lack of understanding concerning the man who first proposed and first wrote those impressive words, ‘the United States of America.’ But it is hardly strange. Paine’s teachings have been debarred from schools everywhere and his views of life misrepresented until his memory is hidden in shadows, or he is looked upon as of unsound mind. We never had a sounder intelligence in this Republic. He was the equal of Washington in making American liberty possible. Where Washington performed Paine devised and wrote. The deeds of one in the Weld were matched by the deeds of the other with his pen. –The Philosophy of Thomas Paine, 1925
Ludwig von Mises: The essential characteristic of Western civilization that distinguishes it from the arrested and petrified civilizations of the East was and is its concern for freedom from the state. The history of the West, from the age of the Greek polis down to the present-day resistance to socialism, is essentially the history of the fight for liberty against the encroachments of the officeholders.
Cicero: Nescire autem quid ante quam natus sis acciderit, id est semper esse puerum. Quid enim est aetas hominis, nisi ea memoria rerum veterum cum superiorum aetate contexitur? (Not to know what happened before you were born is to be a child forever. For what is the time of a man, except it be interwoven with that memory of ancient things of a superior age?)
John Adams: I should as soon think of closing all my window-shutters to enable me to see, as of banishing the classics to improve Republican ideas.
Thomas Edison: I love great music and art, but I think ‘cubist’ songs and paintings are hideous.
Goethe: (Homer) was the most fruitful gardens of the kingdom of literature. (. . . Goethe thought profoundly about Homer. In the great congregation of Homer-enthusiasts he is perhaps the most striking in so far as he dared to compose Homeric poetry, something which, according to the theorists, should have been impossible.)
—Homer in German Classicism: Goethe, Friedrich Schlegel, Holderlin and Schelling, by JOACHM WOHLLEBEN
John Adams: Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams (in a letter to his son John Quincy Adams):
I want to have you upon Demosthenes. The plainer Authors you may learn yourself at any time. I absolutely insist upon it, that you begin upon Demosthenes and Cicero. I will not be put by. You may learn Greek from Demosthenes and Homer as well as Isocrates and Lucian—and Latin from Virgil and Cicero as well as from Phaedrus and Nepos. What should be the Cause of Aversion to Demosthenes in the World I know not, unless it is because his sentiments are wise and grand, and he teaches no frivolities. If there is no other Way, I will take you home and teach you Demosthenes and Homer myself.
Renoir: It is in the museum that one learns to paint.
Albert Einstein: Somebody who reads only newspapers and at best books of contemporary authors looks to me like an extremely near-sighted person who scorns eyeglasses. He is completely dependent on the prejudices and fashions of his times, since he never gets to see or hear anything else. And what a person thinks on his own without being stimulated by the thoughts and experiences of other people is even in the best case rather paltry and monotonous. There are only a few enlightened people with a lucid mind and style and with good taste within a century. What has been preserved of their work belongs among the most precious possessions of mankind. We owe it to a few writers of antiquity that the people of the Middle Ages could slowly extricate themselves from the superstitions and ignorance that had darkened life for more than half a milleniun. –Ideas and Opinions
Vincent Van Gogh: But my God, how beautiful Shakespeare is, who else is as mysterious as he is; his language and method are like a brush trembling with excitement and ecstasy. But one must learn to read, just as one must learn to see and learn to live.
Percy Bysshe Shelley: The poems of Homer and his contemporaries were the delight of infant Greece; they were the elements of that social system which is the column upon which all succeeding civilization has reposed. Homer embodied the ideal perfection of his age in human character; nor can we doubt that those who read his verses were awakened to an ambition of becoming like to Achilles, Hector, and Ulysses: the truth and beauty of friendship, patriotism, and persevering devotion to an object, were unveiled to the depths in these immortal creations: the sentiments of the auditors must have been refined and enlarged by a sympathy with such great and lovely impersonations, until from admiring they imitated, and from imitation they identified themselves with the objects of their admiration. Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822): Defence of Poetry, 1819
Alexander Pope: Our author’s work is a wild paradise, where, if we cannot see all the beauties so distinctly as in an ordered garden, it is only because the number of them is infinitely greater. It is like a copious nursery, which contains the seeds and first productions of every kind, out of which those who followed him have but selected some particular plants, each according to his fancy, to cultivate and beautify. If some things are too luxuriant it is owing to the richness of the soil; and if others are not arrived to perfection or maturity, it is only because they are overrun and oppressed by those of a stronger nature.
Alexander Pope on The Iliad, 1727.
Aristotle: As, in the serious style, Homer is pre-eminent among poets, for he alone combined dramatic form with excellence of imitation so he too first laid down the main lines of comedy, by dramatizing the ludicrous instead of writing personal satire. . . Unity of plot does not, as some persons think, consist in the unity of the hero. For infinitely various are the incidents in one man’s life which cannot be reduced to unity; and so, too, there are many actions of one man out of which we cannot make one action. Hence the error, as it appears, of all poets who have composed a Heracleid, a Theseid, or other poems of the kind. They imagine that as Heracles was one man, the story of Heracles must also be a unity. But Homer, as in all else he is of surpassing merit, here too- whether from art or natural genius—seems to have happily discerned the truth. In composing the Odyssey he did not include all the adventures of Odysseus- such
as his wound on Parnassus, or his feigned madness at the mustering of the host- incidents between which there was no necessary or probable connection: but he made the Odyssey, and likewise the Iliad, to center round an action that in our sense of the word is one. As therefore,
in the other imitative arts, the imitation is one when the object imitated is one, so the plot, being an imitation of an action, must imitate one action and that a whole, the structural union of the parts being such that, if any one of them is displaced or removed, the whole will be disjointed and disturbed. For a thing whose presence or absence makes no visible difference, is not an organic part of the whole. –Aristotle’s Poetics
Albert Einstein: The highest principles for our aspirations and judgements are given to us in the Jewish-Christian religious tradition. It is a very high goal which, with our weak powers, we can reach only very inadequately, but which gives a sure foundation to our aspir ations and valuations. If one were to take that goal out of out of its religious form and look merely at its purely human side, one might state it perhaps thus: free and responsible development of the individual, so that he may place his powers freely and gladly in the service of all mankind. … it is only to the individual that a soul is given. And the high destiny of the individual is to serve rather than to rule, or to impose himself in any otherway. –Ideas and Opinions
Joseph Campbell: If you’re not going to go in there and enjoy it and read, you’re not going to find the myths. If somebody just reads the newspaper every morning. If somebody just reads the newspaper every morning—if that’s his only reading, and then he gets Newsweek or something else at the end of the week—he’s not getting it. You’ve got to read. –The Hero’s Journey p. 191.
Henry David Thoreau: The student may read Homer or Aeschylus in the Greek without danger of dissipation or luxuriousness, for it implies that he in some measure emulate their heroes, and consecrate morning hours to their pages. The heroic books, even if printed in the character of our mother tongue, will always be in a language dead to degenerate times; and we must laboriously seek the meaning of each word and line, conjecturing a larger sense than common use permits out of what wisdom and valor and generosity we have. The modern cheap and fertile press, with all its translations, has done little to bring us nearer to the heroic writers of antiquity. They seem as solitary, and the letter in which they are printed as rare and curious, as ever. It is worth the expense of youthful days and costly hours, if you learn only some words of an ancient language, which are raised out of the trivialness of the street, to be perpetual suggestions and provocations. It is not in vain that the farmer remembers and repeats the few Latin words which he has heard. Men sometimes speak as if the study of the classics would at length make way for more modern and practical studies; but the adventurous student will always study classics, in whatever language they may be written and however ancient they may be. For what are the classics but the noblest recorded thoughts of man? They are the only oracles which are not decayed, and there are such answers to the most modern inquiry in them as Delphi and Dodona never gave. We might as well omit to study Nature because she is old. To read well, that is, to read true books in a true spirit, is a noble exercise, and one that will task the reader more than any exercise which the customs of the day esteem. It requires a training such as the athletes underwent, the steady intention almost of the whole life to this object. Books must be read as deliberately and reservedly as they were written. It is not enough even to be able to speak the language of that nation by which they are written, for there is a memorable interval between the spoken and the written language, the language heard and the language read. The one is commonly transitory, a sound, a tongue, a dialect merely, almost brutish, and we learn it unconsciously, like the brutes, of our mothers. . . No wonder that Alexander carried the Iliad with him on his expeditions in a precious casket. A written word is the choicest of relics. It is something at once more intimate with us and more universal than any other work of art. It is the work of art nearest to life itself. It may be translated into every language, and not only be read but actually breathed from all human lips;- not be represented on canvas or in marble only, but be carved out of the breath of life itself. The symbol of an ancient man’s thought becomes a modern man’s speech. Two thousand summers have imparted to the monuments of Grecian literature, as to her marbles, only a maturer golden and autumnal tint, for they have carried their own serene and celestial atmosphere into all lands to protect them against the corrosion of time. Books are the treasured wealth of the world and the fit inheritance of generations and nations. Books, the oldest and the best, stand naturally and rightfully on the shelves of every cottage. They have no cause of their own to plead, but while they enlighten and sustain the reader his common sense will not refuse them. Their authors are a natural and irresistible aristocracy in every society, and, more than kings or emperors, exert an influence on mankind. When the illiterate and perhaps scornful trader has earned by enterprise and industry his coveted leisure and independence, and is admitted to the circles of wealth and fashion, he turns inevitably at last to those still higher but yet inaccessible circles of intellect and genius, and is sensible only of the imperfection of his culture and the vanity and insufficiency of all his riches, and further proves his good sense by the pains which be takes to secure for his children that intellectual culture whose want he so keenly feels; and thus it is that he becomes the founder of a family. . . The works of the great poets have never yet been read by mankind, for only great poets can read them. They have only been read as the multitude read the stars, at most astrologically, not astronomically. Most men have learned to read to serve a paltry convenience, as they have learned to cipher in order to keep accounts and not be cheated in trade; but of reading as a noble intellectual exercise they know little or nothing; yet this only is reading, in a high sense, not that which lulls us as a luxury and suffers the nobler faculties to sleep the while, but what we have to stand on tip-toe to read and devote our most alert and wakeful hours to. –Walden
John Keats: Oft in one wide expanse had I been told
That deep-browed Homer ruled as his demesne;
Yet never did I breathe its pure serene
Till I heard Chapman speak out loud and bold:
Then felt I like some watcher of the skies
When a new planet swims into his ken.
—On First Looking into Chapman’s Homer, 1817.
Dante: Homer, the sovereign poet. –Divina Commedia
Victor Hugo: Homer is one of the men of genius who solve that fine problem of art—the finest of all, perhaps—truly to depict humanity by the enlargement of man: that is, to generate the real in the ideal. –William Shakespeare, Part II
Thomas Jefferson: A lively and lasting sense of filial duty is more effectually impressed on the mind of a son or daughter by reading King Lear, than by all the dry volumes of ethics, and divinity, that ever were written.
Dante: Let there be no doubt in the mind of the man who has benefited from the common heritage but does not trouble to contribute to the common good that he is failing sadly in his duty. –Monarchia 3
1887 NYT on Abrahm Lincoln: My friend went down and found the tall, smooth-shaved lawyer, to whose face, he says, no engravings or portraits do justice in its wonderful and expressive power. He was reading Homer’s Iliad, in a translation, of course. Lincoln held the book out at arm’s length after a word or two had passed, when he laughed and said: “I have made up my mind that I have got to read Homer’s Iliad,” and the quaint look which has become historical spread over his face. “You know a man might as well be out of the world as not read Homer’s Iliad.” –The Philadelphia Press, Abraham Lincoln: How He Read the Iliad, and His Fondness for Shakespeare, March 9th, 1887,
Thomas Jefferson: Shakespeare must be singled out by one who wishes to learn the full powers of the English language.
Dante and Shakespeare divide the modern world between them; there is no third. –T. S. Eliot, “Dante” (1929), from Selected Essays (1932)
Nor sequent centuries could hit
Orbit and sum of SHAKSPEARE’s wit.
—Ralph Waldo Emerson in “Solution”, from May-Day and Other Pieces (1867)
He was not of an age, but for all time!
Ben Jonson, To the Memory of my Beloved, the Author, Mr. William Shakespeare (1623)
I never quite despair and I read Shakspeare — indeed I shall I think never read any other Book much [...] I am very near Agreeing with Hazlit that Shakspeare is enough for us. –John Keats, in a letter to Benjamin Robert Haydon (11 May 1817)
He has left nothing to say about nothing or any thing.
John Keats, in a letter to John Hamilton Reynolds (22 November 1817)
At once it struck me, what quality went to form a Man of Achievement especially in Literature & which Shakespeare posessed so enormously — I mean Negative Capability, that is when man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact & reason. –John Keats, in a letter to George and Tom Keats ([21/27?] December 1817)
John Keats: Shakespeare led a life of Allegory; his works are the comments on it. (in a letter to George and Georgiana Keats (19 February 1819)
Shakespeare is not our poet, but the world’s;
Therefore on him no speech!
Walter Savage Landor, “To Robert Browning,” published in The Morning Chronicle (1845-11-22); reprinted in The Works of Walter Savage Landor (1846), vol. II
When I read Shakespeare I am struck with wonder
That such trivial people should muse and thunder
In such lovely language.
D. H. Lawrence, “When I read Shakespeare,” from Pansies (1929)
Thomas Jefferson: I read one or two newspapers a week, but with reluctance give even that time from Tacitus and Homer and so much agreeable reading. . . I feel a much greater interest in knowing what has happened two or three thousand years ago than in what is now passing.
Dr. Carl J. Richards (in The Founders and The Classics, Greece, Rome, and the American Enlightenment): Through the use of Roman analogies, William Fairfax, Washington’s mentor and surrogate father, impressed upon him “that the greatest of all achievements was, through honorable deeds, to win the applause of one’s countrymen.” . . It was customary for guests at Belvoir, the Fairfax estate, to sign their names in a register, followed by a favorite Latin quotation. . . Although the founders always endorsed classical education on utilitarian grounds, they defined “utility” in the broadest possible manner. In addition to the writing models, knowledge, and ideas which the classics furnished, the founders contended that they were an indispensible training in virtue. John Adams lectured John Quincy: “I wish to hear of your beginning Sallust, who is one of the most polished and perfect of the Roman Historians, every Period of whom, and I had almost said every Syllable and every Letter, is worth Studying. In company with Sallust, Cicero, Tacitus, and Livy, you will learn Wisdom and Virtue. You will see them represented with all the Charms which Language and Imagination can exhibit, and Vice and Folly painted in all their Deformity and Horror. You will ever remember that all the End of study is to make you a good Man and a useful Citizen. . . The connection between the classics and virtue was deeply engrained and implicitly understood. In 1778 Adams wrote regarding Arthur Lee’s sons (including Richard Henry Lee): “Their father had given them all excellent classical educations, and they were all virtuous men.” To Adams, the causal relationship between the first fact and the second was too obvious to require explanation. Such a relationship could be assumed, since the stated purpose of most classical literature, including works of history, had always been to inculcate morality. Since the inculcation of a fixed moral code is not the expressed purpose of most modern literature (perhaps because there is no longer a consenus concerning morality), modern people would be perplexed by the statement, “They all study American history, and they are all virtous people.” But to the founders, the connection between classical training and virtue was clear.” –C. J. Richard, The Founders and the Classics, Greece, Rome, and the American Enlightenment, p. 37
Nicholas Nassim Taleb: This absence of literary culture is actually a marker of future blindness because it is usually accompanied by a denigration of history, a byproduct of unconditional neomania. Outside of the niche and isolated genre of science fiction, literature is about the past. We do not learn physics or biology from medieval textbooks, but we still read Homer, Plato, or the very modern Shakespeare. We cannot talk about sculpture without knowledge of the works of Phidias, Michelangelo, or the great Canova. These are in the past, not in the future. Just by setting foot into a museum, the aesthetically minded person is connecting with the elders. Whether overtly or not, he will tend to acquire and respect historical knowledge, even if it is to reject it. And the past— properly handled, as we will see in the next section— is a much better teacher about the properties of the future than the present. To understand the future, you do not need technoautistic jargon, obsession with “killer apps,” these sort of things. You just need the following: some respect for the past, some curiosity about the historical record, a hunger for the wisdom of the elders, and a grasp of the notion of “heuristics,” these often unwritten rules of thumb that are so determining of survival. In other words, you will be forced to give weight to things that have been around, things that have survived. –Taleb, Nassim Nicholas (2012-11-27). Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder (pp. 314-315). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition.
C.J. Richard: College entrance requirements, which remained remarkably stable for almost two hundred years, mandated a basic knowledge of the classical languages. When John Winthrop’s nephew, George Downing, applied to Harvard in the mid-seventeenth century, he wa required to “understand Tully [Cicero], Viirgil, or any such classical authors, and readily to speak or write true Latin in prose and have skill in making Latin verse and be completely grounded in the Greek language.” When John Adams entered Harvard a century later, in the 1750s, Harvard demanded that he be able “extempore to read, construe, and parse Tully, Virgil, or such like common classical authors, and to write Latin in prose, and to be skilled in making Latin verse, or at least in the rules of the Prosodia, and to read, construe, and parse ordinary Greek, as in the New Testament, Isocrates, or such like, and decline the paradigms of Greek nouns and verbs.” In 1760, when John Jay entered King’ College (now Columbia), he was obliged to give a rational account of the Greek and Latin grammars, read three orations of Cicero and three books of Vrigil’s Aeneid, and translate the fist ten chapters of John into Latin. In 1774, when Alexander Hamilton chose King’s College over the College of New Jersey because Witherspoon refused to allow the impatient West Indain to move through his program at an accelerated pace, the Princteon entrance examination required “the ability to write Latin prose, translate Virgil, Cicero, and the Greek gospels, and a commensurate knowledge of Latin and Greek grammar.” Finally, in 1816, when Hoarace Mann applied for entrance to Brown University, he faced requirements which Downing would have been completely comfortable: the ability “To read accurately, construe, and parse Tully and the Greek Testament and Virgil . . .to write Latin in prose, and [to know] the rules of Prosody.” Colleges were interested in a candidate’s ability to read Latin and Greek and little else. –C.J. Richard, The Founders and the Classics, Greece, Rome, and the American Enlightenment, p. 19 (Today colleges are interested in a candidate’s ability to take on massive debt which can never be escaped from, not even by declaring bankruptcy, and little else, other than said candidate’s ability to quietly surrender to the deconstruction and debauchery of the culture and currency while going lzozzozzozlzlo.)
Finis Jennings Dake: In all His teachings, Jesus referred to the divine authority of the Old Testament (Mt. 5:17-18; 8:17; 12:40-42; Lk. 4:18-21; 10:25-28; 15:29-31; 17:32; 24:25-45; Jn. 5:39-47). He quoted the Old Testament 78 times, the Pentateuch alone 26 times. He quoted from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Jonah, Micah, and Malachi. He referred to the Old Testament as “The Scriptures,” “the word of God,” and “the wisdom of God.” The apostles quoted 209 times from the Old Testament and considered it “the oracles of God.” The Old Testament in hundreds of places predicted the events of the New Testament; and as the New Testament is the fulfillment of, and testifies to the genuineness and authenticity of the Old Testament, both Testaments must be considered together as the Word of God. –God’s Plan for Man
Socrates honored Homer in his final speech: “Someone will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which is likely to bring you to an untimely end? To him I may fairly answer: There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong – acting the part of a good man or of a bad. Whereas, according to your view, the heroes who fell at Troy were not good for much, and the son of Thetis above all, who altogether despised danger in comparison with disgrace; and when his goddess mother said to him, in his eagerness to slay Hector, that if he avenged his companion Patroclus, and slew Hector, he would die himself – “Fate,” as she said, “waits upon you next after Hector”; he, hearing this, utterly despised danger and death, and instead of fearing them, feared rather to live in dishonor, and not to avenge his friend. “Let me die next,” he replies, “and be avenged of my enemy, rather than abide here by the beaked ships, a scorn and a burden of the earth.” Had Achilles any thought of death and danger? For wherever a man’s place is, whether the place which he has chosen or that in which he has been placed by a commander, there he ought to remain in the hour of danger; he should not think of death or of anything, but of disgrace. And this, O men of Athens, is a true saying.” –Socrates’ Apology
Such is the nature of the Truly Great Men that Dalrock and his loyal flock of frankfaritain tinzgzgzlzoz-serverz must continually seek to diminish, deconstruct, and deny, calling the exalted fellowship of the Great Books for Men “noise.”
Such works are no longer taught in the university, and Dalrock never suggests that we return to the Great Books for Men nor exalted liberty and freedom, but that we simply learn game so as to serve da tinzgzlzlzlzozolzlzoz lzozozozoozozozolzozz.
These are the GReta Men Dalrock’s flock of frankfartian followersz dismiss as Pagans, even as they tranform Jesus into tingzlzlzlzo-centric Pagan deity, teaching that He came to Abolish the Law of Moses, to make way for the Rule of the Dalrockians / Voxianz tingzzlzozoozozoz.
