Reviews of Strange Religious Books: Volume I

The best book (epic poem) ever, Jungian shadowstuff both pleasurable and nightmarish, a 21st century history of 2nd century gnosticism, and the religion of UFOs and those who encounter them.

1. The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea by: M. David Litwa

2. Existential Kink: Unmask Your Shadow and Embrace Your Power by: Carolyn Elliott

3. The Ballad of the White Horse by: G. K. Chesterton

4. American Cosmic: UFOs, Religion, Technology by: D.W. Pasulka

5. Encounters: Experiences with Nonhuman Intelligences by: D.W. Pasulka

6. Undreaming Wetiko: Breaking the Spell of the Nightmare Mind-Virus by: Paul Levy

I had someone read through these reviews, and he said it was the strangest collection of books he’d ever come across. I wouldn’t go that far, but it is a pretty bizarre assemblage. It’s interesting to note that just in the last few days I came across the term shadow-work “out in the wild” so to speak. In context it seemed to be related to both Existential Kink, and Undreaming Wetiko, two of the books I reviewed. So perhaps these ideas aren’t as strange as I thought. Though I’m still not entirely sure what to make of them.

If you’re familiar with my review of Bad Therapy by Abigail Shrier. You’ll know that I think a lot of modern therapeutic practice, when improperly applied, ends up turning potential trauma into actual trauma. My gut reaction is that “shadow-work” is another example of this process. If you have any other examples of “shadow work” I’d be interested in hearing about them. It may be one of those things that’s all over the place already, just not in the places a guy like me goes.

In any case, enjoy reviews of the strangest collection of books ever, at least according to one random person whose name I’m not even going to bother mentioning…

The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea

By: M. David Litwa

Published: 2021

224 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

A gnostic ideology prevalent in early Christianity which held that the god of the Old Testament (often called the demiurge) was the malevolent creator of the physical world. While Jesus, the representative of a higher god, came to challenge and overcome the evil creator and his flawed creation.

What's the author's angle?

This book belongs to the “Here’s an interesting thing you probably didn’t know” subgenre. Gnosticism definitely represented a major current in the early church, while these days it’s been relegated to obscure footnotes. This makes it a rich source of little-known, interesting history. As Litwa says on his website:

My mission is simple: to produce quality scholarship and to communicate that scholarship to a broad and truly global audience. My specific niches are Gnostic and Nag Hammadi Studies, New Testament, and Early Christian history.

This is an example of that communication.

Who should read this book?

People interested in different approaches to the problem of evil (see the next section). People interested in the history of early Christianity particularly the influence and role of gnosticism.

Specific thoughts: An interesting branch in the disciple of theodicy.

Everyone recognizes that for Christianity to be true, there must be a theodicy—a theory explaining evil. This problem was recognized from the very beginning. For the Gnostics (groups like Sethians, the Phibionites and the Marcionites) the answer was the demiurge. The Marcionites in particular drew inspiration from specific Bible verses, chiefly John 8:44:

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Litwa breaks out the following interpretation of the verse:

1. That the devil has a father (by the relational and/or possessive reading)

2. This father is also the father of the fictional Jews (8:44a)

3. This father of the fictional Jews is the Jewish deity (based on traditional Jewish theology)

4. That the Jewish deity and the devil are liars and murderers (stated directly given the relational reading)

5. That the Jewish deity had a hand in murdering Jesus (if “the Jews” do the same works as their father, according to John 8:41)”

This is an example of how entire theologies can be built almost entirely around a single verse of scripture. I’ve never quite bought the idea that a correct interpretation of theology could hinge on a single verse.

Also, as you can see, this is a pretty anti-Jewish interpretation. And Litwa takes pains to assure readers:

The early Christian interpreters discussed in this book were no friends of the Jewish deity and were likely no friends of the Jewish people either. Some of them were staunch critics of Jewish scriptures, at least insofar as these scriptures portrayed the creator as the true deity. A great deal of what these Christians wrote might seem (sometimes crassly) anti-Jewish in modern ears. As historians, we owe it to the ancients to understand them on their own terms and faithfully to report their words, their logic, and their inferences. It should go without saying, however, that I myself do not support or condone any interpretation that might lead to anti-Judaism in any form at any time for any reason.

With that long introduction out of the way, we can finally examine the theodicy of these early Christian gnostics. Essentially their answer to the problem of evil was that the original creator was evil (or, in the case of the Marcionites, very, very stern.) Jesus was the ambassador of the true deity, and came to redeem us from the sinful and fallen material world. Of course if the “true deity” is omnipotent then why doesn’t he eliminate the evil/stern demiurge at some point?

The answer is that gnosticism handles omnipotence differently. There is a strong non-interventionist streak. Plus they consider the spiritual realm to be different and better than the material. For my part it seemed to amount to something like this:

As Gandalf is to the Valar, Jesus is to the “true deity”. There to help and encourage, but expressly forbidden from just remaking the world.

Which is probably too niche to be understood by anyone other than a true Tolkien fan, and also all kinds of blasphemy, but that’s how I roll. I use blasphemous Tolkien references to explain all sorts of things about the world.

Speaking of blasphemy, that’s precisely what gnosticism turned into as things like the Nicene Creed came along. The creed specifically targets materiality, omnipotence, a separate creator god, and Jesus being just an emissary. Comprehensively rejecting the gnostic interpretation of all of those things.

All of which is to say that as a historical conceptual framework was fascinating, as a theology one might want to adopt? You’d end up being pretty lonely.

Existential Kink: Unmask Your Shadow and Embrace Your Power

By: Carolyn Elliott

Published: 2020

224 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

It can be boiled down to the famous quote from Carl Jung, “Until you make the unconscious, conscious, it will rule your life and you will call it Fate.” Elliott labels the dark bits of your unconscious (and the unconscious seems like it’s all dark bits) “kink”. And she asserts that until we embrace the kinky side of ourselves it will continue to ruin our lives.

What's the author's angle?

Elliot is a self-described occultist, and publisher of the magazine Witch. So while there is a self-help vibe to the book, it’s definitely on the New Age end of the self-help spectrum.

Who should read this book?

I guess if you’re really prone to self-sabotage and you’ve tried everything else it might be worth trying this. I read it because I listened to a Mormon podcast that claimed it put forth a new theory for how the atonement of Jesus Christ might operate.

Specific thoughts: So how is this book religious again?

As I already alluded to, this book operates on two levels. The first level boils down to providing an answer to the question: “Why do I keep doing this thing that’s obviously bad for me?” Elliott’s answer is that until you confront your dark impulses head on they’re going to manifest in ways you don’t expect.

Allow me to offer up an analogy. (This is my analogy, not Elliot’s.) Dealing with your subconscious desires is like dealing with a child. If a child needs attention they’re going to do increasingly outrageous things until they get that attention. They’ll start by poking their head into your office. When you shoo them away, they’ll be placated for a moment, but shortly they’ll start singing loudly as they wander up and down the hallway. When that doesn’t work they escalate to crying, yelling, “accidentally” breaking some dishes, etc. As they get older and things get more dysfunction these cries for attention might ramp all the way up to getting pregnant.

You can head all of this off by genuinely engaging with your child. Patiently and carefully digging into their wants and giving them some space to express their emotions. Of course, when phrased like that, this just sounds like normal talk therapy, and there’s nothing particularly “kinky” about it.

I know I’ve seen movies or TV shows where, when the parent comes across a child doing something destructive, rather than punishing the child, the parent ends up joining in. At the moment the only one I can think of is when Michael Bluth ends up helping his son George Michael Bluth to burn down the Banana Stand in Arrested Development. Joining in, and celebrating the darkness is when our engagement becomes “kinky”. I don’t necessarily agree that this level of “engagement” is helpful or even necessary. (After all there ended up being $250,000 hidden in the walls of the Banana Stand.) But it is an interesting idea.

That’s the first level, the level of a typical therapy book. Remarkable only for its aggressiveness. But there is a second level, the theological level. To give you a taste of that consider the following excerpt:

I'd offer the following explanation: as humans, our whole selves are always reflections of the divine totality (“As above, so below; as within, so without”). We are microcosmic reflections of the total holy macrocosm, and as such, we are each innately curious about and desirous for the full spectrum of potential experience, both the painful and the pleasurable, the evil and the good, the ugly and the beautiful.

Really let this sink in for a minute.

And contrary to some airy Law of Attraction notions, we rarely get what we consciously want (unless we do the kind of deep solve work addressed in this book), but we always get what we unconsciously want.

I think a lot of the stuff Elliott talks about in this book is profoundly weird, borderline creepy. (Much of which might be ascribed to me being a prude, but even once that is taken into account I think some creepiness remains.) But this idea of being in search of the “full spectrum of potential experience” touches on something true and interesting. Certainly there is some overlap with Mormon theology, and our doctrine around a pre-existence where we decided to undertake mortality, and everything that came with it: suffering, pain, etc.

All of which is to say that it’s far too brazen for me to really recommend it, but it contains some interesting ideas despite all that.

Oh, and the new theory of the atonement? Perhaps you’ve already figured it out…

If not, imagine that the atonement truly took place in the Garden of Gethsemane (as Mormons do) and further imagine that in that spot Jesus was taking on the totality of all the experiences of all humans: all the pain, all the suffering, all the darkness, etc. Which so far, so mainstream. But if one further imagines that He did that not to remove these things from us, but as a demonstration of how we should take on the totality of all our pain, suffering, and darkness, this is where you arrive at a new theory of the atonement. Being redeemed in this case consists of embracing your darkness, and under this theory of the atonement Jesus performed the biggest such embrace of all.

The Ballad of the White Horse

By: G. K. Chesterton

Published: 1911

120 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

An epic poem about Alfred the Great before and during the Battle of Ethandun when he managed to defeat the Great Heathen Army.

What's the author's angle?

Chesterton was a very conservative Christian and this poem has a very conservative Christian theme. But I think one would have to have a heart of blackest night to let that offend them within the context of this poem.

Who should read this book?

Perhaps epic poetry isn’t your cup of tea. And possibly, even the fact that this poem rhymes can not induce any excitement in you. Well then you have a poor, impoverished soul and I feel bad for you. Everyone without a poor, impoverished soul should read this poem, it’s fantastic.

Specific thoughts: Is this possibly my new favorite book of all time?

There are several reasons why this might be my new favorite book of all time and several reasons why it might not be. Let’s start with the reasons why it might not be.

• To start with, is it a book? I know it’s a long epic poem that was bound as a book, and tells a complete story, but isn’t it technically an epic poem? Clearly I should have no problem declaring it to be my favorite epic poem, and I guess I could consider it to be my favorite literary work? But can I call it a book? Should I even be reviewing it in this space?

• Also nearly everyone has a tendency to get excited by the last thing they read. Surely I need to account for recency bias?

• A lot of the appeal comes from reading the poem aloud. Is that cheating?

• My true favorite book should probably be something I’ve read multiple times. Can I really tell if this is my favorite book on the first read?

But here are some reasons why it might in fact be my favorite book of all time:

• I am actually a huge fan of epic poems. (Though I wouldn’t say my knowledge of this sub-genre is very deep.)

• It combines some of my very favorite things: Christianity, sacrifice, “old gods”, martial valor, English history, Vikings, clever defenses of conservatism, honor, and much more!

• It rhymes. I know modern poetry has gotten past all that, but that was a mistake. The joy in reading something that rhymes has a viscerality that’s satisfying in a way that’s hard to describe.

• One of the previous contenders for “favorite book of all time” was Tolkein’s Silmarillion. And while I am sympathetic to people who say it’s boring, there are moments of terrible majesty that are so superlative that they elevate everything which surrounds them. The Ballad of the White Horse is almost nothing but these moments.

Seriously get this book, read it aloud, and bask in Christian epicness, the kind of Christian epicness that has been drained out of the modern, secular world.

American Cosmic: UFOs, Religion, Technology

By: D.W. Pasulka

Published: 2019

288 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

An account from a religious scholar on the ways in which the description of UFO encounters strongly resemble the descriptions of religious miracles. From this, she concludes that we are witnessing the birth of a new religion.

What's the author's angle?

Pasulka claims at several points that as a religious scholar she doesn’t take sides on questions of religious veracity, but by the end of the book it seems clear that she’s a convert to whatever religion it is she’s describing.

Who should read this book?

If you’re one of those people who feels that the wheel of fire mentioned by Ezekiel in the Old Testament had to be a UFO this is the book for you.

Specific thoughts: Legitimate scientific inquiry or New Age woo?

I’m not really sure what to make of this book. Maybe half of the time it comes across as a New Age, aliens inhabit a separate reality, only the faithful can see them, paranormal book. Though even then, one of the “believers” featured in the book ends up converting to Catholicism, which is as religiously mainstream as one can get.

Another 25% of the time the book bills itself as a serious scientific inquiry. For example a big chunk of the book is taken up by the recovery of what is claimed to be alien material—later claimed to have been verified as such by Garry Nolan, a Stanford professor of pathology (who goes by the pseudonym “James” in the book). After doing a little bit more research I discovered that Nolan himself denies this, which doesn’t do a lot for my opinion of Pasulka or the book.

Even if you don’t bother to do any extra research, the book itself puts forth some stories that seem very implausible. For example when Nolan and Pasulka supposedly get their hands on this material. As you might imagine, Nolan obviously wants to get it back home so he can run some tests on it.

Pause for a second and put yourself in Nolan’s shoes. You’ve acquired something that’s possibly the most valuable material in the world, and you’re trying to get it home. Do you ship it using certified mail? Do you rent a car and drive for 20 hours? (He was trying to get from somewhere in New Mexico to San Francisco.) Or do you put it in your luggage? If you’re going to just put it in your luggage do you check a bag or do you keep it in your carry-on? Out of all of these options Nolan went with the, “toss it in my carry-on” option. This seems remarkably careless given the supposed importance of the material. Especially so given what happened when he tried to go through security:

Security searched [him], his suitcase, his jacket, and everything that he was carrying. By the time he made it through to where Tyler and I were standing, sweat drops glittered on his face and forehead.

I understand that there are already serious questions as to whether any of this is true. But, if it is, Nolan comes across as an idiot. And if it’s not true then it’s bizarre Pasulka would concoct this incident for inclusion in the book. (Of the two, I lean towards the second explanation.)

As one final head scratching moment, if you’ve really delved into the UFO phenomenon you know that the term “flying saucers” originated from a 1947 sighting by pilot Kenneth Arnold. Only Arnold didn’t describe them as saucers, he actually described them as “something like a pie plate that was cut in half with a sort of a convex triangle in the rear”. So later sightings of saucers seemed to originate more from the garbled reporting of what Arnold saw than independently viewing the same things he had seen. You would think that if Pasulka had done as much rigorous investigation as she claims she would have noted this fact, but instead she uncritically repeats that Arnold saw “nine, flat, saucerlike discs”.

Which takes me to the final 25% of the book. This portion concerns the “Invisible college”. This is Pasulka’s term for all the scientists, government employees, and space experts who she claims know UFOs are real and are just waiting for conditions to be right before they go public and usher in a new age of understanding. You would think that they would have educated Pasulka on the Arnold sighting, or that they would have a procedure for transporting alien material (the Tyler mentioned in the preceding quote is supposed to be a member of the “Invisible college” and also the gentleman who converts to Catholicism). And most especially, you would think that when UFO fever was at its highest pitch right after the Pentagon UAP videos were released, that this would have been the moment for them to come forward, and reveal all. But, other than a couple of people like Luis Elizondo, there is no evidence for the existence of this “invisible college”.

Perhaps they’re waiting for something even more dramatic. Or perhaps we should take everything Pasulka says with a large dose of salt…

Encounters: Experiences with Nonhuman Intelligences

By: D.W. Pasulka

Published: 2023

250 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

Individuals and their—often frequent—encounters with aliens, UFOs, and similar phenomena.

What's the author's angle?

This is where it really feels like Pasulka sheds all pretense at being a disinterested observer and moves to being a true believer.

Who should read this book?

I guess if you really want to believe this will strengthen that belief. (And yes, I’m aware of how this sounds like “exercising faith”. Why do you think I put this book in with the religious reviews?) I don’t think skeptics will get much out of it. It’s not “out there” enough to reach the “so bad it’s good” level.

Specific thoughts: Just because I reject Pasulka’s explanation doesn’t necessarily mean I have a better one.

For all my grumpiness I found most of the stories in this book to be quite compelling. That doesn’t mean that I believe that they happened exactly as described. It just means that there wasn’t some obvious alternative explanation. (Obviously a lot depends on an assumption that Pasulka is reporting things accurately, which I have my doubts about.)

In mentioning this I should add that I’m more sympathetic than most towards supernatural phenomena. So perhaps someone else reading this book would come away with a different assessment.

I’ve already spoken a lot about Pasulka and her work on UFOs in the previous review, so the only thing I really have to add here is that Pasulka appears to have traveled even farther away from a “materialist, aliens are visiting us in craft that we can eventually document and study” point of view. She now seems to have fully embraced the “aliens are supernatural beings who behave more like angels” point of view.

I’m not opposed to the idea that there’s more overlap between angels and aliens than is commonly believed. In fact you might even say I’m a proponent of the idea. But Pasulka’s approach is far too credulous in some respects while also not being nearly curious enough in others.

Undreaming Wetiko: Breaking the Spell of the Nightmare Mind-Virus

By: Paul Levy

Published: 2023

250 Pages

Briefly, what is this book about?

Wetiko, an Algonquin term for a civilization-wide nightmare. Before Levy came across the Native American term, he called this phenomenon “malignant egophrenia”. I guess when an egregore has a nightmare it’s technically an egophrenia?

Levy, like Elliott above, is a disciple of Carl Jung. Both books are significantly focused on identifying the inner darkness. Though, beyond that, their two approaches are almost exactly the opposite. For Elliott this darkness is “kink”, something that needed to be explored and embraced. For Levy the darkness is a civilizational wide nightmare that needs to be defeated.

What's the author's angle?

Perhaps you’ve met people you might describe as “new age”. People who identify as Wiccans, or talk openly of performing magic? Rank amateurs compared to Levy. He checks all the “new age” boxes and has worked hard to pioneer whole new categories.

Who should read this book?

This book was recommended to me by someone after they read my post Egregores, Group Minds, and White Magic. So evidently someone thought the answer to that question was… me. Having read it, I’m not sure I agree. I guess on some level both Levy and I agree that we’re experiencing civilizational insanity, but I think we entirely disagree on the source of that insanity.

I got pretty far, but I eventually decided it wasn’t worth finishing. I’d be interested in hearing from someone who did. (Perhaps the original commentor?)

Specific thoughts: Quantum mechanics- the explanation for everything!

People will occasionally mention quantum mechanics in books that have nothing to do with physics. Perhaps they will bring up Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, or maybe they will discuss the fuzzy, probabilistic nature of reality. I know this drives some people nuts. I am not one of those people, I try to be pretty forgiving about such dalliances. But that forgiveness only stretches so far. Levy doesn’t allude to quantum mechanics, he doesn’t mention it occasionally, he considers it foundational to his entire approach. From his biography:

After the publication of The Quantum Revelation, he is now seen as connected with quantum physics. All three aspects - dreams, wetiko and quantum physics are interconnected and complementary facets of a deeper reality into which he is continually deepening his investigation.

I suspect I’m doing this because of my dark heart, but I can’t resist including another quote. This one from his book:

This section elucidates the quantum nature of wetiko, showing how understanding wetiko’s entangled wave/particle quantum nature helps us to come to grips with the tricksterlike nature of this mind-virus, as well as shedding light on the quantum nature of both the world and ourselves. Being quantum in nature, wetiko contains encoded within it both the deepest poison and its own vaccine, and how it actually manifests depends in a very real sense on how we dream it. We inquire into how the revelations emerging from quantum physics—provided we have the eyes to see—provide the medicine for healing wetiko.

It is of course possible that this is exactly how things work. That the world has a dualistic nature, and quantum mechanics is both a manifestation of that nature and that it works in precisely the way Levy describes. I wouldn’t bet on it. But anything is possible.

---

The only book I really enjoyed out of all of these was the Ballad. The rest of them felt more like something I should read than something I wanted to read. Is that evidence of my commitment to intellectual inquiry? A form of masochism? Or is it perhaps my own form of shadow-work? A Jungian dive into the deep recesses of my soul? Whatever it is, if you liked it there’s probably more where that came from, so if you haven’t already make sure to subscribe.