>>26529
>cozying
I don't like that either, and how he seems to think from the outset that Talmudic Jews are not in their own way the first heresy, defined as they are by reaction to Christianity (or his comments on places actively found and proven to exist). However, with regard to the saturation of 'everything' with Christianity, I believe that he is spot on. I would even go so far as to say that the at times desperate frenzy of neopagans to return to a half-remembered "golden age" is in fact a warped version of the very Protestant desire to "return to the roots" in protest of the modern world. In some ways, I (an American) was subject to that same desire when I became a Syrian Orthodox: the desire to "return to the origin point."
To boil it down further, and to paraphrase a commentator, "the fish cannot escape the water in which they swim." You don't realize the water is filled with tiny crosses until it is pointed out to you. It's helpful. The realization allows me to cut through so much noise and see so many talking points as ultimately unimportant, even frivolous. Diplomatically speaking, they must be known, but internally they are no longer to be considered.
I could not surely tell you what to do with it, anon, as I am often terrible with rhetoric (troubles with sloth, wrath, et cetera). But from my experience, low-church Protestants are sometimes shocked to the point of freeze-up to find out things about their worldview are 'not' in fact age-old, but new and coming from the aforementioned theological mishaps. Like the modern conception of the Rapture being borne from the writings of those ur-Zionists Scofield and Darby, for instance. And then there is the resemblance so many of these heresies have to the ancient ones. It's both frustrating and reassuring to know that there is nothing new under the Sun but new permutations and variations of the old. Perhaps something can be made of it. Like this:
https://www.wrmea.org/2015-october/the-scofield-bible-the-book-that-made-zionists-of-americas-evangelical-christians.html
It is a heresy that even my Baptist friend was horrified at once he found out.
>the other two
As for that...I've read through the Cosmist book, and dipped my toes into the Peter one. I'll tell you this: you cannot understand why the Revolution, the Soviet Union, and even modern Russia happened without understanding the Orthodox-originating heresy that is Cosmism. Everything the Soviets touched worldwide is tinged with that heresy. It is also the origin of many Western ideas, good and bad, and so lends some insight to our own cultural landscape. Literally would not have had the obsessive drive to build a new society or a space program without the desire to 'reshape' Creation. Going back further, that influential heresy itself would not exist without the trauma, ambition, and Freemasonry of Tsar Peter the Great, and his desire to "hew" the Russian people from their "rough stone." That itself could be considered a perversion of "the stone that was rejected is our cornerstone." Read them, be amazed and aghast at once.
Here are two more books on the side. The Groys one can be considered a companion piece to Young's (read Young's first). Theosophy is but another heresy as well, and Young briefly touches on it.